Could the Hyksos be the Ancient Hebrew of the bible?

[SoyLeche]

As I mentioned to you before if you experienced the so "called god's calling" then you will understand the bible more than what others had written or translated about it. Again you never answered in Noah's Ark, it told Noah to gather a pair of animals... and everything would be destroyed except for the creatures that made noah's ark... I say bacteria, plankton, amphibians, fish, crocodiles, alligators can survive a flood and would be really happy with the new found food supply. Now answer this.. why where they left out in the bible? Why because these people and it did not know about bacteria... maybe an answer.....

I'm pretty sure this thread isn't about Noah's ark.

 

[ALifetimeToWaitFor....]

Hysko kings bore canaanite names and united palestine. Meaning there is some validity to Logics point.

 

[ProfLogic]

I'm pretty sure this thread isn't about Noah's ark.

You were the one that says my arguments were coherent before this thread. I noted my Noah's ark argument of which you have no response because you know your Noah's ark depiction in your translated bible lacks its credibility that the flood killed everyone except for what it suggested to save. Again how come god did not know about the bacteria that is all over this land that existed then. You never answered it so here is the answer, it your god only knows what humanity know, bacteria was only discovered by humans after your bible so thus it did not have any knowledge about bacteria. As I told you before, it feeds on human information. It needs humanity and not the other way around. Think within yourself, why it says adore me or you will be punished, destroyed.... Its noted so that you will never challenge it, Now if Noah's ark was a fantasy...it opens up the possibility that everything in this book is a fantasy too. Over to you who says read the book read the book,......... Maybe your the one that needs to read the book since you can not answer my Noah's ark argument.

 

[ALifetimeToWaitFor....]

He didn't have to save bacteria, it lives in water every where literally. Its not a sentient being in need of saving.

 

[SoyLeche]

You were the one that says my arguments were coherent before this thread. I noted my Noah's ark argument of which you have no response because you know your Noah's ark depiction in your translated bible lacks its credibility that the flood killed everyone except for what it suggested to save. Again how come god did not know about the bacteria that is all over this land that existed then. You never answered it so here is the answer, it your god only knows what humanity know, bacteria was only discovered by humans after your bible so thus it did not have any knowledge about bacteria. As I told you before, it feeds on human information. It needs humanity and not the other way around. Think within yourself, why it says adore me or you will be punished, destroyed.... Its noted so that you will never challenge it, Now if Noah's ark was a fantasy...it opens up the possibility that everything in this book is a fantasy too. Over to you who says read the book read the book,......... Maybe your the one that needs to read the book since you can not answer my Noah's ark argument.

You assume that I take the story of Noah literally.

You assume a lot.

Anyway, like I said, the topic of this thread is not Noah. If you want to discuss that, start another thread.

 

[ProfLogic]

He didn't have to save bacteria, it lives in water every where literally. Its not a sentient being in need of saving.

The issue was it claimed that it will destroy everything besides the ones in Noah's ark. If it wanted to save bacteria, it would have stated it in the bible through Noah's ark. Now if it was left out, it suggest that it never knew the colonies of bacteria that exist in the water. It did not know because man did not know it. Which means the bible is man made and if it was inspired, it was inspired by an awarenss that did not know more than what humanity have seen or heard. If the bible is man made then the closest would be the story of the Hyksos per factual history why the Ancient Hebrews selected Egypt as a tormentor. This is why it is a great possibility that human history is telling us through the Egyptian factual history that the Hyksos were indeed the Ancient Hebrews.

 

[ProfLogic]

You assume that I take the story of Noah literally.

You assume a lot.

Anyway, like I said, the topic of this thread is not Noah. If you want to discuss that, start another thread.

Now that you are cornered, why don't you explain Noah's ark and tell us what your religious teachers had told you to interpret this story..... Did the great flood actually happen, did the pair of animals and noahs family the only ones to survive, share your knowledge instead of saying incoherent, read the bible.......who knows you might enlighten some posters....

