|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Dating the Exodus | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Lysimachus Member (Idle past 5222 days) Posts: 380 Joined: |
*double post*
This message has been edited by Lysimachus, 08-15-2004 11:19 AM ~Lysimachus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
As of yet, I have not once seen you concede to anything of particular that I or Hydarnes have pointed out. Perhaps that is because neither of you has yet to make a vaid point. I have willingly admited that there are people who claim that Habiru equates to Hebrews. I then went on to point out exactly why they are incorrect. One more time. The term was commonly used from around 2000 through 1200 BCE as a generic term. It was used to describe people commonly seen as brigands, highway robbers, mercenaries, day labors, a placeless people of many descents. I pounted out that the term was used by the Sumerians, Akkadians as well as the Egyptians. It was used idiomatically as shown on EA 288. A more recent example might be the use of the term Romany or Gypsy. What is so hard to understand about that?
Do you want to be known as the one who is place on the "annoying list"? You have a really bad tendency to annoy people--and your attitude really rubs people the wrong way. It can be really really buggy, and I hope you change. I am sorry that you feel that way. I try to never unintentionally offend people. However, the key points are: a) The dating of the Jerusalem Armana letters do not support your verision of the Exodus. b) There is nothing in the Jersualem Armana letters that even hints at invasion, but rather City revolts, power struggles between the cities, and general discord. c) There is nothing in the Jerusalem Armana letters that points to an organized band that resembles the Biblical account of the Hebrews. In support of my position I posted copies of the three documents. I did not "quote mine" them, picking out only those senetences that supported my position. I have never desparaged you, your brother or any of the other supporters of the Video. I have countered your arguments. I have asked all of you to point to those places in the documents that show an invasion was happening. I have asked you good folk to defend your contention that Hibaru = Hebrew. The people that read this thread will decide if you have done either. edited to add required spelling errors. This message has been edited by jar, 08-15-2004 12:32 PM Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4990 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Hi H,
I fail to see any direct pertinence. I've repeatedly acknowledged that there was internal strife and intrigue occuring in the region, that's obvious from any reading of the Amarna letters. Does this in any way resemble the Bible's account of the Conquest of Canaan? You can be honest with yourself here. Also, how does the documented claim in EA 148, where the king of Hazor is said to be giving support to the ‘Apiru, ‘The king of Hasura has abandoned his house and has aligned himself with the `Apiru’. fit the picture of the conquest as portrayed in the Bible? Do you see these problems as 'stumbling blocks' to the 15th century conquest theory? Brian. This message has been edited by Brian, 08-15-2004 03:14 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Brian Member (Idle past 4990 days) Posts: 4659 From: Scotland Joined: |
Hi Vidusa,
(Petko N. Vidusa:The Great Pyramid and the Bible) How much, roughly, does it cost to self-publish your book? Did you try to get any reputable publisher to publish this book for you? Cheers Brian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3078 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
You really amaze me jar. As of yet, I have not once seen you concede to anything of particular that I or Hydarnes have pointed out. Here Hydarnes is referring to one of the world's most renowned epigraphists, and you will continue to boldly assert that this is "yet another unspecified expert"? This is all Jar does - ASSERT contrary to what is evidenced. He is a disruption to quality debate and I think Brian's courtesy to him is phenomenal. Jar possesses the exact mindset of bonfire book-burners. He should be suspended like Rocket was for clowning debate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3078 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Dr. Scott was offered 1 million by the largest publisher in the U.S. just to agree to write and produce ANY book about the Great Pyramid, not counting the normal fee and royalties.
He declined - too busy fulfilling his calling as a Bible teacher.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cold Foreign Object  Suspended Member (Idle past 3078 days) Posts: 3417 Joined: |
Hi Brian:
So far my dating has been tested by the claim that the 1220 dating of Hazor cannot be the destruction by Joshua. The 1220 date for Hazor's destruction is an important part of my claim, and since no one has provided a single solitary piece of contrary evidence, then my association of the 1220 destruction with Jshua still stands. The Cambridge Ancient History Chronology of 1962 refuted you. Message 15 All you are doing is asserting the end of Hazor came by the hand of Joshua instead of Barak, unless of course I have missed the post of yours which refutes Cambridge. You go with Joshua because Yadin's interpretation of Judges record. Is Yadin qualified to handle scripture as excavation ? For the record I never claimed lack concerning the Exodus - only archaeology in general. Archaeology is a component of disputed evidence. When I read archaeologists using words like "suggests" and "probably" and then read their authoritative conclusions I see a case built on uncertainty.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hydarnes Inactive Member |
quote: No problem. I experience the same circumstantial impediments.
