Madkins007

Dr. X- can you give us a quick synopsis of what was going on then? I saw a small part of a Discovery Channel program on this, but could not watch the whole thing.

Volker.Doormann

I think I have posted exact to this question about 10+ serious articles in this forum. What do you believe is not serious about any of my arguments? I think this is a discussion forum, in that arguments counts only. If you are will be taken seriously, then please show that you have arguments next to your given superstition about persons. Your question have shown, that you have had a believe of a historic Exodus of the Jews out of Egypt. Not me. No one who is of any reason, ever have believed in that impossible historic plot, but you. Why do you think, that one should take you serious?

Which of my arguments are not valid?

Volker

Peter Kirby

Hope's daughter,

Did you miss the clear subtext that those who doubt Exodus are trying to promote slavery? Ridiculous and insulting agitprop.

Now, if you want to talk archaeology, I can do that. We have some people like Celsus here who are quite knowledgeable of the archaeology of the Jews and could also chime in.

I must admit that I was not familiar with this 1923 find. But, if it's legit, it must be in Archaeology of the Land of the Bible: 10,000-586 B.C.E. by Amihai Mazar. Perhaps someone could look it up. It's at my uni library, and should be in many others.

When I punched "Khabiri" and "Armana" into Google, there is a single result, the Catholic Encyclopedia, which says:

"Like all the land of Chanaan, Jerusalem had been for many centuries in subjection to Chaldea; after Abraham's time it passed under the domination of Egypt. About the year 1400, while Israel was dreaming of liberation from the Egyptian yoke, certain Cossean peoples, called Khabiri, invaded Palestine, probably at the instigation of the Chaldeans or the Hethites, and took possession of the strongholds. Abd Hiba, king of U-ru-sa-lim, seeing his capital menaced, dispatched six letters in succession to his suzerain, Amenophis III, imploring succour. But in vain; Egypt herself was then undergoing a crisis. It was probably at this period that Jerusalem fell into the power of the Jebusites, who called it Jebus."

Oh, so that's what Jebus means!

Now the CE is no harbinger of liberal speculation but rather presents the facts in the best light of faith. So what is the actual evidence for identifying Khabiri with Israelites? As they are regarded here as "certain Cossean peoples."

And to say that the Moses of Exodus really was active while Ramses II reigned is not without its problems. The Christian writer Gonzalo Baez-Camargo writes, "Ex 2:5--the daughter of Pharaoh. It has not been possible to identify this princess. If the pharaoh of the oppression was Ramses II (see comment on 1:8), she must have been his daughter. There seems to exist, however, no notice whatever about her in Egyptian documents. It has been suggested that she was Hatshepsut, the daughter of Thutmose I, who became Queen of Egypt upon the premature death of her brother and husband Thutmose II. This identification would require the adoption of the so-called long chronology (see comment on 1:8), which is not now generally accepted among scholars." (Archaeological Commentary on the Bible, p. 34)

Moreover, Merneptah was the son of Ramses II, and Exodus 2:23 refers to the death of the pharaoh of the oppression, meaning that Merneptah would have to be pharaoh when the sea was parted and the chariots engulfed in water. Yet the triumphal stele of Pharaoh Merneptah (about 1220 BCE), in recounting the military exploits in the land of Canaan, says in line 27 that "Israel is laid waste; his seed is not." This means that the tribe of Israel was already established in Palestine when Merneptah was pharaoh, and Ramses II and Merneptah cannot be the figures in the biblical story, which tells nothing of them conquering the Israelites in the holy land.

On the other hand, applying an older date to the Exodus is not without its own difficulties, and the whole matter is explored carefully in Out of the Desert?: Archaeology and the Exodus/Conquest Narratives by William H. Stiebing Jr.

best,
Peter Kirby

Primordial Groove

I guess you took offense after all.
Listen Volker, I think your ideas are twisted and distorted. I give no merit to your website, which, you really should stop linking. It's weekly nutwatch material.
Now, will anyone take me seriously? Well, let's examine this, shall we? I ask a specific question about the actual history of the Jews and you link your astrology filled BS site that does not answer anything (well, it might if the sun and moon were in alignment). IOW, to answer my question, you offer astrology.
So, you see Volker, I do not trust you to supply me with any information I may be lacking atm.

To clear things up: do not respond to anything from me. This will alleviate future squabbles.

Volker.Doormann

Which of my arguments are not valid?

Volker

Primordial Groove

The validity of your arguments has been contested on numerous threads throughout the II forums, therefore, pointing out the specifics would be an exercise in futility. I have better things to do than play mental gymnastics with you.
I am content with you perceiving the world however you want. It is your choice, afterall. I choose not to take part in your reality.

Not a big deal.


Doctor X and Peter, thank yous for the links.

Celsus

I'll assume, firstly, that the Atheist's Handbook is trash. Then I'll assume that "The answer to the Atheist's Handbook" is further rubbish. I'd like to see the year both books were published. I'm having a difficult time convincing J.P. Holding that Evangelicals are at least 30-50 years out of date.
Is this hope's daughter talking? Please, show us your archaeological knowledge.
The point is moot. The 'Apiru/Habiru/Khabiri (that term itself is no longer used)/etc. connection with Hebrew people has been discredited long ago (it was first spotted in the 19th century so I don't see how someone could cite a 1923 find except that he is incredibly unqualified to write a book on archaeology). Further, the existence of Semite people in Egypt is well-attested, particularly under the reign of the Semite Hyksos during the 17th and 16th centuries BCE. Josephus even mentions them as the ancestors of the Jews in Contra Apion (IIRC) There is even stronger attestation for the 'Apiru in the Amarna letters (discovered 1888, dated to around the 14th-13th centuries, smack in the midde of the supposed Exodus), but the discrediting of the connection is more due to the generic nature of the term 'Apiru than anything else--Neils Peter Lemche, in Prelude to Israel's Past: Background and Beginnings to Israel's Past (1998), has some pointed criticisms:

• For [late 19th century scholars], the linguistic connection between habiru and the Hebrew 'ibrî was unmistakable. . . .
  
