Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Weltall · 03-26-2007, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

All your points well taken for as much detail as we can garner from what was left to examine. But some Egyptologists have expressed that "Aten" was indeed not the sun disk itself but the rays from the sun.

This is what we call the 'Theistic Dodge'. You focus on a tiny and largely unimportant part of a post and ignore the killer arguments because you can't answer them. In this case, Jack's comments about the existence (according to Exodus) of the Egyptian gods and the fact that the Hebrews were still polytheists at the time you allege that they inspired Akhenaten's monotheism... not to mention all the other issues you've dodged like the utter lack of evidence for the ten plagues (or anything in the Exodus narrative really).

Jack the Bodiless · 03-26-2007, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

Even so, interesting Tursatta is leveraging the death of 10,000 against the life of the king. Why? Very understandable if this was simply a sympathetic increase in the number whom pharoah died with.

If your best friend and pharoah died in the Red Sea with 1000 of his army, and you were empathizing with his son and now pharoah, of course, you'd suggest that you would have preferred it if 10 times as many of the soilders had died rather than the king himself. And that's all he's saying. He wished more people had died rather than the king himself in this "unfortunate event".

This letter would thus confirm pharoah died with others. We know precisely the details, though, from the Bible!!

So, you've quietly dropped your earlier bogus claim regading this letter, but you're still falsely claiming that "this letter would thus confirm pharoah died with others".

The letter says nothing of the sort. And the Exodus is still fiction, of course.

Cege · 03-26-2007, 11:29 AM

Quote:

And that's all he's saying. He wished more people had died rather than the king himself in this "unfortunate event".

This letter would thus confirm pharoah died with others. We know precisely the details, though, from the Bible!!

Tursatta indicated that he wished that he himself had died, or 10,000, or even 20,000 people had died rather than Nimmureya. It doesn't in any way confirm that others died along with pharoah Nimmureya.

We can't apply Bible details to a hyperbolized wish that Tursatta expressed in a letter and make it come out as a confirmation that an unnamed pharoah of Egypt died when Moses 'un-parted' the Red Sea.

The biblical writer could have told us the name of that particular pharoah and made for a much more believable--an validating--story, but didn't. Why do you suppose not?

Quote:

PLUS, did you see that Syncellus also claims that the sister of the pharoah who adopted Moses was Thuthmosis III?!!!!!! WOW!

You are much quicker to WOW! than I am. What historical proof does Syncellus provide to support that claim?

nogods4me · 03-26-2007, 11:33 AM

Quote:

This letter would thus confirm pharoah died with others. We know precisely the details, though, from the Bible!!

Not true. We know from Stargate SG-1 that the Pharoah used the Stargate to return home.

Dean Anderson · 03-26-2007, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

All your points well taken for as much detail as we can garner from what was left to examine. But some Egyptologists have expressed that "Aten" was indeed not the sun disk itself but the rays from the sun. Aten was considered "a force".

At any rate, Aten specifically was not an animal or a bird like the other gods of Egypt.

False again.

Aten was a development of Re-Harakty (i.e. "Ra-Horus of the horizon"), and was sometimes depicted with a falcon's head, just like the god's who the Egyptians "realised" were not individual gods but part of Aten.

In fact, Aten's proper title was:

The Ra-Horus who rejoices in the horizon, in his/her Name of the Light which is seen in the sun disc.

As worship of Aten developed, the solar disk and its rays became the more prominent symbol and the falcon-headed figures of Re and Har ("Ra" and "Horus") faded into the background.

Sure, Aten worship rose to prominence under Akhenaten, but Aten was certainly not a new god, and was certainly not an "invisible" god.

By the way, I was very impressed how you managed to dismiss my refutation of your Biblical dating system (here) by snipping all the details of it out of my post when you quoted me and replacing it with simply "snip, good comments, thanks!" and then completely failing to respond to any of it - instead simply handwaving it away with a comment that "some groups" consider the matter resolved...

Julian · 03-26-2007, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larsguy47

Now. Just one more question. How do I get paid for this?

Try the Bush Administration. They seem very fond of people who handle statistics and facts the way you do.

My personal favorite is where you show that the combined probability of two particular years on your graph is no less than 104%, an astounding proclamation.

For those following along at home and think that there may be an actual discussion going on here regarding the vaunted graoh shown earlier, there isn't. The graph shows a distribution with the total area under the graph representing 100%. It is from such concepts that we get the much used 'sigma' or standard deviation. You may have heard of six sigma, for example, a quality concept championed by Motorola, six sigma referring to six standard deviations, or a coverage of almost 100% of the area under the graph, meaning quality so good that nothing falls through the cracks. In order to determine the probability of a particular range of years, simply calculate the ratio of the area under curve to the whole blackened area. That ratio is your probability. You cannot read off 99% chance for this year, and 98% for this year and so on since probability never goes higher than 1.

