Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9181 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: joebialek123
Post Volume: Total: 918,282 Year: 5,539/9,624 Month: 564/323 Week: 61/143 Day: 4/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Dating the Exodus
Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 317 (132524)
08-10-2004 8:47 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Cold Foreign Object
08-10-2004 6:51 PM


quote:
Originally posted by WILLOWTREE
"Pharoah who knew not Joseph" expulsion of the reigning Zarahites/children of Judah/Shepard Kings. Thus leaving their brethren to face slavery.
Hi WILLOWTREE,
You made this assertion on another thread where I am awaiting your proofs. I am curious for your explanation because these Zarahites are counted among the families of the exodus on the plains of Moab in Numbers 26:20.
However, let's not derail Brian's thread with this. Prove this point to me on the other thread, and I will come back here and argue it with you.
Amlodhi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-10-2004 6:51 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 145 of 317 (134495)
08-16-2004 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Cold Foreign Object
08-16-2004 6:10 PM


Re: Destruction of Hazor
quote:
Originally posted by WILLOWTREE
Professor Gordon aligns his research with a mid 14th century Exodus to an early 15th.
I didn't think this sounded right, so I just reviewed my copy of C. Gordon's "The Bible and The Ancient Near East". On page 112, Professor Gordon specifically has this to say:
quote:
As demonstrated in Chapter IX, pp. 149-152, the Exodus from Egypt occurred C. 1175 B.C.E. under the leadership of Moses. Thus . . . we can work back(wards) to an approximate date of 1295 B.C.E. for Joseph, Levi, and the other ten brothers. Working still further back, we arrive at approximate dates of 1325 for Jacob, 1355 for Isaac, and 1385 for Abraham. This date for Abraham puts him firmly in the Amarna Age . . .
quote:
WT:
With the veracity of the Biblical record confirmed true; that is the presence of Israel in Egypt and the Zarahite/Shepherd King rulership in Egypt (Genesis 48/49 "your servants be shepherds") and their expulsion; we can augment Gordon's loose dating to what the Bible says based on the proven veracity of the aforementioned issue.
And yet, this is quite curious based on Professor Gordon's above quoted statement. Specifically, that the Zerahites could be ruling c. 1800 B.C. if Zerah's father (Judah) didn't exist until c. 1295 B.C.
In consideration of this huge discrepancy in C. Gordon's reported statements, could you please provide the exact reference and quote which supports your statement that he aligns his research with a mid-14th century to 15th century exodus date?
quote:
WT:
Dr. Gene Scott: " Professor Gordon has proven the high culture of Greece originated from Egypt's Hebrew Hyksos Shepherd Kings".
Based both on the exodus dating quoted above and on my reading of what Professor Gordon has to say, this appears to me to be a distortion of the facts. Nevertheless, if you will provide Prof. Gordon's quotations in which he states this is so, I will gladly reconsider.
Until then, it is my understanding (which, again is supported by his exodus dates quoted above) that he nowhere says that the Israelites founded Greece. What he does say is that he believes that both the group that founded Minoan Crete c. 1800 B.C. and the Israelites that departed Egypt c. 1175 both branched off from a widespread Semitic race, components of which had reached the delta of Egypt prior to c. 1800 B.C.
This is a far cry from what you are attempting to insinuate. And, in actuality, Prof. Gordon's statements quoted here tend to negate both your 14th century exodus date and your insistence that Zerahites/Danites left Egypt and founded Greece.
So, again, in case I have read something incorrectly or the printer has mis-printed my copy of C. Gordon's book, please provide the specific reference and quote where C. Gordon contradicts the above quotation.
Amlodhi
This message has been edited by Amlodhi, 08-16-2004 08:41 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-16-2004 6:10 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-16-2004 10:43 PM Amlodhi has replied
 Message 149 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-16-2004 11:04 PM Amlodhi has not replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 153 of 317 (134536)
08-17-2004 1:13 AM
Reply to: Message 146 by Cold Foreign Object
08-16-2004 10:43 PM


