Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Exodus Part One: Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt
ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6239 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 91 of 108 (230210)
08-05-2005 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by jar
08-05-2005 12:42 PM


Re: Re:Habiru
Perhaps Hurrian initially?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by jar, posted 08-05-2005 12:42 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by jar, posted 08-05-2005 1:49 PM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 92 of 108 (230215)
08-05-2005 1:49 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by ConsequentAtheist
08-05-2005 1:40 PM


Re: Re:Habiru
It doesn't seem to be refering to an ethic group in particular but rather a generic term like barbarian or mercenary or brigand.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 08-05-2005 1:40 PM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by John Williams, posted 08-05-2005 4:11 PM jar has replied

  
John Williams
Member (Idle past 4999 days)
Posts: 157
From: Oregon, US
Joined: 06-29-2004


Message 93 of 108 (230273)
08-05-2005 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by jar
08-05-2005 1:49 PM


Re: Re:Habiru
Exactly.
Infact, the Habiru could have been applied to really any ethnic group in the fertile crescent. Khabiru, Habiru, Apiru etc. were vague names that indicated outcasts,nomadic, collective vagabonds, mercenaries, slaves etc.
Wikipedia.org has a good article about the Habiru:
Habiru - Wikipedia
The name Habiru indeed originated from the farther East instead of Egypt. And this works well with the Hebrew tradition. The Habiru are mentioned from c.2000bc-1200bc. Abraham was known as a "Hebrew" in the old testament story, and he came from Mesopotamia where the "Habiru" or SA.GAZ people are mentioned.
In essence, It is my belief that the original Hebrews who are the basis for Israelite nation, were originally Habiru, or a collective bunch of Semetic rebel nomads.
And yes, some were originally slaves:
`Abdu-Heba, a prince of Jerusalem writes to Akhenaten-
"...now the Habiru capture the cities of the king...behold Turbazu has been slain in the very gate of Sile...Behold Simreda, the townsmen of Lachish have smitten him, SLAVES WHO HAD BECOME HABIRU. Yapti has been slain in the very gate of Sile, yet the king holds his peace." (p.176, Ian Wilson. The Exodus Enigma. London. Weidenfeld and Nicholson. 1985. ISBN 0-297-78749-7)Hebrewhabiruslaves

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by jar, posted 08-05-2005 1:49 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by John Williams, posted 08-05-2005 4:27 PM John Williams has not replied
 Message 95 by jar, posted 08-05-2005 5:12 PM John Williams has replied

  
John Williams
Member (Idle past 4999 days)
Posts: 157
From: Oregon, US
Joined: 06-29-2004


Message 94 of 108 (230276)
08-05-2005 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by John Williams
08-05-2005 4:11 PM


Re: Re:Habiru
References to Habiru/Apiru slaves in Egypt:
On two stelae at Memphis and Karnak, Thutmose III's son Amenhotep II boasts of having made 89,600 prisoners in his campaign in Palestine (around 1420 BC), including "127 princes and 179 nobles(?) of Retenu, 3600 Apiru, 15,200 Bedouin, 36,600 Horites," etc..
A stela from the reign of Seti I (around 1300 BC) tells that the pharaoh sent an expedition into Syria or Palestine, in response to an attack of "the apiru from Mount Yarmuta" upon a local town. An unspecified number of the apiru were captured and brought back to Egypt as slaves. (His son Ramses II is traditionally equated with "the pharaoh" of Exodus, Moses's adversary.)
A list of goods bequeathed to several temples by pharaoh Ramses III (around 1160 BC) includes many serfs, Egyptian and foreign: 86,486 to Thebes (2607 foreigners), 12,364 to Heliopolis (2093 foreign), and 3079 to Memphis (205 foreign). The foreign serfs are described as "maryanu (soldiers), apiru, and people already settled in the temple estate". Habiru - Wikipedia

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by John Williams, posted 08-05-2005 4:11 PM John Williams has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 95 of 108 (230291)
08-05-2005 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by John Williams
08-05-2005 4:11 PM


