[b-hebrew] Jericho, Rameses, & San Fransisco

david.kimbrough at charter.net david.kimbrough at charter.net
Sun May 23 16:59:35 EDT 2004


A different way to look at the issue is to consider that 
the OT in four separate locations assoicates the Isrealites 
with a region of Egypt called ?Rameses? which appears to be 
located in the North-East corner of the delta (Gen 47:11, 
Exd 12:37 Num 33:3, Num 33:5).  ?Rameses? is not 
inconsistent with the city of ?Pi-Rameses?, near ?Pi-Thom?.  
Although it is not certain when Pi-Ramesses was built, it 
was probably not built before Ramesses I (who was born in 
the north eastern delta and died in 1290 BC) although it 
may have been built by Seti I.  If we take the OT at face 
value and assume that ?Rameses? is the same as ?Pi-
Ramesses?, then according to Gen 47:11 Joseph settled in 
Rameses no earlier than the mid 1200?s BC.

Of course this may be an anachronism.  If it is assumed 
that the author(s) of Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers were 
writing many centuries after the fact, they may have used 
the name of a region of Egypt that they and their readers 
were familiar with, not knowing it was built after then 
exodus.

All of this is assuming the actually was a battle of 
Jericho.  If for the moment that it is assumed that City IV 
was in fact destroyed by fire as Kenyon argued, that does 
not mean that it was destroyed by the Isrealites or that 
the fire was the result of warfare.  Both the cities of 
Chicago and London were destroyed by fire that had nothing 
to do with war.  In 1908 most of San Fransisco was 
destroyed by fires caused by an earthquake.  If three 
thousand years from now archeologists were to examine the 
ruins of San Fransisco, they would find a layer of upended 
foundations and carcoal.  They might conclude that San 
Fransisco was destroyed by invading isrealites.


 
> From: "Yigal Levin" <leviny1 at mail.biu.ac.il>
> Date: 2004/05/23 Sun AM 07:26:35 GMT
> To: "b-hebrew" <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Jericho(5)
> 
> No, Herm, if you want to argue a theory, you have to give 
us all the
> evidence.
> 
> > <<Given a choice, I'll go for an Assyrian Capivity ca. 
722 BC to reckon a
> > <<chronolgy from.
> >
> > Ok, for the time being, I won't convey the scripture 
that confirms this,
> > however, the Northern Kingdom lasted for 260 years.
> 
> Jeroboam - 22 years (1 Kings 14:20). Nadab - 2 (15:25). 
Baasha 24 (14:33).
> Elah 2 (16:8). Zimri and Tibni in one year, together with 
Omri (16:15-22).
> Omri - 12 (16:23). Ahab 22 (16:29). Ahaziah 2 (22:52). 
Joram 12 (2 Kings
> 3:1). Jehu - 28 (10:36). Jehoahaz 17 (13:1). Jehoash 16 
(13:10). Jeroboam II
> 41 (14:23). Zechariah and Shallum 1 (15:8,13). Menahem 10 
(15:17). Pekahiah
> 2 (15:23). Pekah 20 (15:27). Hoshea 9 (17:1).
> Unless I missed one, that's 243 years. And that's without 
taking into
> account the possibility of one king's last year also 
being counted as the
> next kings first (which would mean up to 16 years less), 
and the possibility
> of a son ruling as regent during his father's lifetime, 
and those years
> being counted for both kings (there are many examples of 
this in the ANE).
> While many scholars have tried to calculate and correlate 
the reigns of the
> kings of both Israel and Judah with the little extra-
biblical evidence there
> is, I think that Thiele has done the best job.
> 
> > After going
> > back 260 years, that brings us to 982 BC, for the year 
that Solomon
> > dies, and the division of the united kingdom.
> 
> Assuming that the Shishak = Sheshonq I equation is 
correct, we still have to
> give c.930 as the death of Solomon.
> >
> > Next, we have 120 years for the combined reigns of 
Solomon, David,
> > and Saul.  Therefore, Saul began the monarchy in 1102 
BC.
> 
> The 40  years each for David and Solomon are suspicious, 
but let's use them
> for lack of anything better. But 1 Sam. 13:1 says, "Saul 
was a year old when
> he reigned, and he reigned over Israel two years". This 
is obviously
> corrupt, but ALL the various reconstructions are just 
that. We just don't
> know how long Saul ruled.
> 
> But now,
> > we need an accurate defined length of time for the 
period of the Judges.
> > In Acts chapter 13, Paul gives a historical narrative 
of the nation of
> > Israel.  He cites that there was a total of 450 years 
for the Judges,
> which
> > yields the year 1552 BC for the end of the conquest.
> 
> The chronology of Judges is extremely problematic. First 
of all, so many of
> their dates are typological multiples of 40. Second, how 
can you know that
> some of them did not act at the same time (say, a Shamgar 
in Zebulun at the
> same time as Jair in Gilead and Samson in Dan)?
> 
> The numbers that "Luke" puts in Paul's speach in Acts 13 
are an attempt to
> make sense of the numbers (based on the LXX).
> 
> > Add 6 years (5.5)
> > for the conquest, we now have 1558 BC for the fall of 
Jericho.
> 
> 5.5 what?
> >
> > Now.  Why is 1st Kings 6:1 in error (or miscopied)?  If 
you withdraw
> > 480 years from 1018 BC, the fourth year of Solomon, you 
have
> > 1498 BC as being the year of the Exodus.  But that is 
not correct.  It
> > is 100 years off.  Go backward 40 years from 1558 BC, 
you have 1598
> > BC as the correct year of the Exodus.
> 
> So why are you willing to accept every other number, 
however problematic,
> except the ONE that doesn't fit your theory?
> 
> Ms. Kathy Kenyon confirmed
> > the 1558 BC date for the fire damage of the Jericho 
walls.  Archaeology
> > provides the key to the correct chronology.
> 
> And what do you do with Ai? Gibeon? Arad? Heshbon? Hazor 
(destroyed c.
> 1250)? The appearence of Israelite settlements only about 
1200? You can't
> take the one piece of outdated archaeological evidence 
that seems to fit and
> ignore all the rest.
> 
> >
> > Therefore, Israel became slaves in 1998 BC, and Jacob 
brought his
> > family to Joseph (during the famine) into Egypt in 2028 
BC.  Joseph,
> > being thirty years old, was appointed governor in 2038 
BC.
> >
> >
> > What I said was, "the fall of MODERN man was in 4267 
BC.
> 
> And where the .... does that come from?
> 
> Yigal
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
> 

David Kimbrough
San Gabriel




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list