Biblical Hebrew Forum

[James Christian <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>]

Hi Karl,

in the meantime while I was writing George himself wrote to correct the
date. This wasn't simple reliance on Wikipedia. This is the state of
Egyptology.

Wikipedia currently host a good photo of the Merneptah stele. If you know a
better place I could link to a good photo so that list members can see what
we are talking about then I'm open to suggestions.

None of the data I have provided draws from or relies on Manetho in any way.
I have only references writing on the wall so to speak. I have only
considered primary source data of physical remains of Archeology.

The letters I was referring to were to Amenhoteps of the 18th dynasty. So I
really don't see how they could be dated to 8th or 9th centuries.

The writing about Yhw of the land of the Shashu is in a 18th dynasty temple.
Merheptah is a late 19th dynasty. He was the 13th son of Rameses II. Only
came to power because all his older brothers kicked the bucket (for such a
big number somebody probably helped them out with said kicking of said
bucket). I find it most likely that the reference to Yhw is therefore much
earlier than the Merneptah stele although it could be argued that this was a
later addition to the temple but I've seen no data that would suggest this
to be the case.

Finally, it is an analysis of the Moabite stele, the Jewish written history
and the Egyptian archeological sources that lead us to a chronology that
would suggest the 18th dynasty. The Moabite stele sets the Kingdom of Isreal
with Omri as King. We know how much earlier than the exile this was because
of further records in Kings. We have a good idea who the Pharaoh of
Solomon's day was because of the reference to Shishak (probably Shoshenq).
Adding up the years to Solomon in the Torah, Joshua, Judges, and Samuel
makes the 18th dynasty fit well chronologically.

Also, it would seem from Josephus we have a clear and unambiguous reference
that the earlier great pharaohs who built the pyramids and so forth predated
Abraham considerably.

