Grog

By all means, we are at the edge of our seats to know what your personal beliefs are. Go ahead. We're listening.

outhouse

King Josiah is said to have implemented monotheism after 622 BC.

he was a strict Yahwist.


Even then it took hundreds of years for monotheism to take hold. The people were not all on board.

Evidence for this is the OT itself showing authors complaining aout those that do not show Yahweh his due respect

as noted above

outhouse

Sorry for the confusion, it would have been a honest mistake.

Your statement does not apply here. There really wasnt a single religion here that emerged from one person.

This was a multi cultural people with multiple beliefs who started more as south and northern tribes with pre-existing beliefs from the Canaanite culture.


One simply cannot describe them as either monotheistic, nor polytheistic nor henotheistic. It was dynamic to say the least, that was ever changing for a thousand years

Duvduv

We should all be so relieved that Outhouse knows. After all, he must have been THERE, or has connections or sources who were in those days of them there Judeo-Canaanites. I thought Finkelstein settled everything, but it looks like Outhouse beat him to it!

ralfellis

.

Actually we have plenty of evidence. Firstly, the biblical texts say that there was an ash fall:

And (Moses and Aaron) took ashes from the fire, and stood before Pharaoh; and Moses sprinkled
it up toward heaven; and it became a boil breaking forth with blains upon man, and upon beast. Ex 9:10

And then they say there was a tsunami:

And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD caused the sea to go
back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided. Ex 14:21


These are two of the classic byproducts of a large eruption - ashfall and a tsunami. But there was only one eruption in the millennia BC that could possibly have reached out as far as Egypt, and that was the eruption of Thera (Santorini) in about 1600 BC. In addition, you will find that the Tempest Stele of Ahmose I has a few biblical quotes on it, about the making of the Tabernacle.

And if you read Josephus Flavius, he clearly states that the Israelites were the Hyksos people of Egypt:

This is Manetho's account. And evident it is from the number of years by him set down belonging to this interval,
if they be summed up together, that these shepherds, as they are here called, who were no other than our
forefathers, were delivered out of Egypt, and came thence, and inhabited this country. Against Apion 16

The 'shepherds' are the Shepherd Kings, the Hyksos. And Josephus claims that the Israelites were the Hyksos, despite being a a Jew himself (and knowing the doctrinal problems that that claim entailed). So do you know more than Josephus did, some 2,000 years ago? Please explain what evidence has emerged since the time of Josephus, that would lead you to that conclusion. And also bear in mind the number of books available to Josephus that are no longer extant. Are you saying that Josephus was utterly mistaken? Why?

And remember that Manetho said exactly the same as Josephus:

It is said that the priest who gave (the Hyksos) a constitution and a code of laws was a native of
Heliopolis, named Osarseph after the Heliopolian god Osiris, and that when he went over to this people he
changed his name and was called Moses. Against Apion 26

So do you know more than Manetho did, some 2,000 years ago? Please explain what evidence has emerged since the time of Manetho, that would lead you to that conclusion. And also bear in mind the number of books available to Manetho that are no longer extant. Are you saying that Manetho was utterly mistaken? Why?



And as to the date being incorrect, if you read Manetho (yes, the historian you do not like) he clearly states that there were two exoduses - the large Hyksos Exodus, and the smaller exodus of the maimed priests and lepers (i.e.: Pharaoh Akhenaton). Thus the biblical Exodus was a combination or conflation of these two exoduses.



.

outhouse

It says they took ash from the fire. If your going to read it literally, please read ty correctly.



No it doesnt, that is your opinion that isnt even substantiated with a litreral reading.

Parting the seas is not a tsunami.


He states its from Mantheo.


This is 1200 years in the past, of which no writing existed less the OT accounts they used.

It also goes against ALL archeological evidence to date.


We now know more then they ever could have known.



He clearly used the OT as refernce. Even if he did not, the migration of people to the highlands of Israel was a slow migration for two hundred years.

Evidence of one exodus does not exist, let alone two.

You would also have to explain why these people used Canaanite pottery, alphabet and deities. You cannot.

outhouse

You have earned yourself a place beside AA on my ignore list


For refusal of common knowledge backed with strong evidence, without refutation.

semiopen

This discussion started at an absurdly early time - what with the illiterate desert nomads, etc.

It is too early to speak of Judaism until at least the brief period of relative importance Jerusalem achieved after becoming an ally of Assyria. After the destruction of Israel in 722, Judea was the last state standing in the area.

However, even this is early, and the beginning of Judaism is probably during, or more likely after, the Babylonian exile.

For example, it is not clear that Passover was celebrated before The Passover Papyrus from Elephantine, 419 BCE

This doesn't seem like it had a long history as an important holiday.

The early settlements in Canaan basically show a group of people who apparently didn't eat pork.

The Sabbath was probably not observed on Saturday before the exile. I've commented in previous threads that it may have been the full moon - just a guess.

Probably Yahweh became an important God before the exile, but he doesn't seem to be the only one.

It's probably sort of ok to say that the group in ancient Canaan were prototypical Jews, but they weren't specifically Jews until at least the fall of Israel and probably more accurately the Babylonian Exile.

Jew_(word)

It might be pointed our that the people that came back from the exile were not necessarily related to the people who originally went.

outhouse

Now this is a rational post. and I agree whole hearted.


Judaism as whole is hard to describe because it often includes the people


Its also hard because the people were religious from their beginning and were trying to answer a question of the evolution of said religious beliefs.

Its difficult because these people have always been multi cultural

outhouse

This is the best explanation I know.

Not everything is 100% correct, but its more right then wrong