by LorenzoSmithXVII 180 Replies latest admin removed
So in reality, the Exodus and the 10 plagues are confirmed -Lorenzo
Have human remains been found in this "wilderness" the 2million jews were in for 40 years? Thousands had to die of old age assuming there was no sickness at all.
How are the plagues confirmed in detail?
sunny23
Have human remains been found in this "wilderness" the 2 million jews were in for 40 years? Thousands had to die of old age assuming there was no sickness at all.
Good questions. Actually, I'm not sure if bones would be expected. Bones are biodegradable under certain conditions. Bones in air-tight caves have been preserved, but not in the open. Further, I know some remains were placed in a cave. I guess we are then presuming the dead were buried. But if the dead were burned, there would be no remains. But then, again, as I've noted, if it was logical under normal circumstances to expect to see lots of remains or at least a few of them, perhaps we are looking at an artificial or intentional effort by the Israelites to leave no evidence behind them of the wilderness trek. Or what if there was a burial place outside the wilderness? Again, you have to consider where there was a pragmatic reason for the Israelites to intentially leave no evidence behind that they had been there.
How are the plagues confirmed in detail?
Well, I don't know about detail, but I'm glad you asked. Here are a few supportive things.
First you have to date the Exodus correctly to the time of Amenhotep III and Akhenaten. Then you look at the potential expected impact of the 10 plagues on the nation. What do we know about this period? What do we know about the mummy of Amenhotep III? What do we know about the military prowess or activity during this period, considering the primary chariot army was destroyed in the Red Sea? Do we have any evidence reflecting on gold rationing during this period, which is a reflection of an economic impact? All these things can either be inconclusive, supportive or contradictory.
First of all, of course, obviously, we look at the religious impact of the effect of the 10 plagues. Akhenaten became a monotheist. The Israelites were monotheists. To me, that's the primary proof. I believe his becoming a monotheist is a logical response to something as dramatic and miraculous as the ten plagues. In addition to becoming a monotheist, he suppressed the other gods of Egypt and called them "worthless." So his reaction is consistent with the phenomenon of the 10 plagues occurring at this time.
Then, there are some background things. Amazingly, we have the "Amarna letters" which is correspondence from the time of Akhenaten and those letters confirm that Akhenaten did send chariot support out to Canaan, which they kept requesting to fight against the "Apiru." But why not. Egypt was at its zenith during the time of Amenhotep III? But this lack of support of even a chariot or two to these vassal city-states now being over-run by the Apiru would be interpreted as a direct result of the destruction of the primary chariot army in the Red Sea. Prior to this, we could presume that Egypt maintained military of the vassal city-states in Canaan, with chariots to spare. But once the central chariot army was destroyed in the Red Sea, logically, Egypt would have recalled all the ancillary chariots from Canaan to come and make up an emergency army in Egypt. This lack of protection, then would give the Apiru incentive to attack and harrass these unprotected city-states. Further, at this point Egypt would have had literally no chariots to spare at this time. There is even a letter documenting the gift of a chariot to Egypt from Assyria, another indication Egypt was short of chariots. So that is consistent with a sudden chariot crisis in Egypt. It might not "prove" in the minds of some that the chariot army was destroyed in the Red Sea, but it certainly doesn't contradict it, as would evidence of a strong presence in Canaan at this time by Egypt.
Third, there are the specifics of Amenhotep III and his mummy. For one, the pharaoh of the Exodus was a different pharaoh than the one Moses left Egypt under for 40 years. So we know that pharaoh has to rule for less than 40 years. Amenhotep III only ruled for 38 years. That is why Rameses II cannot be considered the pharaoh of the Exodus, since he ruled for 66 years. But the mummy of Amenhotep III is very interesting as well. It underwent a special embalming process not used with any other mummy. Why? It might reflect the poor condition of the body at the time of burial. It's reasonable that the pharaohs were embalmed immediately after death for the best results. But if this pharaoh was not available immediately, or was waterlogged by being in the Red Sea for a while, then that would explain the special embalming needed. Again, that doesn't "prove" he died in the Red Sea, but it doesn't contradict it and is suspicious for why he needed a special embalming.
There are a few other very interesting details, but the above three to me support the Exodus, the 10 plagues and the destruction of the Egyptian army in the Red Sea along with the death of Amenhotep III. But there is one other thing to consider as far as archaeology. The KTU 1.78 text.
