Dating the Exodus

Hi WT,Ok, the Cambridge assigns the end of Hazor to Barak. This then means that there should be ANOTHER end of Hazor level that can be assigned to Joshua. So, which end of occupation level does the Cambridge assign to Joshua? My stance isnt based on Yadin, it is based on common sense and logic.We have ONE end of occupation level dated to 1220.We have an end of occupation claimed for Joshua in the Bible.Since there is ONLY one end of occupation level at Hazor then for the biblical narratives to be true this MUST be assigned to Joshua.IF it isnt assigned to him and it is assigned instaed to Barak, then the Joshua narratives are incorrect.Is there an end of occupation level at Hazor dated to around 1400 that can be assigned to Joshua?Brian.

Hi, Moses never entered Canaan, God broke his promise to him Brian.

H Jar,I do appreciate you pointing it out, sometimes I type faster than I think, which is nt difficult.But thanks for highlighting this.Brian.

Hi H, The information to support my claims is in post 155.Josephus must contradict himself if you have a reference by him that puts the duration at 20 years. Do you have the reference for this at a hand so I can check it out myself?The bible does indeed indicate the length of time that it took for the Conquest, you just have to read it thats all.Brian.This message has been edited by Brian, 08-17-2004 11:43 AM

Hi Paul,Josephus' 5 years fits in quite well with the 5-7 years that the Bible has for the Conquest. After 5 years there are no Canaanites left (bar a few) to be writing letters to the pharaoh. I am sure that Ussher puts the conquest at 6 years, but I don't have a reference for that, so it may be wishful thinking.The 5 -7 year military conquest of Canaan ceratinly is no refelcted in the Amarna Letters, so, if it happened at all, it must be after 1350 BCE.The 13th century date still stands strong Keep an eye out for the book and the video coming soon 'The case for the 13th century Exodus'.Brian.Brian.

Blood of Jesus

Hi H, Hey, it is no problem, I can see how Josephus' writings could be misunderstood, and we all make mistakes.But, given that the Amarna Letters do not support a 5 year military conquest of Canaan during the period they cover, 1400-1350 BCE, do you then accept that the biblical account of Joshua's conquest (at face value) is incompatible with the evidence from Amarna?If the 'conquest' was after 1350 BCE, and thus would not be covered by the Amarna Letters, do you then accept that the Conquest has to be after 1350 with the Exodus taking place 40 years previous to which ever post 1350 date is suggested? I understand all too well, I learned my lesson the hard way a few years ago and that lesson was to triple check the sources yourself and if possible use primary sources. But, forget it and let's move on.Brian.

No probs, I actually start back at school tomorrow after almost 8 weeks summer holiday so it will be the weekend before I have time to catch up with myself.Brian.

Just to let everyone know that I am still extremely busy at work and uni and haven't forgotten about the topic.It may be a week or so before I have spare time, sorry guys but we are short-staffed and I have to prioritise things.Thanks for your patience.Brian.

Hi, Some of this evidence would be..........? These Egyptian documents that show Israelite presence are .......? Once you summarise this evidence, then perhaps we can make some conclusions. A 400 year rule by the Hyksos, are you sure about this? Evidence please.Could I refer you to this paragraph in my OP Also, I would really like participants to support any claim with references for their claims. Something like The Hebrews were in Egypt because there are texts that say the Habiru were in Egypt, and Habiru is another name for Hebrew , will not be accepted as an argument for or against anything. The equation of Habiru/’apiru with ‘Hebrew’ would need to be supported from decent academic sources, a website constructed by your mate Bob without any academic references on it doesn’t count. Cheers.Brian.

HI WT,My thesis is going to the binders on saturday 18th, and then I am going for a well-earned drink or two.From monday 20th, I should have at least some free time to participate at EvC again.Thanks for being so patient, I appreciate it. (that goes to everyone else as well).See you soon WT.Brian.

plus or minus 25 years is fine with me WT. 1250 B.C.E. 1446 B.C.E. Might have been this?http://EvC Forum: The Exodus: 'A Dead Issue.' -->EvC Forum: The Exodus: 'A Dead Issue.'Brian

Hi WT,I was just working through my backlog chronologically.Brian.

Hi WT,I would like to reply to your post in segments so we can focus on a reasonable number of points before moving on, I hope you are in agreement with this. What about Rendsburg’s 1100’s date, or the multiple exodus theories? The Bible is the ONLY source, so it has to be the chief source. But, if you are only taking the biblical accounts into consideration then all you are doing is arguing about the content of the Bible, you are not investigating the historical accuracy of the events. We need external evidence to support the biblical narratives. This is unsupported, but I will ignore that and go with the theory for the moment.Okay, we will go with the claim that the Exodus was precisely 1453 BCE. Fine, we have Omri ruling in 853, I have no problems with that, as there is external evidence to support this. So, the time period under scrutiny is the gap between the last year of Solomon’s reign and the first year of Ahab’s. Again, totally unsupported, but we can run with this. I take it you also wish to include the reign of Jeroboam here WT?Anyway, the information in the First Book of Kings *appears* to disagree with this 64 year gap.Jeroboam - 22 years (1 Kings 14:20).
Nadab - 2 years (1 Kings 15:25).
Baasha - 24 years (1 Kings 15:33).
Elah - 2 years (1 Kings 16:8).
Zimri - 7 days (1 Kings 16:15).
Omri - 12 years (1 Kings 16:23).I get the time period to be 62 years and seven days, oh and plus the three days that Rehoboam asked for to consider Jeroboam’s request to lower taxes.I get this to add up to 62 years and 10 days.Am I overlooking something?If I am not overlooking anything then I suggest that the biblical chronology itself falsifies the claim that the Exodus can be dated to precisely 1453.Brian.

Hi WT,Yes I meant Ahab, my apologies for the confusion.I will reply later today to other points.Sorry again for the confusion.Brian.