Joan of Bark

Rubbish, Joseph. The Israelites came from Canaan. There is zero evidence for a mass exodus of over two million Israelites from Egypt.

http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Exodus

And check out the best known popular account of the stories of the OT:

The Bible Unearthed (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Finkelstein and Silberman.

J-D

You have not evidenced yours. What sort of evidence do you think claims should have?

In 853 BCE, the Assyrians under king Shalmaneser III fought a battle against an enemy alliance near Carcar (or Qarqar). Shalmaneser later erected a commemorative inscription in which he mentioned Arabs, under a king called Gindibu, as part of the enemy army.

Arabic inscriptions dating back to the same century have been found in the Akkele Guzay region of Eritrea.'Arabs' and 'Arabians' are the same word (ערביאים) in Hebrew, and it is used, for example, in 2 Chronicles 17:11.

IamJoseph

I never said there is proof of 3 million Israelites in the desert or the splitting of a sea. That the Hebrews were in Egypt is evidential.

The first contemporary description of Egypt comes from the Hebrew bible, including the building of two cities now proven [Pithom and Ramasses], the names of Pharoah and family, the diets, beliefs and terrains of ancient Egypt are known only from the Hebrew writings. The names of nations and wars encountered by the israelites are also historical and known only from the Hebrew writings: Moab [today's Jordan], Mount Nebo, Mount Sinai, the Medianites, the canaanite Kings, and that Egypt and all other nations never spoke Hebrew - are authentic, historical and contemporary of their exact periods. Of note no camels are listed in Egypt, and that the nile never ran dry ever - are again historical factors which vindicates the Hebrew writings. I know of no writings with more authenticity. There is also a lack of a motive for the Hebrew bible to list the slavery encountered in Egypt.

The first Egyptian writings, transcribed in alphabetical Hebrew, is also seen in the opening two words of the 10 Commandments, namely 'ANO CHI' ['I AM'] - namely the Pharoah is not divine.

IamJoseph

False.

False.

False.



And you question the enormous evidences of the Hebrew writings, while proposing such bogus evidence of your claims!? FYI, not only does your examples not mention Arab, but one should apply meagre mental input to know if the Arabs existed in 2 Chronicles, we would see a whole thread of follow-up evidences every 100 years at least, like Arab kings, wars, monuments, writings, etc. This becomes compounded by the fact the Arabs were never dislodged from their region, as with the Israelites.

Even the Egyptian Coptics predate the Arabs - they speak the original Egyptian language.Egypt was not Arab pre-500 BCE.

J-D

No, it doesn't. The line on the Merneptah Stele begins my mentioning Canaan. It's talking about the war Merneptah fought against or in Canaan, but that doesn't mean that Canaan used to be in Egypt. Persia fought a war against the Greeks; that doesn't mean that the Greeks used to be in Persia.When people migrate from one place to another, it isn't always an exodus.If the identification of the name used in the Egyptian text as 'Israel' is correct, then it is evidence that Israel existed at that time--very strong evidence. But it is not evidence for the story of the Exodus.The practice of damnatio memoriae is widely recorded and not just Egyptian, but you are right that the statement on the stele about the devastation of Israel is not reliable information.Many writers of fiction have invented whole worlds complete with detailed chronologies, genealogies, geographies, economies, sociologies, and theologies. Extensive detail in all these areas can be and has been invented and is no reason to believe that a story is factual.

J-D

You have given no reason to think so. You don't believe it because you don't want to believe it.You have given no reason to think so. You don't believe it because you don't want to believe it.You have given no reason to think so. You don't believe it because you don't want to believe it.Sheer bulk proves nothing. The Mahabharata is far more extensive than the Hebrew Bible, but that is no reason to treat it as a historically accurate account.I'm not advancing any claims. I'm only disputing your claims. For example, I'm not saying that there was no Israelite migration out of Egypt. There may have been. But the Victory Stele of Merneptah does not mention it.It does.If instead of relying on ideas you work out in your own head about what is plausible and what is not, you read a little in ancient history, you would find that enormous gaps in surviving records are extremely common. Ancient history is full of topics about which historians have only sketchy ideas or none at all because no records have survived.Perfectly true. Again, I never made any claim that Egypt was Arab before 500 BCE. It wasn't. Egypt was not Arab until the seventh century CE. Neither was Syria or Iraq. But there were Arabs before then.

IamJoseph

False.

The word 'arabians' [a doctored spelling even here] - has no connections with Arabs. These refer to a region beyond Ethiopia - seen in the same source you mention, namely just a few chapters further in 2 Chronicals:

The term Palestinean [derived from Philistine], also in the same passage, are also not connected to Arabs: these were not a middle-eastern peoples.

J-D

I have shown you the Hebrew word. If there was a distinction in Hebrew parallel to the English distinction between 'Arabs' and 'Arabians', you would be able to demonstrate it by showing the two different Hebrew words. But you can't, because your whole position is baseless.It doesn't say 'beyond' the Ethiopians, it says 'beside' the Ethiopians, and part of Arabia is beside Ethiopia.

IamJoseph

It does not use the same word in 2 chr:

This is also why you cannot show any surrounding or follow-up Arab names, kings, wars, relics or any history whatsoever from 2 chr datings [900+ BCE] untill 500 BCE, nor any Arabic writings till 400 CE. Compare this with the historical details of the Hebrews, Egyptians, Canaanites, kurds, Coptics, Lebanon, Assyrians, Babylonians, philistines, greeks, romans, etc - these all show names, kings, wars, etc in numerous points of writings and by archeological relics unearthed every few years. Were the Arabs exiled all this time - where to?




That is Africa. The Ethiopians had evidential allignment with Israel since Solomon's times.

J-D

You have failed to show two different Hebrew words. You have only shown one Hebrew word.I have already told you that the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III erected a commemorative inscription in which he mentioned Arabs, under a king called Gindibu, as part of the enemy army he fought against in 853 BCE, and that Arabic inscriptions dating back to the same century have been found in the Akkele Guzay region of Eritrea. You refused to accept these facts, but you have not justified your refusal. You don't believe it because you don't want to believe it, because it doesn't suit your prejudices, not for any better reason.The Arabs came from Arabia. Where else? And who else was living in Arabia three thousand years ago?Yes, Ethiopia is in Africa. And part of Arabia is beside Africa. And Arabic inscriptions have been found in Eritrea, which is beside Ethiopia in Africa.