Shad
Veteran Member
The Hyksos are not Hebrews
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do you think Moses existed as a historical figure?
- Thread starter Zulk-Dharma
- Start date
The Hyksos are not Hebrews
Zulk-Dharma
Member
I know that. I'm mixing up with all the Hebrew, Jew, Semite, Israelite words.
However, the Jewish user does seem to indicate Hyksos as Semitic slaves are what we are talking about, there are no evidence for Jewish slaves after.
Shad
Veteran Member
There is no evidence for Jew slaves at all. So before you put forward there is no evidence of slaves after an event you need to produce evidence for the preceding event that they were there.
Zulk-Dharma
Member
I know there is no evidence or Jew slaves, I'm not the one claiming there are any - I'm talking about the Jewish user who thinks there are any - then he said Semite and I said Jew, but I was talking about Semite. Just a semantic confusion here.
Shad
Veteran Member
The wording used in the sentence I responded to seems to suggest they were there with evidence in support. Sorry if I misinterpreted that.
I ask about "semitic slaves," not "Jews."
outhouse
Atheistically
Yes we are. It cannot be both, there is only one origin for proto Israelites.
You cannot have Canaanite origins for the majority of the people, and Moses and the Exodus for the origins of the people.
The Canaanite origins leave no room for a mass Exodus of slaves from Egypt, as a matter of fact most scholars claim the Exodus is a theological piece not a historical one.
The Exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Most histories of ancient Israel no longer consider information about the Exodus recoverable or even relevant to the story of Israel's emergence
The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature.
No... you have dismissed all evidence. And, looking at Zulk-Darmha posts, apparently I'm not the only one who realizes it.
You haven't quoted any evidence. Can you help me with one?
Can you quote where I have dismissed the origins of the Canaanites? Or are you making a blanket statement with no proof that I have done so.
I suppose you have the right to have an opinion. I haven't found any evidence that debunks my position at this time.
Usually people who have no empirical and verifiable support end up attacking the person for lack of ability to stand by facts.
Zulk-Dharma
Member
No, we are not. End of debate. Your argument is dismissed as invalid due to this refutation.
Your conjectures and nonsensical polemics plays no role into this, either.
outhouse
Atheistically
End signifies a conclusion. This is the most up to date conclusion.
The Exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Most histories of ancient Israel no longer consider information about the Exodus recoverable or even relevant to the story of Israel's emergence
The chronology of the Exodus story likewise underlines its essentially religious rather than historical nature
I looking at specifics at what people say because how people say things s so important.
Looking at their statement:
1) Most means most but it doesn't mean all. To give "most" credit where credit is due, there is very little available to at this time to confirm any definite position. There are certainly some archaeologists who still believe it did happen. There is not enough evidence either way.
2) They acknowledge that information about the Exodus is not recoverable. It didn't say there wasn't any or there never was but rather they don't have any recoverable.
3) How they came about is, for them, not relevant to the story of Israel's emergence. They recognize that it was suddenly, the recognize that it did happen but that how they got there isn't relevant.
Looking at additional statements:
Those who don't believe in the Exodus say " number of theories have been put forward to account for the origins of the Israelites..." So they still don't have a knowledge of where they came about from.
They do agree that it might have been from the Canaanites. That is understandable. Abraham lived in the region for 100 years. It is quite understandable that living with the Canaanites, eating with the Canaanites, and surely having laborers who were Canaanites that much of the pottery would be the same.
There is also some things that do support the position of Exodus:
1) The Bible describes the period immediately after the Exodus as one of extended wandering in the desert. This wandering was said to result from the fear of the Israelites that a direct route to Canaan, along the Mediterranean coast toward what is now the Gaza Strip, would be dangerous because of the Egyptian armies stationed there. This circumstance has been confirmed as historical by the discovery of the remains of extensive Egyptian influence, habitation and fortification in the Gaza region in this period, especially at Deir al-Balakh. Again, the biblical record is confirmed.
2) Further support for the historicity of the Exodus comes from a stele of the Egyptian ruler Merneptah (1224-1214 BCE). In reviewing his victories against the peoples of Canaan, he claimed, "Israel is laid waste; his seed is not." Here the text designated the people of Israel, not the land, as can be shown from the Egyptian linguistic usage. Many scholars believe that this text refers to the people of Israel before they entered Canaan--that is, in the period of desert wandering. More likely, it is a reference to Israel after they have entered Canaan, but before they established themselves as a sedentary population in the hill country in today's West Bank (Judea and Samaria). Since this view accords with the dating of the Exodus we suggested above, it seems that in this text, the only Egyptian document to mention Israel, we have a direct reference to the Israelites in the period of the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan.