 

[SoyLeche]

Now that you are cornered, why don't you explain Noah's ark and tell us what your religious teachers had told you to interpret this story..... Did the great flood actually happen, did the pair of animals and noahs family the only ones to survive, share your knowledge instead of saying incoherent, read the bible.......who knows you might enlighten some posters....

I already said - I will not get into this in this thread. Actually, I would hope that the Mods would remove every post about Noah in this thread - as they are irrelevant.

 

[gnostic]

I agreed. We already had debate over the Noah and the Flood, and this is not relevant here. Start another topic on Noah if you like, ProfLogic.

You, ProfLogic started this topic about the Hyksos and the Hebrews in Egypt, in the time of Jacob and Moses. You have linked it to the Hyksos' expulsion and Moses' Exodus.

I don't think there is any link between the Hyksos and the Hebrews. I think the Hyksos were already expulsed before Jacob arrived with the rest of his family. The Exodus happened a couple of centuries later.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The Exodus happened a couple of centuries later.

According to what evidence?

 

[gnostic]

Not evidence, precisely, but based on the Bible, from Jacob's death to the Israelites leaving Egypt.

Moses was not a young man, when he finally got pharaoh to release his people. He was already 80 at the time.

My calculation of Jacob's died in 1505 BC. Jacob didn't arrive in Egypt until 1522 BC. See the 2nd table in Timeline of the Patriarch.

According to Egypt's history, Ahmose I (founder of the 18th dynasty) reign between 1539-1514 BC. He was the one who finally drove out the Hyksos, around 1521.

The Hyksos dynasty (15th) ruled in Egypt from c. 1630–1521 BC. The Exodus doesn't seem to happen until the 19th dynasty, which didn't begin until 1292 with Ramses I (its founder). But I don't which pharaoh that Moses had confronted, since the Exodus don't give any name, and no Egyptian records that say that they had large slave population of Hebrews, exodusing out of Egypt.

Such mass exodus would have also cause the collapse of the Egyptian economy, but Egypt was at its height through much of the early generations of the 19th dynasty. Egypt was also in control of Palestine/Canaan in this dynasty, so I don't see how any Hebrews could have possibly taken Canaan with Egyptian garrisons around there. The 20th dynasty was weaker than the previous dynasty and eventually lost Palestine/Canaan, but this period is too late for the Exodus.

So you should understand why I am rather sceptical of the entire Exodus legend, just as I am sceptical about the Hyksos-Hebrew link.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Not evidence, precisely, but ...

Not evidence - period. As I've repeatedly noted, to quote the words of "maximalist" William Dever:

Let me begin by clarifying which books of the Hebrew Bible I think can be utilized by the would-be historian, whether textual scholar or archaeologist. With most scholars, I would exclude much of the Pentateuch, specifically the books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. These materials obviously constitute a sort of "pre-history" that has been attached to the main epic of ancient Israel by late editors. All this may be distilled from long oral tradition, and I suspect that some of the stories -- such as parts of the Patriarchal narratives -- may once have had a historical setting. These traditions, however, are overlaid with legendary and even fantastic materials that the modern reader may enjoy as "story," but which can scarcely be taken seriously as history.

- What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It? (pg. 97)

After a century of exhausive investigation, all respectable archaeologists have given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob credible historical figures. Virtually the last archaeological word was written by me more than 20 years ago for a basic handbook of biblical studies, Israelite and Judean History. And, as we have seen, archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus has similarly been discarded as a fruitless pursuit. Indeed, the overwhelming archaeological evidence today of largely indigenous origins for early Israel leaves no room for an exodus from Egypt or a 40-year pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness. A Moses-like figure may have existed somewhere in southern Transjordan in the middle 13th century B.C., where many scholars think the biblical traditions concerning the god Yahweh arose. But archaeology can do nothing to confirm such a figure as a historical personage, much less prove that he was the founder of later Israelite religion. As for Leviticus and Numbers, these are clearly additions to the "pre-history" by very late Priestly editorial hands, preoccupied with notions of ritual purity, themes of the "promised land," and othe literary motifs that most modern readers will scarcely find edifying, much less historical.

