Dr. Francesca Stavrakopoulou is billed as having peeled back the the mythological "biases" of the Bible to expose the "likely archeological truth behind the text."[1] This euphemism "bias" is their term for lie. Since she doesn't believe in God (her own admission) she assumes the roots of biblical history are merely like all other ancient world mythology. In other words that's all the bible is, just another set of myths illuminating the misconceptions of ignorant and primative people. Her method does revolve around the assumption that since there is no God the truth behind the bible must be the same as that of any culture and ut's mythology..Now her work is extremely interesting to listen to. It is very popular.It also gives great comfort to atheists. It has the efect of saying"ah ha just what I always suspect about the Bible."=
I have no doubt that the people who wrote the bible lived in the same mythological universe as the Ugaretic or Canaanite or any other anciet world people. Yet she overlooks the fact that the OT is offered as an alternative to pagan mythology. Despite the cultural background of the Bible, God,rather than erase the Pagan milue, speaks through it. The voice of God resounds above the pagan historical epoch and cuts a clear path from the shadows and types to Jesus and the empty tomb.
Let's look at a couple of examples: Genesis 1:6-8, it states: "And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. God called the vault 'sky.' And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day."[2] He is not talking about dividing oceans from contenants on earth. He's talking about waters above the earth.For the ancient world the fermament was a vast dome that streached over earth and was behind the sky.It had doors in it and through those doors angels shoveled water which was rain, or snow. That's the way the authors of Genesis saw the world. In Canaanite mythology the battle between Baal and Yom is referenced.God did not instruct mankind in the nature of the universe,so without changing their understanding he just spoke his will anyway.
Ugaritic mythological tablets describe the activities of the main gods and goddesses of the Canaanite pantheon. Although there existed no single state theology, the major gods reflect local geographical concerns about the fertility of the earth and the importance of water as well as relationships to the sky and the underworld. The universe was believed to be ruled in tandem by the older god El and a main warrior-god, Baal, surrounded by a council of deities and a lower level of attendant gods. The divine council included the older generation of the god El and his wife Athirat, known in the Bible as Asherah[3],El was a Cannanite God his cult pre dates ancient Israel. That does not mean that the ancient Israelites thought they worshiped that same El, nor does it mean that the El mythos is the basis of Israelite worship. They used the name El because it was like our term "God," it can be used by any number of cultic practitioners. If God is real they must have applied that name to him because it is a general term much like our term God.
"While the cosmologies of other ancient societies share much in common with biblical cosmology (the ordering of chaotic waters, rival serpents, judgment of humanity by flood), key differences surround the nature of the creator. For instance, the Egyptian creator, Atum, is not an uncreated, eternally preexistent being (like Yahweh). Atum created himself from the chaotic waters. Atum is the first self-caused cause, which is a form of pantheism."[4] The common cultural background was neither misunderstood by proto Israel nor was it something they fled
.
"No doubt there is a common cultural heritage behind the first chapter of Genesis. But this legacy or common cultural baggage wasn't "misunderstood" by the author of Genesis 1. It was "reinterpreted", reconfigured in an enduring, perpetual process of cultural assimilation and differentiation, the very lifeblood of religious exegesis. Some people call this the 'invention of tradition'. I prefer to see it as traditional inventiveness.[5]Here are three examples of God speaking to authors of the OT that are not derived from pagan mythos.
Genesis 12:1-7
12 The Lord had said to Abram, “Go from your country, your people and your father’s household to the land I will show you.
2 “I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.[a] 3 I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.”[b] 1 Kings 19:11-14
Then a great and powerful wind tore the mountains apart and shattered the rocks before the Lord, but the Lord was not in the wind. After the wind there was an earthquake, but the Lord was not in the earthquake. 12 After the earthquake came a fire, but the Lord was not in the fire. And after the fire came a gentle whisper. 13 When Elijah heard it, he pulled his cloak over his face and went out and stood at the mouth of the cave.This passage tells us God does not speak through fireworks and big events but to the heart. That is not derived from myth, There is no myth of God speaking to the heart and there are no prophets in mythology.
