: The thesis I will defend: I don't know about miraclesor pleagues, orr Mses or partimgofthe seabut I am arguimg simply that there are good reasons to suspect that some Hebrews were at one time slaves in Egypt.
Skep: 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.
It is the opinon of professional archaeolosits. they could compare with other Egyptian dwellings, and if the only one's like that are cannonite. that's reaspn to think Cannanites were there. That's not the only support.
Skep: Furthermore, there is not one single written record to corroborate that, in a land where they kept records of everything.
I think there is. One source, Dr. Douglas Petrovich’s book Origins of the Hebrews:claims new evidence Proving Hebrews lived in Egypt,But how would they know? Are they going to say "the people who will become the nation of Israe"? they would not know. Remember I am not defending the pleagues or any of the detials of Exodus.
Skep: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.I am not defindibg their mass enslvement but they could have been in Lowli position they would latter descriobe as slavery the Israelites I mean.There references to the Eperou which may be Hebrew. But if they were just canonites the Egyptions would have no resom to call them Israelites.
>
Skep: 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.I never said there were millions, the Bible doesn't say that either,but how would they have a trace? If therewas No Jospeh and no Moeses how are goigto identify a bucg if Cabbiutes as futrue Israelites? The appeal to "they greater cheologocal community" is ideological not logical. Foirst the gratercomunity ismade up of secularmimded people who ho rleigious alloence. They have o stidiedit, they haveproofit's not true, they only react it an ideologocal princkple they clig to naterialist assumptions.
Hey Skep please try to remember this. I have ebough respet for archaeology and scientific method to doubt theexistenceo of Jophen and Moses,or at least to ut the in a faith only caegry. But there is noway they can bw there no Hebrews im Egyt. Skepers: "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." Now you need to face the reality about myth: they are often based upon truth. I think there is alost no dfference i what I am saying and your statmemt: "...and whatever happened way back in pre-history, that might have been the seed of the myth, is lost to us." is that I stick on a probability argummt that soe Hebrews were iEgypt at sme t,oe, nothing e. You aresso hyterical about the Buble you can'taccepttheinocous posiotoon
. the thing you have never answered, why is the sojourn i Egypt so foundational to thwe Hews? why do
33 comments:
"It is the opinon of professional archaeolosits."
- That comes from a religious organization.(Biblical Archaeology Society). These people are not representative of the greater archaeological community, whose consensus is that there in not sufficient archaeological evidence to support belief that the exodus actually occurred.
"One source, Dr. Douglas Petrovich’s book Origins of the Hebrews ..."
- The guy from Answers in Genesis? A group that actively promotes pseudo-scientific hogwash?
"if they were just canonites the Egyptions would have no resom to call them Israelites. "
- I didn't say they should have been called "Israelites". But there are records of the conquest and destruction of Canaan. Yet, still no mention of bringing a large group of them as slaves to Egypt.
"I never said there were millions, the Bible doesn't say that either"
- According to the book of numbers, the total count of armed fighting men in Moses' group was 603,550. Add women, children, elders, etc - and you easily have a few million. Again, a group that size would not have escaped leaving behind a wealth of evidence.
"The appeal to "they greater cheologocal community" is ideological not logical."
- No, Joe. It is the best hope of avoiding ideological bias. Your sources are religious organizations. Do you suppose that we will unbiased, non-ideological information from them? Definitely not from people like Douglas Petrovich, or the Biblical Archaeology Society.
"there is noway they can bw there no Hebrews im Egyt. ... "
- What I claim is that there was no mass exodus - because the evidence doesn't support it.
"Now you need to face the reality about myth: they are often based upon truth."
- Based upon a GRAIN OF TRUTH, sure. As in something like this: a small band of Canaanites who escaped from the Egyptians (in Canaan), worshiped a Canaanite god called Yahweh, and years later went on to settle in a place they called Israel.
