• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Egyptian exodus proof or slavery?

Brian2

Veteran Member
You keep going bnack to the same source that carbon dating failed and all scholars have issues with his work. It's been shown by scholars that his methodology is bad.
Rohl does not have an advanced degree in archaeology, but is nevertheless now informing the professional archaeology community that they got it wrong.
He's also selling a book, non-peer-reviewed on his own publishing company? And he's selling lectures about how all the OT books are all true yet doesn't have the degrees, hasn't written peer-reviewed papers and isn't really a scholar in the field. None of that work is actual scholarship. What is it? Crank apologetics aimed at fundamentalists.
He's making money off fundies.
Same way Stanton Friedman made money off Roswell alien crashes in the early 80's.


New Chronology (Rohl) - Wikipedia

None of this work seems legit.

Radiocarbon dating[edit]
In 2010, a series of corroborated radiocarbon dates were published for dynastic Egypt which suggest some minor revisions to the conventional chronology, but do not support Rohl's proposed revisions.[41

No doubt what David Rohl has proposed archaeologically and historically has given him hope for his ideas being accepted once the Christians started to hear it and see that it helped with the debate over the historicity of the Exodus and other parts of the Bible. But the reality is that his chronology ideas concerning Egypt can be put aside and still archaeology supports the Exodus and those other parts of the Old Testament, and many other archaeologists and historians see that also. The archaeology is not David Rohl's archaeology, David along with others have just interpreted it positively towards the historicity of the Bible.
And really it is not just fundie Christians that say the Exodus and conquest etc are true history and it is not just David Rohl who makes money from either saying the Bible is true or that it is historically false.

You already sent me here several times. This is a joke. It actually says up front - "A Christian Apologetics Ministry Dedicated to Demonstrating the Historical Reliability of the Bible through Archaeological and Biblical Research."

Is that a bad thing? Does that mean that the site is not trustworthy. It is in reality what the author of the article (Bryant G Wood) has said, he does not plant the evidence, the archaeology is there and all he does is point it out.

So it's a fundamentalist site that isn't interested in what is actually true. Only things that support what they want to be true and probably mis-information and re-interpretations of finds that go against what scripture says? If fooling yourself is your thing than have a party. Archaeology doesn't "confirm" the Bible? Yes some places are real, some people are real. Many are not, many are far different than written about.
This is about where archaeology is with the OT:
"
PROVING THE BIBLE
Q: Have biblical archeologists traditionally tried to find evidence that events in the Bible really happened?

William Dever: From the beginnings of what we call biblical archeology, perhaps 150 years ago, scholars, mostly western scholars, have attempted to use archeological data to prove the Bible. And for a long time it was thought to work. [William Foxwell] Albright, the great father of our discipline, often spoke of the "archeological revolution." Well, the revolution has come but not in the way that Albright thought. The truth of the matter today is that archeology raises more questions about the historicity of the Hebrew Bible and even the New Testament than it provides answers, and that's very disturbing to some people.

It is disturbing for some people that a re analysis of the archaeology does point to the truth of the Biblical record.

But perhaps we were asking the wrong questions. I have always thought that if we resurrected someone from the past, one of the biblical writers, they would be amused, because for them it would have made no difference. I think they would have said, faith is faith is faith—take your proofs and go with them.

The fact is that archeology can never prove any of the theological suppositions of the Bible. Archeologists can often tell you what happened and when and where and how and even why. No archeologists can tell anyone what it means, and most of us don't try.

When archaeologists started flat out denying the biblical record that also means that the theological suppositions for a bunch of lies is also denied. But eventually the truth comes out since archaeology is continually digging more stuff up. This of course is one reason that the altar and curse tablet at Mt Ebal is important in that regard. It really means that the conquest account is true and theories to the contrary can be thrown out and ideas of the Pentateuch being made up around the time of the Exile can be thrown out.
 
Last edited:

joelr

Well-Known Member
It would take 100 pages to respond to your statements on Creation and Flood. Happy to that too, but maybe later. I respond to Gilgamesh here.
Gilgamesh traveled from Sumer to Dilmun on the sea. Dilmun is identified as Indus Valley (~Samuel Noah Kramer). Here he met Utnapishtim who told him about the Flood. I am attaching my post on Gilgamesh for the details please.
I appreciate this conversation. Thanks.


