Exodus, Merneptah stela and israelites

where exactly in between a theocratic oligarchy and a theocratic absolute monarchy did you read democracy? a nation of people with different nationalities and skin tones and languages and cultures and traditions? i appreciate the desire for continued auto-religious isolationism, but i'm really unimpressed with their claim to a land that they claim to have stolen through hundreds of years of wars of attrition and genocide. if we were really interested in nationhood, we'd give up american lands to return it to the natives who owned it first and to the american blacks who seem to want to isolate themselves, too, if atlanta is any demonstration. not to mention the greater germanic nation, the scottish nation, the tibetan nation, should i go on? you mean like having to have special papers to work and live in the nation of your birth and where you own property, because you were born in the wrong church? or having your food, water, and electricity rationed because you've been pushed out of your home to areas that are little more than bombed-out refugee camps, again because while you were born in this land as a citizen, you were born to the wrong faith? or having less of a vote in the government or having no vote over your capital city or not being able to go to certain places in your homeland because you don't have that fancy little mitochondrion? or being beaten up on the public buses because you don't follow religious dress codes. if you knew anything about israel, you wouldn't even begin to suggest that minorities there are protected by the laws. bullshit. the rights of all are protected providing a proper vote to all. nothing about being a minority ensures a given vote nor the exclusion from the system, unless your percentage is continually diluted and your rights are continually restricted by a government that wants nothing more than to remove you from the land where you were born.at any rate. according to their own history, the people who became the jews migrated from iraq; sought shelter from a famine in a foreign land; left that land ransacking its treasure and causing a massacre of its troops by getting them lost and drowned through impressive millitary strategy; took over a huge area through attrition, pillaging, and genocide; and once they had built a nation, turned on their own people declaring that they worshiped wrongly, weren't jewish enough and then perpetrated further acts of horror and genocide on their own people. i'm unimpressed with their claims to the land. i've no issue with the country as it exists now, but i do hold great contempt for their government policies and the way they treat people, especially considering that they, of all peoples, should know better than to mistreat people based on the circumstances of their birth.

The absence of recording, logically, fully supports the Biblical account only for those who are ignorant, delusional or dishonest.The facts are that if anything like the Biblical Exodus happened there would be many external evidences as has been pointed out to you many times before.A few examples:At the time the Exodus supposedly happened, Egypt was but one of the super powers in the area. There were other super powers both to the North and South of Egypt, as well as the rising powers around the Mediterranean.Had there been been a Pharaoh killed unexpectedly, these other powers would have taken notice and acted. In addition, there would be internal evidence as the new Pharaoh set about establishing his reign.Further, it would have been necessary to replace the men, horses, supplies, chariots, weapons and other materials lost. Such a major project would leave traces as the basic infrastructure and economy ramped up for the effort. But I am not relying on Egyptian records. The fact is even those who were in opposition to Egypt never noticed and in addition, those positive indicators like replacement of lost materials, the needed infrastructure and the economic disruption aren't there. Those are not dependent on some imaginary scribe. My position is NOT anti-Bible Ray, it is against those who pervert the Bible.My objection is when folk pervert the Bible to turn it into something it is not.Edited by jar, : No reason given.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

bullshit. the rights of all are protected providing a proper vote to all. nothing about being a minority ensures a given vote nor the exclusion from the system, unless your percentage is continually diluted and your rights are continually restricted by a government that wants nothing more than to remove you from the land where you were born.

---

Yes, a minority is subject to being sidelined via democratic voting. Other laws must be accompanied to result in the minority's protection.

quote:

---

at any rate. according to their own history, the people who became the jews migrated from iraq; sought shelter from a famine in a foreign land; left that land ransacking its treasure and causing a massacre of its troops by getting them lost and drowned through impressive millitary strategy; took over a huge area through attrition, pillaging, and genocide; and once they had built a nation, turned on their own people declaring that they worshiped wrongly, weren't jewish enough and then perpetrated further acts of horror and genocide on their own people. i'm unimpressed with their claims to the land. i've no issue with the country as it exists now, but i do hold great contempt for their government policies and the way they treat people, especially considering that they, of all peoples, should know better than to mistreat people based on the circumstances of their birth.

