Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 49 (9181 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: joebialek123
Post Volume: Total: 918,278 Year: 5,535/9,624 Month: 560/323 Week: 57/143 Day: 0/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Dating the Exodus
Rei
Member (Idle past 7131 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 222 of 317 (142954)
09-17-2004 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by Cold Foreign Object
09-17-2004 3:15 PM


Re: EXODUS DATE: 1453 BC
Velikovsky is a complete nut. Are you familiar with the other sort of stuff that he's proposed? Lets list a few.
* - Venus is a comet that was initially part of the Jupiter system
* - Earth, Venus, and Mars have collided regularly
* - Earth's rotation has completely reversed in the past 3000 years
* - Earth's geology was catastrophically changed by close passes with Venus
* - "Manna" is edible carbohydrates manufactured by microorganisms in Venus's "tail" through some unknown mechanism.
* - Venus's atmosphere is composed of hydrocarbons and carbohydrates
* - Venus isn't hot at all, and the greenhouse effect violates the laws of thermodynamics
* - Craters on venus are from some kind of interplanetary electrical discharge
* - Venus got a circular orbit through electromagnetic forces
Do you seriously want to defend this guy?

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 3:15 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 4:31 PM Rei has replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7131 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 224 of 317 (142963)
09-17-2004 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by Cold Foreign Object
09-17-2004 4:31 PM


Re: EXODUS DATE: 1453 BC
I'd call completely denying spectral analysis and the heat retention properties of gasses (and the corresponding infared glow, and since, direct measurements from probes) to be fringe science. Why wouldn't you?
You're trying to use this man's personal credibility to back up your arguments when you were shown how wrong they were. I demonstrated that he has no personal credibility. Really, you have two options: Defend this guy's personal credibility, or drop your argument by personal credibility.
If you choose the first option, I've presented his claims above - show us that they're not completely nutty fringe science.
If you choose the second option, bring up some real evidence backing up what he claims.
P.S.: I'm not trying to use Crick's personal credibility here as a reference.
This message has been edited by Rei, 09-17-2004 03:43 PM

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 4:31 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 225 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 4:45 PM Rei has replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7131 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 226 of 317 (142968)
09-17-2004 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by Cold Foreign Object
09-17-2004 4:45 PM


Re: EXODUS DATE: 1453 BC
Are you going to drop Velikovsky - the source of your sole non-bilbical reference for the exodus - then?
There's nothing left to debate with you if you take Velikovsky out of it - he's the only person you referenced, and he's a complete nut.
Correction: You quoted some Rutherford, too. Do you wish to discuss Rutherford's claims and drop Velikovsky?
This message has been edited by Rei, 09-17-2004 03:55 PM

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 4:45 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 5:17 PM Rei has replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7131 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 228 of 317 (142991)
09-17-2004 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by Cold Foreign Object
09-17-2004 5:17 PM