James Christian

2010/2/14 K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>

> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:08 PM, James Christian
> <jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>wrote:
>
> > OK. I think you're talking about this:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Israel_stela1.jpg
> >
> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Israel_stela1.jpg>Merneptah, as far
> as
> > I
> > know is dated as 13th century and not 12th century. In summary, here's
> the
> > evidence have.
> >
>
> You should know better than to rely on wikipedia   ;-)
>
> Seriously, your whole argument is based on a house of cards. Wikipedia
> assumes that that house of cards is a foundation of stone, when in reality
> it is no better than soft sand, at best. What it shows is that the field of
> history has had the same corruption as was revealed about climate science
> in
> the Climategate revelations. Wikipedia is just as much a victim of that,
> largely because of its own policies.
>
> In short, the field of ancient history has been taken over by a clique of
> historians who believe that Manetho was basically accurate in his
> histories.
> That is the position of Prof. Kitchen. They have taken over the peer
> reviewed journals, choose who get allowed into universities as professors,
> in short, who can be considered as a professional historian. If someone
> challenges their conclusions, they sniff that the challenger is not a real
> historian, because he didn’t publish in a peer reviewed journal. But
> because
> they control the editorial boards of the peer reviewed journals, they
> refuse
> the challengers’ papers because they challenge the status quo. (Notice the
> circular argument?)
>
> For six decades, people who have compared the official histories with
> archeology, have noticed sharp discrepancies between the two. Some go as
> far
> as accuse Manetho of taking advantage of the fact that pharaohs had
> multiple
> names to list pharaohs, even dynasties, twice in order to pad the list, to
> make Egyptian history older. Yet these challengers to historical orthodoxy
> have been forced to publish in the popular press, and now online, because
> of
> the censorship of the peer-reviewed system.
>
> Already Sir Flanders Petrie found clear evidence of the Exodus, but he
> didn’t recognize it because it was connected to the 12th and 13th
> dynasties,
> supposedly long before the Biblical Exodus. By the time of the 18th dynasty
> and the Amarna letters, we are dealing with post united Israel, where even
> the remaining parts were far smaller than even what was controlled during
> the times of the Judges. Further, neither was called “Israel”. So why
> should
> we expect to find the name “Israel” in such late documents?
>
>
>
> > … Still no mention of a kingdom of Isreal…4) Merneptah Stele talks about
> > the Ysrir as a people in a fixed area but in
> > a context which makes it clear that they are not nations… If
> > we are to identify the Ysrir with Isreal they are still not large enough
> or
> > settled enough in cities for them to be considered city states but a
> large
> > semi permanent yet still nomadic group in the Canaan region.
> >
>
> Oh? Or could this refer to a people who had been removed from their land by
> Nebuchadnezzar?
>
>
> > 5) Mesha Stele (9th century) clearly relates a victory over 'Omri King of
> > Isreal'. There is explicit reference to YHWH. A reconstruction of line 31
> > could indicate a reference to a house of David. This is our first
> > unambiguous reference to a nation of Isreal with a King and an
> unambiguous
> > association with YHWH.
> >
>
> This stone is dated not by Manetho, but by its connection to the Bible.
>
> >
> > All in all the evidence looks like this. … No clear references
> > to a nation of Isreal in the times of these Kings. … Finally, the deal is
> > sealed with an explicit reference to a King
> > of Isreal named Omri on a stone tablet from a neighbouring nation. …
> >
> > There seems to be no doubt in the data.
>
>
> On the contrary, there’s plenty of reason to doubt the “data”. Much of it
> was religiously generated to make Egypt appear older, hence a more mature
> and honored society. It contradicts much of what has been found through
> archeology throughout the Mid-East.
>
>
> > We are seeing signs in the data of
> > growth of a Shashu people associated with a god Yhw from the time of
> > Amenophis III to a clear witness of a Kingdom of Isreal with a King about
> 4
> > centuries later. This data fits well with the chronology and related
> events
> > we can glean from the Torah, Joshua, Judges, Samuel and Kings. A nomadic
> > people introduce Yhw to Egypt, leave Egypt, start causing trouble in
> > Canaan,
> > grow in size in Canaan but don't really become a Kingdom as such straight
> > away and then years later become a fully established Kingdom known by its
> > neighbours as being associated with the god Yhwh.
> >
>
> Let’s contrast that with the picture from archeology. Though the surviving
> Egyptian records don’t mention when they arrived, by the 12th dynasty,
> there
> were swarms of “Asiatic” slaves, many with recognizably Hebrew names,
> throughout Egypt. Then during the 13th dynasty, they left suddenly, so
> suddenly that some men neglected to take their tools and some women,
> surprisingly, forgot their jewelry. Further, before they left, they had had
> a surprising infant mortality rate, specifically of infants between the
> ages
> of 2–4 months, as shown by burials below the slaves’ houses.
>
> Within a couple of years after those slaves left, the Hyksos were able to
> invade and take over Egypt “without a battle”.
>
> About the same time, a rich and powerful Canaanite culture was suddenly
> destroyed. The walls of Jericho fell down and the city burned after such a
> short siege that the granaries were still full. The city of Ai was so
> thoroughly destroyed that we are not even sure where it was. Most of the
> other cities were either abandoned or continued on as relative villages
> with
> far less material wealth and a recognizably different culture.
>
> Egyptian records don’t mention much about this period of history, as they
> were under the heel of the Hyksos. Even after the Hyksos were expelled, it
> took a while before they were able to assert authority outside of Egypt
> itself.
>
> These are just the broad outlines of just some of what archeology shows us.
> When we get to finer grained details, we find even more discrepancies.
> While
> I have read about some of those, I have not studied them in depth.
>
> I think the above is sufficient to show that the Hyksos invaded about 1445
> BC, that the big and powerful city of Jericho was destroyed about 1400 BC,
> and many other redatings of historical data. Then the archeology fits the
> Bible almost perfectly.
>
> >
> > James Christian
> >
>
> Given the sorry state of scholarship, as clearly demonstrated by
> Climategate, but known indirectly in other scholarly areas, can we trust
> those dates propagated in the official histories?
>
> Karl W. Randolph.
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>