No not only in stone, on papyrus, and clay tablets found in Canaanite libraries and in the archaeological sites Sinai peninsula.
Proof? Well in is well documented concerning the origin and evolution of the Hebrew language The Hebrew language simply did not exist before 600 BC
PRevious archaeological and historical research DID NOT consider them fake. They were considered undocumented until archaeological evidence has been found. This kind old concerning the evidence and research on the Hittites
No it is not a valid determination. and proves nothing. Yes the Bible reflects the culture, and some figures have been documented to be real, but many not.consists of narratives written between It was compiled and edited between ~600 BCE and ~400 AD from different undocumented sources, and obviously it is not accurate. It lack original documents dated to the time the narratives were written and for the most part lacks provenance of authorship. Humanity has been around for over 300,000 years and the earth ~3,5 billion years.
I dont know why you keep coming up with this bull****. you come up with rot and twist it in order to make it appear that something is fact when it is not.
The Silver Scrolls (dated 600 b.c) are merely the oldest SURVIVING texts currently from the Hebrew Bible. That does not tell us the bible is only dated to 600 B.C. We have other evidence its much older than that date!
No one has made the claim that the original world wide language was Hebrew btw. How could it have been...the Hebrew nation didnt exist at the time of Abrahams calling. The bible clearly tells us Abraham was called by God out of Ur of the Chaldees
to become a great nation.
As i said, just because their exists a known document of 600 B.C only means thats the oldest document we have...it does not attest to the age of the people and culture...it is clear they had language of their own long before that time. This does not support any claim that the jews came out of the Canaanites!
Jewish Languages
Jewish languages are the various
languages and
dialects that developed in
Jewish communities in the
diaspora. The original Jewish language is
Hebrew, supplanted as the primary vernacular by
Aramaic following the
Babylonian exile. Jewish languages feature a
syncretism of
Hebrew and
Judeo-Aramaic with the languages of the local non-Jewish population.
Early Northwest Semitic (ENWS) materials are attested through the end of the Bronze Age—2350 to 1200 BCE.
Khirbet Qeiyafa (
Arabic: خربة قيافة), also known as
Elah Fortress and in Hebrew as
Horbat Qayafa (
Hebrew: חורבת קייאפה), is the site of an ancient fortress city overlooking the
Elah Valley and dated to the first half of the 10th century BCE.
[1][2] The ruins of the fortress were uncovered in 2007,
BTW, if Nebuchadnezzar took them into captivity in 457 B.C, do you think these were essentially cave men he took prisoner? They had wealth and a way of life that was clearly a lot more than 143 years old when taken into captivity...otherwise why the heck would one of the richest kingdoms of the day even bother?
Hititties...
The Hittites are mentioned more than forty times in the Bible. Twice we are told that Heth, their father, was a son of Canaan, one of the four sons of Ham. From the picture the Genesis narrative presents, at least one tribe of the Hittites was established in the land of Canaan in the time of Abraham, and this patriarch bought a property from them near Hebron. Later, one of Isaac's sons, Esau, married Hittite wives. When Israel went up to conquer the Promised Land, the Hittites were among the peoples that the Lord promised to drive out. The language of some passages would seem to give to the Hittites more importance than is given the other Canaanitish populations, and to make them a great power.
Even if the Hittites seem to have taken an important part in the confederation that opposed Joshua, which suffered a tremendous blow at Hazor, they do not seem to have been entirely destroyed, as the Hittites are frequently mentioned in the subsequent history of Israel. We.find that David had Hittite soldiers in his army, before and after his accession to the throne. Under Solomon, the remains of the Hittites and other Canaanites were finally subjected to tribute or bond service. But we are also told that Solomon and his company of merchants carried on an immense trade with "the kings of the Hittites" and "the kings of Syria," especially in horses from -Egypt.