---

Nothing is correct here. Jews did not come from Iraq. Judaism was born and incepted in canaan. The egyptians were not ransacked - they used slaves without pay and without any rights. Liberty was borne when Israel prevailed. Egypt instigated the canaanites wrongly, and genocide was declared against the Israelites when they fleed Egypt. Your appraisal is not just wrong, but the reverse of the facts, thus you bypassed all the wrongs comitted by Egypt and Canaan. Jews have never stolen anyone's lands in all their 4000 year history, despite being the world's most dispersed: did Jews rob Tasmania, Pakistan or Poland?

quote:

---

The facts are that if anything like the Biblical Exodus happened there would be many external evidences as has been pointed out to you many times before.

​

A few examples:

​

At the time the Exodus supposedly happened, Egypt was but one of the super powers in the area. There were other super powers both to the North and South of Egypt, as well as the rising powers around the Mediterranean.

---

Egypt was not one of, but THE superpower, equivalent with Rome.

quote:

---

Had there been been a Pharaoh killed unexpectedly, these other powers would have taken notice and acted. In addition, there would be internal evidence as the new Pharaoh set about establishing his reign.

---

Pharoah was not killed, his army was; the OT says he lived after the battle with Moses. The oral law says Pharoah lived to a ripe age, but not as a Pharoah - he became a believer and went on to promote Judaism; so did his preist, who became Moses' father in law. The other nations did notice what occured, and Egypt was weakened greatly. The israelites had battles with many other nations before entering canaan. Babylon, then Persia emerged as the next superpower, and egypt never recovered her superpower status again.

quote:

---

Further, it would have been necessary to replace the men, horses, supplies, chariots, weapons and other materials lost. Such a major project would leave traces as the basic infrastructure and economy ramped up for the effort.

---

This did occur. Nor is there any doubt that Egypt was steeped in enslaving peoples from other nations, which system broke down, and an Israelite sovereign nation resulted in Canaan. Generally, aside from a few items not yet proven, the OT narratives are vindicated as a whole, with no blatant inconsistancies.

quote:

---

My objection is when folk pervert the Bible to turn it into something it is not.

---

EG?

Nice assertion. Silly but still nice. Rome didn't even exist except perhaps as some small village at the time the supposed Exodus happened. I suppose you actually have some support for any of that?AbE:It is also totally irrelevant. If, as your fantasy depicts, the Pharaoh lived on but not as a Pharaoh, it would still mean a sudden change in management in Egypt. We would see the advent of the new Pharaoh and it would correspond in time with the supposed exodus.In addition, the lost stores, soldiers, equipment, chariots, horses and supplies would still have to be replaced. Such a major and rapid ramp up would not go by without leaving a trace.Finally, there is the imagined loss of manpower when a large body of workers walked off the job. That too would show up in projects abandoned or postponed, as well as the need to recruit replacement workers.Sorry, the Biblical Exodus simply never happened as depicted in the Bible.End of AbE: Again, what does that have to do with the Exodus? Do you have any evidence that any of the things mentioned in the Biblical Exodus myth actually happened?Honestly, the OT is filled with blatant inconsistencies and the Exodus Myth is a classic example.Edited by jar, : expand the part on the effects that would be left.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

your beloved old testament says that abraham came from ur. ur is in iraq. the old testament says that when the jews left, they took treasure from the egyptians. there's no evidence in egypt that they utilized slave labor. the buildings in egypt in particular from that time period are clearly built by skilled labor, not unskilled slaves. what's this about egypt instigating cannan? that's not even a proper sentence. and just because the egyptians killed israelite babies doesn't excuse the israelites from their genocides against the hittites, the amorites, the cannanites, the perizzites, the hivites, the jebusites and then their own tribe of benjamin before turning on the northern kingdom. what are these wrongs of cannan? the bible doesn't even mention any other than being in the way or "pagans". have you read the bible? hell, it's not even that many books of it. just exodus and joshua would do. what does tasmania have to do with anything? there were jews in tasmania? all i know about tasmania is that the native population was completely annihilated by the brits (or post-brits). i think pakistan is an equally unfounded point in this discussion. and poland. well, in 1335 king kazimierz wielki opened poland to the jews which were being expelled from the rest of europe and guaranteed their freedoms. shortly into the 1400s, the austrians were responsible for pograms against the jews and there were some issues post-wwi, but they were limited in scope. the real oppression of jews came with the german invasion in 1939. btw, the ghettos were built by the jews by choice because they wanted to live in separate religious communities. the germans forced more people into the ghettos and made them the center of great oppression, but did not build them or initiate jewish indwelling.they have as much of a right to exist and pursue their own goals as anyone else as long as their pleasure does not infringe on others. but to deny that they are just as flawed as the rest of humanity is beyond foolish, into the territory of dangerous. because to deny that they have the same penchant for nationalism and racism as the rest of us is to further endanger a huge population of second-class citizens which is frankly past the edge of suffering very serious human rights violations and is in danger of much worse if nothing is done.