quote: The etymology of certain terms, without question, translates into variation depending on the culture or context in which it was being used. I am familiar with the widespread usage of the term.
quote: Again, there is no question that the term was widespread and used to refer to peoples who weren’t associated with any particular urban location, but rather wanderers, nevertheless, certain texts in the Amarna correspondence seem to convey more of an organized threat being referred to in certain respects which include the word Apiru, rather than that of disorganized/fractioned skirmishes that might also be attributed to Apiru in a differing circumstance or situation (I will be supporting this a bit later in the balance of my critique). The former fact alone (a prevalent large-scale usage of the term), however, is not adequate basis enough to negate the proposed origin for the word as a prototypein which Hebrew is quite likely a derivative (contrary to your assumption that the term is being equated). This proposition introduces its merit based on the etymological provenance of many biblical terms that only satisfactorily correspond with a Hurrian linguistic conception. This is confirmed by the Wikipedia Encyclopedia: If the Habiru were the proto-Hebrews, a Hurrian origin would offer strong support for this since many Hurrian cultural themes appear in the bible. Many Biblical proper names (individual, group and place names, as well as the popular -ya name-ending) that have no satisfactory Semitic etymology, can be demonstrated to perhaps descend from Anatolian or North Syrian (Hurrian) onomastics testifing that these names may have entered Hebrew directly from Hurrian. For example, David is explained from Dudya (beloved of Ya where Ya is the Hurrian divinity) a Hurrian Habiru name later used as Solomon's coronation epithet and many of David's wandering Hebrews also possess Hurrian Habiru names (e.g. Nihiri).-- Habiru - Wikipedia This is an especially valuable attestment coming from a source that seems to be itself very critical of making such a nexus. Considering this Hurrian heritage to many Hebrew terms, and other very suggestive data, it is not unlikely at all that Apiru was an earlier forrunner of the term that was later christened Hebrew. And the presence of this historical data is assuredly one of the factors behind Frank Cross’ more definitive identification. The fact remains that the Israelites WOULD have undoubtedly been referred to as such (either Apiru or Asiatics) in a post-Exodus scenario, as they were without metropolitan ties. And if a circa date for the events referred to in the Bible remain can remain consistent with the historical record, there is simply no unbiased reason why it to be dismissed as a possibility. To corroborate my former statements with respect to other Amarna letters bearing testament to a seemingly more organized threat from the Apiru, and not strictly disorganized skirmishes between petty kings, let us look at what Rib-Addi, king of Gubla (Byblos) has to say about the situation: "Moreover, look, he strives to seize Gubla ! And...may the king, my lord, give heed to the words of his servant, and may he hasten with all speed chariots and troops that they may guard the city of the king, my lord...But if the king, my lord, does not give heed to the words of his servant, [b]then Gubla will be joined to him, and all the lands of the king, as far as Egypt, will be [i]joined to the `Apiru[/b] [/i] (P.160. EA 88. "Blockaded." William L. Moran. The Amarna Letters. Baltimore. Johns Hopkins University Press. 1987) Does this record seem to reflect the same accounts given in Scripture for a number of Canaanite states allying/joining with the Israelites under Joshua? It could very well be, and if the Apiru here being referred are exclusively mercenaries, sociopolitical parties and robbers why would it pose any serious threat to all the lands of the king (particularly Canaan)? Also: "...Sumur has now been seized; troops from Gubla have been killed...We are servants of the king, and it is distressing for us to see we are going to be taken. I myself am afraid I will be killed...He must not neglect his city. If he does not send them [troops] to Gubla, they [`Apiru] will take it...The lands of Canaan will not belong to the king." (pp.212-213. "EA 131 A Commissioner Killed." Moran. 1987) This is suggestively a warning from Rib-Addi telling the king of Egypt that if he does NOT send troops into Canaan to stabilize the situation, that the Apiru will CONQUER the land of Canaan, not that it will be destroyed because of petty strife. Could it be slightly exaggerated? Perhaps, but it can be equally argued that the results from the controversy in the region (and the fulfillment of his admonition that the lands will not belong to the king) testify to Rib-Addi’s warnings. The context also seems to indicate that there is a coming threatfurther elucidated by the cry it is distressing for us to see we are going to be taken, once again harmonizing with the possibility that there was actually an invasion occurring. And further striking: "...the `Apiru forces waged war against me and captured the cities of the king, my lord, my god, my Sun. The `Apiru captured Mahzibtu, a city of the king, my lord, and plundered it and sent it up in flames..."-- (p.265. EA 185. "An Egyptian Traitor." Moran. 