Julian
(who works professionally with statistics)

Julian · 03-26-2007, 02:10 PM

Ooh, I just remembered another reason why it is pointless to even discuss the archeological evidence of the exodus as described in the bible. May I present to the assembled readers my very first post on IIDB from many years ago (please note I fixed a math error from the original):

Original post

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian

...
600,000 males on foot escape from Egypt, excluding children. That would mean that we are looking at probably around 1,000,000 males total. Add to that an equal number of women. I will be fair here even though women are generally more numerous in a population. That makes for 2,000,000 people. Exodus further states that they brought along a large number of livestock and so on. Again I will be conservative and say a total of 3,000,000 goats, cows, chickens (no pigs) and so on. That makes for a total of 5,000,000 living creatures. Now, they all need water. Watering holes or wells in the desert are generally not overly large so lets assume that 10 creatures can drink or fill their waterskins at any given time. Lets say it takes 20 seconds for each group of 10. You would need about one and a half gallons of water a day in a desert enviroment to stay strong and healthy. Basically this means that you would need to carry 6 gallons of water away from the water just for yourself. Even more to feed the livestock for the next few days even though they drank today. So roughly about 20 gallons of water or around 80 pounds of additional weight. Of course, small children and babies can carry next to nothing so add another 40 pounds at least. Boy, they must have been really strong. All this water should last you and yours for about six days or so. That is how long it would take to water the entire population. Six days. By that time you will have to go back to the well and get more water. No wonder it wook 40 years. It would seem that they spent all that time wandering around in a big circle around a watering hole, never able to proceed. And I am, of course, not even concerned with the fact that waterholes will dry out in many cases... Oh yeah, lets not even look at how to feed ruminants in the Sinai desert...

Another fun thought: Since one of the plagues of Egypt killed off all the horses, how were the chariots drawn? Non-jewish slaves with a bit between their teeth?
...

All too easy...

Julian

Niall Armstrong · 03-26-2007, 02:16 PM

Dear Lars!

You're both right and wrong when it comes to the C14 dates. Your right in that the relative probability says that it is more likely that the sample is dated from 871 than 925 BCE.
But for this relative probability to be of any use, you have to be 100 % sure that the sample could only be from these dates. This is not normally the case with archaeological datings, and, all things considered, I sincerely doubt that it is the case here. (See my previous post. There would have to be a lot more proof. You would have to have similar datings from the other sites mentioned on the Shoshenq monument.)
As it stands, this c14 dating is brilliant, showing that this site was destroyed around the time originally believed. But, since c14 is difficult to use for fine chronology, this is not enough to topple the traditional chronology.

Do understand that we are not trying to circumvent the data to avoid the data. We are trying to inform you about the use of C14 dating. It is a brilliant tool for approximate dating, especially since organic material is so common, and burning such a great preserver, but for fine chronology we need typology, "seriation", or, probably the best, dendrochronology. For my part I never send in a single sample for radiocarbon dating, even for "rough" Scandinavian Iron Age chronology. And I know that one may not trust a lone C14 date to choose between two such "fine" chronologies.

Larsguy47 · 03-26-2007, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Anderson

False again.

Aten was a development of Re-Harakty (i.e. "Ra-Horus of the horizon"), and was sometimes depicted with a falcon's head, just like the god's who the Egyptians "realised" were not individual gods but part of Aten.

In fact, Aten's proper title was:

The Ra-Horus who rejoices in the horizon, in his/her Name of the Light which is seen in the sun disc.

As worship of Aten developed, the solar disk and its rays became the more prominent symbol and the falcon-headed figures of Re and Har ("Ra" and "Horus") faded into the background.

Sure, Aten worship rose to prominence under Akhenaten, but Aten was certainly not a new god, and was certainly not an "invisible" god.

Thanks. This is just for your information. But different aspects of the sun were defined and the sunrise aspect of the sun was Ra-Horus, as you noted. But the sunset/afternoon part of the sun was considered as "Aten". So the Aten concept was rather specific, which is interesting. So the topic is complex for sure, and we'd have to see it in the specific context in which Akhenaten applied it.

Quote:

By the way, I was very impressed how you managed to dismiss my refutation of your Biblical dating system (here) by snipping all the details of it out of my post when you quoted me and replacing it with simply "snip, good comments, thanks!" and then completely failing to respond to any of it - instead simply handwaving it away with a comment that "some groups" consider the matter resolved...

[/QUOTE]

Sorry. I think I was addressing it by agreeing or disagreeing with you. But per your request, I will be glad to line-by-line my position on this! Coming up.

Larsguy47

Cege · 03-26-2007, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian

Another fun thought: Since one of the plagues of Egypt killed off all the horses, how were the chariots drawn? Non-jewish slaves with a bit between their teeth?

To be fair, the book of Exodus says that the horses (and other livestock) that were killed by plague and hail were "in the field".

Is there any archelogical and/or historical evidence that 600+ (described a couple of chapters later) as following the Israelites into the Red Sea) horses could have been housed in barns or stables to protect them from the plague and hail that killed all the livestock in the field?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-26-2007, 02:16 PM	#128
Niall Armstrong Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Norway's Bible Belt Posts: 85	Dear Lars! You're both right and wrong when it comes to the C14 dates. Your right in that the relative probability says that it is more likely that the sample is dated from 871 than 925 BCE. But for this relative probability to be of any use, you have to be 100 % sure that the sample could only be from these dates. This is not normally the case with archaeological datings, and, all things considered, I sincerely doubt that it is the case here. (See my previous post. There would have to be a lot more proof. You would have to have similar datings from the other sites mentioned on the Shoshenq monument.) As it stands, this c14 dating is brilliant, showing that this site was destroyed around the time originally believed. But, since c14 is difficult to use for fine chronology, this is not enough to topple the traditional chronology. Do understand that we are not trying to circumvent the data to avoid the data. We are trying to inform you about the use of C14 dating. It is a brilliant tool for approximate dating, especially since organic material is so common, and burning such a great preserver, but for fine chronology we need typology, "seriation", or, probably the best, dendrochronology. For my part I never send in a single sample for radiocarbon dating, even for "rough" Scandinavian Iron Age chronology. And I know that one may not trust a lone C14 date to choose between two such "fine" chronologies.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.