None of this makes any sense. Gilamesh is from a completely different theological system and is a character from a myth.
Moses is not a real person. There are many lines of evidence Genesis was written by several authors in 5/6 BC. They go over the different authors here:

Moses life is a collection of Egyptian myths including a deity giving laws on stone tablets. Characters who lived far before the stories were written (and the Israelites were a people) are fiction? There wasn't one Israelite running around centuries before there were Jewish people? They would have been an Egyptain or Mesopotamian and worshipped those fake Gods?
Yahweh is a deity who is spoken about in every way exactly like all deities since Sumer.

Again, a large part of this early conversation with Hebrew Bible professor F. Stavrakopoulou is that her research into older Gods has shown this to be true

Francesca Stavrakopoulou Discusses Her Latest Book,

3:15 Yahweh is the same as older Greek gods. Anthropormorphic, dynamic, colorful, emotional, vivid, changeable, masculine, real body parts. In "God: An Anatomy"

Gilamesh isn't a "prophet". That is a fictional concept. First there needs to be good evidence that a theistic deity exists and actually talks to people. That has not been done. Why it would care about mundane things, have human emotions, require blood sacrifice (just like all the other Gods), and then when Greek Hellenism made Gods more cosmic and took souls to heaven then suddenly this God also does that?
There isn't evidence for anything except stories created by people.

Genesis was written and they needed some older characters to be the "flood guy" and someone to kick things off (Abraham). That doesn't mean it's real? There was not one man living with the Canaanites getting secret messages from the "real God" while everyone there worshipped EL and Ashera?
Ashera was actually the consort of Yahweh in early Israel up until the 6th century. Gods of reality would not pick out one tribe?


The 2 religions have some common ground because for one storytellers travel, because all religious myths have commonalities and these spread around and because people write similar metaphorical legends. Joseph Campbell has several books comparing all the worlds religions into similar themes that all humans deal with. But he knows none of the stories are literal and there are no theistic deities giving people messages. If so, the messages from Yahweh are remarkable similar to all religions before it and the NT is all Greek/Persian theology. This quest is no different than trying to find if Hercules and Thor maybe had adventures together.
There is no Garden of Eden? Humans existed for 200,000 years and evolved from hominids over millions of years. There was no first man. The final transition from Homo Heidelburgensis to H Sapien was over millenia.


"Most historians view the patriarchal age, along with the Exodus and the period of the biblical judges, as a late literary construct that does not relate to any particular historical era;[8] and after a century of exhaustive archaeological investigation, no evidence has been found for a historical Abraham.[9] It is largely concluded that the Torah was composed during the early Persian period (late-6th century BCE) as a result of tensions between Jewish landowners who had stayed in Judah during the Babylonian captivity and traced their right to the land through their "father Abraham", and the returning exiles who based their counterclaim on Moses and the Exodus tradition of the Israelites.[10]

Historicity

Abraham's well at Beersheba, Israel
In the early and middle 20th century, leading archaeologists such as William F. Albright and G. Ernest Wright and biblical scholars such as Albrecht Alt and John Bright believed that the patriarchs and matriarchs were either real individuals or believable composites of people who lived in the "patriarchal age", the 2nd millennium BCE.[57] But, in the 1970s, new arguments concerning Israel's past and the biblical texts challenged these views; these arguments can be found in Thomas L. Thompson's The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives (1974),[58] and John Van Seters' Abraham in History and Tradition (1975).[59] Thompson, a literary scholar, based his argument on archaeology and ancient texts. His thesis centered on the lack of compelling evidence that the patriarchs lived in the 2nd millennium BCE, and noted how certain biblical texts reflected first millennium conditions and concerns. Van Seters examined the patriarchal stories and argued that their names, social milieu, and messages strongly suggested that they were Iron Age creations.[60] Van Seter and Thompson's works were a paradigm shift in biblical scholarship and archaeology, which gradually led scholars to no longer consider the patriarchal narratives as historical.[61] Some conservative scholars attempted to defend the Patriarchal narratives in the following years, but this has not found acceptance among scholars.[62][63] By the beginning of the 21st century, archaeologists had given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac or Jacob credible historical figures.[64]"




This makes sense and is backed by the vast majority of scholarship. The far more likely answer is every culture comes up with a bunch of stories, they are fiction.
 

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

TruthPrevails
Do you think that's enough to categorize the entire nation as arrogant. I also noticed you didn't provide an example.
I have no interest in categorizing anyone. I am only trying to present a possible reason for the perSecution of the Jews. I confess I do not have a clear example. But I have not looked for it. it is an hypothesis that needs to be tested.
 

