Simultaneous appearance of written language and common man

quote:

---

about the dates though, the jews kept the dates of their history meticulously...so meticulously in fact that we know the exact year of the flood, of Adams creation, of the exodus from egypt ect

---

That isn't true. It is possible to use the Bible to work out dates. However we DON'T know if the dates are at all accurate. Not one of those dates can be confirmed from any other source at all, and in fact it is entirely possible that none of the events listed happened at all.

quote:

---

i have read your links and it is still glaringly obvious that ...as is stated in paragraph 1 of your 2nd link...
'it is all but universally accepted among scholars that the Sumerian cuneiform script of c. 3000 BC is the earliest form of writing.'

---

Nobody should be surprised to find out that this is false. In fact the quote does not appear in the second link at all. Or in the first link, either.Here are the links from Message 31 for anyone who can be bothered to check. The actual text of the second link indicates that writing did NOT suddenly appear, nor was its appearance contemporary with the (post-Flood) appearance of people in the region as the Babel myth would require: The hard archaeological evidence is firmly against you.Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

quote:

---

archeologically speaking, there is evidence that what moses wrote about Egypt was accurate

---

Since we don't have anything that Moses wrote about Egypt how can it be proved accurate ? And, of course, the unknown writer or writers of Exodus could certainly have some knowledge of Egypt even if the Exodus never happened at all.

quote:

---

Archeological evidence exists which shows that it was a custom of the Egyptians to allow foreigners to live in egypt in areas separate to egyptions. Bricks have been found made of straw,

---

If these are simply general Egyptian customs then they are no use to you. It is entirely possible for the author to know such things whether the Exodus happened or not. Do you have anything that links these alleged facts to the Exodus ?

quote:

---

Its not surprising that the Egyptions didnt make a written record of the event...would you exptect them to record such a defeat as 'our slaves turned on us and killed most of our army'? I cant imagine any nation would do so.

---

Archaeological evidence covers far more than writings. The Exodus should have been a massive depopulation of Egypt - the Israelites leaving plus the deaths from the plagues. That in itself should show up. So should evidence of the massive deaths caused in the plagues. Egypt's military weakness should be evident in history. None of this appears at the right time for you.

quote:

---

i read on a jewish website that this is based on a papyrus dating from the end of the Old Kingdom that seems to be an eyewitness account of the events preceding the dissolution of the Old Kingdom. The name of the writer on the Paprys is said to be an Egyptian named Ipuwer...

---

According to you, the Exodus is dated to near the start of the New Kingdom. The Old Kingdom ended around 2150 BC. If the Israelite records are so "meticulous" as to allow the calculation of exact dates as you claimed then the Ipuwer papyrus can have nothing to do with the Exodus.However, it is generally NOT thought to be an eyewitness account (the date of composition is usually held to be in the Middle Kingdom) and it is questionable whether it is intended to refer to any past event. And much of it does not match to anything in the Exodus account (see the text here.(You should remember that Jewish websites are just as likely to be biased and inaccurate on the subject of the Exodus as Christian websites. Jewish websites can be the best sources for getting the views of modern Jews, but being Jewish hardly makes them experts on Egyptology !).Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.