Biblical Hebrew Forum

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

I'm not necessarily concluding that Joshua is the nomadic skirmishes that
were referred to. I see a limited number of possibilities.

1) The pleas to the King of Egypt are about nomads in general invading towns
before Joshua appeared on the scene
2) The pleas to the Pharaoh are from the beginning of the conquest
3) During the kingom of Israel some Canaanite towns still thought they were
in control of Canaan and wrote to the King of Egypt
4) Israelites now already in control wrote to the King of Egypt in Akkadian
as a lingua franca

The letters are archaeology that cannot simply be ignored they have to be
explained in some way. Of the 4 variations I listed above personally I find
3 and 4 highly unlikely and am leaning towards 1 or 2 which would place the
nation of Israel as not yet formed in the time of the 18th dynasty Pharaohs.
In order to support a 13th dynasty we would need to start looking at some
kind of interpretation like 3 or 4. Are they interpretations you would be
comfortable with?

James Christian



2010/2/17 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.
> >>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
>