Just because Ahab is mentioned by Shalmaneser III does not mean that Eli judged Israel for 40 years!
The Bible says Eli was a priest and served in that dimension for 40 years.
If we consider the entire ‘historical books’ of the Old Testament the actual percentage of corroborating external evidence is miniscule.
I disagree.
One could say the actual percentage of historical claims corroborated by the external evidence of the O.T. is miniscule.
But whatever degree of accuracy that your comment contains is purely a subjective assessment because the view assigns an inferior status to the Bible.
WT writes:
Consistency cannot be mis-viewed as circular and "inconsistencies" given unreliability status.
Brian: "Why not?"
WT: Because it is an admission of bias/double standard. Go ahead and confirm the criticism of we theists.
Consistency is a positive attribute of reliability not a negative attribute of circularity.
IOW, give credit where credit is due OR relinquish perceived objectivity.
Brian writes:
Philistines oppress Israel 40 years (13:1)
Samson: 20 years (15:20 and 16:31)
You have omitted the 20 year oppression by Jabin
You have omitted the 7 years oppression of Midian
You have omitted the 18 year oppression of the Ammonites
You have omitted the 40 year oppression by the Philistines
The problem I have here is that you have included the 8 year oppression of Cushan-rishathaim and the 18 year oppression of Eglon, why have you included these and ignored the four I have mentioned?
If you wish to suggest that the four periods of oppression run concurrently with the rule of certain Judges then that is fine, but I really would like references that support this.
It is imperative to differentiate when Israel was not ruled by a Judge, but by a foreign king, and when a Judge ruled during a period of enemy harassment.
Recognition of these two realities/circumstances resolves the Judges chronology adequately.
Periods of servitude to heathen kings constitute links in the chronological chain while enemy affliction during the rule of a Judge does not. The length of the rule of the latter extends the chronological chain but the consecutive accounting of the two circumstances is without basis/severe error.
The length of the Judges interval is determined by totalling the periods of rule, either by a Hebrew Judge or a foreign king, while omitting durations of the oppressions.
All of the alleged omissions run concurrently within the chronology posted in
Message 219.
Brian writes:
You have omitted the 20 year oppression by Jabin
The key word is "oppression" and this occurred during the Judgeship of Deborah:
Judges 4:3,4
And the children of Israel cried unto the LORD: for he had nine hundred chariots of iron; and twenty years he mightily oppressed the children of Israel.
And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.
Judges 15:20 (speaking of Samson)
And he judged Israel in the days of the Philistines twenty years.
But the texts do not say that Jabin or the Philistines ruled the Israelites.
Yet the scriptures specifically state that the kings of Mesopotamia and Moab ruled in Palestine for 8 and 18 years respectively. (Judges 3:8 and 3:14)
Hence the oppression of Jabin gives way to the stated duration of Deborah's rule. (40 years/Judges 5:31)
The twenty years of Samson falls within the 40 year Philistine oppression, which said oppression began with Ibzan followed by Elon and then Abdon.
Ibzan was a northern stationed Judge of Zebulon while Samson is famous for his Philistine conquests in the south (present day Gaza).
Already cited is the passage which states Samson ruled "in the days of the Philistines" (Judges 15:20)
The Judgeships of Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon are recorded as a block, including their duration of rule and deaths. (Judges 12:8-15) Then the circumstances of oppression covering all three judges immediately follows in Judges chapter 13/Philistine oppression of 40 years. Hence the 20 years of Samson runs concurrently with his contemporary Ibzan of the north.
The total years of Ibzan, Elon, and Abdon are 25 years, which leaves the Philistine oppression continuing for another 15 years. 1Samuel 4:17,18; 5:2; 6:1,21; 7:11-13 records that the Philistine oppression came to an end during Samuel's first year which began at the death of Eli who held the office of High Priest for 40 years.
Ibzan, Eli the priest, and the 40 year Philistine oppresssion all began in the same year.
When Abdon and Samson died, which corresponds with the latter years of Eli the priest no civil Judge or ruler came to power, hence the passages in the book of Judges describe this period,
"in those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes." (Judges 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25)
The Midianite oppression began at the close of Deborah's rule (40 years)(Judges 6:1) and the deliverance came by the hand of Gideon (40 year rule).
