1. 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!

Featured Why Study The Bible?

Discussion in 'Biblical Debates' started by Earthling, Jun 11, 2018.

  1. sayak83

    sayak83 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,590
    Ratings:
    +8,067
    Religion:
    Pluralist Hindu
    I just wanted to know what causes u believe the parts that you believe are historical regarding patriarchs, exodus etc.
     
  2. exchemist

    exchemist Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2018
    Messages:
    5,151
    Ratings:
    +3,992
    Religion:
    RC (culturally at least)
    That's interesting. The Arabic word for day is the same.
     
  3. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    Well, their both Semitic.
     
  4. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    But why? What difference does it make. Do you want me to give you some spurious scriptures or spurious historical references? You see? I can do both, so what's the point? I tell you what, let me drop a text wall on your unsuspecting crown. You can ignore it if you like but it is part of a discussion I had with a wonderfully informed (on the Bible) atheist as a Guest on the SAB forum. This is only a portion of it on Egyptian history.

    Egyptian chronology is uniquely important because it is used in so much of ancient historical observation but also because at times Egyptian history meets with that of Israel. 1728 B.C.E. Israel entered into Egypt and 215 years later the Exodus. 1513. Pharaoh Shishak's attack on Jerusalem took place during Rhoboam's fifth year in 993 B.C.E. King So of Egypt reigned about the same time as Hoshea, c. 758 - 740 B.C.E. and Pharaoh Necho's battle that resulted in Josiah's death was likely in 629 B.C.E. (1 Kings 14:25 / 2 Kings 17:4 / 2 Chronicles 35:20-24) Modern historians would differ from this as much as a century but narrow down to about 20 years by Necho's time.

    The reason is that modern historians rely upon documents such as the Egyptian king lists and annals. The fragmentary Palermo Stone with the first five "dynasties," the Turin Papyrus which only gives fragmentary lists of kings and their reigns from the "Old Kingdom" into the "New Kingdom," and other fragmentary inscriptions. These and other independent inscriptions were coordinated in chronological order by Manetho, an Egyptian priest of the third century B.C.E. He divides the Egyptian monarchs into 30 dynasties which modern Egyptologists still use today. With astronomical calculations based upon Egyptian texts of lunar phases and the rising of the Sothis (Dog Star) a chronological table can be produced.

    Manetho's work, of course, is preserved only through the writings of later historians such as Josephus, Sextus Julius Africanus, Eusebius and Syncellus. Third, fourth and late eighth to early ninth centuries C.E. They are fragmentary and often distorted. His work is distorted not only through scribal errors and revisers but untenable from the start. Legend and myth.

    Part of the problem was that he listed princely lines from which later rulers over all Egypt sprang. Several Egyptian kings ruled at one time and the same time, so it was not necessarily a succession of kings on the throne one after the other but several reigning at the same time in different regions. The result is a great total number of years.

    So when the Bible indicates 2370 B.C.E. as the date of the deluge, Egyptian history must have begun after that date even though Egyptian chronology goes all the way back to the year 3000 B.C.E. it actually doesn't.

    Egyptologist Dr. Hans Goedicke of Johns Hopkins University has a nonsensical theory that the Biblical record of the events at the Red Sea and the Exodus coincided with a 1477 B.C.E. volcanic eruption at Thera resulting in a tsunami or tidal wave that drowned the Egyptian forces, but his theory doesn't pay much attention to the Biblical account which mentions no wave.

    The Hyksos period of Egyptian history warrants the same degree of caution and suspicion. Some believe that the Hyksos were a foreign people that gained control of Egypt and place Joseph's and then his family's entry into Egypt as being during that period of the Hyksos rulers, but only on the premise that it would have been more likely for a foreign ruler to have given a non Egyptian the position of second ruler.

    But that theory disagrees with the Bible. Potiphar the court official was an Egyptian (Genesis 39:1) and Joseph was surrounded by native Egyptians. (Genesis 43:32)

    Josephus, the source of the name Hyksos, accepted some connection between them and the Israelites but argued against many of the details found in Manetho's account. He (Josephus) preferred the term Hyksos as Captive Shepherds rather than Shepherd Kings.