There is no legitimate reason to doubt the existence of somebody like Moses, especially given how influential that he is in Jewish tradition. A lack of archaeological evidence for things from thousands of years ago should be precisely what we would expect, as the vast majority of things perish or get destroyed over time. This person you've been interacting with is a lunatic.
testing
The greater archaeological community has never studied this issue. In this last go round I did not quote anything from BAS. The scholar I quoted Dr, Pelovictch got his PhD from U Toronto which is a public research university and is acclaimed world wide.
Skep: "No, Joe. It is the best hope of avoiding ideological bias. Your sources are religious organizations."
Non of the resarch I brought up was produced by BSA. One quote was from their library but that do not mean it was done my them, you are freaking out over a quote wathat s put on the net by BSA: The resarch wasn't done by an arganizati but by a guy U of Toronto which is not rleigious and is accaied.
Petrovich may be a scholar. But he is first and foremost a religious apologist, and his work shows that his goal is to substantiate his religious beliefs, and that's not how legitimate science (and archaeology) works. You can't expect unbiased scholarship from someone like that. In fact, his work is highly controversial within the archaeological community. And he contributes to Answers In Genesis, which is flatly rejected by scientific scholars. You can try to present this guy as a highly respected scholar, but I don't just automatically accept his material as legitimate unbiased scholarship. I'll listen to the greater archaeological community, and you should too.
Joe, I'm not freaking out. I simply want to see unbiased scholarship, and you haven't shown that. If you want people to take this stuff seriously, you need to expand your sources outside the religious community. Cite some actual peer-reviewed, secular scholarship.
im-skeptical said...
Petrovich may be a scholar. But he is first and foremost a religious apologist, and his work shows that his goal is to substantiate his religious beliefs, and that's not how legitimate science (and archaeology) works.
Meta: That is nonsense, I can make the general criticism of you and all atheists. I can assert that your purpose isto destroy the bibile beleif in God you are not critically examining the material. You are making knee-jerk denials you have not disproven the material evidence such as the houses I spoke of.
Skep: You can't expect unbiased scholarship from someone like that. In fact, his work is highly controversial within the archaeological community.
Meta: You will have to documet that, it's justa stat,emt of biased subjective atheist propaganda.
1:59 PM
SkepAnd he contributes to Answers In Genesis, which is flatly rejected by scientific scholars.
Meta: Does he actually wrute stuff for that site? Or are they just quoting him? We are not goingto getaywhere ifeveryonei quiteis bised because he's beimg quoted by me,and dotto you.
The guy did the actual excavations of the houses is Manfred Bietak, He is renown all his afflictions are in Europe no sign of religious belief. Betak is from Viennia, teaches at University of Viennia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manfred_Bietak
"I can assert that your purpose isto destroy the bibile beleif in God you are not critically examining the material."
- You can assert that but it's not true. I am interest6ed in one thing: finding truth. And science is a pretty good way to do that. But science requires that we first gather evidence, and then seek the best explanations that take all the evidence into account. If you start out with a conclusion, and then seek evidence for that, then you are not conducting science. And you are likely to head down the path to ideological-based beliefs that ignore important factual information. I will go where the evidence leads, and that includes any religious evidence that may be found. But I won't favor one subset of evidence while rejecting the rest.
"you have not disproven the material evidence such as the houses I spoke of."
- I never said he was disproved. I said his material is biased, and it definitely is.
"You will have to documet that, it's justa stat,emt of biased subjective atheist propaganda."
- Thy this:
https://www.academia.edu/30372805/The_Early_History_of_the_Alphabet_The_Proto_Sinaitic_Inscriptions_2_0_Canaanite_not_Hebrew
"Does he actually wrute stuff for that site?"
- Go to the site. He is listed as one of the members.
you assert you want to find ruth but clearly are not. You Cleary assert truth can't involve the divine.
I didn't say that. I said I will listen to ALL the evidence, INCLUDING any religious evidence that may be found. On the other hand, you ONLY listen to religious evidence, and ignore everything else.
