New Video: Pharoah's Actual Chariot Wheels In Sea!

Hi Paul,Sure I could argue that the reference to Dan is not an anachronism, for example it may not be Laish but another city called Dan in Phoenecia in Abrams time. But I agree that this is an anachronism, as COULD be the Rameses estate name for Avaris. Which, of course, jettisons the deep rooted belief that Moses wrote the Torah.It also brings into question the reliability of the bible as an accurate historical source, if these are anachronisms then could something written so long after the events it portrays be historically accurate?This supports the conclusion that I am beginning to reach, which is that the Hebrew Bible's account of Israel's origin should be relegated to a secondary source. I am almost convinced that the archaeological data should now be the primary source for the origins of Israel which means that, coupled with comparative anthropology, archaeology is a more reliable witness than the Hebrew Bible.The textual evidence from the Hebrew Bible is not the only reason why it is assumed that the Exodus happened after the beginning of the construction of the Estate of Rameses. There is an abundance of archaeological evidence that rejects the possibility of the Exodus in the mid 15th century, which would fit Thutmosis III reign.However, I hope you can allow me the luxury of a couple of days to type up the reasons why scholars reject the 15th century date for the Exodus and promote a 13th century date, as I have a busy day at work tomorrow and have a couple of seminars on wednesday.Best wishes, and thanks for replying to my posts, I appreciate the chance to discuss this.Brian.------------------
Remembering events that never happened is a dangerous thing!

I recently read _The Bible Unearthed_ and there seems to be quite a strong case that the Torah and the Deuteronomistic history reflect the situation of the 7th Century BC. Very interesting reading.

quote:

---

Genesis 14:14 refers to Dan - do you want to argue that Dan existed in the time of Abram ?
If 14:14 uses an anachronistic name for a location, why not 47:11 ?

---

I see what you mean, Paulk, but Exodus 1:11 has the Israelite slaves there in the 17th dynasty helping to build the "treasure cities of Pithom and Raamses."Also they are presently excavating the ruins of Raamses and this link:Create a Website | Tripod Web Hosting says Raamses existed from the 20th to the 12th dynasties which leads me to wonder:
1.If the region was named after some previous Raamses/Ramses,
2.If the later Ramses Pharoahs were named after the region........or
3.If They were simply unrelated people and places.(from link)

quote:

---

Excavations have been continuing for over 30 years near the Egyptian village of Tell Daba. Here in the Nile Delta region a large Middle Bronze Age settlement has been uncovered. This is the region of Goshen and the excavation is at the location of the biblical city of Raamses or Pi Ramesse or the city of Ramesses II. Settlement here spans a period from the 12th to the 20th Dynasties of Egypt. The ancient city at its peak covered an area of ten square kilometres making it one of the largest cities of the ancient world. It existed for 800 years before being abandoned when its stones was used to build Tanis.

---

At any rate this seems to weaken the Ramses argument.
(Sorry about the link not working) Search Google, "Raamses city"
------------------
Surely the Lord Jehovah will do nothing except he reveal the secret to his servants the prophets. Amos 3:7[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 03-18-2003]

It says that there was a settlement there from the 12th Dynasty - not that the name Raamses applied then. And since it explictly identifies the name as "the city of Ramesses the II" it would seem that the name dates from the reign of that pharoah (19th Dynasty) - and it is his son Merenptah who erected a stele commemorating a victory in Canaan, including the defeat of Israel.And Exodus does not point directly to the 17th Dynasty at all. Indeed the only possible king if the 17th Dynasty who could be involved at all is the last, Kamose, since it is he who finally expelled the Hyksos. More, the site you refer to is identified as not only Raamses, but the Hyksos capital Avaris (on the very website you referred to) and no major building activity has been identified there during the 17th dynasty.

Hey Paul:Judge, over on the other thread, claims 1590 bce as the Exodus date. Which would put it in the reign of Tao II. Is there something in the passages you and buzz are discussing that indicates the pharoah whom Moses iced was king over a united Egypt? If so, you're right that Kamose was the first one after the defeat of the Hyksos, but that puts it to after 1573 or so. Especially if the "city of Ramses" was supposed to be Avaris (Tal ed-Dab'a), which didn't fall until Ahmose I (Kahmose's son) captured it around 1540. The final end of the war didn't occur until around 1529 after the seige of Sharuhen, the last Hyksos stronghold in Palestine.I guess I'm confused. If it wasn't Ramses that was killed by Moses, then who was it?

