Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

James:

In my last letter in a different thread, I mentioned several clues that made
me conclude that the Exodus was at the time of the Hyksos or before.

Now to go to the book of Joshua.

Joshua does not describe mere “nomadic skirmishes”, rather describes a
fairly quick campaign of no more than a few years that resulted in a total
and unequivocal political and military defeat of the Canaanites and
occupation of the whole land, with the exception of the Philistines. Judges
adds the detail that many Canaanites were neither driven out nor killed off,
rather they were enslaved and allowed to remain in the land, co-existing
with Israel.

While none of the written records survive from Israel’s neighbors (Amelek,
Moab, etc.), the descriptions preserved in Judges and 1 Samuel indicate that
Israel, while not a kingdom, was recognized as a unified nation, not just as
bands of nomads. Further, it was a nation that lived mostly in towns (except
when driven out of them as mentioned below), not as nomads.

The details from both above and below contradict the Tell Amarna letters in
many ways. Archeology backs up the Biblical record.

Karl W. Randolph.

On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 4:57 AM, James Christian
<jc.bhebrew AT googlemail.com>wrote:

> On the contrary, just recently I am seeing that much of Egyptian history
> seems to sustain the content of the separate historical narrative parts of
> the Torah, Joshua and Judges.
>
> As you have observed Israel occupied parts of Canaan for several hundred
> years before they could be recognised by their neighbours as a kingdom
> proper. And that seems to be precisely what we are seeing in the
> contemporary inscriptions. Working backwards we have a concrete witness to
> the Kingdom in the days of Omri. A possible witness to a King who cares for
> the poor in the rough time of David. A witness to nomads we could identify
> with Israel (Ysrir) occupying Canaan in the time of the Judges. Letters to
> Egyptian kings complaining about nomadic skirmishes about the time of Joshua
> (or just before). A reference to Yhw of the land of the Shashu which could
> have been written either about the time the Hebrews would have been
> occupying the fertile land of Goshen or have been a later addition to the
> temple around the time of the Judges.
>
> James Christian
>
> 2010/2/16 K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>
>
>> James:
>>
>> You need to take the whole of Judges into account.
>>
>> What we see in Joshua is a quick conquest of Canaan. But it was a
>> political
>> conquest that did not drive out all the Canaanites, rather it just smashed
>> their political cohesiveness and took over the cities. But what about all
>> the people living outside of the cities in the farming villages? Joshua is
>> silent on them, but Judges mentions that they were enslaved, not driven
>> out
>> or killed (chapters 1 & 2). Afterwards, Israel was repeatedly driven from
>> the cities by invaders (did the invaders have help from the Canaanite
>> slaves? the text is silent). Only under David was the kingdom finally
>> fully
>> secured with all the cities under permanent Israelite control.
>>
>> That would account for the archeological finds that the cities during this
>> period were often abandoned or just small, insignificant towns (contrary
>> to
>> the tell Amarna letters). It also accounts for why the cities were often
>> reconquered. It also accounts for why those cities that were dwelt were
>> relative poor, lacking multi-generational wealth of long settlement.
>>
>> This is the message imparted by the text of Tanakh.
>>
>> If you believe, as I do, that Tanakh presents accurate history, then you
>> must conclude that Egyptian history is all messed up. The contradictions
>> are
>> too striking.
>>
>> Karl W. Randolph.
>>
>