quote:

---

Rome didn't even exist except perhaps as some small village at the time the supposed Exodus happened.

---

Brilliant observation, but my statement did not refer to time, but equivalence, both being the only superpower in their periods.

quote:

---

I suppose you actually have some support for any of that?

---

Read Exodus again: pharoah was not killed.

quote:

---

Sorry, the Biblical Exodus simply never happened as depicted in the Bible.
Do you have any evidence that any of the things mentioned in the Biblical Exodus myth actually happened?

---

Yes. But don't you?

quote:

---

Honestly, the OT is filled with blatant inconsistencies and the Exodus Myth is a classic example.

---

Inconsistancies negate a myth factor, and indicates a veracity amidst some factors being not bearing an alignment with other percieved factors. It is not a classic example of myth at all, and represents actual history. Myth is Zeus and Hercules. You did not evidence any inconsistancies: small variances of datings and minor contradictions do not indicate a myth factor, but in fact affirm its antithesis. Lets not forget that king david was equally classified a myth by the greatest scholars for over a century, and many extensions were drawn from that premise; this was totally overturned with the Tel Dan find. David was a mere 250 years after the Exodus. I suspect your views are based on obsolete data.

quote:

---

your beloved old testament says that abraham came from ur. ur is in iraq.

---

How else would you know where Abraham came from - it is the first recording of the city of Ur. What you disregard is, Judaism and Israel did not come from Ur, but was established in Canaan, by Israelite canaanites, two generations later, via Jacob: none of these peoples ever went to Ur or any other country. By this time, the Israelites were canaanites for 300 years, their beliefs and tribal community established in this the only land they knew. How long do neanderthals need for a green card?

quote:

---

the old testament says that when the jews left, they took treasure from the egyptians. there's no evidence in egypt that they utilized slave labor. the buildings in egypt in particular from that time period are clearly built by skilled labor, not unskilled slaves.

---

The egyptian's main claim to fame was their slave asset; this is not in dispute. The Israelites built two cities there: you are quoting the texts selectively, choosing what suits. It is ubsurdity to claim the israelites just walked out with a superpower's treasures - equally so that you negate 210 years of slavery without wages. Can I assume that if your assessment of no slavery is incorrect, the israelites rightly begat compensation?

quote:

---

and just because the egyptians killed israelite babies

---

I like the use of 'just' when describing the first recording of genocide.

quote:

---

doesn't excuse the israelites from their genocides against the hittites, the amorites, the cannanites, the perizzites, the hivites, the jebusites and then their own tribe of benjamin before turning on the northern kingdom.

---

True, the hitites were not killed because of Egypt killing babies. This occured when the canaanites barred entry to Israel, and proclaimed genocide too: this is missing from your accusation. You cannot chose what you like from a text!

quote:

---

what are these wrongs of cannan? the bible doesn't even mention any other than being in the way or "pagans".

---

Congratulations - the first correct question! The text, which you avoid numerously, says, 'ALL THAT WAS EVIL IN THE SIGHT OF THE LRD DID THEY (THE CANAANITES) DO'; and 'ALL THAT THEY DID TO THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS YOU SHALL DO UNTO THEM'. What did you think this was referring to - why not read again? Why did two of the eight canaanite kingdoms side with the Joshua and battle the other six? The OT is an exacting, intergrated document - and requires correct comprehension.

quote:

---

have you read the bible? hell, it's not even that many books of it. just exodus and joshua would do.

