Egyptology Sets Up A Straw Man

Ray,There isn't a single mention of the Exodus on your links, and the first page is simply ridiculous, its really just a copy of chapter 15 of 'Ages in Chaos, a 50 year old book of crazy Velikovsky's, with NO supporting evidence.It claims that Thumose III recieved the booty from Solomon's Temple, but Thutmosis III lived over 500 years before this, and the Bible claims that it was Shishak who spoiled the Temple:1 Kings 14:25-26In the fifth year of King Rehoboam, Shishak king of Egypt attacked Jerusalem. He carried off the treasures of the temple of the LORD and the treasures of the royal palace. He took everything, including all the gold shields Solomon had made. Sheshonq:Horus name: Meryre Sekhafemnisuterzematawy
Nebty name: Khaemsekhemtimihorsaaest Sehetepnetjeruemmaat
Golden Falcon name: Sekhempehti Huipedjut-9 Wernekhtutaunebu
Prenomen: Hedjkheperre Setepenre
Nomen: Sheshonq ThutmoseHorus name: Kanakht Khaemwaset
Nebty name: Wahnesyt
Golden Falcon name: Djeserkhau Sekhempehti
Prenomen: Menkheperre
Nomen: ThutmoseBit of a problem that I would think.Ray, you really need to stop surrounding yourself in these silly books, there are far better 'scholars' out there to study than Velikovsky and Rutherford.Brian.

Nor evidence to prompt them to leave.

I already responded here:http://EvC Forum: Egyptology Sets Up A Straw Man -->EvC Forum: Egyptology Sets Up A Straw ManRay

Not really an answer Ray, more in the lines of a flight of fancy. LOL

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hi Brian: The single, most often cited reason status quo Egyptologists give for rejecting a mid-15th century Exodus date is the reign of the greatest Egyptian warrior Thutmose III occurring when the event is said to have taken place. As the reasoning goes (notice it is not based on evidence but subjective reasoning) Thutmose III would never have let Israel go.Since 1952 we know Thutmose III did not live in the 15th century. Velikovsky was a naturalist-atheist, but it doesn't matter. The Karnak wall bas-reliefs depict Temple treasures that have been matched with their descriptions in the O.T.We have literary (O.T.) corresponding with physical evidence (Karnak) = fact. Now there is no reason to resist a 15th century Exodus date.If you even breathe a Sosenk identification I will quickly refute. Insult = inability to refute. More insults caused by the inability to refute. I suppose by your logic anything over 50 years old is automatically refuted. I wonder what I.E.S. Edwards, Breasted, and a host of other scholars would think of your criteria ?What is crazy about the links Brian ?Why don't you explain yourself ?Velikovsky matched the Karnak wall with O.T. descriptions. Why did it take until 1952 ?Answer: extreme bias of atheists assuming the Bible is wrong and having no interest in seeing it verified lest they are obligated to repent and bow to the Deity who controlled history.Look at the responses to physical evidence in this topic !Ray

Shortened linkI also recently heard a teaching by Dr. Scott reading from an archaelogical report saying a gold trumpet from the Temple was unearthed. It contained ornamentation from Egypt and Hebrew Palestine. The two birthright children of Joseph were half Egyptian. When I locate the source I will post it.RayThis message has been edited by AdminJar, 01-18-2006 05:37 PM