Then a voice said to him, “What are you doing here, Elijah?”
jer 20; 7-9
7You deceived[a] me, Lord, and I was deceived[b]; you overpowered me and prevailed. I am ridiculed all day long; everyone mocks me. 8 Whenever I speak, I cry out proclaiming violence and destruction. So the word of the Lord has brought meThis is really anti-mythological because it records the psychological feelings of the first person on the purpose who must speak the word of God. It's a psychological experience he can't shut up. There is nothing like that in mythology, This totally authentic historical rendering of ancinet's Israelite relationship with God on a personal level.
insult and reproach all day long. 9 But if I say, “I will not mention his word or speak anymore in his name,” his word is in my heart like a fire, a fire shut up in my bones. I am weary of holding it in; indeed, I cannot.
Notes
[1] Dr. Francesca Stavrakopoulou, "The REAL Israelite Religion: Interview with Dr. Francesca Stavrakopoulou" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-nM3-QE2V4&t=240s Dr. Stavrakopoulou, professor of Hebrew Bible and Ancient Religion at Exeter University, and star of the BBC's "Bible's Buried Secrets", Digital Hammurabim 2021..
[2]NIV.
[3] Ira Spar, "The Gods and Godesses of Canaan," Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History, the Met april 2009 https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/cana/hd_cana.ht.
m [4]The Buble Project,"Does the Bible Borrow From Other Creation Stories?" Ancient Cosmology Episode 2m May 24, 2021 https://bibleproject.com/podcast/does-bible-borrow-other-creation-stories/.
[5] Ibid.
34 comments:
Joe: Since she doesn't believe in God (her own admission) she assumes the roots of biblical history are merely like all other ancient world mythology.
And rightly so. Christianity is not proven. There are roughly the same number of Christians as Muslims. Do you think we should assume Islam is true?
Joe: It has the efect of saying"ah ha just what I always suspect about the Bible."
Take a look at all the apologetics sites that do just that for Christianity! Surely what is important here is whether the claims are true or not.
Joe: Yet she overlooks the fact that the OT is offered as an alternative to pagan mythology.
What do you mean by "pagan"? I suspect you mean not Christian. To me, this looks like a labelling game; you are labelling all other religions as pagan, with the implication that your own is different. To an atheist, it is not.
The reality is that the Israelites were a Canaanite tribe who originally worshipped the Canaanite pantheon. The head of the pantheon was El, the Most High, and he had seventy sons. Yahweh was one them - the one to whom the Hebrews were allotted.
Deut 32:8 When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance,
when he divided all mankind,
he set up boundaries for the peoples
according to the number of the sons of Israel.
9 For the Lord’s portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted inheritance.
This may be viewed as a kind of marriage between the god and the tribe's city. Yahweh was the one assigned to the Hebrews and Jerusalem. Similarly, Melqart was the God of Tyre; Chemosh of Moab; Tanit and Baal Hammon of Carthage; Kaus of Edom; Moloch (or Milcom or Molech) of Ammon. Dagon of the Philistines. Some of these get a mention in the Bible; they were still very much a part of the culture when the Bible was written.
A lot of the Bible that was written pre-Captivity was all about getting the Israelites to worship Yahweh exclusively - because it was written by the priests of Yahweh. All the stuff about "high places" is referencing places where El was worshipped, and mostly is saying how they should be destroyed.
Leviticus 26:30 I will destroy your high places, cut down your incense altars and pile your dead bodies on the lifeless forms of your idols, and I will abhor you.
El's consort was Asherah, and there are plenty of references to her places of worship - the Asherah pole. And again, they were to be destroyed.
Exodus 34:13 Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones and cut down their Asherah poles.
It was commonly believed that if a statue was sufficiently well made, then the god or goddess would dwell in it, and so the statue was worthy of worship. Really the only thing to set the Hebrews apart at that time was their god resided in an ark. This is why worshipping statues, idolatry, is prohibited in the Bible.
During the Babylonia Captivity, that changed. Those in exile were the priests and leaders, so a large proportion of te population were priests of Yahweh who were looking to explain why their God had allowed the Babylonians to win. This was the big shift towards monotheism.
Pix
It has the efect of saying"ah ha just what I always suspect about the Bible."
- As if one needs an academic scholar to tell us what is already perfectly clear. The pagan origins of the Hebrew bible right there for all to see (and I take pagan to mean polytheistic). In Genesis 3:22, God says “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil." What do you suppose "one of us" refers to? Or is that just speaking through the pagan milieu?
They used the name El because it was like our term "God,"
- Right. El was the chief god, and Yahweh was his son, as Pix has pointed out. This was the accepted truth at the time Genesis was written. You have to move on to the later books of the OT to see the more evolved Hebrew view of Yahweh (or Jehovah) as the one and only God.