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

TruthPrevails
Gilamesh is from a completely different theological system and is a character from a myth.
I would like to take this forward before we get into other issues. I thought you had relied on enuma, atrahasis and Gilgamesh to show biblical origins in Mesopotamia. I am showing that Gilgamesh shows origins in india valley. Let us clear this up. Thx.
 

Bharat Jhunjhunwala

TruthPrevails
But the reality is that his chronology ideas concerning Egypt can be put aside and still archaeology supports the Exodus and those other parts of the Old Testament, and many other archaeologists and historians see that also.
I agree with archaeology supporting the ot. But I have seen rohl on Eden at lake van. There is no archeological evidence there. The archaeological support for ot increases many times in the indus valley.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
It is called poornima. Hindus are greatly driven by moon position. The first 5, second 5 and third 5 days have similar values.
Thank you, it looks like this is a poor equivilance to the sabbath. It's closer to what we call Rosh Chodesh, but occurs on the new moon, not the full moon. What I would be looking for is a yadava weekly day of complete rest.
 

River Sea

Active Member
What you said sounds a bit ambiguous as to whether you are talking about the descendants of Abraham being given Canaan after the Exodus or if they still have a claim to it today.
The Canaanites of 1400BC did not believe in YHWH and it is debatable that Muslims believe in the same God that the Jews believe in.
But the Bible does speak of God having given the Jews Canaan and the Jews being told by God to drive out the Canaanites from the land and that this is a judgement on the Canaanites by God. The Jews were under His law and with Him as their God and being subject to His rulings. There is also talk in the Bible of God bringing back the Jews to Israel and the Christ saving them in a political way, from destruction then and God being their God forever in Israel and with David (imo the Messiah) being their King forever.
Of course that does not give the Jews the right to treat the Palestinians unjustly and more understanding and brotherly love in that regard from both sides would be great, but words are easy from the outside.

I agree with you @Brian2 you wrote, "Of course that does not give the Jews the right to treat the Palestinians unjustly"

Why do Jews treat Palestinians unjustly? I wish Jews treated Palestinians justly.
 

River Sea

Active Member
Moses is God to Pharaoh, what does that mean?

Exodus 7:1 New International Version
Then the Lord said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
I agree with you @Brian2 you wrote, "Of course that does not give the Jews the right to treat the Palestinians unjustly"

Why do Jews treat Palestinians unjustly? I wish Jews treated Palestinians justly.

I couldn't really make the judgement on that one. From a distance it looks as if bad actions are coming from both sides.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Moses is God to Pharaoh, what does that mean?

Exodus 7:1 New International Version
Then the Lord said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron will be your prophet.

A prophet gets messages from God to pass on to others but because Moses did not want to speak (because he was not a good speaker) God would give the message to Moses and Moses would tell Aaron and Aaron would be the one who told Pharaoh. So it was as if Aaron was the prophet and Moses was God.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
I agree with archaeology supporting the ot. But I have seen rohl on Eden at lake van. There is no archeological evidence there. The archaeological support for ot increases many times in the indus valley.

Even the Hebrew alphabet is said to have come from Egyptian hieroglyphics.
 

River Sea

Active Member
Krishna was brought up by his foster
parents Nanda and Yashoda., are foster parents the same as adoption or what does foster parents mean back when?

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala

Ok I understand now. Nanda (foster father) was a relative of Vasudev (natural father). Krishna was taken to Nanda to save him from Kansa.

Krishna killed Kamsa just as Moses killed a Mitsrite

I can't find Kansa., oddly Kamsa and Kansa are close in spelling. Can you help me here?

I'm going to guess., correct me ok., Kansa is misspelled and is actually Kamsa., so how old was Kamsa then compare to Krishna, I'm guessing 20 years older., so that would mean Krishna killed Kamsa who's 20 years older then Krishna, am I understanding this correctly., compare to how old was Mitsrite who Moses killed?

Another question I have is how come the philistines were so dangerous for the Hebrews Yadavas?

As Yadavas were fighters how come they're skills weren't enough to keep them safe from the Philistines and so had to take the long rout?

Hebrew Yadavas travel by land, how come not build a canoe for the river?
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
... it is not just fundie Christians that say the Exodus and conquest etc are true history and it is not just David Rohl who makes money from either saying the Bible is true or that it is historically false.