---

Its the world's most honest document, and not a candy-coated one, listing all the good and bad occurences in that time without pulling any punches. That is why it remains the most believed scripture in existence. You again fail to include that Joshua made a peace offer to the six canaanites, which was responded to with unconditional death to Israel, and what would result had the canaanites succeeded in their declared goal: why is that? Further, in that time, wars for land dominance were always faught with the anihilation of the other side, because of a superstition premise; this was normal fare, and not to be confused with conquering another nation for slaves.

quote:

---

what does tasmania have to do with anything? there were jews in tasmania? all i know about tasmania is that the native population was completely annihilated by the brits (or post-brits). i think pakistan is an equally unfounded point in this discussion. and poland. well, in 1335 king kazimierz wielki opened poland to the jews which were being expelled from the rest of europe and guaranteed their freedoms. shortly into the 1400s, the austrians were responsible for pograms against the jews and there were some issues post-wwi, but they were limited in scope. the real oppression of jews came with the german invasion in 1939.

---

Yes, jews were in all these places, but did not steal anyone's lands: that's the point.

quote:

---

btw, the ghettos were built by the jews by choice because they wanted to live in separate religious communities. the germans forced more people into the ghettos and made them the center of great oppression, but did not build them or initiate jewish indwelling.

---

Not true. This refuge was saught when medevial christianity enforced conversions, barred jews from returning to their land, and instigated inhuman decrees with death penalties, such as not being allowed any work or vocation, owning properties, entering schools, having shops, farms or food business, or any professional vocations. Such signs were posted in all Europen townsquares. The only item which was not included was 'money lending' - and traveller's cheques and modern banking resulted.

quote:

---

they have as much of a right to exist and pursue their own goals as anyone else as long as their pleasure does not infringe on others. but to deny that they are just as flawed as the rest of humanity is beyond foolish, into the territory of dangerous. because to deny that they have the same penchant for nationalism and racism as the rest of us is to further endanger a huge population of second-class citizens which is frankly past the edge of suffering very serious human rights violations and is in danger of much worse if nothing is done.

---

???

"another really stupid assertion" and "Re: another really stupid assertion" are pretty poor. How about coming up with subtitles that actually reflect and help define the messages content?Plus, a good subtitle may very well help if you are looking back for a particular message. You can look at the topic index (ie. this topics) and hopefully find that certain message.Adminnemooseus

---

Eh?So, in your earlier post you claim that the Old Testament 'records their (Kyksos) history' and when asked where this information is you say your claim doesn't have to be backed! Bit of a joke mate. Apart from circular reasoning, there's quite a few other problems here but I am not going to highlight them because I can see that discussion with you is pointless and my time id too valuable right now.I would suggest that you do read some academic books if you are really interested in this subject, and also read some books to discover what history actually is. Once you do this you will see how silly your view of history is.Take care.Brian.

Of course it is, but only after many reworkings but different schools and/0r individuals over a few centuries. Well to be diarised (IMO) would mean that eyewitness wrote it down at the time of the event, it would be a primary source. For the enslavement and exodus we do not have a single primary source, so it is not diarised. Well this is what I am asking you, in which year did the Exodus happen, I'll even allow you to use books outside the Book of Exodus if you like, even though your earlier claim says that the date can be worked out from the Book of Exodus. This remains to be seen, all I have from you so far is just your unsupported (and rather ignorant) opinion. Meaningless. This is sone fantasy world you are living in.You really should try backing uo things you claim, it would gain you more respect from people.Brian

What is it then? LOL!Which scholars are you on about? Which puzzles me as to why you have failed to provide a single date so far. The Tel dan Stele was inscribed long after the biblical date for David, and it doesnt even mention King David. The reference in the Stele to Byt Dwd is disputed by many scholars, such as Davies and Thompson. No there isn't. No it isn't. The Gregorian calendar is a continuation of the Julian Calendar, do you ever actually research anything for yourself or do you uncritically swallow everything that is contained on fundy websites?Brian.

quote:

---

Eh?