Anonymous said...
Joe: Since she doesn't believe in God (her own admission) she assumes the roots of biblical history are merely like all other ancient world mythology.
Px:And rightly so. Christianity is not proven. There are roughly the same number of Christians as Muslims. Do you think we should assume Islam is true?
Christianity is proven but I never based that upon the number of adherents, don't how that got into it/
Joe: It has the efect of saying"ah ha just what I always suspect about the Bible."
Take a look at all the apologetics sites that do just that for Christianity! Surely what is important here is whether the claims are true or not.
The fact that there were myths about a god named El does not idprve the reality of the god of the Bible
Joe: Yet she overlooks the fact that the OT is offered as an alternative to pagan mythology.
What do you mean by "pagan"? I suspect you mean not Christian. To me, this looks like a labelling game; you are labelling all other religions as pagan, with the implication that your own is different. To an atheist, it is not.
That is postmodern bull shit designed to side track real logic. The traditional meaning of pagan is not Christian, I am using it here of Canaanite and Ugaritic religion.
The reality is that the Israelites were a Canaanite tribe who originally worshipped the Canaanite pantheon. The head of the pantheon was El, the Most High, and he had seventy sons. Yahweh was one them - the one to whom the Hebrews were allotted.
That is not proven That's an anti biblical theory deigned to damage the meaning of the text and undermine belief in God.
Deut 32:8 When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance,
when he divided all mankind,
he set up boundaries for the peoples
according to the number of the sons of Israel.
9 For the Lord’s portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted inheritance.
This may be viewed as a kind of marriage between the god and the tribe's city. Yahweh was the one assigned to the Hebrews and Jerusalem. Similarly, Melqart was the God of Tyre; Chemosh of Moab; Tanit and Baal Hammon of Carthage; Kaus of Edom; Moloch (or Milcom or Molech) of Ammon. Dagon of the Philistines. Some of these get a mention in the Bible; they were still very much a part of the culture when the Bible was written.
Horse shit. it's a statement the geographical set up and the Distributuion of religion it has no agreement. It does not demonstrate pantheistic beliefs, BTW I do not deny that Israelites emerged out of pantheistic beliefs. Abram came from a Pathetic culture God started speaking to him he was the only guy
A lot of the Bible that was written pre-Captivity was all about getting the Israelites to worship Yahweh exclusively - because it was written by the priests of Yahweh. All the stuff about "high places" is referencing places where El was worshipped, and mostly is saying how they should be destroyed.
That us JEDP theory it's not proven Israeli archeologists don't use it. It's better to use Ctiz en laiben.
Leviticus 26:30 I will destroy your high places, cut down your incense altars and pile your dead bodies on the lifeless forms of your idols, and I will abhor you.
Did you not read my essay? I agree the major porton those books like Deuteronomy and Kings are about trying to quash the worship of other gods. That does not disprove the true God nor does it prove they did not startas wpwjo-ommtvU/
El's consort was Asherah, and there are plenty of references to her places of worship - the Asherah pole. And again, they were to be destroyed.
that does not is prove that a real God speaking to those who were willing to listen.That does not orive Gid iriginated inthat mytolgy
px:
It was commonly believed that if a statue was sufficiently well made, then the god or goddess would dwell in it, and so the statue was worthy of worship. Really the only thing to set the Hebrews apart at that time was their god resided in an ark. This is why worshipping statues, idolatry, is prohibited in the Bible.
that is nonsense there i a lot set them apart. In an earlier period, child sacrifice set them apart. Also other aspects of morality. that Gpd was talking to the Israelite because the other's weren't listening
During the Babylonia Captivity, that changed. Those in exile were the priests and leaders, so a large proportion of te population were priests of Yahweh who were looking to explain why their God had allowed the Babylonians to win. This was the big shift towards monotheism.
That is the antiGod theory it is not proveb history it's a way of imbruing belief in God There is no proof that there was no cult of listeners to God who did not worship other gods.
im-skeptical said...
It has the efect of saying"ah ha just what I always suspect about the Bible."
- As if one needs an academic scholar to tell us what is already perfectly clear. The pagan origins of the Hebrew bible right there for all to see (and I take pagan to mean polytheistic). In Genesis 3:22, God says “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil." What do you suppose "one of us" refers to? Or is that just speaking through the pagan milieu?