The KTU 1.78 text is a record of an eclipse that occurred over Ugarit that was found in the debris of a palace fire that was reported to Akhenaten in his 12th year. The eclipse occurred in 1375 BCE. So the text is used to date the 12th of Akhenaten in 1375 BCE. In that case, we have an issue of an absolute date for the beginning of the reign of Akhenaten 11 years earlier in 1386 BCE. It might be relevant or dismissible, but it's part of the evidence. I bring it up because of the chronology for the fall of Jericho between 1350-1325 BCE per archaeology, which would date the Exodus between 1390-1365 BCE specifically. Point being, 1386 BCE falls within the archaeological range for the Exodus as established by Jericho. This becomes significant when we combine that with the historical pharaoh of the Exodus from 8th Century AD references such as Syncellus who clearly pointed to the pharaoh of the Exodus as Amenhotep III. So you've got three corroborating pieces of evidence pointing precisely to the Exodus during this period, in fact, specifically to the year 1386 BCE.
So it seems very interesting, now that we are actually forced to date the Exodus to 1386 BCE, that we find Akhenaten becoming a monotheist all of a sudden. But the reason for that dramatic focus on monotheism now has to be considered in the context of the Exodus occurring in 1386 BCE. Of course, the nation dropping the false gods of Egypt and becoming monotheists like the Israelites is a textbook response to an event like the 10 plagues.
But there is the other side of this coin. Why am I bringing this up? Why haven't archaeologists long ago figured out that Akhenaten's monotheism was apparently due to the 10 plagues? Why haven't archaeologists used the dating from Jericho to date the Exodus? It makes no sense, unless they clearly know once you confirm a date for the Exodus, particularly during the time of Akhenaten, that it would prove the Exodus actually happened. Maybe somebody doesn't want that to happen.
But archaeology has also painted themselves into a corner as well, with radiocarbon-14 dating and critical dating for the Solomonic buildings at Megiddo, which Israel Finkelstein dates to the "early 9th century BC." Why is that significant? Because the rule of Solomon is linked to the Exodus. The Exodus occurs 480 years prior to the 4th of Solomon. So if you date the Exodus based on the KTU 1.78 eclipse text to 1386 BCE specifically, then you also have to specifically date the 4th of Solomon to 906 BCE and his 40-year rule from 910-870 BCE. Of course, that is precisely where Finkelstein is dating the buildings of Solomon, to the "early 9th Century BC" (900-867 BCE). That means the "relative chronology" of the Bible's reference to the Exodus and the fall of Jericho and the time of Solomon are confirmed now by archaeology! But it also means that Biblical archaeologists should have recognized this harmony and long ago focused on the academic theory of the Exodus occurring at the time of Amenhotep III and Akhenaten, not that that pharaoh wasn't already the historical pharaoh of the Exodus! Why would a focus on the Exodus occurring during the time of Rameses II, then even be considered at this point? Especially when Finkelstein actually dismisses the Exodus from occurring during the time of Rameses II, using the evidence from Jericho which confirms Jericho was desolate at the time of Rameses II?
The academic question is, with good dating for the buildings of Solomon and the fall of Jericho coordinated, why haven't archaeologists figured out when to date the Exodus. Solomon dated to the early 9th century BC and the fall of Jericho by the Israelites between 1350-1325 BCE is a supportive or contradictory reference to the Bible's timeline for these events. It forces us to date the Exodus between 1390-1365 BCE. But where are the discussions about the Exodus occurring at the time of Amenhotep III by archaeogists? It's not there. They claim the Exodus didn't happen and claim the Exodus occurred during the reign of Rameses II. But is that actually a deliberate avoidance of any possibility of the Exodus being linked to Akhenaten and his monotheism? Absolutely! Because Akhenaten's sudden monotheism confirms the 10 plagues! In a big way, especially if you are now forced to date the Exodus during this time based on archaeology.
Think about that! We now know when the Exodus occurred and we now know why Akhenaten became a monotheist and started to suppress the other gods of Egypt. He is talked about extensively and lots of reasons given for this sudden re-focus by the scholars out there, but none of them link the Exodus to this time, even though Syncellus and others had historically dated the Exodus to Amenhotep III.