The 18 year Ammonite oppression was during Judge Jair and overlapped into the first year of Jephthah.
The key to the above system of chronology reckoning is the accounting of a Judge's length of rule, a foreign king's length of rule and then the subsequent placement of the 4 oppressions into one or more of these rulerships.
Because the book of Judges specifically states when a heathen king ruled the Israelites (2 times) this becomes the basis to not count any of the oppressions in the chronological chain.
I will point out 2 glaring omissions that your source ignores that we can discuss. Remember, I only need to add one year to your chronology to falsify it.
Lets get something straight:
I have presented a chronology that incorporates what I believe the Bible records. The Bible must contain a year for the Exodus and my post 219 says it is 1453 BC.
Thousands of scholars will say the Bible records a different date than mine.
Nobody's date is proveable beyond falsification. I and my sources merely dare to commit to a date.
My 1453 date is a target that none of my opponents will ever agree, you all will find a year here or there to falsify it with - so be it.
You have already agreed that the Bible dates the Exodus 1446 BC.
We are a mere 7 years apart.
Because my date/post 219 is the latest argument posted these present exchanges are the expected scrutiny that any argument should receive.
The real debate begins when we argue the massive difference between my mid-15th and your mid-13th.
Brian writes:
The Elders quite clearly ruled after Joshua’s death, the text informs us that the people served the LORD all the days of Joshua AND all the days of the Elders that outlived Joshua. Now, your Josephus quote tells us that Joshua died 25 years after Moses, and this is the 25 years that is used, but your source immediately begins the oppression of Cushan-rishathaim! What happened to the rule of the Elders that outlived Joshua, your source appears to have them end their rule at the same time as Joshua’s death. This is what I call a horrendous omission.
Rutherford assigns a 25 year span. It is not omitted.
The text of Joshua 2:7 simply says that the Elders who outlived Joshua, that is his peers. When these persons died the Israelites immediately regressed into idol worship and God punished them accordingly at the hand of their enemies.
Chapter VIII/Rutherford page 607:
"Both the Bible and Josephus say Joshua died at the age of 110 years.
The latter reference also states that Joshua's rulership continued for 25 years after the death of Moses. This period includes that of the Elders associated with Joshua.
Joshua 13:1 states that he was "old and stricken in years" only 6 years after the entry into Canaan (Joshua 14:7,10). This indicates that the 25 years rule assigned to Joshua by Josephus includes the rule of Joshua and the Elders associated with him, for it is stated in Judges 2:7 that some of these outlived Joshua: "And the people served the Lord all the days of Joshua and all the days of the Elders that outlived Joshua."
Joshua and the Elders thus ruled for 25 years after the death of Moses about 6 weeks earlier.
There is another horrendous omission a few verses later at Judges 2:10:
"And also all that generation were gathered unto their fathers: and there arose another generation after them, which knew not the LORD, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel."
After Joshua died, and BEFORE Cushan’s oppression, enough time passed for all of Joshua’s generation to die. Not only that, enough time passed for ANOTHER generation to arise, it is only at Judges 3:8 that God delivers Israel into the hands of Cushan-rishathaim. Your source has the oppression of Cushan-rishathaim begin immediately after the death of Joshua, this is unacceptable given the biblical information.
Rutherford says Judges 2:10 is but narrative content informing the reader that persons unattached to Joshua became the majority population, hence their quickness to worship idols. This type of commentary reflects the evolution of the people from following God to their eligibility to receive the curses stated by Moses for not continuing in all things of the book of the law/covenant.
The very verses you argue that should receive a timespan in the chronology do not say anything about duration of time. They demonstrate the truth that God has no grandchildren - a theological truth.
The 11 year solo rule of Samuel does not fit with the biblical information. Perhaps you can clear this up?
Rutherford's source is Josephus/Antiquities VI, xiii,5.
Samuel reigns solo after the death of Eli for 12 years (1 year co-regency with Saul) and 18 years with Saul the King.
