Unbelievable. I must commend Buzsaw for doing a marvelous job at defending the Aqaba evidence. Brian and PaulK are squealing for grounds to stand on, and it just isn't working. The ‘big picture’ is just too overwhelming.
quote:
This question is more for young earthers than for Buz, but how does this line up against the geneology time-telling method for biblical literalists? (i.e., add up the life span of everyone in the Bible and get roughly 6000 years.) Do the dates jive?
As for dating everything on a global basis, I am no expert. But The Exodus Case (book) does a marvelous job at explaining the uncertainties of dating civilizations:
I feel confident enough to address this point and tell you right out that non-Christian scientists have severely erred in their dating methods of ancient civilizations. First off, I'm going to use the Egyptians and Joseph as an example:
By calculating the time in Egypt with the help of indications found in the books of Genesis and Exodus, and the fact that Joseph was 30 years old when he was appointed ruler in Egypt, the life of Joseph can be dated around 1745-1635 BC. The measure of uncertainty regarding this date can be in the order of 10-30 years. In the last 2000 years the measure of uncertainty is around 4 years (our modern era after the birth of Jesus), and there are uncertainties in the above calculation, e.g. when a sovereign dies in the second year of his reign, does this mean after 13 months or after 24 months? This type of uncertainty can generally be corrected, but when it is a matter of a number of steps in the calculation then one should add a decade or two to allow for the factor of uncertainty.
The books of the Bible together with other historical sources (concerning Nebuchadnezzar’s entry into Jerusalem) give us the basis for a relatively well-founded time-axis. Considering that this spans almost 1800 years plus 2000 years of our modern era, in all almost 4000 years, one must realize that these are very precise estimates.
So what can we say about the points in time which are given regarding the history of Egypt? To put it simply, the basic material is very difficult to use for exact estimations. There are several reasons for this:
1. It is not all clear it is not all clear how many people have actually been rulers in Egypt. When several names occur, it could mean that there are a number of different people, or several people who are given different titles in different contexts, or they could refer to one and the same person. As it can be seen from the example of the Swedish royal family and all the names which can be used, uncertainties easily arise. We also know that the Egyptian rulers had many titles. One example is given:
and I asked him who was the Chamberlain the Ibis, the Chief Lector Priest Imhotep, the son of Ptah
In this example four different names for one person have been used at the same time. Another example is Tutankhamun, who had at lest five different names: Tutankhamun, Nebkheprure, Renpkhau sehetepnetjeru, Neferhepu, segerhtawy and Kanakht tutmes.
The knowledge we have of the names and titles of each ruler, his family and ministers, during the several thousand years, leave room for a great deal of uncertainty.
2. In one inscription seals have been preserved as a sort of Egyptian royal line. It should be noted that the inscription is not complete (it is damaged), and it may be that several seals belong to the same person. It is natural to assume that a person changes his seal as he moves on from being the heir to the throne to join ruler with the pharaoh, and later becomes Pharaoh. It is not unlikely that several people, other than the sovereign, are named in this type of tabulation e.g. the monarch and the heir to the throne. Altogether this gives rise to a great deal of uncertainty in establishing dates.
It should be noted that the joint ruler, before taking over as Pharaoh in Thebes, was Pharaoh in Memphis. In other words, there could be two pharaohs in office at the same time, one being superior (Thebes) to the other (Memphis). Several texts speak of Egyptian leaders in the plural, Egyptian kings. One example is the bible text of Jeremiah (Jer. 46.25).
3. The language is a further difficulty, partly because it is based on symbols and not on letters in the ordinary sense, and partly because it is a dead language. This leads to problems of interpretation and understanding. There is an inscription with the same text in two different languages(with two varieties of hieroglyphs) which is fundamental for an understanding of the Egyptian hieroglyphs, the so-called Rosetta stone. It should be noted that the only or two of all the pharaonic seals are included in this inscription.
4. The main source of information regarding the history of Egypt is found in the graves of the pharaohs. With only a few exceptions all these graves have been plundered. This means that certain information is brought to the fore because more is known about that particular example, while there are long periods of time about which there is little knowledge.
Tutankamun has been brought to the fore very markedly, and his beautiful and valuable death mask (in gold and the semi-precious stone turquoise) has become a modern symbol for Egypt. The reason for this is that Tutankamun’s grave was one of the few that had not been plundered, and therefore contained all the valuable objecrts of gold. In addition, everything else that a royal personage would take with him on his journey of death was intact. On the other hand, the degree of magnificence with which Tutankamun was surrounded is surprising in view of the fact that he was only around 18 years old when he died.
The importance accorded him today is due not to his political significance, his long reign, the knowledge of him as a great leader in history or anything of this nature, but to the fact that his death mask and other items in the untouched grave were so magnificent and had not been stolen (approximately 700 objects were found in the grave). The next question one can ask oneself is if this was the rule for all royal burials or only for Tutankhamun, since there is so little with which to compare it as most other graves have been plundered.