The problem we are going over is the claim in Exodus that the oppressed Hebrews were forced to build Raamses (Exodus 1:11). If we put this in the 17th Dynasty (as buzzsaw says) then it would have to be the Hyksos forcing the Israelites to build Avaris.The name Raamses seems to refer to Ramesses II which causes a problem since the Pharoah of Exodus 1 is certainly dead by Exodus 2:23 and Ramesses successor is Merenptah, who has to be alive after the Exodus.If we assume that the name Raamses is anachronistic then things open up more, Horemheb seems to have built on the site of Avaris, which allows a bit more time, or we could go back to the Hyksos or earlier.But in my view there is no reliable tradition underlying the story. Moses is more like Arthur or Robin Hood than a fully historical figure and the Bible as we have it may be closer to Mallory or at best Geoffrey of Monmouth rather than a modern history.

Heh. Okay, I think I'm seeing part of the problem. Somebody's trying to reconcile a biblical account with the actual historical record. Sounds more like a confusion over the fact that Tal ed-Dab'a was more or less occupied from at least the 12th Dynasty (Queen Sobeknefru) to modern times. There were apparently at least three cities on the site: one from the 12th Dynasty or earlier, a fortified city built by the Hyksos, and at least one temple to Seth built by Ramses II (although there was a commemorative stele found attributed to Horemheb). There is also evidence of fairly continual occupation in the interim - the site was a pretty important trading center at the end of the Middle Kingdom. No wonder the literalists are confused.

Below, a statement from Ron Wyatt's widow for what it's worth about the wheels:(Note: When Ron was alive, I heard him lecture and saw his slide presentation of some of his expeditions into the hills of Aarat where he showed the large ballast stones and what he claimed to b the ark form in the hill. I've read his book also. Many claim he is a fraud, including Morris's ICR. I've corresponded with Morris about Wyatt, with his criticism and imo, what he had to say inadequately refuted Wyatt's claims. Morris has made expeditions to Mount Aarat himself, looking for the ark up high, but imo, that's rather silly thinking hoofed animals could get off the steep terrain alive if it landed up there.}

quote:

---

So far, this coincided with the Biblical account. They found several 6-spoked wheels, as well as an 8-spoked wheel. And finally, in 1988, Ron found the 4-spoked gold chariot wheel, which looks almost perfect. The reason this one was so well preserved is that coral does not grow on gold. The wood inside the gold "veneer" was deteriorated, which made it very fragile and for that reason, he has not attempted to retrieve it from the water.

​

The significance of these wheels is of extreme importance to the dating of the Exodus and determining which dynasty was involved. Back in the late 70's, Ron actually retrieved a hub of a wheel which had the remains of 8 spokes radiating outward from it. He took this to Cairo, to the office of Nassif Mohammed Hassan, the director of Antiquities whom Ron had been working with. Mr. Hassan examined it and immediately pronounced it to be of the 18th Dynasty of ancient Egypt. When Ron asked him how he knew this so readily, Mr. Hassan explained that the 8-spoked wheel was only used during the 18th Dynasty. This certainly narrowed the date. We began to thoroughly research the Egyptian chariot and soon discovered that the fact that Ron and the boys found 4, 6 and 8 spoked wheels places the Exodus in the 18th Dynasty according to numerous sources, such as the following: "Egyptian literary references to chariots occur as early as the reigns of Kamose, the 17th Dynasty king who took the first steps in freeing Egypt from the Hyksos, and Ahmose, the founder of the 18th Dynasty. Pictorial representations, however, do not appear until slightly later in the 18th Dynasty...." (From "Observations on the Evolving Chariot Wheel in the 18th Dynasty" by James K. Hoffmeier, JARCE #13, 1976)

---

http//http://www.wyattnewsletters.com/exodus/ex05.htm------------------
Surely the Lord Jehovah will do nothing except he reveal the secret to his servants the prophets. Amos 3:7[This message has been edited by buzsaw, 03-18-2003]

Though certainly not as silly as most of the major elements of the flood story.

This thread isn't about the flood, but imo, there's a whole lot more evidence for the flood than the excuses/alternatives bandying about to refute the flood.

buzsaw: I would be more than happy to discuss any such evidence you have on a new thread. Please open one with a few - three or four - examples.

Oh, and buz: read buddika's post first:
http://EvC Forum: 50 Ways to Leave Your Flooder -->EvC Forum: 50 Ways to Leave Your FlooderThanks

Leaning toward closing this thread...------------------
--EvC Forum Administrator

That works for me, but I would be interested in seeing if Buzsaw has anything new to offer re "evidences of the Flood." Buz, if you would like to start in the Flood forum.....