Re: Re:Habiru
The link you provided points to some book called the Exodus Enigma. But when I read the Armana letters I find no such image.
In addition I tried to find references to the inscription you mentioned but with no success. can you get more information of them?
Here's a link to some translations of the Armana Letters. In them I find no references to anything that might give the idea that there was any specific peoples called the Habiru.
I believe there might be some kernal of truth to the exodus myth, I don't doubt that some semitic peoples later became the Hebrews, but I see no reason to think that it might have been Habiru.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by John Williams, posted 08-05-2005 4:11 PM John Williams has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by John Williams, posted 08-05-2005 7:47 PM jar has replied

  
John Williams
Member (Idle past 4999 days)
Posts: 157
From: Oregon, US
Joined: 06-29-2004


Message 96 of 108 (230327)
08-05-2005 7:47 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by jar
08-05-2005 5:12 PM


Re: Re:Habiru
Actually, Habiru/Sa.Gaz are mentioned 25 times in the Amarna tablets.
Here is an online encyclopedia of the Amarna Letters:
Forbidden
As a side note, I find the Hyksos expulsion of the 1500's bc also as a possible insperation to the collective Exodus myth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by jar, posted 08-05-2005 5:12 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by jar, posted 08-05-2005 7:50 PM John Williams has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 97 of 108 (230329)
08-05-2005 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by John Williams
08-05-2005 7:47 PM


Re: Re:Habiru
Yes, I've read the Armana letters. I provided a link so that you can actually read the references in context.
As a side note, I find the Hyksos expulsion of the 1500's bc also as a possible insperation to the collective Exodus myth.
yes, some folk believe that. But I've never sen and real correlation between the two events beyond the fact that the Hyksos may too have been semitic. But that is also true of the Phoenecians and the 'People of the Sea'.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by John Williams, posted 08-05-2005 7:47 PM John Williams has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4960 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 98 of 108 (230391)
08-06-2005 5:55 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by John Williams
08-04-2005 10:36 PM


