But that is not what you claim ... twice!
Rather ...
You have offered nothing to validate such a claim, other than your appeal to some curious logic that Genesis 11:28 somehow proves your (now abandoned) assertion.
-
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!
Exodus Archeology Evidence
- Thread starter Mrpp
- Start date
But that is not what you claim ... twice!
Rather ...
You have offered nothing to validate such a claim, other than your appeal to some curious logic that Genesis 11:28 somehow proves your (now abandoned) assertion.
I have no problem with the Siloam inscription in the context of the evolution of Hebrew text between the 9th century and6th century BCE,
Thanks, but that was not my question.
Then be more specific. like the Ostraca from Samaria' it is part of the evolving Hebrew text from Canaanite/Phoenician text.
Last edited:
Respectfully, post #364 was not asking you to be more specific. It was suggesting that you consider answering my question and, of course, you have every right to avoid doing so. Again ...
Your fog index of your question(?) is to high. I believe I have responded,
I was hoping that conversation with you might prove productive. I was clearly wrong.
Your high fog index warrants it. This problem is nothing new,
GoodAttention
Well-Known Member
I will leave any critical analysis of academic references to people like yourself.
This simply confirms the fact that you are only basing your argument on subjective belief in scriptures, ignoring evidence.
Can yu provide an objective verifiable evidence for the existence of Joshua and the invasion of the Canaanite Levant. By the way it was mostly occupied by Egypt at the time,
GoodAttention
Well-Known Member
Where do you think the 14th Dynasty based out of Xois came from? Did they appear instantaneously?
Well. likely first built by the Egyptians between 3400-3100 BCE in the first Dynasty. Also built as Capital Hyksos (1638-1530 BCE) when they ruled Egypt and by the Egyptians in the 14th Dynasty. It is was built over a period of more than 3000 years.
Yes, the Hyksos and Egyptians had slaves, but the overwhelming evidence demonstrates that the pyramids and the cities were built by skilled communities of craftsman.
References will be provided if needed.
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
The simple fact that Genesis 11:28 have mentioned “Chaldeans”, tell me it couldn’t be written some times in the Late Bronze Age, where traditions have attributed the books (including Genesis) to Moses as author.
The Chaldeans shouldn’t exist in southern Babylonia, at Ur in the story of Abraham, as the region called “Chaldea” wouldn’t have drained the water from the marshland. The Chaldeans couldn’t have migrated south and east of Ur. Mentioning the Chaldeans at all, tells me the authors were either living around the time of exiled, or some times after Cyrus allowed them to return to their homeland.
The Ketef Hinnom scrolls is the earliest known existence of the Priestly Blessing, which are in the Book of Numbers, chapter 6. The amulet have been dated between 620 & 590 BCE.
There is a problem with the existence of the silver scrolls. The KH 2 (2nd sheet of silver) only inscribed from verses 24 to 26, omitting verses 23 & 27 that in Numbers 6.
The question is, was the Priestly Blessing was pa of the Levite priesthood, and independent of the Book of Numbers, and independent to the story of Moses & Aaron?
GoodAttention
Well-Known Member
I'm not talking about who built Xois the city, I am asking specifically about the 14th Dynasty.
Who were they?
Where did they come from?
What period did they rule?
What was their relationship to the 13th Dynasty?
The Egyptians ad Hyksos built the city over a period of 3000 years. It was not suddenly built in the 14th Dynasty. The Egyptians came from Egypt in the 14th Dynasty. Archeological evidence confirms that the builders of the pyramids, Temples and major structures were built by skilled communities of builders,
Egypt always had slaves, but they ere not skilled builders.
Hyksos were Canaanites.
GoodAttention
Well-Known Member
WHO WERE THE 14TH DYNASTY?
WHERE DID THE 14TH DYNASTY COME FROM?
WHAT PERIOD DID THE 14TH DYNASTY RULE?
WHAT WAS THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE 13TH DYNASTY?
Egyptians. Egypt was divided over the millennia between southern and northern Egypt. There were various casts and stratified society, and slaves from all around the Mediterranean and the Levant and Africa
What were called the Hyksos were Canaanites that settled in the northern Delta region and ruled Egypt for a time.
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
I don’t understand your fascination with the 14th dynasty (1705 - 1690 BCE), as there are not much known about the Second Intermediate period, as it exist concurrent with the 13th dynasty (1803 - 1649 BCE), prior to establishment of the 15th dynasty - the Hyksos dynasty (1674 - 1635 BCE).
