fatpie42

That's what I said.

Yes, the writers of the Tanakh obviously knew a lot about Egypt, but we have no evidence to back up what these writers said about the involvement of the Israelites in history. We have no evidence of a vast group of Israelite slaves in Egypt for example.

Later than what? It's definitely mentioned in the collection of Old Testament writings:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_writing_on_the_wall

The plagues of Egypt? Joshua making walls fall down by crying out their devotion to God? Samson's the super-human? Goliath the giant? The tower of Babel? Adam and Eve?

The Hebrew Bible is FULL of mythology and that means that the events it describes are strongly coloured by the bias of the Jewish people. As such, to use it for historical purposes we need other accounts. We have as yet to dig up giants, find accounts of the exodus in Egypt, and the idea that humanity began with a singular couple is actually scientifically impossible!

I was saying that the Hebrew Bible is limited in its use as a primary source. Not that it never tells the truth about anything.

Edit:
Oh and the fundies like to suggest that there is archaeological evidence for Noah's flood. We can't forget THAT one, can we?

spin

You mean the city of Raamses built by Ramses II well after the Hebrews were supposed to have left Egypt and Pithom which was built much much later again. That's just as has been described, nonsense.

We know of fantasies regarding ideal temples, but where is there any evidence for an actual building? Nowhere.

Do you really think that the Jews were ever in Egypt before a bunch went there to escape the Babylonians? We know that the Hyksos left Egypt and poured into the Levant, but Jews? When? Where's the tangible evidence? Once again: nowhere. The first discernable mention of Jews leaving Egypt was by Egyptians in the 2nd temple period who conflated the Jews living in Egypt with the Hyksos in order to berate them as having once before been driven out of Egypt -- as lepers. Josephus records these much earlier reports from Manetho et al.

Have you seen these relics recorded in scholarly peer-reviewed journals? Of course not.

Saying something and demonstrating it are not the same thing. You have no evidence for your claims.


spin

spin

It's difficult to include all the errors and rot posted in the message I'm replying to.
Did you overlook the vast amount of Egyptian historical indications from Egypt itself, plastered all over the walls of the many temples, tombs, palaces, etc, and on papyrus? We know basically when all those texts were written. You cannot demonstrate when the biblical texts you cite were written, or how much is based on fact.

This is totally rubbish when you realize that Ramses II built Raamses and that Necho built Pithom several centuries later. And it is usually Egyptians who built Egyptian projects, not foreigners. Do you have any evidence from Egypt for such a proposition as compared to the evidence to the contrary? No.

(You are simply rehearsing your belief in the veracity of the Hebrew bible, not providing any evidence.)

And for how many millennia was it the king's highway??

Hey, shit, you find the claim that the Egyptian diet which probably didn't change for centuries was "100% authentic" so meaningful for your lack of evidence?

Umm, which rebellion? which priests?

Which ancient Egyptian names are you referring to?

You probably date the Moses/pharaoh stuff to circa 1500 BCE. The pyramid texts were written 1000 years earlier. WTF are you talking about?

Do you think for some reason that these names are not known from other sources?

Tell me why the Jews didn't know about the arrival of the Philistine in the Levant when the Philistines arrived circa 1170 BCE and the Jews were in the promised land well before that, weren't they?

And why does the bible talk about the Hittites in Palestine when they were never in Palestine?

The million plus people involved in the "exodus" is miniscule to you??

Perhaps if you opened your eyes, you'd see some...

Actually no they haven't. Somewhere I saw you try to fob off the Tel Dan stela as meaningful here, but it mentions nothing but BYTDWD, the "house of the beloved", a temple (as I have mentioned elsewhere, along with other such temple towns, Beth-Shamash, Beth-Anat, Beth-El). You might have had more luck if it had been BYT DWD , as two words. What historical source mentions Solomon??

Do you think the grave of Jesus in India is veracious?

This is the Merneptah stela. It mentions Israel as a tribal group that Merneptah cut down.

Really now? What is your source of Phoenician philology? It sounds totally wrong.

And for your information the hieroglyphic system is basically alphabetic, but with hieroglyphs for specific symbols included, so that Tutankhamen is spelt TWT-[ankh symbol]-)MN.

Why don't you try to find a source that will tell you when the BETH first became pronounced /v/ at the end of a syllable? Hebrew spells Abraham )BRHM (ALEF-BETH-RESH-HE-MEM), eg Gen 17:5. Note the BETH??

1001 Nights, Kalevala, Iliad, etc.

Most, if not all, of Daniel. Genesis from go to whoa. The Davidic kingdom which reached the Euphrates. The conquest. Oh, think about it, you'll find lots.


spin

IamJoseph

i was stating a fact: the Temple was the largest edifice in the then known world. That textiles and pottery came from elsewhere is a common denominator to all. Einstein never invented the paper he wrote on or the pen he held. I don't deny that there is wisdom and good in all nations - but the Temple was larger than any Greek or Roman edifice - this is not my opinion but what the ancient texts of Josephus, Tacitus, Chinus and Apion say.

IamJoseph

Totally wrong. The Medrash [a book of parables] is not regarded as history. The Mosaic five books, and the prophetic books [Isaiah, Jeremia, Esther, Micah] - these are 100% history - proven with archeological relics and inter-nation archives. Are you claiming the book of Esther, which records the destruction of the first temple in 586 BCE, the Jews' exile in Babylon, the texts naming both the Babylon and Persian kings and their wars, as well as the re-building of the Temple - is not history? :constern01:

IamJoseph

Yes, I was not disputing you but supporting what you said. The history of Ceasar is reocrded before Christianity's emergence, including that he allowed the Jews to cnduct their beliefs, without deeming it a violation of Roman laws - because Ceasar acknwledged these Hebrew laws predated Rome.