No, but those who blather about "true history" are outliers whose existence is of little statistical import. They serve as little more than fundie fodder.

Wikipedia: The Exodus # Modern Scholarship

Scholars classify the Exodus as the founding myth[d] of the Israelites,[18][e] recounted in the Book of Exodus. It tells a story of Israelite enslavement and eventual departure from Egypt, revelations at biblical Mount Sinai, and wanderings in the wilderness up to the borders of Canaan.[6] Its message is that the Israelites were delivered from slavery by Yahweh their god, and therefore belong to him by covenant.[18]

The majority view of modern scholars is that the Torah does not give an accurate account of the origins of the Israelites, who appear instead to have formed as an entity in the central highlands of Canaan in the late second millennium BCE from the indigenous Canaanite culture.[19][20][21] Most modern scholars believe that the story of the Exodus has some historical basis,[22][23] but contains little material that is provable.[24]

Origins and historicity
See also: Sources and parallels of the Exodus and Historicity of the Bible
There are two main positions on the historicity of the Exodus in modern scholarship.[19] The majority position is that the biblical Exodus narrative has some historical basis, although there is little of historical worth in it.[24][25][18] The other position, often associated with the school of Biblical minimalism,[26][27] is that the biblical exodus traditions are the invention of the exilic and post-exilic Jewish community, with little to no historical basis.[28] The biblical Exodus narrative is best understood as a founding myth of the Jewish people, providing an ideological foundation for their culture and institutions, not an accurate depiction of the history of the Israelites.[29][18] The view that the biblical narrative is essentially correct unless it can explicitly be proven wrong (Biblical maximalism) is today held by "few, if any [...] in mainstream scholarship, only on the more fundamentalist fringes."[19]

Reliability of the biblical account
Mainstream scholarship no longer accepts the biblical Exodus account as history for a number of reasons. Most scholars agree that the Exodus stories were written centuries after the apparent setting of the stories.[21] The Book of Exodus itself attempts to ground the event firmly in history, dating the exodus to the 2666th year after creation (Exodus 12:40-41), the construction of the tabernacle to year 2667 (Exodus 40:1-2, 17), stating that the Israelites dwelled in Egypt for 430 years (Exodus 12:40-41), and including place names such as Goshen (Gen. 46:28), Pithom, and Ramesses (Exod. 1:11), as well as stating that 600,000 Israelite men were involved (Exodus 12:37).[30] The Book of Numbers further states that the number of Israelite males aged 20 years and older in the desert during the wandering were 603,550, including 22,273 first-borns, which modern estimates put at 2.5-3 million total Israelites, a number that could not be supported by the Sinai Desert through natural means.[31] The geography is vague with regions such as Goshen unidentified, and there are internal problems with dating in the Pentateuch.[9] No modern attempt to identify an historical Egyptian prototype for Moses has found wide acceptance, and no period in Egyptian history matches the biblical accounts of the Exodus.[32] Some elements of the story are miraculous and defy rational explanation, such as the Plagues of Egypt and the Crossing of the Red Sea.[33] The Bible did not mention the names of any of the pharaohs involved in the Exodus narrative, making it difficult for modern scholars to match Egyptian history and the biblical narrative.[34]

While ancient Egyptian texts from the New Kingdom mention "Asiatics" living in Egypt as slaves and workers, these people cannot be securely connected to the Israelites, and no contemporary Egyptian text mentions a large-scale exodus of slaves like that described in the Bible.[35] The earliest surviving historical mention of the Israelites, the Egyptian Merneptah Stele (c. 1207 BCE), appears to place them in or around Canaan and gives no indication of any exodus.[36] Archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman say that archaeology has not found any evidence for even a small band of wandering Israelites living in the Sinai: "The conclusion – that Exodus did not happen at the time and in the manner described in the Bible – seems irrefutable [...] repeated excavations and surveys throughout the entire area have not provided even the slightest evidence."[37] Instead, modern archaeology suggests continuity between Canaanite and Israelite settlement, indicating a primarily Canaanite origin for Israel, with no suggestion that a group of foreigners from Egypt comprised early Israel.[38][39]

I believe that Israelite ethnogenesis is far more complexed and nuanced than that offered by either the conquest or the organic evolution models, but talk of accepting the book of Exodus as accurate history is simply nonsense.
 
Top