That does not prove that he's talking to a pantheon of Gods.They could be angels. They could be the Trinity. O aso lile you doibt that the authors of Gensis has an idea of the Trinity but we don;t know thd origin of that passage.It it was the result of a trance state he might have heard God say Let us."
They used the name El because it was like our term "God,"
- Right. El was the chief god, and Yahweh was his son, as Pix has pointed out. This was the accepted truth at the time Genesis was written. You have to move on to the later books of the OT to see the more evolved Hebrew view of Yahweh (or Jehovah) as the one and only God.
That is not proven, some culture had those names and relationship amog mythological gods that does not mean the authors of the bible did; You disparagingly talking about the Priests of Y were persuading others to drop belief in other gods. that is similr to my concept. there was a sub group that understood who the true God was and did not worship other gods you don't know how widespread tjey were or how far back they God.
Joe: Christianity is proven but I never based that upon the number of adherents, don't how that got into it
No history book has the resurrection as fact.
Joe: The fact that there were myths about a god named El does not idprve the reality of the god of the Bible
Sure. But the fact that the Bible includes them, and even has the bit where El assigns the Israelites to Yahweh is very good evidence of the polytheistic roots of your religion.
Joe: That is not proven That's an anti biblical theory deigned to damage the meaning of the text and undermine belief in God.
Of course it is not proven! It is however very well supported. By the Bible.
Joe: Horse shit. it's a statement the geographical set up and the Distributuion of religion it has no agreement.
It is about the geographical set up and the distribution of religion, but the basis is polytheistic mythology. Right there in the Bible.
Joe: It does not demonstrate pantheistic beliefs, BTW I do not deny that Israelites emerged out of pantheistic beliefs. Abram came from a Pathetic culture God started speaking to him he was the only guy
So what are you arguing about?
Joe: That us JEDP theory it's not proven Israeli archeologists don't use it. It's better to use Ctiz en laiben.
And yet the numerous instructions to destroy the high places and the Asherah poles.
Look at all the kings who did evil in God's eye. What evil was that? Worshipping other gods.
I would imagine most Israeli archaeologists are Jews as keen to deny the polytheism of the pre-Captivity Israelites as you.
Joe: Did you not read my essay? I agree the major porton those books like Deuteronomy and Kings are about trying to quash the worship of other gods. That does not disprove the true God nor does it prove they did not startas wpwjo-ommtvU/
Of course it does not disprove, but it very much undermines it. Why else did you make this post?
Joe: that does not is prove that a real God speaking to those who were willing to listen.That does not orive Gid iriginated inthat mytolgy
Sure, but it offers another explanation for where religion came from. We can see Judaism evolve out of polytheism, and Christianity evolve out of that. We do not need God to explain it.
Joe: that is nonsense there i a lot set them apart. In an earlier period, child sacrifice set them apart. Also other aspects of morality. that Gpd was talking to the Israelite because the other's weren't listening
But they still had chattel slavery, they were not that morally advance. They committed genocide when they conquered other nations, unlike the Babylonian who were far more humane, more advanced in that regard.
Joe: That is the antiGod theory it is not proveb history it's a way of imbruing belief in God There is no proof that there was no cult of listeners to God who did not worship other gods.
I am not sure what you are claiming here. There undoubtedly was a priesthood who exclusively worshiped Yahweh, and that pre-dated the Captivity by a long time.
Pix
They could be angels. They could be the Trinity. "
- That was just one of many passages that refer to multiple gods. How about Exodus 15:11, which asks ""Who among the gods is like you, LORD? Who is like you— majestic in holiness, awesome in glory, working wonders?
You disparagingly talking about the Priests of Y were persuading others to drop belief in other gods.
- Yes, there was a concerted effort to get the people to stop worshiping other gods. It was a commandment in Exodus 20:3 and Deuteronomy 5:6.
Sure, but it offers another explanation for where religion came from. We can see Judaism evolve out of polytheism, and Christianity evolve out of that. We do not need God to explain it.
No it doesn't. As purely sociological tool it starts with religion fully formed, even though Polytheistic that is religion, so you have not told where it comes from. In terms of theological content no one bases that upon not knowing where religion comes from,. No real theologian says "we don't know where religion comes from therefore God."