    Manetho presented the Hyksos as gaining control of Egypt without a battle and then destroying their cities and temples. Many years later the Egyptians supposedly rose up and fought a long and terrible war against them. Finally an Egyptian force of 480,000 men besieged them at their chief city, Avaris, and then, oddly enough, an agreement was reached that allowed the Hyksos to leave the country unharmed and they went to Judea and built Jerusalem. (Against Apion, Book I, par. 14)

    Manetho adds to the account in what Josephus labels a fictitious addition of a large group of 80,000 leprous and diseased persons being allowed to settle in Avaris after the shepherds had left. Those persons later revolted and called back the "shepherds" (Hyksos?) who destroyed the cities and villages etc. (Against Apion, Book I, pars. 26, 28)

    Though modern historians agree with the idea of a Hyksos conquest, they believe Josephus quotations as inaccurate in associating the Hyksos with the Israelites. They can't find much information from ancient Egyptian sources to fill in the records of the "Thirteenth to the Seventeenth Dynasties." Since they can't find it, they assume that some disintegration of power occurred in the "Thirteenth and Fourteenth Dynasties" based upon not much information, Egyptian folklore, and conjecture they conclude that it was the "Fifteenth and Sixteenth Dynasties" that Egypt was under the domination of the Hyksos.

    Some archaeologists depict the Hyksos as "northern hordes . . . Sweeping through Palestine and Egypt with swift chariots." Others present them moving as a 'creeping conquest,' a gradual infiltration of migrating nomads or semi nomads who slowly took control or as a swift coup d'etat . In The World of the Past, 1963, p. 444 archaeologist Jaquetta Hawkes says: "It is no longer thought that the Hyksos rulers . . . represent the invasion of a conquering horde of Asiatics. The name seems to mean Rulers of the Uplands, and they were wandering groups of Semites who had long come to Egypt for trade and other peaceful purposes."

    If that were true how would these wandering groups have gained control of Egypt in the "Twelfth Dynasty" which was about the time of Egypt's peek of power. It indicates to me a considerable amount of confusion on the parts of not only ancient Egyptian history but modern interpreters as well. No validity of the Hyksos Period can be achieved.

    Another point of consideration is the fact that Egypt, like many Near Eastern lands, was heavily linked with the priesthood and the scribes were well trained under their tutelage leaving the very possible fact that propagandistic explanations were invented to account for the Egyptian gods to deal with Jehovah and the exodus.

    If the Exodus account can be questioned it is only because the Pharaohs of Egypt didn't make any record of it. That is not unusual. They tended to record only their victories and not their defeats and they tried to erase anything historical that was contrary to their nationalistic image or ideology. Thutmose III, for example, chiseled away inscriptions made of Queen Hatshepsut on a stone monumental record found at Deir al-Bahri in Egypt.

    Manetho the Egyptian priest and historian hated the Jews and Josephus quotes Manetho as saying that the ancestors of the Jews "entered Egypt in their myriads and subdued the inhabitants," Josephus said that Manetho "goes on to admit that they were afterwards driven out of the country, occupied what is now Judaea, founded Jerusalem, and built the temple." - Against Apion, I, 228 (26).

    Though Manetho's account is regarded as unhistorical the fact remains that he mentions them as being in Egypt, going out and in other writings identifies Moses with Osarsiph, an Egyptian priest. Josephus also mentions two other Egyptian historians; Chaeremon, and Lysimachus who said that Joseph and Moses were driven out of Egypt at the same time. - Against Apion, I, 228, 238 (26); 288, 290 (32); 299 (33); 304-311 (34).