​

So, in your earlier post you claim that the Old Testament 'records their (Kyksos) history' and when asked where this information is you say your claim doesn't have to be backed! Bit of a joke mate.

---

No contradiction here, the hiksos need not be decussed when the issue was Israel's interaction with Egypt.

quote:

---

It does not just say a new king arose - it qualifies it with 'who knew not Joseph or the Hebrews'.

​

Apart from circular reasoning, there's quite a few other problems here but I am not going to highlight them because I can see that discussion with you is pointless and my time id too valuable right now.

---

Suit yourself, but there is no circular reasoning in completing a sentence which says the reverse what you inferred. The only reason A NEW KING AROSE is stated, is because this king said something about the hebrews, which you left out - else we would not have to make a U-turn to correct you.

quote:

---

The book of exodus is an intergrated part of the OT,

​

Of course it is, but only after many reworkings but different schools and/0r individuals over a few centuries.

---

Your now making yourself uncorrectable by asserting this deflection - with no evidence again. Which is the world's least distorted document - by period of time, and follow-up evidence of its writings? Take your time!

quote:

---

Well to be diarised (IMO) would mean that eyewitness wrote it down at the time of the event, it would be a primary source. For the enslavement and exodus we do not have a single primary source, so it is not diarised.

---

Its diarised by one person, with the nomination of 3 million witnesses, and a host of nations and places noted also - with contemporary descriptions. That is why there could only be one author and one writing date.

quote:

---

its date, including the day/month/year is calculatable (given), and observed annually as the passover.

​

Well this is what I am asking you, in which year did the Exodus happen, I'll even allow you to use books outside the Book of Exodus if you like, even though your earlier claim says that the date can be worked out from the Book of Exodus.

​

There is more credence here, for example, than the dates of christmas or the date greece battled persia:

​

This remains to be seen, all I have from you so far is just your unsupported (and rather ignorant) opinion.

​

it is followed by other dates upto the end of the OT writings, then by follow-up books which also contain dates.

​

Meaningless.

​

Its as good as it gets.

​

This is sone fantasy world you are living in.

​

You really should try backing uo things you claim, it would gain you more respect from people.

​

Brian

---

The dates are already worked out, and available in the hebrew calendar, which observes these festivals. There is some variances suggested by some scholars about the exodus year, due to some other events being allocated a different date by them - so it depends who's datings you prefer.

quote:

---

The Tel dan Stele was inscribed long after the biblical date for David, and it doesnt even mention King David. The reference in the Stele to Byt Dwd is disputed by many scholars, such as Davies and Thompson.

---

Both david and solomon are now regarded as real historical figures by the widest of concensus. The stele mentions the davidic dynasty, siting events also described in other writings (Kings), and even describes the vista david would have had when writing certain psalms. Some in the M/E even deny the Jerusalem temple and say Jews are europeans and not Jews: so what!

quote:

---

there are numerous such examples.

​

No there isn't.

​

The gregorian calendar is a contrived continuation of it.

​

No it isn't. The Gregorian calendar is a continuation of the Julian Calendar, do you ever actually research anything for yourself or do you uncritically swallow everything that is contained on fundy websites?

​

Brian.

---

That was the Pope's error - the Julian (solar only) is wrong - the OT (solar-lunar) was what was right. The quotes are not from a fundy websites.The relevent issue is what impacts if the exodus did occur, and that slavery was rampant in Egypt - its overturning and the establishment of inalienable human rights so clearly reflected in the OT laws. I have no idea why it is rejected as myth so boldly, when all subsequent powers emulated Egypt upto the Roman empire. With the later power 2000 years ago, freedom of belief became Rome's greatest war - with a cost of over 1.1 million lives being lost. It changed the world - but not much mentioned these days.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