That's why I say the archaeologists are lying, because nobody with a degree is that dumb. But why would they avoid the truth and lie about this? It must be too big of a can of worms in the field, too big of a scandal to reveal. Think of all the atheists who would not welcome this confirmation? They are at a comfort level of repeating "there is NO EVIDENCE" at all of the Exodus or the 10 plagues. Well, that's a very weak argument if you date the Exodus to the time of Akhenaten! They can't make that claim now that there is "NO EVIDENCE" of the Exodus when the pharaoh ruling after the Exodus suddenly becomes a monotheist like the Israelites!
People in the field like to keep their options open and dating the Exodus confirmatively and absolutely to the time of Akhenaten gives them no wiggle room. That's because an absolute date for the Exodus is going to give you an absolute date for the reign of David and Solomon. They don't want that. Why? Because the actual evidence shows that Solomon belongs to the early 9th Century BC rather than where they are now dating him, that's why. All this essentially will confirm the current popular timeline for David and Solomon is incorrect and archaeologists, not being historians, don't want to deal with correcting the timeline or discussing timeline issues.
That's why, I basically ignore archaeologists when it comes to their assessments. As I said, what I need from Finkelstein and Kenyon are their best guesses at dating certain events. I don't need them to misinterpret the Bible or be dishonest. The fall of Jericho in 1346 BCE works for me. Solomon's rule during the early 9th Century CE, works for me. It doesn't work for JWs! It doesn't work for the popular pagan timeline. But that's their problem, right?
It's my opinion that they know the Exodus must have happened at this time and that Akhenaten's sudden monotheism is too powerful of a confirmation of that reality. They don't want to deal with that reality, they want to believe the Bible is a myth and these things didn't happen, but since Akhenaten proves it did, they avoid linking Akhenaten to the Exodus, even though all the archaeology in place now, even radiocarbon-14 dating forces them to.
So the Bible is true. Those in the field of Biblical archaeology are dishonest anti-Biblicalists. So what else is old?
LET ME KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS!! Thanks.
Viviane6 hours ago
How stupid of me!
Well, you finally got one thing right.
===
But, Viv. If I'm stupid, what does that make you?
I don't know where you people get off being such meanies to poor Lorenzo! I for one believe in everything he says.
I also believe in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and Congress!
Caedes3 hours agoI don't think I have ever seen Lars so uncomfortable, well done Viv. Normally he just ignores people who point out that he is talking bollocks.
CalebInFloroda18 minutes agoI don't know where you people get off being such meanies to poor Lorenzo! I for one believe in everything he says.
I also believe in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and Congress!
I thought you were supposed to be Jewish? I have plans for you. I want to discuss some fascinating Jewish things. So how "Jewish" are you? You do realize that Jews and JWs were targets by the Nazis, right? When the Bible spoke of the "love of the GREATER NUMBER would cool off" it was a reference to the increase in antisemitism that would occur approaching WWII after the last generation began in 1914. But if there is a "greater number" then there must be a "lesser number," right. Same distinctive reference in Daniel when it mentions the covenant will be kept in place for "the many" (9:27 "...and he must keep the covenant in force for the MANY for one week." Who is "the many"? The "many" and the "greater number" are the same group. But if so, that also implies "the lesser" and "the few." This is the way the Bible distinguishes between two branches of the "holy ones." The "many" and the "greater number" is a reference to the Jews. The "few" and the "lesser number" is a reference to Jehovah's Witnesses. So JWs play a big role in the fulfillment of Bible prophecy alongside the Jews.
But I'm far more interested in discussing Jewish culture and customs with you. Do you know much about that?
She hasn't really figured out what is going on yet.
You're adorable when your puffing your chest out. And by "adorable" I mean "utterly boring and predictable".
Wow, this fruitcake is back?
Total horseshit theory that the jews meticulously burned all their remains, though. Even modern cremation techniques leave teeth behind. Teeth are notoriously tough, in fact they last millions of years as evidenced by archaeological finds in the cradle of humanity in Africa.
Adding to the stupidity of this idea, where did they get the fuel for these miraculous funeral pyres? Wood from the verdant forests of the Sinai? Oil from their magical Nev-R-Empty(tm) clay jars?
There should also be a shit-ton of latrine pits dotted across the desert. The reality? Nothing.