3) Further, this theory must explain away the historical and archaeological evidence. Numerous cities from this period show a cultural change at precisely the point when the Israelites are said by the Bible to have appeared. Indeed, the newcomers, since they came from the desert, show a lower level of material culture than the Canaanites whom they displaced. This situation fits well the notion of Israelite conquest and infiltration.
4) the Israelites, throughout their history in the land, were concentrated in those areas easiest to defend against the superior arms of the Canaanites, a fact that supports the notion that they were invaders.
5) the doubters have claimed that few cities from this period show evidence of armed destruction. But careful consideration of the biblical narrative, with due attention to the account in Judges and the evidence that the Canaanites were never entirely displaced, eliminates this inconsistency fully. Indeed, the archaeological record supports a reconstruction of the historical events of the conquest when both Joshua and Judges are studied together.
Has the Exodus Really Been Disproven? - Lawrence H. Schiffman
6) In a paper published October 27, 2008 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Levy reports the results of excavations at an Edomite settlement in Southern Jordan at a site known as Khirbat en-Nahas (ruins of copper in Arabic).Here he discovered evidence of extensive "industrial-scale" copper mining and smelting from the 10th and 9th centuries BC.The mine works were scattered over an extensive area.Levy’s group excavated twenty feet of layers from occupation of this large settlement over several centuries, finding evidence that "indicates the Edomite society was sufficiently advanced to have posed a threat to the reigns of David and Solomon."The lower levels showed evidence of a comples, organized Edomite state as early as the 12th century BC, putting it well into the period of the Judges.The evidence points to the highest activity during the reign of Solomon, which would be consistent with the biblical statements about Edom.We may be looking at one of King Solomon’s mines says Levy."I think it throws the question back out there."
7) Carbon dating of artifacts discovered with the pottery shard places the discovery at about 1000 BC-close to the time of the battle in which Israel defeated the Philistines.It is wise to be circumspect about this discovery, as the text has not yet been fully deciphered. It is not clear whether this text contains words from the Old Testament.The group from Hebrew University have identified the Hebrew words "judge," "slave," and "king" in the text.It is hoped that this artifact will shed light on the state of Hebrew script at this very early date.The work at the site has produced evidence there "was most likely a strong king and central government in Jerusalem during the period scholars believe David ruled the holy city and ancient Israel."
It has been estimated that only about 10% of archaeological sites in what was ancient Israel have been excavated. I am prepared to place my bet that there are many more exciting discoveries waiting to be made.I am also confident that the recent trend will continue.With every discovery, the historical accuracy of the biblical histories will be supported and confirmed.
Two Recent Archaeological Discoveries Support the Bible | Evidence for Christianity
Without going into fruitless and baseless attacks on your person or my person, my point is simple. At this point no on knows, archaeology is time-consuming and time will ultimately tell.
IF I'm wrong, I will correct my position.
outhouse
Atheistically
That is a decade older then the current consensus. his view has been replaced by this below dated 2011.
Most histories of ancient Israel no longer consider information about the Exodus recoverable or even relevant to the story of Israel's emergence
Moore, Megan Bishop; Kelle, Brad E. (2011). Biblical History and Israel's Past. Eerdmans. ISBN 9780802862600.
Just so you know Lawrence is a great NT scholar. He is untrained for this period, and it is outside his field of study.
outhouse
Atheistically
The archeological evidence does not support the story told in the Book of Exodus
The Exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Meyers, Carol (2005). Exodus. Cambridge University Press.
Sorry you no evidence, and all evidence point in a different origin.
The Exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Meyers, Carol (2005). Exodus. Cambridge University Press.
Sorry you no evidence, and all evidence point in a different origin.
Zulk-Dharma
Member
You're very provocative. Troll harder, you're on my ignore.
outhouse
Atheistically
and most archaeologists have abandoned the investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit".[4]
Dever, William (2001). What Did the Biblical Writers Know, and When Did They Know It?. Eerdmans. ISBN 3-927120-37-5.
Dever is one of the best in the field, him and Finkelstein own this topic.
Dever, William (2001). What Did the Biblical Writers Know, and When Did They Know It?. Eerdmans. ISBN 3-927120-37-5.
Dever is one of the best in the field, him and Finkelstein own this topic.
outhouse
Atheistically
The Exodus (from Greek ἔξοδος exodos, "going out") is the founding myth of Israel;
The Exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Did you notice the highlight of the whole wiki article??
It states it is a myth
The Exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Did you notice the highlight of the whole wiki article??
It states it is a myth
Thomas E. Levy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Levatine Archaeology -- Levy was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and is a Fellow of the Explorers Club, Levy won the 2011 Lowell Thomas Award for “Exploring the World’s Greatest Mysteries.”
Making discoveries that confirm the Biblical accounts of that time period
"Jew slaves"?
If so, it was yours, not mine.
So, just to be clear, is it your claim that there were no slaves in Egypt after the Hyksos expulsion or that none of them were Semites?