In spite of all that the Bible has to say about the Hittites, "scarcely a generation ago, . . • many scholars claimed that the Hittites were but a mythical race of people. . .. We are told that Abraham bought the cave of Machpelah from a Hittite, that Esau took Hittite women. . . . In spite of these and a score of other references to the Hittites, the scholars continued to assert that if such a people ever existed, they were merely a small tribe of Palestine occupying but a village or two."—"The Bible and the Spade," Edgar J. Banks, p. 97.
Finally, your last statement "humanity has been around for 300,000 years..."
Show me a written document dating humanity to 300,000 years old, please?
What you actually have is fossilized human remains from Morocco that secular scientists claim are 300,000 years old. They do not actually have proof that these bones are 300,000 years old...its merely a theory of age using the same theorectical timeline that tell us the rest of the evolutionary story. That is not proof of anything any more than your statement against the hebrews is. You claim there is no written proof beyond 600 bc and then you claim 300,000 years for mankind without any written evidence! And whats more, the fossils found in Morocco appear to have "modern faces" and, "the Moroccan site is in northwest Africa, far from the sites in East and South Africa that have yielded many of Africa’s other hominin fossils." ("
These Early Humans Lived 300,000 Years Ago—But Had Modern Faces" National Geographic Magazine June 8 2017)
It is very clear from the Morocon find that these individuals lived either much earlier or at least at the same time as the Ethiopian discoveries dated 195k. We also find artefacts such as tools and this clearly tells us these people were intelligent enough to manufacture tools to use for tasks in excess of the 300-350l evolutionary timeline...so there is a big problem with that date clearly...its 105k older than the Ethiopian site!
And finally, they dated this site using radioative dating methods...that in and of itself is proven highly unreliable and only works under the standard of universalism...which the bible flood debuts as untrue (given much of the bible history is shown to be true, we have no reason to doubt the rest of it other than nonchristians claim its false via a secular theory from sources corrupted by Satan and sin. What we see around us is a result of the influence of sin...God has never claimed this world as we know it today to be the perfect creation he made...it is but a shadow of that creation and lies in ruin. The whole idea of the biblical plan of redemption is to restore not only humanity, but also the rest of the world.
You cant reconcile the DArwinian timeline of modern humans with ancient Neanderthals and find that they actually date the opposite way around (ie the modern is older). This suggests they co-existed and that is the point...it also agrees with the biblical record far better than the Darwinian one!
What i find really interesting about the find in Khirbet Qelyafa is that they found Carbon 14 at the site and have dated it to 1050-970 B.C using that method. This tells us its not actually very old at all and this supports the bible timeline very accurately back to at least that date. That is evidence for biblical historical accuracy.
Note the
findings are that...
Archeologists, Yosef Garfinkel, Mitka R. Golub, Haggai Misgav, and Saar Ganor rejected in 2019 the possibility that Khirbet Qeiyafa could be associated with the Philistines. They wrote: "The idea that in this chronological phase the knowledge of writing should be associated with the Philistine city state of Gath can now be rejected.
In 2010, Gershon Galil of the University of Haifa identified Khirbet Qeiyafa as the "Neta'im" of 1 Chronicles 4:23, due to its proximity to Khirbet Ğudrayathe (biblical Gederah). The inhabitants of both cities were said to be "potters" and "in the King's service", a description that is consistent with the archeological discoveries at that site.
Now the really interesting thing about the Shephelah surveys is that they appear to have had a colonised population of some 50-100k individuals...and i must ask, given Jewish history states Abraham was their founding father, how long would it take 1 man and his immediately family to become a population of that size?
It appears to me that you lack intellectual acuity in not seeing the contradiction in your Darwinian view on this subject. The evidence is actually a lot more consistent with the biblical narrative.
BTW it seems that your real intent here is an attempt at knocking off the law of Moses in the biblical narrative. That wont work using this method amigo...time you barked up a different tree as the Silver Scrolls containing reference to that law obviously come from a time much earlier...as supported by the biblical narrative of Moses writings and the affirmation of the law as given at mount Sinai.