Ray, the Jehoash tablet was a forgery and the forgerer has been indicted.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I don't think it is the most cited, but it is certainly well up there, and it is an excellent reason. This isn't the reasoning that I have heard. It goes more like this, and is based on a great deal of evidence. Egypt under Thutmose III was at the peak of her power, the Empire stretched all the way over to the Euphrates, meaning that Palestine was essentially a province of Egypt. Now, all mention of Egyptians in the Bible end at the Sea of Reeds episode (for the time being at least), with the massacre of pharaoh's armies. But Israel, if the Exodus, wanderings, and conquest were true, would have been escaping from Egypt, then wandering around another part of Egypt for forty years, then Joshua battled to get into another part of Egypt! It doesn't fit in with real history. Why does Israel never encounter Egyptians during the desert wanderings, and why no mention of Egyptians during the 'conquest'?Do you think if Thutmose was anihilated that it would go unnoticed? No, since the turn of the 20th century we know that he reigned in the 15th century, and we still know this. He was also a nutball. But, you are right, it doesn't matter because Velikovsky isn't taken seriously in the academic world. Heavens Ray, the guy has a comet flying around the solar system, it collides with Earth, stops it spinning on its axis, flies around a while, comes back past the Earth and starts the world spinning again in the opposite direction, and all that this does is to make Egyptian history 600 years off! What a load of nonsense, how can you take it seriously? How do you know that the illustrated treasures on the Karnak bas-reliefs are illustrations of the actual treasures from Solomon’s Temple? To be fair, nothing has been linked at all, was there even a Solomon's temple, do the items correspond with treasures of other near eastern nations? Does the physical evidence = treasure from Solomon’s treasure? If you believe so, then how do you know? You mean apart from the fact that there is no evidence of Hebrews in Egypt during the 15th century, no archaeological evidence of a mass exodus from Egypt, no pharaoh Rameses for at least 150 years, no evidence of a weakening of Egyptian power, Kadesh-Barnea did not exist in the 15th century, there was no Ammonite or Moabite kingdoms before the 13th century, Jericho, Ai, and other cities were uninhabited during the 15th century, the Philistines weren't in the area during the 15th century, need I go on? Shishak = Sheshonq, living in the 10th century. Thutmosis III, died 500 years previous. No insult, just a simple fact. It is nothing but conjecture. The author is writing a persuasive piece, it isn't a critical academic work. It is equivalent to the Flightpath of the Gods by von Daniken. Not at all, I've told you before that many books contain theories that stand the test of time. But, once a theory has been falsified it has to be abandoned or refined. Velikovsky's original hypothesis, it didn't even qualify as a theory, was rapidly abandoned, Rohl refined it, but it too has been abandoned. Well, since you misrepresented my criteria they wouldn't think anything. I wonder what Breasted would think of Thutmosis III living in the 9th century BCE, do you think he would agree? Do you wish me to critique the entire page, or are you going to follow forum rules and avoid bare links? Do you want to highlight the strongest arguments from your link, or will I have to examine the whole chapter? Let me know, I'm easy with any option. You should be asking yourself that. If it was so obvious the extremely biased Christian archaeologists would have highlighted it before 1952. You appear to be oblivious to the FACT that almost all of the pre 1970 archaeologists were theists, Christian and Jew. If you look at the history of archaeology in the near east it was dominated by Christians and Jews who went to extreme lengths to try and validate biblical events. Don't believe me? Tell you what I'll do, for every theist archaeologist or scholar you name that was working in the near east before 1952, I will name five Christian/Jewish. Do you think atheist scholars were in control of 'Biblical Archaeology' when conservative Christians virtually had a monopoly on near eastern sites up until WW II?The atheist suppression of evidence or refusal to acknowledge the significance of 'biblical' artefacts is a joke. William Albright reigned supreme for over 40 years in this field of academia, you must know this.The fatal flaw in your argument is much easier to demonstrate. What about the books and journals that atheists have no involvement, why do they ignore all this wonderful evidence? 99% of it is bemusement and requests for clarifications.Brian.

Based upon the indictment and the fact of non-archaeological origin I withdraw.If the indictment fizzles and enough scholars validate then we shall see.RayThis message has been edited by Herepton, 01-19-2006 04:41 PM

The indictment has nothing to do with the fact that the stone was a forgery (although finding a lab to put a false pateina in, as well as many 'works in process' for faking is a good indication).What was important is that the pateina was demonstrated to have been artifically applied in modern times, using chalk, and 2000 year old charcol (to fool the radiocarbon dating). However, the patina was not tightly bonded to the stone, and it was shown that it was applied at the tempature of 120 degress farenhight (warm water).