The problem with the 14th dynasty was so short, and yet it has far too many rulers for that period, of unknown origin, because a few names appeared to be West Semitic, while one name appeared Nubian. Some of the names in the 14th dynasty are found in the Turin Canon king list, while some names don’t, but exist in much later source, like the 3rd century BCE Aegyptiaca, by Hyksos.
Now West Semitic might be Canaanite or Hebrew, but there were many West Semitic people in the 2nd millennium BCE, eg Phoenicians, Amorites, ancient Syria groups.
The Amorites were Northwest Semitic-speaking people, found in Ebla and Mari (Syria), but they have spanned east (eg southwest Mesopotamia) and west (eg Canaan), like establishing the 1st dynasty of Babylon, hence the Old Babylonian empire. So they were probably present in Egypt is not out of the question.
Second. The other problem, is what information we do have about the 2nd intermediate period come from Manetho, an Egyptian priest that flourished during the early Ptolemaic dynasty (3rd century BCE), hence I’d question to reliability of Manetho’s Aegyptiaca, because I have to wonder where does his sources come from.
As I have said, the more years - eg decades or centuries, the less reliable are the sources, that’s why I don’t trust Manetho, or worse, the 1st century CE Josephus, who have equated the Israelites with the Hyksos, even though Manetho never even mention the Israelites or Hebrews.
Josephus’ Hebrews-Hyksos connection caused untold problems for modern historians as they have to untangle fabricated myth of Josephus (about the Hyksos) from Egyptian history.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
This is what Chat GPT has to say,
The 14th Dynasty of ancient Egypt is a relatively obscure and poorly understood period in Egyptian history, primarily due to the limited archaeological evidence and fragmentary records that have survived. Here's what we know:
1. Who were the 14th Dynasty?
The 14th Dynasty was a group of rulers who governed parts of Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period. The exact number of kings who ruled under this dynasty is unclear, but scholars generally believe that there were several monarchs who were either contemporaneous with or immediate successors of the 13th Dynasty kings. The rulers of the 14th Dynasty are typically considered to have been of Semitic or Asiatic origin, though the evidence for this is sparse.2. Where did the 14th Dynasty come from?
The 14th Dynasty is believed to have originated in the Nile Delta, specifically from the region around the city of Avaris (modern Tell el-Dab'a), which was a major center of Asiatic settlement during the Second Intermediate Period. Avaris had become a prominent hub for Hyksos (foreign rulers of Semitic origin) who would later rule much of Egypt, so the 14th Dynasty rulers might have been closely connected to the Hyksos, although they were not direct Hyksos rulers themselves.While the 14th Dynasty kings may have ruled from Avaris, they were likely part of a faction that held power in the northern Delta rather than ruling over the entire country, which was divided between competing dynasties during this period.
3. What period did the 14th Dynasty rule?
The 14th Dynasty's rule is thought to have occurred during the Second Intermediate Period, approximately between c. 1800 BCE and c. 1650 BCE. The precise dates are difficult to pin down due to the limited records from the period, but it is generally considered to have overlapped with parts of the 13th Dynasty and the early part of the Hyksos domination in Egypt (15th Dynasty).4. What was their relationship to the 13th Dynasty?
The 14th Dynasty's relationship to the 13th Dynasty is somewhat ambiguous. Some scholars suggest that the 14th Dynasty ruled concurrently with the 13th Dynasty, but over a smaller area (perhaps the northern Delta), while the 13th Dynasty ruled from Memphis and other parts of Egypt. Others argue that the 14th Dynasty might have been a direct offshoot or continuation of the 13th Dynasty in some capacity, especially if the 13th Dynasty experienced a breakdown of central authority or fragmentation during its decline.It’s also possible that the 14th Dynasty rulers were independent, but their territories overlapped with the declining 13th Dynasty, as Egypt was experiencing internal instability at the time. The precise nature of their political and military relationship is unclear, but it seems that the 14th Dynasty rulers were essentially regional rulers, who were part of the broader, fractured political landscape of the time.
Conclusion
In summary, the 14th Dynasty was a relatively obscure group of rulers who came from the Delta region of Egypt, possibly of Asiatic origin, and ruled during the Second Intermediate Period. They are thought to have coexisted with the later years of the 13th Dynasty and were probably smaller, regional rulers rather than the major political power in Egypt at the time. Their exact relationship to the 13th Dynasty remains unclear, but they appear to have been part of the broader fragmentation of Egypt's political structure during the period.It doesn't look like you are going to get answers that satisfy your capitalization.
GoodAttention
Well-Known Member
Thanks.
The 14th Dynasty being a ruling class that was Canaanite in origin can therefore be considered.