- ibid (pg. 99)

Now let us turn to the biblical data. If we look at the biblical texts describing the origins of Israel, we see at once that the traditional account contained in Genesis through Joshua simple cannot be reconciled with the picture derived above from archaeological investigation. The whole "Exodus-Conquest" cycle of stories must now be set aside as largely mythical, but in the proper sense of the term "myth": perhaps "historical fiction" ...

- ibid (pg. 121)​

And, as I've also mentioned in the past, I invite you to spend a day or two at the marvelous Israel Museum. There you will find amassed a remarkable collection of evidence pertaining to the history of that region - but not one scrap of evidence supporting the Exodus/Conquest.

Believe what you will, but please don't pretend that the belief is evidenced.

 

[gnostic]

Sorry, Jay, but I had edited my last post, since then.

I am just as sceptical as you about the Exodus, Jay. I am merely telling what I have learnt from reading, not what I believe to be true.

I did some calculation here and there, and found that ProfLogic's Hyksos-Hebrew link doesn't match with timeframe of the bible and Egyptian history. But I also don't think the bible's Exodus link with Egyptian history too, because their departure would have been noticable and disastrous to the Egyptian economy and empire. Had the Israelites taken Canaan, then the Egyptian would have known that their province was taken.

There are no Egyptian records of the 7 year's famine in the New Kingdom. No evidence of mass exodus. No records of Moses' plagues. No records of destruction of Egyptian army by divine intervention. There are no records of any Hebrew governor named Joseph or Zaphenath Paneah (Joseph's Egyptian name), or anyone by the name of Moses.

All these events would not have escaped the Egyptian notices.

 

[ProfLogic]

There are no Egyptian records of the 7 year's famine in the New Kingdom. No evidence of mass exodus. No records of Moses' plagues. No records of destruction of Egyptian army by divine intervention. There are no records of any Hebrew governor named Joseph or Zaphenath Paneah (Joseph's Egyptian name), or anyone by the name of Moses.

All these events would not have escaped the Egyptian notices.

People might say that the Egyptians destroyed any evidence of this event in their history. It is a strong possibility but if a nation had encountered a divine being, I would have thought that they would have such fear in disrespecting this being by destroying its accomplishments. This is why it is highly unlikely. In addition, Egypt would have been into the one god adoration. In the Hyksos' case, Egypt wanted to eradicate them from thier history but they still made it in Egyptian history. It seems that if one tries to hide history, it would still arise no matter what. No other people left Egypt in mass quantities than the Hyksos. It is also suspicious that Egypt was the antagonist in the bible and even its armies chasing the hebrews which is similar to driving the hyksos out of Egypt.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

People might say that the Egyptians destroyed any evidence of this event in their history. It is a strong possibility but if a nation had encountered a divine being, I would have thought that they would have such fear in disrespecting this being by destroying its accomplishments. This is why it is highly unlikely. In addition, Egypt would have been into the one god adoration. In the Hyksos' case, Egypt wanted to eradicate them from thier history but they still made it in Egyptian history. It seems that if one tries to hide history, it would still arise no matter what. No other people left Egypt in mass quantities than the Hyksos. It is also suspicious that Egypt was the antagonist in the bible and even its armies chasing the hebrews which is similar to driving the hyksos out of Egypt.

Even if they did, there would be archeological evidence.

 

[gnostic]

No, ProfLogic.

I don't think you have study Egyptian religion/mythology at all. The Egyptians were actually tolerant to other religions and are very willing to adopt other deities. They had adopted Canaanite, Syrian and Babylonian deities into their own religions, like Baal, Anat, Astarte, Ishtar, and many more (but which I can't think straight at the moment; I am suffering from dizziness and the flu, so forgive me if I my post don't make sense in some areas).

The only exception is at the time of Akhenaten (18th dynasty king) and his monotheism of Aten; this was the only time they had religious persecution. Religious persecution was completely unheard of before then. And even after the people returned to the old polytheistic religion, they still continued to worship Aten, even after Akhenaten's death.

