ConservativeAtheist

Actually, there are some researchers that say the dope idea could be the explanation for most of the stories in the bible...

http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=69048

Vampyroteuthis

Please explain why you believe this to be true.

I don't see any native american's trying to force their silly religious customs on the rest of the nation the way xians and muslims are doing. They pretty much mind their own business. Is this practice that I find offensive.

Toto

I think you will find that modern historians are skeptical of all ancient historical documents.

Not quite true - check out the recent case of Kensington man.

oixo

Thanks for the suggestion. I had, indeed, read a few reviews and snippet of excerpts from the aforementioned book but never became ardently gravitated to give it a chance. From what I had gathered, the book precisely conveys the same message that you convened in addition to several interesting "similarities" among Egyptian history and Biblical event of Israelites and Moses. For instance:

The expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt, Invaders who came either though a preconceived dynasty or gradual settlement in Egypt and ruled in middle Egypt but ultimately removed around 17th century BC. It's said they they indeed had some names identical to Israelite traditions.

Interestingly enough, there was a Pharaoh name "Ah-mose I" who drove Hyksos out and even restored some ruling outside of African in Cannon (in addition to extension of Egyptian borders to south at Nubia).

I don't know how much about a roll "Thutmose I" played in the whole picture but he indeed quashed some of the supposed rebellion and loosely coupled nomadic invaders, referred to as Hapiru, who are thought to formed a federated band out of tribes of Israel.

oixo

With all do respect, every single of those historians came almost a millennium after the supposed arrival of Moses. Hecataeus (400th-300th BC), Manetho (300 century) and he covered a wide range of dynasties, Lysimachus (late 200BC), Eupolemus (mid 100BC) and was a Jewish historian (go figure), Tacitus (100+ AC), Numenius (200 BC) and didn't he believe Plato was the Moses!

As it has been said, speaking on the "established" traditions of Judaism by the time of their conscription does not help the veracity of their work. Jewish tribes had already marked their presence in lands governed by Egypt; and this was occurring at the time of 26th dynasty or perhaps 5th-6th century BC. This is awfully starting to resemble the work of Tacitus and Josephus and their accounts of early Christianity with each superficially mentioning how some band of religious people -- which by the way, there were hundreds of small "religion" sects popping up at the time to fill-in the void created by the expulsion of Jews by the Romans and who he referred to as Christians without any reference to Jesus -- were suffered death by the sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate. At least, in my book, Tacitus and Josephus had the ink dried on their paper 100 years after Jesus' birth but all the discussed historians wrote about Moses almost more than 1000 years later.


I don't know how many fallacies you violated in this short paragraph but I am just going to leave there.

Malachi151

They also acknowledge Romulus and Remus as the founders of Rome, Hercules as the son of a god, Homer as a Greek chronicler, Mithras being born in a cave, etc....