    Jeroboam fled to Egypt to escape Solomon when Shishak ruled (1 Kings 11:40). Later, in the fifth year of Solomon's successor Rehoboam's (933 B.C.E.) Shishak invaded Judah but didn't bring Jerusalem to ruin. (2 Chronicles 12:1-12)

    Archaeological evidence of Shishak's invading the area of Palestine was found on a fragment of stele at Megiddo and mentions Sheshonk as a victory of his. (Ancient Near Eastern Texts, edited by J. Pritchard, 1974, pp. 263, 264) A relief on a temple wall at Karnak, the north part of the ancient Egyptian city of Thebes, lists numerous cities and villages that Shishak conquered. (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum, Leiden, 1957, Vol. IV, pp. 59-60) It is likely that his campaign was not so much to assist the ten tribe kingdom but to gain control of the trade routes located in the territory of that kingdom, thus extending Egypt's power and influence.

    Necho[h] was a pharaoh of Egypt, who, according to Herodotus (II, 158, 159; IV, 42) was the son of Psammetichus (Psammetichos, Psamtik I) and succeeded his father as ruler of Egypt. He began construction on a canal linking the Nile with the Red Sea but didn't complete the project, though he did send a Phoenician fleet on a voyage around Africa in three years.

    At the close of Josiah's 31 year reign (659 - 629 B.C.E.) he was on his way to help the Assyrians at the river Euphrates. Josiah disregarded "the words of Necho from the mouth of God" and was killed while attempting to turn the Egyptians back at Megiddo. Three months later Necho took Jehoahaz, Josiah's successor, captive and made 25 year old Eliakim his vassal, changing his name to Jehoiakim. He (Necho) also put a heavy fine on Judah. (2 Chronicles 35:20 - 36:4 / 2 Kings 23:29 - 35) About 3 or 4 years later Necho's forces were defeated at Charchemish at the hands of the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. (Jeremiah 46:2)
     
  5. sayak83

    sayak83 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,590
    Ratings:
    +8,067
    Religion:
    Pluralist Hindu
    The text wall is not very well argued, nor does it reach any conclusion.
    The one thing I will say is that the conventional Egyptian chronology used today by historians are very well validated by radiocarbon dating of organic material collected from tombs and mummies of various pharaohs.

    Radiocarbon-Based Chronology for Dynastic Egypt

    By the way, I thought this thread was about historical value of the Bible. It isn't?
     
  6. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    Empty arguments, unfounded criticisms, and links. That's all I get.
     
  7. savagewind

    savagewind Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    37,914
    Ratings:
    +4,308
    Religion:
    An X-Jehovah's Witness
    I would like to know what "Bible Believer" means.
     
  8. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    It means I believe the Bible.
     
  9. savagewind

    savagewind Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    37,914
    Ratings:
    +4,308
    Religion:
    An X-Jehovah's Witness
    What does it mean to believe it?
     
  10. savagewind

    savagewind Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    37,914
    Ratings:
    +4,308
    Religion:
    An X-Jehovah's Witness
    Believe: "to feel sure of the truth of".

    All of it? Or what? Some of it? I feel sure of the truth of some of it. But, I know for absolute certainty that it isn't all that God says. Do you believe every bit of it is God's own communications? Some people believe that.
     
  11. savagewind

    savagewind Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    37,914
    Ratings:
    +4,308
    Religion:
    An X-Jehovah's Witness
    I think that a good relationship must be consistent. I believe that God is good. The Bible isn't consistent. It is in some places, but for it to be God's own words it MUST* be consistent throughout which it isn't.

    *In my opinion.
     
  12. sayak83

    sayak83 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,590
    Ratings:
    +8,067
    Religion:
    Pluralist Hindu
    The link shows that current Egyptian chronology is validated and based on highly accurate radiocarbon dates, and hence its critiques are wrong. Simple.

    Was there any other point in that text you pasted that you wanted me to address?

    I see that you avoided the question about which parts you believe to be historical and which isn't.
     
    #132 sayak83, Jun 13, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2018
  13. sayak83

    sayak83 Well-Known Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    8,590
    Ratings:
    +8,067
    Religion:
    Pluralist Hindu
    This hymn from the Vedas is a famous creation hymn.

    HYMN CXXIX. Creation.
    1. THEN was not non−existent nor existent: there was no realm of air, no sky beyond it.
    What covered in, and where? and what gave shelter?
    Was water there? Unfathomed depth of water?

