Radorth

There was nothing flippant about my comment bfi, I assure you.

Rad

lpetrich

And we are supposed to swallow Will Durant's conclusions whole because he is supposedly on "our" side?

I believe that is "methodology" is in error, and that much of the Gospels is fictional, if not the entire contents.

Cry me a river, O Radorth. And enjoy being awakened in the middle of the night by some alleged Holy Spook.

mfaber

I see we have 2 threads on what might be the same program, especially since Radorth, before the comments above, has mentioned the Discovery Channel (QUESTION: Are there 2 different programs, one on the History Channel and another one on the Discovery Channel?)

Anyway, I will proceed as though we are critiquing the same one, namely the Discovery Sunday:Who was Mose?. In the other thread, BibleBelted characterized this show as one of those "shameless pseudo-science crapumentaries" and I agree with that assessment for the following reasons.....

One thing they never mentioned was that the the Bible gives contradictory dates for Exodus. Calculating the date from Solomon's reign and his construction of the Temple in I Kings gives a date for Exodus of 1447 BCE, but by the chronology supplied in Judges, Exodus occurred sometime between 1577-1617 BCE. The most accepted date is the one from I Kings of 1447 BCE.

Now if the Bible is right about the 1447 BCE date, that doesn't square with the archaeological evidence that the Hebrews built Raamses II city (they claim that this is the city of Avaris)because that date is somewhere around 1260 BCE. The obvious thing here is the Hebrews could not have built this city because they were already supposed to have left Egypt many years earlier!!! What really got my goat was the dishonesty of the producers in NOT mentioning the fact that the Biblican date of Exodus and the building of Raamses' city (Avaris) don't coincide and speak as though there was absolutely nothing wrong at all!

Now look at the eruption of Thera, which they try to use to support the Biblical story of the plagues and "pillar of fire". They don't mention that this eruption has been dated at ~1628-48 BCE by radio-carbon dating and act as though the eruption coincided with Moses/Exodus. This eruption has been dated as early as 1390 (by ice-core dating, now discredited). <a href="http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/thera/crete.html#15thC" target="_blank">Dating of pottery</a> supports a late fifteenth century time frame for the Thera eruption. However, one oddity which proponents of the 1500 BCE date that had never been explained, is the fact that the Egyptians don't mention this catastrophe. Currently <a href="http://www.mystae.com/restricted/streams/thera/dating.html" target="_blank"> dendrochronology and radiocarbon dating </a> supported by historical records place it at 1628-45 BCE.

<a href="http://www.arts.cornell.edu/dendro/thera.html" target="_blank">
Overview and Assessment of the Evidence for the Date of the Eruption of Thera</a>(more on the history of the dispute of the date of the
eruption)

Again, they don't seem to think that it is important to mention the discordance of all these dates!!! TO SUM UP:

• 1. Thera eruption---&gt;1628-45 BCE
• 2. Exodus--&gt;1447 BCE
• 3. Raamses's city built--&gt;~1260 BCE

They make much of the the Merneptah stele (an upright stone dated 1207 BCE) because "Israel" is mentioned on the stone. What they DON"T SAY is:

• 1. That this is the FIRST mention of "Israel" found in Egypt. It outlines Raamses II’ son, Pharaoh Merneptah’s campaign into Canaan in which a people named "Israel",who LOST the battle.
• 1. Apart from this single military encounter which in itself contradicts the Wilderness account, it seems unbelievable that 2 million+ Israelites could be unknown to a people who seemed to have taken "note" (literally and figuratively) of all circumstances in their sphere of influence.
• 2. The Exodus writer gives no name of any Pharaoh at the alleged time of Joseph or Moses.
• 3. There is absolutely NO mention of Joseph, the 7-year famine, the plagues, the Israelites, or the drowning of Pharoah's (which one?) army in any Egyptian records covering the time that they were alleged to have been there.
• 4. Exodus alleges that there were upwards of 2 million people wandering in the "wilderness" for 40 years. However, despite decades of searching the sites listed in the Bible with every tool available to archaeological science (including ground-penetrating radar and satellite imagery), NOT one single, solitary, artifact has turned up!
• This is by no means an exhaustive list of the lack of archaeological evidence that contradicts the Exodus story!

<a href="http://www.strbrasil.com.br/English/Atheos/pentateuch.htm" target="_blank">With regard to the existence of Moses,</a> they take note of the fact that the Biblical account has a startling resemblance to the Babylonian/Sumerian Legend of Sargon. They gloss over the fact that the in 587 BCE, the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem and carried the leading citizens of the Kingdom of Judah as prisoners to Babylon (where the Hebrews could easily have become aquainted with this legend). Not to worry, they say, because the Biblical legend isn't Babylonian at all because SEVEN words in the Hebrew text are Egyptian in origin and not Sumerian!!! I don't know about the rest of you, but I find this kind of basis for dismissing the facts that the accounts are so similar and that the Hebrews would certainly have known the legend, not credible. In addition, considering the slanted presentation of the whole program, makes me doubt both the significance and veracity this analysis. BTW, they fail to tell the audience that there is no extra-biblical evidence supporting the historical existence of a man named Moses..... SSHHEESH!!!

Something else that might interest you about this program. Unless I am very much mistaken,
the biased nature of this program stems from the source which appears to be David Rohl's Pharaohs and Kings: A Biblical Questwhich is really a 3 part TV series of which Who was Moses is only part. Here is a review of the book from <a href="http://www.christiansunite.com/055.shtml?Category=Online_Forums%7CMailing_Lists%7 C24&n=21" target="_blank">Christian Family Links</a>

The point is that whoever is responsible for program content obviously took the author's view that the Bible was RELIABLE historically, but the FACTS just don't support Rohl's book!

An example of the caliber of Rohl's work can be seen in the following thread started by Vanderzyden...................

<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=51&t=000627" target="_blank">Hebrew slaves in Egypt</a>

Vanderzyden tried to use Rohl as a source for proving the Exodus account in this thread. Intensity and Co. rebutted this (peruse the thread to make up your own mind on that, of course).

Bottom-line here Radorth is that Exodus is indeed a myth and Moses is just "King Sargon revisited". Got any evidence to prove otherwise????

[ October 09, 2002: Message edited by: mfaber ]</p>