That is BS. My PhD work was in a secular program, the archeologist who excavated the houses was secular and probably non Christian,
It's not a question of who did the excavation. The issue is how religious "scholars" have interpreted it. And there is no question that Petrovich (the one making these claims) is religiously motivated. The fact remains that very little actual evidence exists of the exodus, and people like Petrovich are grasping at straws to use an isolated datum like 4-room huts as a basis to believe that large population of Hebrew slaves existed in Egypt.
It is equally important how God haters have screwed it up.
I'm skeptical of his skepticism, and everyone should be.
I am skeptical of your definition of skepticism. Would you care to elaborate on that?
Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...
Pix Petrovich is not important; I told you the one who did the excavations is at Vienna no evidence he's a religious person at all. Besides that, you have no real evidence of bias you are merely drawing conclusions based upon your prejudices. Neither you nor Skep have dealt with the facts, evidence does indicate Hebrews in Egypt. You have not answered the argument that the centrality of the thesis to Jewish culture argues for some form of historicity.
10:57 PM
Joe, the general consensus of the archaeological community is that evidence of the exodus is extremely lacking. The things you have cited are very thin evidence, and tend to lead to the conclusion that it never happened. I asked you to go outside religious sources and look at most archaeologists have to say about it. But since they don't back what you claim, you just ignore them.
you keep forgetting I am not arguing for the Exodus I argue some Hebrews, may oky 19 lived in Dgyot at some time, they did nitart the red sea they didn;t lead a huge mass of people out of Egypt, just a small group, archeologists have nt thought about this.
It appears that the "grain of truth" behind the biblical story may be just that. Is so, then the biblical story is indeed mythical. In particular, the size of the Israelite army in the migration is fabricated, along with many (if not most) of the details spelled out in the Pentateuch.
none of that bother me i am not an inerrantist, the mythological does have meaning the Exodus Narrative is clear and easy to spot.
OK. Let's dial back. You say a mass exodus of Hebrews from Egypt may not have actually occurred, but there was a population of Hebrew slaves there. How many? You say "I never said there were millions, the Bible doesn't say that either". Actually, the bible clearly says that over 600,000 of them were armed fighting men. That means there were a few million in the Hebrew population that followed Moses, according to the bible. Of course they wouldn't be called "Israelites" before Israel was founded, and that's not the issue. They were Canaanites. And without a doubt there were some Canaanite slaves in Egypt, but not a significant population worthy of being mentioned in the extensive records we have of Egyptian exploits. So let's say it was a much smaller group that followed Moses and left Egypt. And that would be more consistent with archaeological findings. But it's not consistent with the biblical story. How could this band of wanderers then establish the nation of Israel? Again, we are faced with a choice between believing the archaeological and historical evidence available to us, or believing the biblical story. You can't really reconcile them.
The figure for nu,mber of Israelis is dougtful. 600 mil soldiers would be 2 or 3 Milion overall. But that exact number given for the size of the Egyptian's population, It doesn't seem likely the Israelites would the same number over 430 years?
Skep saysSo let's say it was a much smaller group that followed Moses and left Egypt. And that would be more consistent with archaeological findings. But it's not consistent with the biblical story. How could this band of wanderers then establish the nation of Israel? Again, we are faced with a choice between believing the archaeological and historical evidence available to us, or believing the biblical story. You can't really reconcile them.: ""
Y'all already argued that the main body of proto Usraelites were only cannonand never in gupt I accpet that,so the band frm egyt wasller admayve 500,000 or so. they teamed up wioth the guys already their,who knowls wy I guess they had thsame idea about god.
Where do you get 430 years from? It took them 40 years to get to Israel. Not enough time for the population to grow that much, unless, as we noted, the nation was formed mainly from native Canaanites.
A group of 500,000 spending 40 years in the desert would have left significant traceable evidence.
certainly 2 Mil would leave a trace i'm sure half mil would.leave a trace that would last imto modern times. 430 years is stated in Exocus 12"4o. I don't necessarily think that's accurate.
So 430 years is how long they were in Egypt before they left. But we're saying (and it sounded like you agreed) that it was a relatively small band of Hebrews that followed Moses out of Egypt.
yes
Post a Comment