You have no idea how happy I am that I could procure your agreement, that is the rejection of the Biblical Exodus date based upon an assumption of Pharoanic power. Agreed.However, the time frame you are describing is the 9th century BC.The Thutmosis Palestinian campaign DID NOT reach the Orontes in Syria. That list is the names of cities conquered by Thutmose III engraved at Karnak. Kadesh is Jerusalem. Kadesh at Karnak is holy Jerusalem. A word study in the O.T. will show beyond any doubt that Kadesh refers to Jerusalem.Forbidden "More recently, the problem may have been solved satisfactorily by K. Birch.26) It is well known that the later Egyptian pharaohs had as many as five names. Now Birch has noted in this regard that "... the (Golden) Horus names of Thutmose III comprise variations on: Tcheser-khau, Djeser-khau, Cheser-khau, (Sheser-khau?);" names that come very close indeed to "Shishak" (Hebr. qwaOwi) according to Birch. Nor do these names have the problem of the presence of the letter "n" as found greatly complicating discussions on the name Shoshenq's appropriateness for "Shishak". Regarding the succession of consonants - considered much more important than the changeable vowels in ancient names - we get for Sheser-kau the pattern, Sh-S-K, corresponding almost exactly to Sh-Sh-K, and more suitable than Shoshenq (Sh-Sh-N-K)."Scholarly analysis has now connected Shishak with Thutmose III.Velikovsky, Ages in Chaos, pages 164, 165 [1952]: "Cut into the outside of the southern wall at the Karnak Temple is a hieroglyphic name which reads "Sosenk", and this king of the Libyan Dynasty inscribed the names of cities subject to him.

​

"The relief has 155 names of cities" [Jirku, Die agyptischen Listen, Klio Beihefte, XXXVIII (1937)] "Only 17 can be located with certainty, and 2 more with probability. 14 of these belong to Israel; they are mostly unimportant towns while the remaining 5 in Judah are, with one exception, obscure villages" [Breasted, Records, Vol.IV, Sec.711.]"Ray Martinez: Here we have inscriptions testifying to non-existent cities and locales.Maybe more have been identified today.But the point is, are the cities myths because they have not been identified ?The point is Sosenk is not Shishak as these bas-reliefs do not mention nor include Kadesh, Jerusalem, or Temple treasures. This is maddening to say the least.I think you might actually be enjoying this ?Your commentary contains many false assumptions that predetermine your conclusions: Biblical evidence is false.The Biblical record AND Egyptian history coincide when the Velikovsky reconstruction is adopted. Jews are not in a conspiracy to fool the world. We move New Kingdom Pharoahs TO the circa 9th century BC and everything fits. The only reason minimalists will not go along is because this would falsify the entire work of atheist Egyptology for over 100 years. He was not decimated because he was contemporary with Rehoboam. Why have you deliberately conflated "Worlds in Collision" with "Ages in Chaos" ?Velikovsky was an atheist/naturalist. Best friends with Einstein. He is famous for offering outrageous natural explanations to account for Biblical miracles. There is no bias for the supernatural. The only reason Velikovsky is hated "is because he refuted them all" (Dr. Scott)Ad hom attacks = inability to refute. Velikovsky proves the evidence for the Bible will not be accepted no matter what. With the validity of worldviews on the line your position is understandable. Despite your academic credentials you do not speak for all scholarship. The Media takes everything Darwinists say at face value without any dissenting views allowed = Biblical truth supression claim corresponds with reality.Since Dr. Scott's death his heir has decided to publish all of his material. An army of transcribers is at work around the clock. The evidence for the Bible is massive. Dr. Scott was the single greatest researcher and scholar ever in ancient history. The only reason the vast body of evidence is relatively unknown is because, like the Bible says, nonbelievers suppress it. The decision to publish Dr. Scott's scholarship will open the worlds eyes to the flood gates of evidence in existence. If I open a topic, and time permitting, will you participate ? You have reason to now sue your eye doctor. Email me if you want a witness. Negative.I will start a special topic IF you commit - time permitting on both sides ? Straw man.I never disputed what you have me disputing above. Atheist Egyptology has existed from its inception. Modern day revisionism has been in full swing since the early 1970's.Dr. Scott: "I never read an archaeological report from the 19th century that denied the Exodus".Minimalists have slowly taken over. Brian, how can the Bible ever be verified if minimalism ASSUMES the Bible wrong and willfully interprets evidence contrary ?The first goers proved the Bible. Angry atheists have since attempted to erase. How come you never mention how Kenyon was refuted, that is her silly departure from Garstang based upon a lack of pottery ?I want the Board to know that I know you have high credentials in ancient history, yet you have argued the man.I respect credentials.Do you want a debate about understanding views ?Let me know. Most scholars will not participate in any discussion that includes Velikovsky.The Great Pyramid proves the existence of God and the Biblical penalty that God blinds the eyes of those who deny Him Creator credit.EvC will not allow me another GP topic. They want to sleep at night.RayThis message has been edited by Herepton, 01-19-2006 07:24 PM