Re: Exodus facts and legend
One thing that I think most of us can agree on is that the Exodus story which was probably written in the 8th-6th century BC,
I take it you mean ‘finally written down’ in 8th to 6th century BCE since there are narratives in there that are quite ancient, ‘The Song of Miriam’ for example, has been dated by textual similarities in Ugaritic poetry to the 13th century BCE (Cross and Freedman: (1955) Song of Miriam, JNES 14, 237-250).
was likely a compiolation of different facts and then embelished upon and attributed to the Hebrew people in many cases.
I would agree with that, but I don’t think our fundy friends would. However, there are less than a handful of ‘scholars’ who would take the Exodus at face value.
The problem with saying a compilation of different facts is that it may be near impossible to identify what these different facts are, just because something is plausible doesn’t mean it did happen.
The names and nations mentioned in the OT were real and historical, but they were often converged into different time periods and eras to describe different geographical settings.
Well, I would disagree to a certain extent, because many of the names and nations mentioned in the Bible have not been identified. The 9 kings mentioned in the war of Genesis 14 are wholly invisible, in fact, to take it a stage further, there is no character in event in the entire Book of Genesis that has been identified in external sources.
But, yes, some have been transferred back in time, as the many anachronisms in the texts suggest. The authors appeared to have assumed that since there was a great city somewhere during the time that the texts were written, then that city may have always been there. As an historical source, the Old Testament is a horrendously inaccurate record.
Thus, the "Way of the Philistines" given as a route god didn't want for the Exodus through Sinai, and Gaza, obviously shows us that if the Exodus did take place in the 1400's bc, the story was later edited by scribes who didn't know that the Philistines and other sea go-ers arrived in 1200, not 1400bc.
Yes, and the Philistines are also mentioned in Genesis!
There is also another problem here, why doesn’t the Bible mention the many Egyptian forts and outposts along the highway? Why does it never mention any Egyptians outside of Egypt? The Bible has all contact with Egypt end at the Sea of Reeds, quite impossible.
Little tidbits of this sort of editing are shown all through out the bible. Even with all of this, I believe that the stories are a collective fact fiction
You are entitled to believe this, but I would argue that the Biblical Exodus is a fantasy, I see no reason to keep manipulating the text and the available evidence to try and make some historically accurate version of the Exodus plausible. The Bible version simply didn’t happen, it is time to put the Book of Exodus on the fiction shelf.
historical places and stories that were based on real settings and historic figures
Well, can you name any real historic figures in the Exodus account and explain why you think that they were actual historical people, because I cannot find any evidence at all outside of the Bible that supports any character in the Book of Exodus as being real.
--but greatly embelished and given credit to the Hebrews/Israelites.
Embellishment was the order of the day, many cultures recorded events in the same way. What I am thinking is that since the origins of Israel as portrayed in the Bible have been shown to be untrue, then whose history have the Israelites stolen?
The Exodus legend most likely was based on the simple trade and commune between semetic peoples and Egypt.
And how does this reflect anything in the Exodus myth?
The Semetic Hyksos dynasties of Egypt and the Story of Joseph and Jacob[c.1700-1500bc], show some correlation and historical truth.
I would say that there are a handful of things in the Joseph and Jacob stories that *could* have happened, but again there is no external evidence that directly mention these two biblical characters.
The Joseph story is also riddled with anachronisms and possible plagiarisms (the Egyptian Tale of Two Brothers). Joseph is known for his ability to interpret dreams, and it was the ability to interpret the pharaoh’s dreams that enabled Joseph to climb the ladder of success. There is a problem here though as the king of Egypt was never referred to as a pharaoh before the reign of Thutmosis III (1490-1213 BCE) (McCarter, P. K. The Patriarchal Age in Shanks (Ed) Ancient Israel: A Short History from Abraham to the Roman Destruction of the Temple, Prentice Hall: Biblical Archaeological Society, Englewood Cliffs; Washington DC.
McCarter also lists some other problematic information:
Some of the personal names in the story are Egyptian. Joseph’s wife is called Asenath (Genesis 41:45), a name with parallels beginning in the middle of the 20th Dynasty (about 1184-1070 B.C.), thus about 1100 B.C. The name of Asenath’s father is Potiphera (Genesis 41:45), and this name has been found on an Egyptian stele dating to the 21st Dynasty (about 1070-945) or later. The name of Joseph’s Egyptian master Potiphar (Genesis 37:36) is probably a shorter version of the name Potiphera. Joseph’s own Egyptian name, Zaphenath-paneah (Genesis 41:45) has no exact parallel in extant Egyptian records, but names with a similar structure are attested to from the 21st Dynasty (about 1070-945 B.C.) and later.