We have evdence, but we don't have proof. There was hardly any historical writings at this time, and we can use this as an affirming factor: we have equally no disputation of the texts in the Mosaic books. Slavery was a commonplace premise for conquered nations, and the Egyptians were notoriously notable for erazing any writings negative of each ascending Pharoah. But we have an Egyptian stelle mentioning Israel, we have proof the Israelites return to canaan and living there for almost a 1000 years till the Babylon invasion, with historical books which contain 100s of 1000s of historical stats of other interacting nations and wars with the israelites.


?

To counter these writings, one must disprove the disprovable - which has not happened as yet. I cannot offer you rationality about the plagues - but I can do that with the surrounding descriptions concerning the same issue. If the text says a miracle occured [a non-imperical statement today], there is no need to prove this in a lab - it would not be a miracle in that case. Equally, it does NOT mean the provables are also myth! If one cannot prove samson's unusual power, it does not mean there were no battles with the Philistines in Gaza or that they never built underground cities and worshipped a deity called Dagon. The surrounding descriptions in the text [aside from FX miracles] - are 100% historical; this by itself is a great thing, considering the anciency of the texts and that this historical data is otherwise not available elsewhere.

I understand your point - and I dispute it. As per the evidence, all provable stats [aside from miracles] - are primary sources of history. To an extent no other writings can match the Hebrew.


I would say almost all of the stuff mentioned as evidence or proof would be baseless and fantasy. But this does not mean the surrounging descriptions in Noah are myth either. While Christianity can be seen as the world's educaters, making the Hebrew bible the most known writings, it also commited a whole lot of mis-reps by distorting the Hebrew bible to make it incline to the Gospels. Now we have christians who say the earth is 6000 years old, citing Genesis - which is not true or correct, and this is why the battle of Creationism VS Evolution has been lost. Genesis only says speech endowed humans are 6000 years old - which has not been disproven as at now. A careful read of the Noah story has in its beginning preamble, it applies only to 'Noah's possessions' [household; domestic animals]; and to the then known world only. Let anyone with a straight face dispute this region was not always subject to great floods, backed by other-nation writings, or that the names and terrain mentioned in the Noah story [Mount Arafat's first mention] - is myth!? :wave:

Toto

Please cite a source for this silly claim. 100%?? What archives? What relics?

There may be some historical elements, but Esther is not a historical figure.

Debate over historicity of Esther

IamJoseph

This is an additional, secondary disputation, varied from the two cities mentioned being myth. The dates you mentioned as 'LATER' cannot have much credibility - Egypt was not known as a great power for long after this time, making the advent of building new cities not acceptable. There is no motive whatsoever for a text to say they built two cities, when that stat is evidenced in its primal form: these two cities' ruins are factual first and foremost, and they are first mentioned in the Hebrew writings. IOW, the term MYTH does not apply here.

Yes.

Manetho has been shown to be obsessed in antisemtiism, as were almost all Hellenist and Roman writings: this is how the Gospels emerged. Manetho also says the Temple contained an ass which the jews wrshipped - but we know when Titus destroyed this temple, he claimed the jews were barbarous for not having an image in their God house! Other Roman writings said the Jews killed Greeks and drank their blood inside the temple [which is where the later blood libels came from in Europe].

These writings have no impact on the Mosaic writings and descriptions. There is more than sufficient evidence the Israelites were in Egypt for 210 years, and that they returned when it was least feasabe, via precisely described routes which mentions a host of terrains and nations. There is no lack of veracity in the descriptions of the babylonian exile compared with the Egyptian one - other than a shortage of alphabetical books of other nations in this space-time. You are saying one is history and the other myth - demanding only that equavalent proof for both must be had - disregarding each event's relative differences. if one examines this issue, they will find we don't have clear proof of the Minoens or Zoroshtra either - and that far more evdence is at hand of the Hebrew writings. In fact, aside from the Mosaic, we have no alphabetical 'books' per se from any place else - not even for 500 years after the given dates of the Hebrew narratives - making the demand for more conclusive proof irresponsible. here, more proof would be non-credible and in difference of the space-time: the lack of absolute, conclusive proof [as opposed evidences], is itself a proof of this period.

Why of curse not? I have seen the total scientific vindication by archeologists accepting the findings of the Tel Dan discovery, which proved the 3000 year historicity of King David - a mere 250 years after Moses. David's writings mention Moses numerously, and accords with all the narratives in the Mosaic books; so does all 55 Prophetic Hebrew books thereafter. This is a stunning discovery which does not get better any place: show us a a writing which proves a 3000 year figure so conclusively? Show us a contemporary relic of Buddha mentioning him in writings or an artifact for example, which is 2500 years old - we have no writings or relics of it?

IamJoseph

[QUOTE=Toto;5840979]
I did. Here's some more, which lists actual archeological sources:

Esther is perhaps the most blatantly historical hebrew writings of all. It has Persian back-up; Esther is in fact a persian name she was annointed with after becoming Queen to Darius. The building of the 2nd temple would not have occured but for the details given in that book. I found the book of esther reading like last week's Daily Telegraph - the amount of historical details contained therein.

Wiki is not a good source for anything concerning Israel - with numerous court actions imposed on that source and continueing, including the term 'Palestine' used for Judea: that name did not exist before 70 CE - it was called Judea. Also why Jesus could NOT have been a Palestinian - he died 40 years before Rome dumped this name on Judea. I think 'fair go' applies which writings is the most historical - and which are myth. Try the Britania instead!

Toto

A few artifacts which indicate that there was an ancient Israel do not establish that all of their stories are based firmly on historical incidents.