Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>]

Dear List,

It is apparent that some dating may (?) be required. Several dates would
possibly narrow the focus.

First, under the traditional dating of the Exodus ca. 1446-45 BC, one would 
add
430 years (according to the Genesis 15:12ff passage for the Sojourn in Egypt),
this would give a date around 1876-75 BC. The Pharaoh of Joseph would be
Senostris III.

Second, it is commonly agreed that the Hyksos came to power about 1750 BC. 
This
would fit in right nicely with the phrase, " 'Now there arose a new king over
Egypt, who did not know Joseph" (Exodus 1:8). Now, notice that the text refers
to a "new king," not a "new pharaoh." This would indicate, to me a 
"non-Egyptian
King." If not, then it would have to refer to the new pharaohs ca 1550 BC who
revolted against the Hyksos and drove them out of Egypt.

Third, If the Later Date of the Exodus is used (I do not subscribe to this
theory, but for the sake of argument), then the 430 years added to the date of
Seti I, Rameses II and an Exodus date of 1290-1275 BC would give 1730 BC. This
would be the time of Joseph arriving in Egypt and coming to power as PM about 
20
years after the Hyksos arrival. This 13th Century date of the Exodus is only
approximate, so I would give a date for Joseph to be somewhere between 1705 
BC -
1730 BC.

Fourth, the text of Exodus 1:9 tells us that this "new king" is speaking to 
"his
people." This could refer to the Hyksos king speaking to his own people, 
fellow
Hykos; or it is the new pharaoh speaking to fellow Egyptian power brokers.

En Xristwi,

Rev. Bryant J. Williams III


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
To: <b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2005 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Joseph: Israel - Hyksos - Egypt


> Jack:
>
> > ... I find it highly doubtful
> > that any reader / listener in ancient or modern times would
> > have, with a plain text reading, have taken the Egyptian
> > king as anything other than an indigenous Egyptian.
>
> How many people know about the Hyksos? Even
> educated people? Of those who have heard about them,
> how many have analyzed the situation as presented in the
> plain text reading? When one starts with a conclusion, is it
> not hard to look at a situation with new eyes?
>
> For those of us who were reared in religious homes, both
> Jewish and Christian, all we have heard since youth is
> that the pharaoh was Egyptian. Hence we take it for
> granted. That hypothesis is so deep in our society that
> even secular people take it for granted. The only reason I
> questioned it was because certain things just didn't seem
> to fit a native Egyptian pharaoh explanation.
>
> > .... Your hypothesis
> > would see the the Hyksos conquer Egypt and then fear both
> > the native Egyptians and immigrant Israelite (Asiatic)
> > populations.   However the Hyksos fear the Israelites more
> > than the Egyptians and enslave only the Israelites and
> > attempt to control only the Israelite population.
>
> No, the text just doesn't mention the native Egyptian
> population. Historical records indicate that the native
> population was oppressed as well.
>
> >  From a purely historical perspective, the Israelites and
> > Hyksos seem natural allies in conquered Egypt before the
> > New Kingdom, if such a situation actually existed.
>
> Why?
>
> > ....    The text as written makes clear that the
> > Egyptian king in the story is an indigenous Egyptian.
>
> No, the text doesn't say.
>
> > There is no indication that the King is afraid of the
> > Egyptians
>
> Again, the text just doesn't say, though it does mention the
> many who hate him, which could include oppressed native
> Egyptians.
>
> >   .... or that there is any sense of a possible alliance
> > between the Israelites and the native Egyptians (in Ex 2
> > the general Egyptian population seems at best neutral or
> > even hostile to the Israelites).
>
> Would an enslaved and oppressed Egyptian population
> have much say in the issue? It is my understanding from
> the histories that I read that the Hyksos had driven out the
> Egyptian population that they didn't enslave.
>
> > However, the real issue for the discussion here is not
> > history but the Hebrew text of the OT.
>
> This is the bottom line, where the rubber meets the road.
>
> The text just does not include details that modern
> historians consider vital for a historical record. But while
> I consider it an accurate historical account, it is not a
> modern one. Further, it includes only those details that
> advance its ideological message. As a result, all I say is
> that the pattern of details that the account does include
> fits the Hyksos better than any other group that I know,
> a conclusion open to disagreement. The text is just too
> vague for certainty.
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
>
>
>
> -- 
> ___________________________________________________
> Play 100s of games for FREE! http://games.mail.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>
> For your security this Message has been checked for Viruses as a courtesy of
Com-Pair Services!
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/164 - Release Date: 11/9/05
>
>


For your security this Message has been checked for Viruses as a courtesy of 
Com-Pair Services!