  Two subsequent observations upset these initial and pervasive notions. First, in the Amarna collection, the Hebrews are confined to the letters from Jerusalem and are never mentioned in any letters asided from EA 285-290. This is a bit odd as Jerusalem should be the last place to look for Hebrews; rather, according to 1-2 Samuel, Jerusalem only came into Israelite hands much later, when David conquered the city. Second, it is equally strange that the habiru are absent in letters posted from Shechem, although Abdi-Heba [a king of Jerusalem responsible for the Amarna correspondence--see Peter's quote of the Catholic Encyclopaedia (is it the 1902 edition available on line?) refering to Abd Heba] refers to the habiru as being active in the vincinity of Shechem. Here the local prince, the notorious Laba'yu, formed an alliance with the habiru to overturn Egyptian rule, at least according to Abdi-Heba's letters. . .
  
  The Amarna letters mention another group in terms strikingly similar to the ones Abdi-Heba used for the habiru. When the letters were deciphered, scholars were not in doubt as to the identity of this group. This time the group did not carry a Semitic name but a Sumerian name, in several variations: SA.GAZ, SAG.GAZ, or simply GAZ. However the German Orientalist Hugo Winckler soon unlocked the key to this mystery. He discovered that the SA.GAZ was actually another name for the habiru [From footnote: This was confirmed in the Hattusas documents, which used both terms to describe the same group.] The discovery had profound effects. Now it would be incorrect to say that there were too few references to the Hebrews' alias, the habiru; on the contrary there were far too many and from almost every part of the Near East! And more references followed as new texts were found and deciphered. Habiru now showed up in every possible place--even in places never frequented by the forefathers of the Israelites. In short, we possess references to the habiru peope living in such remote places as Asia Minor, Egypt, Elam (modern Persia), as well as in Syria, Palestine, and Mesopotamia. Moreover, the references are not limited to the Amarna period [1400-1200 BCE] or the Late Bronze Age; they practically litter documents covering all of the second millenium B.C.E.
  
  pp. 138-139

In short, hope's daughter, the find is of no use to you and the fact that the author is unaware of Winckler's deciphering and the subsequent rash of finds puts him several decades out of date. Please try harder next time.

Joel

Amos

Yes it is, but the historcal aspect of the bible is just there to show how history repeats itself and I have the living proof for that.

The deliverance of the Jews from Egypt is there to show how they followed an evangelist by the name of Moses who led them into the promised land where they did not belong and therefore wandered about in the not-so-promised-land (desert) for 40 years and died nonetheless. I would say that 40 days is all the time we should spend in the desert and if the bread we receive is indeed from heaven we will be able to go right to the source and feed on the living bread . . . wherefore Jesus did not return to Judaism but feasted in the foreign land of Galilee (Jn.7:1-13).

What really happened is that Moses "parted the waters" to gain entrance into the promised land and that is the wrong thing to do because we must learn to walk on top of the water to get into the promised land ( I think Jesus showed us how and Billy Graham et al shows us how to part the waters to gain this forced entrance).

The manna they received was indeed from heaven but it since it was second hand to them from Moses (or from the bible today), it could not sustain them and therefore they remained lost for fourty years and died from old age (add 40 years to midlife to indicate that they died from old age and therefore "nonetheless").

What really happened to them is that they became "children of God" without the invitation of God and so they really forced their way into heaven where they ended up with the saved/sinner complex that would never leave them because of sin (they committed the sin agaisnt the HS, also called spiritual fornication or the rape of Mary theotokos).

Zamjatin (in "WE") calls their trail (in the desert) "Transavenue 49" because it is about here that saved sinners terminate their journey of life and go directly from their treasured material world (signified by the number 4) to the foot of the cross (9) where they remain in the hope of better things to come after they die.

Volker.Doormann

I have studied Hebrew scriptures and most of all other religious scriptures on its spiritual essence and origin meaning in deep for over 30 years now, and have written about this in this forum, because of the lack of knowledge of most of the writers here, to help for an understanding between people who are feeling religious or feeling not religious.

Misunderstanding about the meaning of the abrahamic scriptures have effected in the attack on 2001.09.11 and on a conflict in Israel and Palestine for more than 50 years now. Simple knowledge on the common character of each human being regarding it's soul relationship dramatized also in the Hebrew scriptures can solve the problems of polarized people by reasonable understanding without any believe. It is my intention and was my intention to write and discuss this especially here in the spiritual darkness of Plato's cave, called IIDB. It is obvious now that this intention is not welcome on this board, neither from any reader nor from any referee here.

I will not write on this board further.

Volker

doormann.tripod.com

Doctor X

Primordial Grove:

You are welcome! Now, sing with me:

Ding Dong! The Witch is dead!

Sometimes the classics are the best.

In general, I always find such exits--the "you are not worthy of me you scum I shall post no more other than to prat on right now in a egotistical tantrum"--variety rather pathetic. They tend to end with a collective wish that the door not slam on the poster's ass on his way out!

Madkins007:

Well . . . I do not know if I have the time, frankly, to condensce such books that it would do anyone any justice. On the other tentacle, I understand the "here, just read this 2000 page book" does not help much on a discussion board. I would, therefore, REALLY suggest reading the Archeaology and the Bible listed in the Recommended Reading List. It is short, complete, and very readable.

I would also warn against the History and Discovery Channel programs--they are altered to fit theology in order not to offend viewers.

--J.D.