Re: Destruction of Hazor
quote:
Originally posted by WILLOWTREE
"Archaeologist Dr. Cyrus Gordon states that they later sailed from Greece to other European coastlands, including Ireland and Denmark. In his book, Before Columbus, Gordon relates, A group of Sea People bore the name of ‘Dan.?The Bible tells how a segment of the seafaring (Judges 5:17) Danites [were part of] the tribal system of ancient Israel. . . . The Danites were widespread. Cyprus was called Ia-Dnan ‘The Island of Dan(an).?The same people were called Danuna, and under this name they appear as rulers of the Plain of Adana in Cilicia. Greek tradition has their eponymous ancestor, Danaos (Dan), migrating from the Nile delta to Greece . . .?(p. 108). Note that the Israelites did in fact emigrate from Egypt. Cyrus Gordon added, Virgil also designated the Greeks as ‘Danai.?Bold scholars see the influence of the Danites in Irish folk lore . . . and in the name of Danmark (‘Denmark?: the land of Dan . . .?(p. 111).
There appear to be only two short excerpts from C. Gordon in the above paragraph. Page 111 of what? Dr. Scott's book?
Let's see what Prof. Gordon is really saying here:
quote:
. . . the bible presents the history of Israel in an idealized fashion. Nations simply do not descend from the offspring of one man (in this case Jacob/Israel). Instead, nations typically develop from the coming together of a variety of peoples over time . . .
. . .concerning the tribe of Dan. Among the Sea Peoples was a group called the Danuna, associated by many scholars with the people called the Danaoi by Homer. This group, like the Philistines, settled on the coast of Canaan, but in time joined the Israelites as the tribe of Dan. Their tribal allotment is on the seacoast immediately adjacent to Philistine territory. Judges 5:17 refers to their dwelling in ships; Genesis 49:16 suggests that Dan is joining the Israelite tribal league at a rather late date; and Judges 18:1 notes that Dan did not have an allotment of land like the other tribes. All of these factors combine to support the theory that the tribe of Dan originated as one of the Sea Peoples.
(The Bible and the Ancient Near East, Cyrus H. Gordon and Gary R. Rendsburg, Pgs. 175 & 176, W.W. Norton & Co. pub., N.Y./London, 4th ed., 1997)
quote:
WT:
I quoted Gordon's Hebrew expulsion "c.1800 BC" thats what he said.
But he doesn't. You are confusing the terms Hebrew and Semite. To use your previous dialectic: All Hebrews are semites, but not all semites are Hebrews. Since Prof. Gordon dates Jacob at c. 1325 B.C., it is quite obvious that he does not think that some descendants of Dan (or Zerah) sailed away from Egypt c. 1800.
Therein, it is also obvious that he does not think that these Danuna/Danaoi took their name from a son of Judah.
Thus, rather than saying that the Hebrew tribe of Dan became the Sea Peoples and/or Minoans, he is, conversely, saying that some of these Sea Peoples settled the west coast of Canaan and later integrated into the group calling themselves Israelites and thus became the tribe of Dan.
My objection, then, was the result of these; your specific statements of "fact":
quote:
WT: I quoted Gordon's Hebrew expulsion "c.1800 BC" thats what he said.
He does not.
quote:
WT: Professor Gordon aligns his research with a mid 14th century Exodus to an early 15th.
He does not.
quote:
WT: Professor Gordon decimates any doubt as to Israel's presence in Egypt and their c.1800 BC flight when a Pharoah rose up "who knew not Joseph"
Prof. Gordon does not say that the Israelites fled Egypt when "Pharaoh rose up" nor at any other time before the exodus of 1175 B.C.
quote:
WT: He has emigration from Egypt by Hebrews c.1800 BC. Are you paying attention ?
No he does not say Hebrews. Are you paying attention? Look at the dates he gives: 1295 B.C.E. for Joseph. Thus, according to Prof. Gordon, a group of semitic peoples sailed out of the Egyptian delta c. 500 years before Joseph ever entered it.
Now, look at your words quoted above. While the small excerpts (interspersed into Dr. Scott's narrative) from Prof. Gordon may be correct as far as they go, you then misrepresent what he is saying and proceed to put words in his mouth that he did not say and further give the impression that he supports Dr. Scott's views; which he does not.
If you want to integrate some of Prof. Gordon's research into your (or Dr. Scott's) theories, that is fine. But you are going far beyond this. You should either represent his views accurately and in context or not at all.
Amlodhi
This message has been edited by Amlodhi, 08-17-2004 12:24 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-16-2004 10:43 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-17-2004 3:08 PM Amlodhi has replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 173 of 317 (134765)
08-17-2004 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by Cold Foreign Object
08-17-2004 3:08 PM