    2.Death was not then, nor was there aught immortal:
    no sign was there, the day's and night's divider.
    That One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature:
    apart from it was nothing whatsoever.

    3 Darkness there was: at first concealed in the dark, this All was indiscriminated chaos.
    All that existed then was void and formless:
    By the great power of Warmth was born that Unity.

    4 Thereafter rose Desire in the beginning,
    Desire, the primal seed and germ of Spirit.
    Sages who searched with their heart's thought discovered
    The Existent's kinship in the Non−existent.

    5 Transversely was their severing line extended:
    What was above it then, and what below it?
    There were begetters, there were mighty forces,
    free action here and energy up yonder

    6 Who verily knows and who can here declare it,
    Whence it was born and whence comes this creation?
    The Gods are later than this world's production.
    Who knows then whence it first came into being?

    7 He, the first origin of this creation,
    Whether He formed it all or did not form it,
    Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven,
    He verily knows it, or perhaps
    He knows not.
     
  14. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    Excellent! Quite beautiful. Thank you.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  15. Hawkins

    Hawkins Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    Messages:
    1,347
    Ratings:
    +118
    No. what is unique in the Bible is about how a truth shall convey among humans. Humans can only (or most often) get to a truth by putting faith in human accounts of testimonies. Even a scientific truth operates this way. 99.99% humans don't explore evidence, we leave it to the 0.01% scientists to do the job for the rest to believe with faith. That's why among the 100% humans who know for a fact that black holes (or neutrons) exist, 99.99% of them don't have the evidence.

    Scientific truths on the other hand are only a limited and specific kind of truth about a phenomenon which can repeat before us. Most occurrence in our reality are not repeatable, including our history or everyone's past (currently there are more than 7 billion humans on earth but with no past recorded down such as what you ate in last Christmas which is never verifiable by science, so is every single meal of 70 billion humans on earth).
     
  16. Segev Moran

    Segev Moran Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2016
    Messages:
    1,593
    Ratings:
    +443
    Religion:
    Wow
    I\ll just repeat the question.
    How do you know?
     
  17. savagewind

    savagewind Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    37,914
    Ratings:
    +4,308
    Religion:
    An X-Jehovah's Witness
  18. savagewind

    savagewind Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    37,914
    Ratings:
    +4,308
    Religion:
    An X-Jehovah's Witness
    !. I believe the Bible is really and truly God's Word (and God doesn't lie).
    2. I believe the Bible is a force for good for myself.
    3. " " for the Earth
    4. I believe every word in it. It is all words of God.
    5. I believe it holds the secrets of life and death.
    6. I believe it is the only way to know The God.
    7. I believe it is as though I am being led by God to learn the words of it.

    OK? Which one?
     
  19. savagewind

    savagewind Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Messages:
    37,914
    Ratings:
    +4,308
    Religion:
    An X-Jehovah's Witness
    @RothschildSaxeCoburgGotha I understand that I might be on ignore by you but I don't know so I shall try another tactic.

    You say, "I believe the Bible" and you have not answered my queries about what it means to you to believe so how about your meaning of the word Bible?

    What is the Bible that you believe? I mean what is it about the Bible that you believe?
     
  20. Earthling

    Earthling David Henson

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    3,793
    Ratings:
    +756
    Religion:
    Bible Believer
    I never put anyone on ignore. I want to hear you all, but there are a lot of posts. I've read a couple of yours about JWs which I thought were OK. nothing I could add to them. Well I could have but what would be the point. Bans on organ transplants, vaccinations, neutrality and the Standfasters. False prophecy is their biggest problem.

    You're not obtuse. You know what it means to believe in the Bible. My beliefs are very similar to the JWs. Remove the pagan nonsense. Trinity, cross, Christmas, Easter, immortal soul, hell, rapture.

    I take it you are a traditional Christian who has a beef with the likes of me and the JWs and I see you in my periphery getting louder and louder. Don't be obsessive about it. I'm going to go back to my website soon. I won't have time to post.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
Loading...