5. In ancient times Egypt was divided into upper (southern) and lower (northern) Egypt, upper and lower respectively were in relation to the river Nile. These two regions had their own pharaohs, but during certain periods of time the land was united. During other periods the Nile delta had its own pharaoh or king. Combined with the lack of knowledge concerning certain periods, this makes dating very uncertain.
If one calculates dates for Norway and Sweden during the last two centuries based solely on the lines of kings, one meets problems for two reasons. For one thing, the king of Norway was in exile during the second world war (which the Swedish king was not), but above all Sweden and Norway formed a union during the period 1814 to 1905, when the king of Sweden was also king of Norway.
After a long period of time, and with very limited information factors such as these can lead to great uncertainty in calculating dates.
7. Pharaohs who fell from grace, or in other ways did not fit in, have been removed from various inscriptions listing cartouches (royal seals) from different pharaohs. It is common to find notes in the literature on how certain statues, inscriptions etc. were systematically destroyed by rulers in Egypt. This falsification of ancient history naturally makes things very difficult, when it is a matter of obtaining a clear picture of different eras up to 5000 years ago.
8. There are several different opinions about epochs in time and chronologies with regard to Egypt’s pharaohs. This in itself indicates that the chronologies contain uncertainties.
9. One example of uncertainty is mentioned when discussing how long Pharaoh Djoser reigned. Djoser is regarded to have reigned for 19 years. At the same time the Step Pyramid in Sakkara (Djosers mausoleum) was constructed and built by Imhotep. Probably Imhotep attained his position a number of years after Djoser had attained to his position, so the actual time for construction, organization, and building of this extremely large edifice was perhaps only 10 years.
In one comment surprise expressed that the first pyramid could be built in only 19 years, but the question as to whether the dating is completely correct is not raised. Nor is the method indicated by which the date was determined. Djoser is said to have several names; Djoser, Zoser, Netjeri-khet and Tosorthos, which can also create uncertainty. Nonetheless, the exact period of Djosers reign is given to the year (2668-2649 BC) in spite of the fact that there are only a few references to Djoser, and that it concerns events of approximately 4600 years ago, according to Egyptian chronology.
10. A further aspect of the uncertainty involved in calculating the dates of the early Egyptian dynasties is presented in E.A. Wallis Budge’s book (most recent revision 1989. The following passage is found in this book:
The dates that he and others have assigned to the first dynasty depend upon the numbers of the years that they have assigned to these two intervals. But these dates — Lepsius BC 3892, Lieblein BC 3893, Brugsch BC 4455 or 4400, Meyer BC 3315, Breasted BC 3400, Hall BC 3500 — are only indexes to the opinions of those who propose them, and it is quite possible that every one of them is wrong in point of actual fact. The material for fixing with certainty the date of the first dynasty does not exist at present.
The span of time indicated for this point in Egyptian history varies considerably between the authors mentioned, 1140 years to be prices. Wallis’ book gives several examples of extensive differences in estimated dates and mentions that the Egyptians did not keep their own chronologies in the way that we do, and therefore generally speaking it is difficult to draw specific conclusions about dates and periods of time.
The reign of Pharaoh Djoser was during the third dynasty. There is a great deal of uncertainty about the dating because of the reasons given above, and therefore it is difficult to compare them with the comparatively exact time-axis which the biblical texts set up.
It should then be more important to relate events to each other, and this also gives a greater degree of certainty when the older Egyptian dynasties are discussed. For example, it may be that dating done with the help of constellations of stars (discussed earlier) could change the Egyptian time-axes with around 1000 years, depending on which constellation cycle one chooses.
There is a much greater degree of precision in the statement that the events regarding seven years of famine occurred during the r3eign of Djoser, when Imhotep was the second man in the realm of Egypt, and that this period of famine was connected with a sort of contract agreement with God.
The answer to the question whether Imhotep and Joseph were alive during the same period of time (in other words were the same person), cannot be given on the basis of calculations of the exact years because of the lack of Egyptian time-axes which, in a way that inspires confidence can indicate the dates of the older Egyptian dynasties. On the other hand, events during the reign of pharaoh Djoser show a remarkable number of similarities with descriptions in the Bible (in the books of Genesis and exodus), similarities which do not exist with other pharaohs.
(sources:
The Exodus Case by Lennart Moller)
To sum it up, the scientists which are providing your information regarding dates are either lying to you, or do a great job at deceiving themselves. Don’t even use the dating argument anymoreevolution scientists will forever continue to delude the people into thinking that ancient civilizations are older than they really are, and sadly, many of you are in that bunch.
quote:
Thirdly, it was a lot more than 600 chariots that were allegedly lost, it was every single chariot that was in Egypt! .
There is a strong current in the Gulf of Aqaba, and we are lucky to find the remains that we do. It is only logical to conclude that of all the chariots and horses buried, few remains exist. The larger portion of remains were most likely buried under the sand or swept off the edge of the underwater landbridge. It would require equipment (that of what was used for the Titanic) to go to these depthsin which one day we hope to do.
~Lysimachus
™ Version 4.2