Joe: that is nonsense there i a lot set them apart. In an earlier period, child sacrifice set them apart. Also other aspects of morality. that Gpd was talking to the Israelite because the other's weren't listening
But they still had chattel slavery, they were not that morally advance. They committed genocide when they conquered other nations, unlike the Babylonian who were far more humane, more advanced in that regard.
It's an evolutionray process. You can't take one snap shot and say "this is it,"
Joe: That is the antiGod theory it is not proveb history it's a way of imbruing belief in God There is no proof that there was no cult of listeners to God who did not worship other gods.
I am not sure what you are claiming here. There undoubtedly was a priesthood who exclusively worshiped Yahweh, and that pre-dated the Captivity by a long time.
No one takes JEDP seriously anymore. You are too into the Priest thing; God didn't just talk to just priests and nothing else. People followed God out of Egypt, mixed with Canaanite's then began falling away and Priests as well as others, such as prophets bring them back to God.
im-skeptical
"They could be angels. They could be the Trinity. "
- That was just one of many passages that refer to multiple gods. How about Exodus 15:11, which asks ""Who among the gods is like you, LORD? Who is like you— majestic in holiness, awesome in glory, working wonders?
The OT has multipool sources it's just all priests. Some where polytheistic they reflect the Canaanites culture that mixed with the Israelites.
Joe: "You disparagingly talking about the Priests of Y were persuading others to drop belief in other gods."
- Yes, there was a concerted effort to get the people to stop worshiping other gods. It was a commandment in Exodus 20:3 and Deuteronomy 5:6.
1:36 PM
Yes true but the polytheistic branch represents a falling away not the status quo.The followers of Y were trying to get the people to come back, they were not insurgents.
Joe: No it doesn't. As purely sociological tool it starts with religion fully formed, even though Polytheistic that is religion, so you have not told where it comes from. In terms of theological content no one bases that upon not knowing where religion comes from,. No real theologian says "we don't know where religion comes from therefore God."
Polytheism developed from animism.
https://www.thearchaeologist.org/blog/the-religious-evolution-of-human-civilizations-from-animism-to-monotheism
Joe: It's an evolutionray process. You can't take one snap shot and say "this is it,"
My position is that it is an evolutionary process. If you are right, they get this stuff directly from God. God talked to Moses, Moses wrote it down.
Joe: No one takes JEDP seriously anymore. You are too into the Priest thing; God didn't just talk to just priests and nothing else.
Of course not, because God does not exist. Do you dispute that the Old Testament was written by priests and prophets of Yahweh?
Joe: People followed God out of Egypt, mixed with Canaanite's then began falling away and Priests as well as others, such as prophets bring them back to God.
No one takes the Exoduis seriously any more, Joe! The Israelites were Canaanites who invented the Exodus.
Joe: The OT has multipool sources it's just all priests. Some where polytheistic they reflect the Canaanites culture that mixed with the Israelites.
The OT all comes from the priesthood - the priests and the prophets of Yahweh. None of it comes from merchants or craftsmen. None of it comes from the priesthood of other gods.
The Israelite culture developed out of Canaanite culture, their worship of Yahweh evolved out of Canaanite polytheism.
Joe: Yes true but the polytheistic branch represents a falling away not the status quo.The followers of Y were trying to get the people to come back, they were not insurgents.
But you have to assume the Exodus to make that credible. The Exodus that was made up by the Yahweh priesthood.
Pix
"Some where polytheistic they reflect the Canaanites culture that mixed with the Israelites."
- The Israelites were Canaanites.
"but the polytheistic branch represents a falling away not the status quo."
- The archaeological/historical consensus is the reverse of what you claim. Monotheism evolved from the polytheistic status quo. And the biblical evidence supports that.
"The Israelites were Canaanites."
See here.
Pix
There is no disproof of the Eguptioan sojurn and there is so,eevodence to support it. Not saying Joseph or the 10 plagues existed bit a core of slaves from Egypt seems to have combined with Canaanites. .
Skep says ""but the polytheistic branch represents a falling away not the status quo."
- The archaeological/historical consensus is the reverse of what you claim. Monotheism evolved from the polytheistic status quo. And the biblical evidence supports that." This actually sdeems t support my position. a group frm Egypt camdinwith those lready in cannan that is my position.
Hey medicrock I saw a blog post recently by an atheist that bothered me could I ask you to take a look at it and make a response to his attacks on the empty tomb and Resurrection
fine bring it on!
Religion is a playhouse for the nutty.
"a group frm Egypt camdinwith those lready in cannan that is my position."
