[b-hebrew] Jericho, Rameses, & San Fransisco
Kevin W. Woodruff
cierpke at prodigy.net
Sun May 23 17:22:17 EDT 2004
And there would be others who would insist that San
Francisco was destroyed in 1906 instead of 1908
because the ancient archives at Tel-el-New York have
that event dated to April 18, 1906 at 5:12 local time
--- david.kimbrough at charter.net wrote:
> A different way to look at the issue is to consider
> the OT in four separate locations assoicates the
> with a region of Egypt called ?Rameses? which
> appears to be
> located in the North-East corner of the delta (Gen
> Exd 12:37 Num 33:3, Num 33:5). ?Rameses? is not
> inconsistent with the city of ?Pi-Rameses?, near
> 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
> 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
> that the author(s) of Genesis, Exodus, and Numbers
> writing many centuries after the fact, they may have
> the name of a region of Egypt that they and their
> were familiar with, not knowing it was built after
> 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
> not mean that it was destroyed by the Isrealites or
> the fire was the result of warfare. Both the cities
> Chicago and London were destroyed by fire that had
> to do with war. In 1908 most of San Fransisco was
> destroyed by fires caused by an earthquake. If
> thousand years from now archeologists were to
> examine the
> ruins of San Fransisco, they would find a layer of
> foundations and carcoal. They might conclude that
> 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
> that confirms this,
> > > however, the Northern Kingdom lasted for 260
> > Jeroboam - 22 years (1 Kings 14:20). Nadab - 2
> 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
> 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
> taking into
> > account the possibility of one king's last year
> being counted as the
> > next kings first (which would mean up to 16 years
> and the possibility
> > of a son ruling as regent during his father's
> 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
> the reigns of the
> > kings of both Israel and Judah with the little
> 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
> Solomon, David,
> > > and Saul. Therefore, Saul began the monarchy in
> > The 40 years each for David and Solomon are
> but let's use them
> > for lack of anything better. But 1 Sam. 13:1 says,
> was a year old when
> > he reigned, and he reigned over Israel two years".
> is obviously
> > corrupt, but ALL the various reconstructions are
> that. We just don't
> > know how long Saul ruled.
> > But now,
> > > we need an accurate defined length of time for
> period of the Judges.
> > > In Acts chapter 13, Paul gives a historical
> of the nation of
> > > Israel. He cites that there was a total of 450
> for the Judges,
> > which
> > > yields the year 1552 BC for the end of the
> > The chronology of Judges is extremely problematic.
> 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
> 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
> > 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
> > > 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,
=== message truncated ===
Prof. Kevin W. Woodruff, M. Div., M. S. I. S.
Library Director/Reference Librarian, Professor of Bible and Greek
Tennessee Temple University/Temple Baptist Seminary, 1815 Union Ave.
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37404, United States of America
423/493-4252 (office) 423/493-4423 (home) 423/493-4497 (FAX)
Cierpke at prodigy.net http://pages.prodigy.net/cierpke/woodruff.htm
More information about the b-hebrew