|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Dating the Exodus | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Vidusa Inactive Member |
The problem with that cronology is that it is based first on an event, the flood, that does not seem to have ever happened, and second, on the ages of people that have no evidence of their even having lived. Finally, Joseph, Joseph getting sold into slavery, Joseph going before Pharoah, and all the other dates and events are without any evidence as well.
-------------- The Bible is clear and simple about this chronology.(Petko N. Vidusa:The Great Pyramid and the Bible)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminAsgara Administrator (Idle past 2333 days) Posts: 2073 From: The Universe Joined: |
Welcome Vidusa, are you Petko Vidusa?
If you plan on discussing your(?) book we did have a thread dedicated to the pyramid, http://EvC Forum: PROOF OF GOD This thread has been closed due to length, but there is a spin off thread here, http://EvC Forum: Longest Land Meridian. We want to keep these threads pretty close in terms of topic. The new thread is discussing just one of the claims made in the original thread. When this is taken care of, we will move on to another claim from the original. AdminAsgara Queen of the Universe http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote:And probably wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The Bible is clear and simple about this chronology. The Ring Trilogy is clear and simple about the chronology of Middle Earth. Should I accept the chronology of Middle Earth? If we look at the Bible to provide literal chronologies, we cannot get past the second verse of Genesis. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hydarnes Inactive Member |
quote: Gratuitous remark
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hydarnes Inactive Member |
quote: What you refer to as a lack of evidence could can very well mean that you're looking for his (or said person's) existence in all the wrong periods of history. Have you ever looked at theory which suggests that Joseph was Imhotep? The evidence is rather persuasive, as well as compelling.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hydarnes Inactive Member |
quote: But don't you espouse a c1200 Exodus, or have you changed your position?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hydarnes Inactive Member |
quote: Actually, I suggest you reform your appraisal of Bryant Wood's finds, as they not only largely disprove Kenyon's earlier artificial conclusions, but provide significant evidence to rule out the 1500 postulate that purportedly eliminates a Joshua conquest. I will address this in the pertinent thread, so don't bother to perpetuate the dialogue in here. P.S. I haven't seen you respond any further concerning the Habiru/Apiru, did I miss where you conceded that there is a strong possibility that the name *could* have included the Isrealites who were starting to invade canaan at roughly the same time?Or are you still planning to contend such a likelihood? This message has been edited by Hydarnes, 08-14-2004 02:30 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
lfen Member (Idle past 4708 days) Posts: 2189 From: Oregon Joined: |
For the biblical chronology to be correct, at face value, the conquest of canaan HAS to be around 1400. ... they should all show massive destruction levels at around 1400BCE, this is 100% at odds with the archaeological evidence. Hydarnes, It's right there in the material you quoted. Brian's argument is simple. Using the biblical chronology the conquest has to be around 1400 but that is "100% at odds with the archaeological evidence". Brian is arguing for the 1200 date based ON the evidence which does not support the biblical chronology. Brian has not changed his position he is simple stating the contradiction between archaeological evidence and biblical account. lfen
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
P.S. I haven't seen you respond any further concerning the Habiru/Apiru, did I miss where you conceded that there is a strong possibility that the name *could* have included the Isrealites who were starting to invade canaan at roughly the same time? Actually, since the name was used throughout the region by Sumerian, Egyptian, Akkadian, Hittite, Mitanni, and Ugariti, from about 2000-1200BCE, to describe various landless and lawless peoples covering an area from Iran to Egypt, it is very unlikely that it refers to the Hebrews. Instead, it appears to be a generic term for landless nomads. Once again, you really have to twist the evidence to try to make it conform to the Bible in any way. And even if you accepted that interpretation, it appears that the Habiru left the Delta region sometime around 1200 and not in a major Exodus, but simply straggeling off, family by family, clan by clan over a period of hundreds of years. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3078 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Hi Brian:
Did you not tell me once that John Garstang's dating of Jericho is unreliable because of his alleged bias for the Bible ? And that Kenyon's "fortunate" improved dating methods corrected the bias ? Of course, Dr. Scott labeled Kenyon's revisionism "higher criticism" status - a phrase used to describe the scholarly elements which handle the Bible as presumably false. WT
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3078 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Where is the twisting ?
Hebrew/Habiru/apiru Answer: Only in the assertion that we do not see what we see. It is only rejected because it is so/too obvious. You evos can deduce a frickin fossil "to be incontrovertibly human - millions of years old" but an obvious see for yourself similarity has you suddenly "confused".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
A statement was made as if it were somehow relevant to the conversation. I was merely replying that the comment may not have any relevance when compared to real-life archeological evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Actually, it is more likely related to the Akkadian term Habbatu which refered to a robber or brigand.
It was a generic term used by many regional powers to refer to landless people that primarily made their living by theft and highway robbery. They were located all over the Middle East and the term was in use from around 2000 on. There is no indication that it refers to any particular people and certainly not to any region. For more information on the origin of the term Check here. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
John Williams Member (Idle past 5029 days) Posts: 157 From: Oregon, US Joined: |
Is there any solid evidence that the Moses even existed? What about the entire Nation of Israel?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024