The information contained in these texts suggests that the Joseph stories were written after 1000 BCE.
So, do we again accept that there was a Joseph but the tale just reflects the period when the text was finally edited, or do we conclude that the Joseph tales are fiction?
The Idea of Hebrew slaves in Egypt, shows us a convulge of different facts and stories. There were a people called "Habiru", mentioned frequently in the Amarna letters (c.1400 bc)who were runaway slaves attacking Canaanite strongholds (vassals to Egypt).
Sorry, but I completely disagree with this claim, the Amarna letters do not mention runaway slaves attacking Canaanite strongholds. The Amarna Letters only speak of hired Habiru being employed by local Canaanite kings to help attack other Canaanite Kings. The mention of Habiru in the Amarna Letters is absolutely nothing at all like the Conquest narratives if the Bible.
Also, the 1400 BCE date for the Conquest is all but universally abandoned by scholars involved in the debate. We may have Sarna, Bimson, and Wood, who try to support this date, but the overwhelming evidence suggests that if there was some sort of conquest it would need to be nearer to 1200 BCE.
There is a considerable bit of evidence that could show us that the Conquest legend mentioned in the OT, was based on the Habiru slaves attacking these canaanite strongholds in c. 1400-1350bc, and later sites such as Hisban(1200bc) etc.
I don’t quite understand what you are getting at here. The Conquest of Canaan only took five years (Josephus writes in Antiquities of the Jews Book 5 Chapter 1 Verse 19: The fifth year was now past, and there was not one of the Canaanites remained any longer, excepting some that had retired to places of great strength. This five year period is given support in the Hebrew Bible where we can use the references to Caleb’s age to arrive at a figure of five years for the entire military campaign of Joshua. So, how can the Amarna Letters cover a period of 50 years when almost all of the local population were slaughtered during the 5 years of Joshua’s campaign?
Do you have any reference to Habiru attacking Heshbon in 1200 BCE?
may not have been destroyed till 200 years later when Israel, was mentioned for the first time as a nation in the Merneptah Stele.
And how do we know that the ‘Israel’ of the Merneptah Stele is the Israel of the Bible?
Thus the "Conquest" really may have been a 200+ year tribal war the Habiru who later became known as "Israel" declared against the Canaanites.
There is a problem here with your hypotheses, and it has to do with ethnicity.
As we all seem to already know, the Habiru were not an ethnic group, they were a social strata that were found all over the ancient near east.
They cannot be characterised as ethnically homogeneous in any one location, nor are they tied to any single economic activity throughout the Near East. In short, an ‘Apiru could have been a Hittite, Hurrian, Phoenician, or almost any other nationality of the ancient near east, they were not identified by their ethnicity, in other words the term ‘Apiru denotes a social stratum.
Since the term ‘Apiru has been shown to refer to a social stratum, the equation of the term with the Hebrews is untenable as the Hebrews are said to be an ethnic group. More problematic for the equation is the fact that the Bible suggests that the whole of ‘Israel’ came out of Egypt, however, the ‘Apiru are now attested to in a large variety of sources from different times and places.
For example,
1. In Mesopotamia, they are in evidence through the periods of Ur III, 1 Babylon, and after; in the Nuzi texts (fifteenth century) they play an especially prominent role.
2. Documents from Mari (eighteenth century) and Alalakh (seventeenth and fifteenth centuries) attest their presence in Upper Mesopotamia throughout the patriarchal age.
3. In Anatolia, the Cappadocian texts (nineteenth century) knew them, as did those of Boghazkoy (fourteenth century).
4. They are also mentioned in the Ras Shamra texts (fourteenth century).
5. Egyptian documents of the Empire period (fifteenth to twelfth century) refer to them, both as foes and rebels in Asia and as bondsmen in Egypt.
6. The Amarna letters (fourteenth century), where they appear in Palestine and adjoining areas as disturbers of the peace, are the best witness to them of all.
(Bright: History of Israel, SCM Press, London 1972, p92)
John Bright goes on to conclude that obviously, a people found all over western Asia from the end of the third millennium to about the eleventh century cannot lightly be identified with the ancestors of Israel! (Ibid: 92).
Perhaps some of the classical exaggerations of the Exodus are the numbers given which describe thousands of men. Numbers were very often symbolic, not literal. 3,6,7, and 40 were just some of the sacred numbers. The 2.5 million Israelites wandering in the desert are so much of an exaggeration it is quite laughable.
The most plausible argument that I have heard, although it has problems, is the translation of eleph as ‘family’, or ‘tent’ instead of ‘thousand’. So, we have 600 families instead of 2.5 million people, which is much more realistic.
I have calculated that there may have been as many as 25,000 Israelites when entering Canaan, but this is truly an enormous number in a barren waterless desert such as Sinai/Negev.