There is not a single shred of archaeological evidence that the Hebrews were ever enslaved in Egypt or that the exodus ever occurred. In all the writings in Egypt (and they recorded everything) there is no mention of this. In all the digs in the middle east and the Arabian peninsula, no trace of the Hebrew migration has ever been found. Bottom line: it never happened.
Medicrock here's the blog post denying the burial of Jesus and the resurrection could you make a response to this https://lutherwasnotbornagaincom.wordpress.com/2014/08/28/the-resurrection-of-jesus-was-there-a-missing-body/
(1) I have seen such evidence, can;t look now
(2) Passover is so central to Judaism, there is no time we know of when they did not claim to have been slavesim Egypt so that indicates there is hsome hisrocial reality behind it.
that source denying the burial of Christ. I read his first 2 which are laughable. First he argues we can't prove Paul understood resurrection in the bodily sense, In fact he can't give us a reason to think he did not. That's laughable. Not even an argument but a smoke screen. Mroeover,from wht Paul says in 1 Cocrithians he clearly did. His second point is based upon ciriticsm of Mark. But there is something called Pre Mark redaction which takes the emty tomb backt at least AD 50 which is the scope of living witnesses. U have weritten extensively on pre Mark redaction, it's real schlalry fiew poimt ike Q based upon exegsis.
this is the article I wrote for Holding's "Defending the Resurrection." Ut argues we can take theemty tombgack at least to AD 50, http://religiousapriorijesus-bible.blogspot.com/2010/05/story-of-empty-tomb-dated-to-mid-first.html
Skep evidence of Hebrews in akinete Egypt: Reed huts more than 3,000 years old belonging to workers—perhaps slaves—and with the same floor plan as ancient Israelite four-room houses have been identified at Medinet Habu, opposite Luxor in Egypt. These reed huts may represent extra-Biblical evidence of Israel in Egypt.
Israelites Found in Egypt - The BAS Library
The BAS Library
https://library.biblicalarchaeology.org › article › israelites.
The Biblical Archaeological Society can hardly be regarded as an unbiased source. They grasp at straws to justify the biblical stories. The archaeological community as a whole rejects those stories, while agreeing that there may be some grain of truth behind them that bears little resemblance to the biblical account. Perhaps there was a band of Iseaeli refugees who escaped from the Egyptians as they laid waste to the Israeli homeland (an event that is noted Egyptian writings).
I ask you to refute his main point in the article or could you write a short rebuttal attacking his main point in the article
"I scored 88 on my IQ test, and 88 is the grade of a B plus. Therefore, my intelligence is way above the national average." -Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)
Skep I gave you archeological data. You have none. Doubt is not proof.
cute but 88 for IQ score is profoundly retorted. I bet it's near Trump's score.
Anon I destroyed the major supports for his argument, He says "MISSING ITEM #2: UNCONTESTED EVIDENCE THAT ANYONE KNEW ABOUT AN “EMPTY TOMB” STORY EARLY ONs: "" Mid century is early on and Major scholar Helmutt Koester and other major scholars took the preachingof the empty tomb to mid century, that is the pre Mark redaction, Now how strong is his thesis when you destroy that?
Archaeological data? You mean because there were 4-room reed dwellings in Egypt, and Israelis also used 4-room dwellings? But we don't know who built them or who lived in them. So your contention is that they could have been made by Israelis, but there is no proof of that, and they could just as well been made by native Egyptians. Furthermore, there is not one single written record to corroborate that, in a land where they kept records of everything. There is no record of the mass enslavement, or the exodus, no names mentioned. There are no artifacts left behind that are distinctly Israeli. There is nothing in the archaeological record that clearly indicates their presence there. If there had been millions of them enslaved in Egypt, there would be some trace of that. If those millions made spent 40 years in the Arabian peninsula, there would be some trace of that. But there's nothing. That's archaeological data. And that's why the greater archaeological community doesn't believe it.
Let's face it. This is a mythological story, and whatever happened way back in pre-history, that might have been the seed of the myth, is lost to us.
I have a question what is your stance on The Exodus do you think it happened or not
Anon your Exodus question will be dealt with in my answer to Skepie. But in a word, yes. I think some Hebrews were slave in Egypt at some point. Weather or not they/ BTW why don't you choose a sscreen name?
Skepie I am doing my answer to you as a main blog post fr this week.
Post a Comment