so, we can't see the truth because god doesn't want us to see it?, then whats the point? no i think its because you just keep saying the same things over and over again, when people show you are wrong..

When any person for any reason attempts to re-explain the obviousness of design in every aspect of reality, God instantly reacts and blinds THAT mind to the obviousness as a penalty for resisting the obviousness with the intent to deny Him Creator credit.Darwin to Dawkins = re-explain design as the product of a blind/Godless product.The Bible says the re-explanation is caused by God as a penalty for what I just explained. The penalty is confirmed by the fact that the Emperor is completely naked/macro assumed....driven by the penalty.The point is:God wants you to die and not come to the truth for lying about the truth via Darwinian nonsense and lies. Thats why He blinds you. Romans 1:25

​

Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.Mindless assertions that defy physical evidence and data do not jeopardize physical evidence.The GP proves both things that I said and it is not a matter of opinion.Did you know the GP is an exact scale replica of the Northern Hemisphere ?How did camel riding Egyptians fresh out of the Stone Age know the shape and dimensions of the Earth ?Ray

the point is that you are claiming you can read gods mind, and/or he is a sadistic bastard who, does illogical things such as blinding people to the truth instead of showing them the truth, which sounds more likely? so do oyou have any evidence of this other than claims?, other than that why bring this up at all?

Never made this silly claim as you know. My claims about God are from the Bible - you know the source which claims to be His word ? The Bible says HE DID SHOW them: What did God show them ?The next verse tells us: What is God's sub-conclusion about persons who were shown how physical reality reflects His invisible Person ? Then the next verse tells us exactly what they did: THEY KNEW GOD....who knew God ?Charles Darwin WAS a christian/theist who accepted Paley's "Argument from Design" (source quotes available upon request). But the verse says Darwin did not give God Creator credit. Instead the verse says Darwin: "....became vain in their imaginations" = what God thinks of any work which rules Him out = Origin of Species credited to Charles Darwin instead of his Maker.God wants Creator credit - THATS ALL.All these verses are in the context of the 18th verse which announces a certain wrath of God exists. The last phrase of the 21st verse tells us HOW God decided to manifest His wrath against persons who deny Him Creator credit. God showed them, they flipped Him off, He in turn darkened/blinded their mind as a punishment for attempting to re-explain the obviousness of design as the product of a blind process. IOW, Darwinism is what a person must believe for denying God Creator status and credit.The fact that there is no evidence for macroevolution - it is assumed = penalty corroborated.This is the Biblical explanation for the existence of the Theory of Evolution.Now the context is set for that 25th verse: THE POINT: Romans was written in 58 AD. Correspondence with reality 2000 years later = proof of God, the claim that the Bible is His eternal word is now confirmed.source of theology: Dr. Gene ScottRayThis message has been edited by Herepton, 01-21-2006 10:59 AM