Yes, even this reduced number would not have survived in the wilderness. The 25 000 may not sound a lot by today’s standard, but it would be a huge amount 3500 years ago. No one had armies anywhere near that size, and remember that there are occasions when the Israelites were worried about other groups, so they must have rivalled their numbers.
Before the Census of Numbers 1. The Book of Exodus mentions "600,000 men on foot" in the hebrew exodus from egypt. This is obviously a mistranslation on the copyists part or just part of an oral exaggeration. Obviously 6,000, or more realisticly 600 men were first intedned. Let's say there were 600 men, that would give an entire Exodus population of 2,400-3,000--Satisfyingly realistic enough.
If you could squeeze the number to 2-3000 it would certainly be more realistic for certain events, would cause problems with some others though, I couldnt imagine that amount storming Jericho.
I have recently been in a crowd of 2,000 people in a fundraiser walk, and just being among that number makes me think of how difficult it would be to keep everyone under control, giving each person enough food and water. 2 million would be impossible.
Yes, and remember that the wanderings took 40 years, a lot longer than your walk I hope!
Whatever the case, if it was 2,400 or 24,000 Israelites, it seems very possible such an Exodus could have happened.
But this Exodus would be nothing at all like the Exodus account of the Bible. Which leads to the question: If we cannot trust the Bible to present accurate historical information, then should we trust it for accurate spiritual information?
The way I see it, if the Bible authors happily invented last historical events, then perhaps that resurrection thing that Jesus was said to have done could similarly have been invented.
But, on a more serious note, the Exodus/Conquest narratives have been used to give Israel some sort of legitimate claim to the land, but if these are invented then it is horrendous that so many people have been killed in Palestine because certain people take the Bible literally.
Therefore, one could say that the exodus from egypt to Canaan of semetic peoples who later became known as Habiru/Israel,
I disagree with the equation of Habiru/Israel, the equation was abandoned about 70 years ago.
Many scholars originally argued for a linguistic connection between the terms Hebrew and ‘Apiru, the original assertion was that the word Habiru simply equalled Hebrew. However, a problem arose with the discovery of the ‘ha-bi-ru’ in the letters of king IR-Heba of Jerusalem in the Amarna archives. The publication of the clay tablets from the Hittite capital Hattusa produced proof that the Sumeriogram ‘sa.gaz’ that means ‘robbers’ (habbatu) , is to be read in the Akkadian and Hittite texts as ‘hab/piru’ (Weippert, M. (1971)
The Settlement of the Israelite Tribes in Palestine: a critical survey of the recent scholarly debate, SCM Press, London. 64).
In 1939 it became clear that the consonantal element of the word ‘ha-bi-ru’, ‘had to be recognised as '-p-r, which meant that all etymologies dependent on the root HBR were excluded, and corresponding attempts with ‘BR and the ‘ibrim became uncertain. The word ‘Apiru itself is not of Hebrew origin, and, of course, the Hebrew word for ‘Hebrew’ is ibrim. The origin of the word itself is not known for certain as there is no certainty as to the language (NW Semitic, Hurrian, etc.) or the verbal root from which the sociopolitical technical term (‘Apiru) was originally drawn (Gottwald, N. K. (1979) The tribes of Yahweh : a sociology of the religion of liberated Israel, 1250-1050 B.C.E, SCM Press, London.: 401).
Although the term ‘outlaw’ seems to be the most apt term to define the ‘Apiru, it tends to miss out many of the categories of society in which the ‘Apiru are said to have existed. While the ‘Apiru were distinctly recognisable from the population of the existing society that they happened to be involved with, they normally relied on that society for their livelihood. They were often employed by members of a society either as individual contract labourers or as hired groups of soldiers, agricultural labourers, or construction gangs (Ibid: 402).
It is fine for you to believe that some Habiru later became Israel, but I think you would have a terrible time proving it.
There is too much historical/legendary evidence to refute these kernals.
I disagree.
I think that the evidence that is available contradicts a great deal of the biblical texts and that certain people seem intent on making connections that may not exist. Scholars who try and manipulate the evidence to fit the biblical account invariably ignore great chunks of contrary evidence, or they make special pleas to non existent evidence. For example, just because there were habiru employed in Egypt does not mean that any of the habiru were Hebrews, it is not a simple as that.
I would say that the only thing that we know for certain in the entire debate over the origins of ancient Israel is that the Bible version, at face value, is untrue.
Cheers,
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by John Williams, posted 08-04-2005 10:36 PM John Williams has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by John Williams, posted 08-06-2005 4:24 PM Brian has replied
 Message 103 by Nighttrain, posted 08-06-2005 11:44 PM Brian has not replied