Now, the Ark is taken and Eli dies as soon as he heard of this, then Samuel’s solo rule begins. But, 1 Sam. 6:1 tells us that the Ark remained in the ‘country of the Philistines’ for 7 months, then it travelled all over the country for an undisclosed period of time. Then it finally arrives at Kirjath-Jearim (1 Sam. 7:2) where it remains for 20 years, then at 1 Sam. 7:3 we have Samuel addressing the Israelites. So, we have at the very least 20 years and 7 months that have passed since the death of Eli, how can Samuel only have reigned for 11 years?
Samuel ruled 11 years solo, 1 year with Saul, then 18 years into the reign of Saul for a total of 30 years.
How do the events in your blue box spoil this ?
Brian writes:
First of all, your source has another horrendous omission, namely he neglects to inform his readers that Josephus contradicts himself over the period of Saul’s rule.
This quote, that your source cites, actually terminates the one year joint rule argument!
First you say Josephus contradicts himself and is thus unreliable, then you use the same Josephus quote to harm a Rutherford argument. I don't get it.
The length of Saul’s rule is unknown for certain.
Acts 13:21
And afterward they desired a king: and God gave unto them Saul the son of Cis, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, by the space of forty years.
I do not want to further entangle the Saul issue until you respond.
As for Samuel I do not see a great need to haggle over 1 year unless you have virtually irrefutable evidence.
Jubilee Cycle
Brian writes:
But you are using the cycle from Moses’ time to date the beginning of the first cycle, that is why you start at 10 years after the beginning of the conquest. This is actually wrong as well as both the Bible and Josephus tell us that the conquest only took 5 years, the whole sabbatic thing is hopeless.
As clearly stated in post 219 the INAUGURAL Jubilee cycle began the year of the Exodus/1453 BC. Fifty years later, which is the 10th year into the Conquest is the end of the inaugural Jubilee AND the FIRST year of the FIRST cycle. Hence years 1405 -1404 BEGINS the FIRST cycle.
The 50th year is the Jubilee AND the FIRST year of the NEXT cycle as post 219 says.
I am using Leviticus 25:2 as the basis because it states "when ye come into the land". Therefore, the first cycle begins 50 years after the Exodus which comes out to the 10th year in Canaan. From the 10th year in Canaan to Josiah's 18th is 784 years.
784 divided by 49 (7 x 7 Sabbatic cycles) = 16 with no remainder.
The above evidence interlocked with the historical fact derived from the Jewish Almanac perfectly confirms 1453 BC and decimates the mid-13th century.
How can you argue evidence which I initiated does not support my claims ?
If you are not saying this then I do not understand your criticism and will wait for clarification.
My 13th century date doesn’t rely on the period of the Judges the texts are too unreliable to trust as being an accurate representation of actual historical events. They can easily be ignored or reinterptreted.
What justification is there to IGNORE evidence. That is a rhetorical comment.
IOW, the "only" source for the Exodus - a major section thereof must be capriciously avoided in order to prove the Bible incorrect.
Paulk was bitterly complaining that Rutherford "ignores what the Bible says" I wonder if his criticism will apply to you in this issue ?
Like I said in post 219, mid 13th century theorists must arbitrarily ignore what the Bible says.
You are refuted by your own words.
I propose we randomly eliminate any archaeological evidence presented by theorists who want to substantiate the Bible incorrect because of their admission that they simply ignore the historical chronology of the Judges.
Anyone can assert the Bible to be inaccurate if they act like 300 to 400 years doesn't exist.
Your blue box quote above tells any objective person that your Exodus date is without merit - based upon a narrow body of evidence interpreted to falsify the Bible.
Like I said in post 219, mid-13th century theorists accept a few passages to support their theory (out of context at that) while ignoring the rest.
I am pleased that you admit your approach straight out.
You also admit that you were very tired when you typed your response and I see evidence of that it your replies. Feel free to amend things in lieu of this fact.
I hope your present teaching assignment will provide a computer.
sincerely,
WT
This message has been edited by WILLOWTREE, 09-30-2004 11:50 PM
™ Version 4.2