Re: EXODUS DATE: 1453 BC
I'll only respond to Rutherford, since you've refused to defend Velikovsky.
quote:
Rutherford/Chapter IX "Exodus and Wilderness Journey" pages 627-629:
"The great mass of archaeological information thus unearthed has revealed the destruction of various Canaanite cities in Palestine during the latter half of the 13th century BC.
True, but deceptive. First off, the great mass of evidence unearthed has shown *no* evidence of an influx of a volume of people even a fraction the size of the Israelites, *regardless* of which date you choose. Most notably absent is *any* significant evidence in Sinai, nor any evidence of the supposed Israeli-Egyptian battles as described in the bible. Secondly, the archaeological evidence shows the destruction of various Canaanite cities *all throughout this period*.
In fact, there is much evidence that the story is written later. Egypt is referred to as the "land of Goshen", derrived from Geshem, a 5th century BC Qedarite royal family name. No pharaoh names are ever given, which would be surprising given how much the Pharaos tried to publicize their names. No mention is ever made of the Egyptian forts in the Sinai which, while gone centuries later, were present during the peak of Egypt's power under which the exodus supposedly occurred. Moses is named by the pharaoh's daughter, and yet is given the name because it sounds similar to "I drew him out" in Hebrew (so we have the Pharaoh's daughter speaking Hebrew?). Etc.
Kadesh-Barnea has turned up no evidence of an encampment. Ezion-geber? The same. Tel Arad, where Israel supposedly fought King Arad? Nothing from the late Bronze Age. Tel Hesbon, where Israel supposedly fought the Amorites? Again, nothing from the Bronze Age. Etc. There have been genetic studies on human remains of the people in the region - their genetics don't change. Cultural artifact styles don't change. Etc. There simply was no exodus.
quote:
"The destruction of some Canaanite cities by Joshua was not their final destruction as such. There is no indication of the destruction of Bethel, amongst other places, in the early Israelite conquests, although it was taken by "the House of Joseph" as recorded in Judges 1:22-26. But the excavations carried out at the site in 1934 under the direction of Prof. Albright of America reveal that the city was subsequently destroyed by fire in the 13th century and the final destruction of Canaanite power at that time is confirmed by the Scriptures.
People don't even know exactly where Bethel was. Even seminaries generally freely admit this.
quote:
"The tablets state that the Habiru came to Canaan via Seir or Edom, and this was the very route of the Israelites under Moses, as defined in the Bible (Numbers 21:4).
The Habiru. Not the Israelites. The Habiru, who the Sumerians described as an "unclothed people, who travel in dead silence, who destroy everything, whose menfolk go where they will"? Who, when Habiru soldiers were listed in the Tikunani Prism, had Hurrian names for the most part (a small fraction had semitic names)? Are these the people who you're calling the people of Israel? Suuuure. If they are, than the people of Israel were completely different than portrayed in the bible. Realistically, though, as the Oxford History of the Biblical world concluded, after more texts kept finding "Habiru" living all around the fertile cresent with different descriptions, that they had no common ethnic affiliations, spoke no common language, and were in general a term for nomadic brigands.

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 5:17 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 6:09 PM Rei has not replied
 Message 232 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 11:09 PM Rei has not replied
 Message 237 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 3:05 PM Rei has replied

Rei
Member (Idle past 7131 days)
Posts: 1546
From: Iowa City, IA
Joined: 09-03-2003


Message 238 of 317 (144134)
09-23-2004 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by Cold Foreign Object
09-23-2004 3:05 PM


