[b-hebrew] Dates of Ezra and Nehemiah - and assumed knowledge

Peter Kirk peter at qaya.org
Sun Sep 17 21:11:44 EDT 2006

On 18/09/2006 00:55, Uri Hurwitz wrote:
>  It is a bit amusing to observe people express solemn 
>   opinions on subjects in which they don't really have training.It
>    would appear that matters Egyptological are best left to
>    Egyptologists.
>   \
>     For example, Peter Kirk has written, inter alia: 
> "..... The orthodox estimate of 
> the date of Shoshenk I is dependent on estimates by Thiele etc of the 
> date of the Shishak invasion in 1 Kings. Kitchen et al have fitted other 
> Egyptian rulers around this date for Shoshenk I but with a lot of 
> uncertainties. And Thiele's dates are derived from the Bible and from 
> Mesopotamian data, but not at all from Egyptian. ....

I am not personally an Egyptologist. But I have read some of the 
conclusions of Egyptologists. And I don't need Egyptology to know that 
Thiele's dates are not dependent on it.

>    To reject commonly accepted  Egyptian chronologty  because it does
>   not fit with biblical chronology  -- clearly typological --  based on numbers
>    such as 480 or 40 years, is an expression of faith, not scholarship.

To reject the clearly stated data in the Bible in favour of speculative 
dates derived from Egyptology, based for example on all kinds of 
assumptions about likely reign lengths, co-regencies assumed or rejected 
as convenient to fit the overall reconstruction etc, is an expression of 
faith in Egyptology, not scholarship.

Peter Kirk
E-mail:  peter at qaya.org
Blog:    http://speakertruth.blogspot.com/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/

More information about the b-hebrew mailing list