You seem to have overlooked your original claim, the claim to which
I am enquiring, here it is again.In post number 5 you claimed: ” The Hyksos left no writings, and Israel does back-up their history with authentic, contemporanous accounts, Then I asked where I could find where Israel backs up Hyksos history, then you answer by saying in post 34 Hyksos don't have to be backed here. . What kind of discussion is this?Look, either you do not have evidence of Israel ”backing up’ Hyksos history or you don’t. If you do have evidence, could I please have that evidence as I am very interested in this area? If you don’t have any evidence then that is fine, just let me know so I can stop expecting to see it. Thanks. So what is the reason why a new king arose? LOL, and this is exactly the circular reasoning I am talking about, answer this question and you will see it for yourself.How do we know that the new king who arose said something about the Hebrews? This is just silly. The earliest extant texts are the Dead Sea Scrolls, written more than one thousand years after the alleged event, so how do you know it is least distorted? Do you really think that the DSS texts are identical to earlier texts and if so why?
BTW, pick almost any ancient near eastern texts and they have not been altered at all. The Amarna Letters, Nuzi Texts, Mari Texts and so on, and you have original ancient texts, what do we have for the Bible? Not a single original text, and the earliest extant is over 1500 years after some events described init, that is pretty underwhelming. The Bible itself doesn’t even claim this, this is just another fundy ”urban myth’. Well we know this number is inaccurate, there simply wasn’t enough room for this amount of people and the growth rate is impossible for the time and place. The most amazing thing is that 3 million people are archaeologically invisible. Most of the places on the Exodus route have not been found! Over forty places mentioned and about 3 that’s been identified, that’s mighty impressive Jo. In a document written 1200 years after it was supposed to have happened? How could this author record his own death?How could Moses, who died 40 years after leaving Egypt, write that:Genesis 36:31 And these are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any king over the children of Israel.Now there was no King of Israel until Saul, nearly 400 years after Moses died!I am afraid that the Pentateuch is rife with anachronisms, and depending on which date you tell me that you wish to place the Exodus in (remember you have failed to provide this date so far), there could be a lot more. So, in which year was the Exodus said to have happened, if it is all worked out then it should be easy for you to tell me. Whose datings do you prefer, and if the Bible was this wondrous reliable texts that scholars use to date near eastern events how can there be any disagreement about the dates? That’s another strange one. Untrue.Take Nils Peter Lemche as an example, re Tel Dan he thinks that: . the fragments belong to two different inscriptions is obvious when the two inscriptions are compared. First of all, it is clear that the lines in the two fragments do not match each other. Second, the style of writing is different from one fragment to the next, although the fragments were probably written at the same time. (Lemche N P, (1998) The Israelites in history and tradition, London, John Knox Press, page 39)Also, Bayt-Dawid can be translated in several ways, ”House of Dod’ (Dod being a God), ”House of Vessels’, and the biggest problem is that the bytdwd of the stele is written as one word, whereas in the bible the House of David is always written as two words ”bit dwd’.So this may be a reference to a place rather than a dynasty.The Tel Dan Stele is still very much debated over, it isn’t as cut and dried as some would have you believe. Well there are real problems here too. K Noll has big reservations over Niran and Naveh’s reading of the other fragments. The two royal names on fragment B2 does not necessarily read the way that Biran claims. Here is one line of text as it exists: . ram Bar and ”iah Bar . Now that is it! How does Biran release this in his article, before peer review I may add?Well Biran states that it reads ”unequivocally’ as: [Jero]ram Bar [Ahab] and [Ahaz]iah Bar [Jeroham]. How on earth can this be unequivocal? This is yet another example of the lengths that people will go to to try and prove the Bible accurate.Noll comments that ”ram Bar’ broken text could just as easily read ’[Hi]ram Bar [X, King of Tyre]. The ”iah Bar does not have to read Ahaziah bar Ahab. (Noll, K (1998), The God who is Among the Danites, JSOT 80 3-23, page 8. No, it was your error.The Gregorian was not a continuation of the Hebrew, it was a continuation of the Julian, contrary to what YOU said. It is simply because there is not a single shred of evidence to support it, and mountains of evidence to falsify it, and it has been falsified. It is only because the face value account written in the bible has been shown to be so inaccurate that we have all these silly other theories that reinterpret the bible to make it fit the evidence.Brian.

quote:

---

Show me any Egyptian record that records a defeat?

---

In a recent NG documentary "the bible uncovered", Kara (Kathlyn) Cooney clearly said that Egyptians did record failures. She wasn't specific but if you can find her contact info she's the one to talk to.... i couldn't find it, sorry!Edited by Reding, : No reason given.Edited by Reding, : No reason given.