Re: HUMAN EVOLUTION and the HEBREWS in SINAI
Sorry, I missed your earlier post. Give me a minute, and I'll take care of it.
quote:
IOW, like my EXODUS DATE: 1453 BC (Message 219) says you are simply asserting archaeology to be the objective standard that every other avenue of evidence must fall down and bow to.
Why are you arguing about the date, when such a thing is evidenced at *no date*?
quote:
"One must not forget that the interpretations of these finds {in Palestine} has been and still is largely dependant on the school of biblical exegesis to which the excavator adheres."
The evidence of an influx of half a million men (plus others) isn't dependent on the school of biblical exegesis you adhere to. It doesn't exist anywhere.
quote:
But archaeology does support 1453 BC as my post shows.
I already responded to your post, and raised a number of criticisms to it - namely, the appalling lack of evidence of a huge number of people moving in.
quote:
quote:
Kadesh-Barnea has turned up no evidence of an encampment. Ezion-geber? The same. Tel Arad, where Israel supposedly fought King Arad? Nothing from the late Bronze Age. Tel Hesbon, where Israel supposedly fought the Amorites? Again, nothing from the Bronze Age. Etc. There have been genetic studies on human remains of the people in the region - their genetics don't change. Cultural artifact styles don't change. Etc. There simply was no exodus.
Thus asserts REI, we all can log off now.
I forgot - you don't address individual points. Silly me. Are you going to tackle *any* of those?
quote:
There is voluminous evidence of the Exodus.
Thus asserts WILLOWTREE, without giving *any* examples, as I did, for which you faulted me.
quote:
If you want to argue whether it happened or not I suggest you go here and knock yourself out:
Not when you're trying to use archaeology to back up your case over here.
quote:
The Bible was written to record things that the Author wants known. If the Bible did not record such things then they would never be known.
The Bible was written because Constantine ordered the printing of 50 bibles, which froze the cannon and declared what was aprocryphal and what was not. The cannon is composed of the old testament plus a variety of different, and sometimes contradictory, new testament books that were followed by sects of Christians living in different regions of the Mediterranean. The Old Testament was a set of stories, some backed by evidence, some blatantly false (for example, off the top of my head, Esther is a glaring example) accumulated on top of the Pentateuch, some for moralistic purposes, and some for historical purposes. The Pentateuch was written to unify the varied stories of the different sects of the Israeli population, including the priestly tradition and the deuteronomic tradition, in addition to the JE epic narratives (Judah and Elohim (northern Israeli tradition)).
quote:
You are exalting an inferior discipline (archaeology) to be THE objective source of truth above all else.
Look, if you want to keep your debate about when the bible says the exodus was out of archaeological facts, then be my guest - I won't interfere. But if you bring up archaeology, I'm going to object when you assert things that are false. Expect it.
quote:
What confirms archaeology ?
Other archaeology from completely different places and sources (including historical records, lists of kings, etc), radiometric dating (often with concordance models), dendrochronology and ice-core dating, and various lines of archaeological investigation (writings, pottery styles, situational features (ash, etc), fossil analysis/genetic study, etc).
quote:
Re: Destruction of Hazor (Message 51) But a lack in archaeological evidence for an Israelite occupation during the 15th century does not automatically prove an absence of such. And it would do skeptics well to remember that the location in Egypt known as Tell el-Maskhouta (identified as the biblical succoth, and the stronghold from which Egypt would launch her campaigns into Palestine and Syria) has yielded no archaeological evidence whatsoever for signs of military buildings, barracks, forts or any other such structures during the 18th and 19th dynasties, notwithstanding the fact that Egyptian records testify to their existence.
A typical Egyptian fortress could hold perhaps a couple hundred people, and usually held far less (excluding the large depots, like at Tharu). You're talking about a bare minimum of half a million people leaving no evidence. *Yeah right* we're not going to find any evidence; it should be littering the countryside. Genetics should be changing. Pottery or other cultural styles should be changing. Etc. It just doesn't happen. It's not there.
quote:
What they conveniently keep quiet about is the fact that the Nile flooded the Delta regularly thus wiping out the regions ancient history with it.
But there *are* a number of archaeological sites in the Nile Delta, and they often show quite a good degree of preservation, so that argument doesn't stand. Heck, many of them were found during searches for confirmation of the exodus, such as Naville's excavations at Saft el Henna and Tell el-Maskhutah.
quote:
May I remind that the OP says concerning this evidence that only scholarly sources will be considered. While your position undoubtedly reflects a school of thought you need to substantiate your dismissal of Habiru not meaning the Hebrews.
Ask, and ye shall receive. Here's a basic primer, with a very long listing of sources. It cites many of the inscrptions involved.
quote:
The linguistic similarity is not a matter of opinion
The heck it isn't! Even the Oxford History of the Biblical World disagrees with you, let alone the vast majority of archaeologists. It most distinctly IS a matter of opinion, and a distinct *minority* one at that.
quote:
and it is only rejected because it is so obviously speaking about the Hebrews.
If you'll agree that the hebrews didn't have semitic names the majority of the time, ran around naked, lived as thugs, and lived all throughout ancient mesopotamia, sure.
quote:
quote:
and were in general a term for nomadic brigands.
What do you think "Hebrew" means ?
Brigands? Who ran around naked, and lived in the whole middle east, and didn't usually have semitic names? Are you serious?
quote:
I find it rather funny that you evos would argue a paradox (if the Exodus happened then....but it really didn't).
It's not a paradox. It didn't happen, at any date. You can hold your own views, of course, but as I mentioned, if you try and back it up with bad archaeology, I'm going to call you on it.
This message has been edited by Rei, 09-23-2004 03:08 PM

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 3:05 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-23-2004 6:37 PM Rei has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024