  
Theus
Inactive Member


Message 99 of 108 (230486)
08-06-2005 3:30 PM


Does anybody here follow archaeology?
Hey, just aheads up but archaeological evidence in Israel (from excavations at Megiddo and Hazor) strongly suggest that there was no large Hebrew invasion into Canaanite lands... ever. We don't even have walls (ever) around Jehrico (or 'ehrico as there is no letter J in the Hebrew aleph-beth). Instead, we see the normal razing and buidling of cities at normal rates aside from known large incursions into Israel, such as that of Vespian in the first century-ish.
Archaeologists now suspect that the Jewish religion slowly evolved alongside Canaanite belief structures, gradually taking form before the Diaspora. There's a pretty strong argument that Israel and Judah only became hot stuff with the advant of King Abram while David and Solomon were small tribal rulers. And the Nevum and Kevithum, which compose most of the Christian "Old Testemant" and Hebrew Tanakh were most likely written durring King 'osiah's reign largely to form a cultural history (aka NOT ACADEMIC history).
So, that being said, there are proto-hebraic artifacts from a mining site at Serabit El Khadin in the Sinai penninsula that have some Egyptian trade influences (a mining site for precious blue gems) and some Hebrew-ish stuff (a pyramide with what seems to be a Hebraic inscription). However, the people living here were not of the Jewish faith as we know it, and probably weren't monotheistic. And chances are stronger still that it was not slavery as described in Exodus, but normal economic trade. Like in many religious writings, some general principals may be true, but the devil is in the details.
כי כורות בתח נושם

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by jar, posted 08-06-2005 3:44 PM Theus has not replied
 Message 102 by John Williams, posted 08-06-2005 4:32 PM Theus has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 100 of 108 (230492)
08-06-2005 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Theus
08-06-2005 3:30 PM


Welcome back Theus.
Glad to see you back again. Hope to see more contributions from you in the future

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Theus, posted 08-06-2005 3:30 PM Theus has not replied

  
John Williams
Member (Idle past 4999 days)
Posts: 157
From: Oregon, US
Joined: 06-29-2004


Message 101 of 108 (230508)
08-06-2005 4:24 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Brian
08-06-2005 5:55 AM


Re: Exodus facts and legend
I appreciate your response.
It certainly is a valid stance to believe that the Exodus/Genesis stories are nothing but fiction until there is some sort of remarkable historical evidence that can substantiate them.
I believe some of that historical evidence does exist which can atleast suggest their was a people who were called "Israel" during the time period just before the arrival of the Philistines c.1200 bc.
The one example of this would be the Israel Stele of 1207 bc.
You asked a good question: "And how do we know that the ‘Israel’ of the Merneptah Stele is the Israel of the Bible?"
Like most historical identification, you don't now with 100% certainty. But the indicators seem reasonable enough as most scholars do have a general consensus that the Israel mentioned in the stele is plausable evidence of the Israel of the bible.
I was impressed with the evidence you gave me which seemed to indicate a c.1000 bc origin for the Joseph story. This might make me reconsider my views of that narrative. [But I still think the bible narrative is a garbled fantasized account of old Hyksos memories of grandeur].
As for the people mentioned in Genesis etc, it seems that they were just like most folk heroes, such as king Arthur etc. Highly mythologized representations of real people. That's just my assumption though.
Now on to the Habiru:
Most of what you gave me was information I already knew of. I believe that the Hebrew ethnicity came from the Habiru/Apiru, who were outcasts from all ancient mid-east society and eventually formed a Robin Hood sort of band of ancient cossack/pirate like semi-nomadic warrior class serfs, who hired themselves out as Mercenaries, workers etc.[thus the slave traditions in egypt combined with memories of the Hyksos capitol at Ramsess(Avaris)].
Really, the evidence certainly exists for a possible link of the Habiru with the Hebrew. Thus,[as I believe] the Hebrew people were a collective bunch of rebel folk who came from far and wide throughout the Near-eastern world to join in groups that plundered, allied, and threatened the fairly weak Egyptian vassal princes of Canaan during the c.1400-1300's bc. This diverse group of people had legends and memories of an origin in the east-- accross the Euphrates[Abraham etc.] thus they became known as Hebrews--Eber meaning "across". Some of these groups formed into tribes that united and worshiped a combination of gods, El, Yahweh, etc. and eventually became known as the people of "YisrEl"--Israel. Then came their memories of a time when they lived as kings in Egypt, (Joseph,Jacob) and when they were driven out in an Exodus (Hyksos dynasty and Expulsion).
Then Philistines, and Sea people [arch rivasl] came from the coast in 1200-1150bc. For the next 200 years we would have the stories of mighty wars between Israel and Philistia--AKA Goliath, Samson. An Aegean Greek-like influence seems evident in these old bible stories--The Giant GOLIATH--wears armor like Herakles, Samson is likened to any Sun God of ancient lore.
I think that the Shasu/bedouin-nomads, may also have had some part to play in the influence of the Israelite people as Donald Redford believes.
Thank you for listening to my highly imaginative scenario. My extraordinary ideas deserve equally extraordinary evidence as I am aware.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Brian, posted 08-06-2005 5:55 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 08-08-2005 1:27 PM John Williams has not replied
 Message 106 by Brian, posted 08-08-2005 2:46 PM John Williams has not replied

