Biblical Hebrew Forum

[George Athas <George.Athas AT moore.edu.au>]

James,

I'm not sure if you realise, but there are very few people (if any) who 
seriously challenge the idea that the Philistines are the Pereset of Ramesses 
III's account of the invasion of the Sea Peoples in c.1176 BC. Not only is it 
a good linguistic match between Egyptian and Hebrew, but the archaeological 
record supports the identification (see the production of Mycenean IIIB ware 
in the Levant). This is a basic datum of the historical record. It actually 
provides a very firm external point of verification for the Philistines, 
making the hypothesis I described previously anything but circular reasoning. 
Only if you reject the Philistine=Pereset identification could you possibly 
see it as circular reasoning. And if you do reject the identification, you'd 
have to show good reason why - which would probably have to take the form of 
newly discovered evidence. The hypothesis stands on good solid ground - not a 
'shaky foundation' at all. It's not 'my' theory - it's the basic wisdom of 
the academy at the moment.

It seems you have a bit of history to brush up on, James. Before then, you 
might want to think again about lambasting some of the most basic ideas in 
the field.


Regards,

GEORGE ATHAS
Moore Theological College (Sydney, Australia)
www.moore.edu.au