1987) Again, we see that the Apiru forces were waging war and capturing a city, and the particular context seems to strongly reject your categorical conclusion that these letters were exclusively alluding to minor, disorganized, uncoordinated squabbles and inherent political strife, although there was a great deal of this. We also find that certain conduct manifested on the conquered cities in Joshua resembles what the king of Byblos is relaying, additionally detracting from your claim that the conquest CANNOT coincide with events as stated in the Amarna letters. Interestingly enough, there is an individual named Yishua mentioned in EA#256 written by Mut-Balhu (meaning Man of Baal) who was the son of Labayu the king of Shechem. Could it be that Yishua relates to Joshua in some way? If the Amarna letters ARE containing any information relevant to the Israelite invasion as mentioned in scripture, they are most likely referring to the beginning of their emergence in the region, and most likely not during. Personally, I still lean towards the conclusion that that the main part of Joshua’s conquest occurred at the end of the 18th dynasty and after the reign of Akhenaten, yet Akhenaten’s empire collapsing is in perfect harmony with Scripture and a post-Exodus scenario, as Egypt would have suffered a major military, as well as economic decline, rendering any assistance to her vassal states a virtual impossibility. In conclusion then, when considering the Biblical narrative, it is important to remember that a c.1445.b.c date for the Exodus must include at least a 40 year gap between the Israelites leaving Egypt and entering Sinai, and the time that the conquest of Canaan begins under Joshua. Additionally, at least 20 years must be factored as the tentative duration of the conquest itself. The Bible does not specify the length of time for the entirety of Joshua’s invasion, but Josephus concurs with a 20 year period. Thus, any time between 1400 and the mid 14th century is an acceptable time margin for the conquest to have occurred. Either way, the circumstances inherent in the Amarna letters simply do not favor your assumption that the two events are incompatible (mutually exclusive), and if anything, would actually serve to precipitate such an event. This message has been edited by Hydarnes, 08-15-2004 10:57 PM This message has been edited by Hydarnes, 08-15-2004 11:10 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hydarnes Inactive Member |
And now, a little question for Jar:
Do you just enjoy the fact that you can wield such an uncanny ability to get others so thoroughly aggravated with your obscene mockery of well-stated points that don’t particularly comply with your ideological adherences?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Eta_Carinae Member (Idle past 4405 days) Posts: 547 From: US Joined: |
That is BS and you know it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hydarnes Inactive Member |
quote: Ah, you came just in time to grace us with your complimenting words.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Do you just enjoy the fact that you can wield such an uncanny ability to get others so thoroughly aggravated with your obscene mockery of well-stated points that don’t particularly comply with your ideological adherences? Actually, I just get really annoyed by shallow logic and misdirection. I don't think we should withhold information, quote mine and misrepresent to defend a particular point of view or position. For example, if you really wanted to support your assertion of the relation between Habiru and the Hebrew Nation, why didn't you include the next section from the Wikipedia section.
As more texts were uncovered througout the Near East, however, it became clear that these Apiru were found throughout most of the Fertile Crescent". The scholars who wrote the Oxford History of the Biblical World concluded that the "Habiru" had no common ethnic affiliations, that they spoke no common language, and that they normally led a marginal and sometimes lawless existence on the fringes of settled society. Those scholars characterized the various Habiru/Apiru as a loosely defined, inferior social class composed of shifting population elements without secure ties to settled communities, who were frequently encountered in texts as outlaws, mercenaries, and slaves. In that vein, some modern scholars consider Habiru and related words to be more of a political designation than an ethnic or tribal one. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hydarnes Inactive Member |
quote: I think I've heard enough of your guile for one thread, and I would appreciate it if you would, from now on, refrain from cluttering decent topics with this inconsiderate and disingenuous foolishness.
quote: Seeing that you proved your dishonesty earlier with your accusation about my withholding the name of a mentioned "expert", the above is naturally rife with the same drivel. I mentioned, immediately subsequent to my furnishing the source: This is an especially valuable attestment coming from a source that seems to be itself very critical of making such a nexus. Oh, but how quick you are to point out misdemeanors in others, only to reveal your own folly. This message has been edited by Hydarnes, 08-15-2004 11:20 PM This message has been edited by Hydarnes, 08-15-2004 11:21 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
The readers are intellegent folk. Give them all of the available information, that which supports a position as well as that which questions it. They are fully capable of making a judgement.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hydarnes Inactive Member |
Jar, if you don't take serious offense, how old are you?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024