  
John Williams
Member (Idle past 4999 days)
Posts: 157
From: Oregon, US
Joined: 06-29-2004


Message 102 of 108 (230512)
08-06-2005 4:32 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Theus
08-06-2005 3:30 PM


Re: Does anybody here follow archaeology?
Interesting info Theus.
I agree that the biblical idea of a huge Canaanite conquest under commander Joshua was an exaggeration. If anything, I believe it was a collective tradition of 200+ years of tribal wars condensed into one big fat story.
I am interested to hear more about Serabit El Khadin. I'll have to google that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Theus, posted 08-06-2005 3:30 PM Theus has not replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 103 of 108 (230625)
08-06-2005 11:44 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Brian
08-06-2005 5:55 AM


Re: Exodus facts and legend
Before the Census of Numbers 1. The Book of Exodus mentions "600,000 men on foot" in the hebrew exodus from egypt. This is obviously a mistranslation on the copyists part or just part of an oral exaggeration. Obviously 6,000, or more realisticly 600 men were first intedned. Let's say there were 600 men, that would give an entire Exodus population of 2,400-3,000--Satisfyingly realistic enough.
If you could squeeze the number to 2-3000 it would certainly be more realistic for certain events, would cause problems with some others though, I couldnt imagine that amount storming Jericho.
Trouble is, if you fiddle with numbers, how many were slain at Mt. Sinai, 3000 or 30 or 3?(Ex 32:29) Then again, the breeding program must have kicked in to produce the tribal roll-call in Numbers:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Brian, posted 08-06-2005 5:55 AM Brian has not replied

  
ConsequentAtheist
Member (Idle past 6239 days)
Posts: 392
Joined: 05-28-2003


Message 104 of 108 (231016)
08-08-2005 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 101 by John Williams
08-06-2005 4:24 PM


Re: Exodus facts and legend
quote:
Really, the evidence certainly exists for a possible link of the Habiru with the Hebrew.
  —"John Williams"
I'm unclear what is meant by suggesting evidence of a possibility. Has anyone in fact argued againt the impossibility of such a link? And what, specifically, is this evidence?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by John Williams, posted 08-06-2005 4:24 PM John Williams has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by jar, posted 08-08-2005 1:34 PM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 105 of 108 (231017)
08-08-2005 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by ConsequentAtheist
08-08-2005 1:27 PM


Re: Exodus facts and legend
I don't think anyone has said it's impossible but looking at the usage over time it seems unlikely.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 08-08-2005 1:27 PM ConsequentAtheist has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024