Re: Destruction of Hazor
quote:
WILLOWTREE
Your instant revisionism is irrelevant.
But it is not "my" revisionism. It is the opinion of the source (C. Gordon) that you cited:
quote:
WT:
From: Professor Cyrus Gordon (Ph.D. Univ. of Pennylvania) Field archaeologist in the Near East 1931-5 and conducted exploratory missions in the East Mediterranean. Authority on Ugaritic Tablets; eight years engaged in deciphering the Minoan and Eteocretan inscriptions.
Author: "Ugaritic Literature" (1949), "Ugaritic Textbook" (1940, 1947,1955, 1965), "Adventures in the Nearest East" (1941, 1957), "Hammurapi's Code" (1957), "The Ancient Near East" (1953, 1958, 1965), "Evidence for the Minoan Language" (1965), "Ugarit and Minoan Crete" (1966)
So, you cite all these impressive credentials when you think he supports your position; but now you call his opinions "instant revisionism"?
quote:
WT:
Dr. Gordon, in the book I quoted, proves that Greek civilization originated from Hebrew civilization. They were parallel structures, of which Greece and its inception was born from Hebrew.
I think you might want to actually read some of those books you cited since you appear not to understand what it is that Prof. Gordon is saying. And even though this is on topic, I don't intend to clutter Brian's thread with endless wrangling on this point.
So:
Either provide the exact quote and reference where C. Gordon states that the Hyksos were Hebrews and/or that the Greek civilization was founded by Hebrews;
or:
Drop it, and quit putting words into Prof. Gordon's mouth.
Amlodhi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-17-2004 3:08 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-18-2004 6:14 PM Amlodhi has replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 176 of 317 (134771)
08-17-2004 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Hydarnes
08-17-2004 6:31 PM


Re: Destruction of Hazor
Hello Hydarnes,
I hope the mods will forgive one quick off topic transgression, but it seems your proposed new topic may not make it through intact and there seemed nowhere else to get this message to you.
Just wanted to say thank you for the information you presented on Maqla at Jabal al Lawz. That is exactly the type of factual presentation I appreciate. I found it intriguing and will give it due consideration.
My apologies for the digression, Brian.
We now return you to the regularly scheduled program.
Amlodhi
This message has been edited by Amlodhi, 08-18-2004 09:17 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Hydarnes, posted 08-17-2004 6:31 PM Hydarnes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Hydarnes, posted 08-17-2004 6:52 PM Amlodhi has not replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 194 of 317 (135049)
08-18-2004 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by Cold Foreign Object
08-18-2004 6:14 PM


Re: Destruction of Hazor
???. . . Semites armed with Peneteuchal (sic) origin . . .???
{chuckle} . . Is that some esoteric way of admitting that you can't come up with the quote?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-18-2004 6:14 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-18-2004 6:54 PM Amlodhi has replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 200 of 317 (135093)
08-18-2004 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by Cold Foreign Object
08-18-2004 6:54 PM


quote:
WT:
You are obviously in the process of obtaining the source - I will wait. Also, my previous posts about Gordon have been ignored.
I am obviously waiting for you to post a quote from C. Gordon justifying the words you attributed to him.
>>Are you able to produce that or not?<<
Your continued transparent evasions have grown tedious.
Post it or drop it. Those are your only two honorable choices.
[Edited to add: Please post the quote on the Gen. 22:17 thread, as you have also made the same claim there. I think it's more on topic there and this thread can then continue without the digression.]
This message has been edited by Amlodhi, 08-18-2004 07:38 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-18-2004 6:54 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 08-19-2004 2:07 PM Amlodhi has not replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 233 of 317 (143076)
09-18-2004 12:36 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by Cold Foreign Object
09-17-2004 11:09 PM


Re: EXODUS DATE: 1453 BC
quote:
Originally posted by WT
May I also remind you that to argue for an Exodus date - any date - AND also take the position "if it happened at all" is a position of paradox.
No it isn't.
Say a jealous man was investigating his wife's claim that she was shopping at a certain shop on a given Saturday and he was able to ascertain that the shop opened at 10:00 A.M. and closed at 2:00 P.M.
There would be nothing paradoxical about surmising that if she was really shopping there on Saturday (i.e. if it really happened), then it would had to have occurred within a specific timeframe, i.e., a time window compatible with the physical data.
Far from being a paradox, this is simply logical necessity.
Amlodhi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-17-2004 11:09 PM Cold Foreign Object has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 09-18-2004 5:22 PM Amlodhi has not replied

Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 312 of 317 (148239)
10-07-2004 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 311 by Cold Foreign Object
10-07-2004 7:31 PM


What he meant to say was . . .
quote:
Originally posted by WT
Brian and I agreed a long time ago that our respective worldviews are based upon the evidence. That he is an atheist because of the evidence and I am a theist because of the evidence. We argue under these assumptions.
quote:
Originally posted by WT
If the Bible doesn't confirm archaeology then we know that archaeology cannot be trusted or seen reliable.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 311 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-07-2004 7:31 PM Cold Foreign Object 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