The 19th and 20th dynasty adopted a lot of foreign deities, so the Egyptian kings would not have hesitate to adopt something like the all-powerful Hebrew God, because it would have suited them quite well to make a myth that the Hebrew God had given them the divine right to rule over Egypt, like their native sovereign gods had (eg. Re and Horus). They had readily adopted the Greek gods, when the Macedonians arrived.

Unlike Judaism and other monotheism, ancient Egypt is very willing to adopt as many gods as they like. There were no rules of not accepting a foreign god, because Egyptian religion has no creed and no dogma.

That's why I don't think the Exodus display a realistic portrayal of Egyptian kings in regarding to native and foreign religion.

The Hyksos brought with them the Canaanite goddess Anat with them, and they still worshipped her in the 19th and 20th dynasties (New Kingdom). Sorry, ProfLogic, but I don't buy your assertion about wiping out another foreign religion.

And if they had tried to get rid of the Hyksos without learning from them, they would have undoubtedly failed. The Hyksos brought new technology with them, so without adopting them, the Hyksos would have continued to be the Egyptian masters.

And I still don't think the Hyksos and Hebrews are connected. The Hebrews knew nothing about the chariots.

 

[ProfLogic]

No, ProfLogic.

I don't think you have study Egyptian religion/mythology at all. The Egyptians were actually tolerant to other religions and are very willing to adopt other deities. They had adopted Canaanite, Syrian and Babylonian deities into their own religions, like Baal, Anat, Astarte, Ishtar, and many more (but which I can't think straight at the moment; I am suffering from dizziness and the flu, so forgive me if I my post don't make sense in some areas).

The only question in terms of the hebrew people and its self proclaimed god of all is, if the Egyptian had encountered this being at all, wouldn't it be in their historical record due to the knowledge that it can destroy what it wants and has shown that it can end its civilization. It is not like what you see in guerilla tactic because in this case there is really no where to hide, you can't hide from it. But we have not seen any evidence in Egyptian history of this occurence at all. Its so easy for a race to proclaim that they have the one god and that they are chosen, it is hard to show what they say they are, especially if it is made up in their minds.

And if they had tried to get rid of the Hyksos without learning from them, they would have undoubtedly failed. The Hyksos brought new technology with them, so without adopting them, the Hyksos would have continued to be the Egyptian masters.).

The idea to get rid of the Hyksos was in reference to Egypt's history, they would still take the technology but would not mention were it came from.

And I still don't think the Hyksos and Hebrews are connected. The Hebrews knew nothing about the chariots.

People were taught that the chariots of the pharoah chased the hebrews up to the parting of the Red Sea.

 

[ProfLogic]

Even if they did, there would be archeological evidence.

Tha's why there is no more unlikely candidate of the Ancient Hebrews as the Hyksos, otherwise with all the digging in Egypt they would have found out another race that migrated away from Egypt similar to the Hyksos. To this day none.

 

[SoyLeche]

The only question in terms of the hebrew people and its self proclaimed god of all is, if the Egyptian had encountered this being at all, wouldn't it be in their historical record due to the knowledge that it can destroy what it wants and has shown that it can end its civilization. It is not like what you see in guerilla tactic because in this case there is really no where to hide, you can't hide from it. But we have not seen any evidence in Egyptian history of this occurence at all. Its so easy for a race to proclaim that they have the one god and that they are chosen, it is hard to show what they say they are, especially if it is made up in their minds.



The idea to get rid of the Hyksos was in reference to Egypt's history, they would still take the technology but would not mention were it came from.



People were taught that the chariots of the pharoah chased the hebrews up to the parting of the Red Sea.

The problem here is that you are arguing one point (that there is no evidence that the Exodus occurred) - and thinking that that proves an entirely different point (that the Hyksos are the Hebrews of the Exodus and they invented God to cover their tracks).

Even if you can prove conclusively that the Exodus did not occur, it proves absolutely nothing about the point you are actually trying to argue.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Similar to listening to preachers and religious readers on a book that was written thousands of years ago of which can not be proven in looking at its content. Good luck with that......

A non sequitor. Nice try though.