Archaeologically Dating the Exodus to Amenhotep III

by LorenzoSmithXVII 180 Replies latest admin removed

• 

  CalebInFloroda

  Lorenzo,

  How Jewish am I? I can kvetch in Yiddish and I find guilt very enjoyable and they cut off a little too much off my PP as a boy without my permission.

  I didn't know you were the authority on who is Jewish or not Jewish? Does that mean when the paperwork finalizing my citizenship in both Spain and Israel are compete, you'll be signing the papers? Or since you are this authority can you speed stuff along, I really want to go take a tour of Tel Aviv. I hear it is pretty this time of year. (Just joking, in case you can't tell.)

  All kidding aside, despite the fact that I don't believe a word you say I do admire your spunk. I've decided to lean away from talking too much about my religious beliefs here as I am more interested in supporting my fellow exJWs wherever they are in their journey away from the Watchtower.

  So please accept this note as a "no thank you" to your invitations to be included in your plans. The last Gentile who tried to include us in his plans sent us to concentration death camps, so you understand if I' m not to keen to desl so with you personally.
• 

  LorenzoSmithXVII

  marmot4 minutes agoWow, 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.

  Good point. Well let's get back to square one. If the Bible's story is correct and the Israelites trekked in that region for 40 years and we find not a shred of evidence for that, then why do you think that is? I don't know specifically. But my best guess is that the absence of any evidence might be artificial or intentional. Maybe they intended to leave little or no evidence of their presence in the wilderness.

  God was EXTREMELY upset with the Israelites at this time. God had demonstrated his power with the 10 plagues and delivered them out of Egypt and in no time they were trying to worship an idol. He was very annoyed but stuck with them. In Hebrews he notes that not a single one of them would "enter my rest" meaning none of those of that generation would become part of the 1st resurrection. Those of the first resurrection are the ones who enter his rest of the 1000-year reign rest from Satan, who is abyssed at the time.

  In the meantime, the 10 plagues had a very positive effect on Egypt and Egypt's close alley in Assyria, both of which converted to monotheism and the worship of Yahweh. So it is interesting that in the Bible, preference is often noted by the order in which a name appears. For instance, even though Japheth was the eldest son, the sons of Noah are listed as Shem, Ham and Japheth, showing preference over Asiatics and Blacks compared to whites, ultimately. But we can understand that because Satan's greatest scourge in the world and worst example of humanity is white supremacy and Nazism. Of course, the Jews are born out of Shem. But getting back to the post-Exodus Jews, when God lists those who were his recognized peoples right after the Exodus, he ranks Egypt and Assyria before the Israelites. But that is understandable because Akhenaten got it! He became a very devoted and focussed monotheist and led all of Egypt into monotheism and actually suppressed the gods of Egypt, unlike the Israelites who quickly made a golden calf. Here is that reference to a rare time when God considered Egypt and Assyria his own:

  ISA 19: 21 And Jehovah will become known to the Egyptians, and the Egyptians will know Jehovah in that day, and they will offer sacrifices and gifts and make a vow to Jehovah and pay it.22 Jehovah will strike Egypt,+ striking and healing it; and they will return to Jehovah, and he will respond to their entreaties and heal them.

  23 In that day there will be a highway+ out of Egypt to As·syr′i·a. Then As·syr′i·a will come into Egypt, and Egypt into As·syr′i·a, and Egypt will serve God together with As·syr′i·a. 24 In that day Israel will be the third along with Egypt and with As·syr′i·a,+ a blessing in the midst of the earth, 25 for Jehovah of armies will have blessed it, saying: “Blessed be my people, Egypt, and the work of my hands, As·syr′i·a, and my inheritance, Israel.”"

  
  

  This is the Amarna Period. This is confirming that the Egyptians would begin to worship Yahweh immediately after she was struck, which was the ten plagues. But in the end, notice the rank the Bible gives to Egypt compared to Israel: "“Blessed be my people, Egypt, and the work of my hands, As·syr′i·a, and my inheritance, Israel.”"

  
  

  You see, Israel is mentioned last, and why not? Akhenaten was far more focussed than the Israelites right after the 10 plagues. Considering what a huge disappointment the post-Exodus Israelites were to God, it wouldn't be unlike him to want to never be reminded about their disobedience and that disappointment. So the Jews may have been instructed to remove everything from that region, all evidence that they had been there. Or, possibly, we might be looking at God's own desire to leave no trace of the Israelites from this very disappointing time.

  
  

  Bottom line is, while most people think that something should have been left under normal circumstances, there may be an artificial reason why there is nothing left that we don't know about, including divine intervention. Now I'm more than willing to grant persons the doubt about this since I don't have any answers for them. But what does that have to do with dating the Exodus and confirming the impact of the 10 plagues on Egypt? What has that got to do with confirming David and Solomon or the Israelites in foreign records throughout the Divided Kingdom Period? That is, there is lots of archaeological evidence to discuss besides the 40-year trek in the wilderness.

  
  

  So I'm acknowledging I don't know. There doesn't seem to be any natural evidence for this period in the wilderness. I get it. But that doesn't prove the Exodus didn't happen. That does not prove that the Israelites were around to destroy LBA Jericho. I started out discussing the dating of the Exodus. Why bring up the wilderness trek?

  
  

  I understand the frustration about the wilderness trek for most. But it isn't for me. Maybe I have to ultimately face that God was so upset and disgusted with that situation that maybe he caused a great storm to blow through to completely wipe out every trace the Israelites had been there. He didn't want the memory of them being there to become a historical note. So we may be looking at a miracle. So it's not an issue for me as much as for others. In the meantime, the Exodus did occur along with the 10 plagues and now we know precisely when! That's exciting! That's wonderful. It can't be avoided.
• 

  LorenzoSmithXVII

  Vivianean hour agoThank you.

  
  

  You're very welcome, my dear.
• 

  konceptual99

  This is an aspect of the Bible I've not looked at in any great detail. Is there actually ANY evidence that Israelites were enslaved in Egypt, left en-mass, wandered in the Wilderness for 40 years and then conquered the Canaan?

  Where does the Bible and it's account of Israelite history match up with secular sources?
• 

  konceptual99

  By any great detail, I mean from a critical perspective rather than gulping down what I was fed for decades at the meetings.
• 

  Viviane

  You're very welcome, my dear.

  As usual, you've got it exactly backwards.

  Instead of looking at all of this from a backwards and uneducated point of view, have you tried looking at it from a smart and less dumb angle?
• 

  Mephis

  We have Amenhotep III's body - DNA testing shows the family links from Tut backwards, he's Tut's grandad. He isn't in the Red Sea but an obese elderly gentleman with some congenital nastiness such as having a clubfoot like his grandson. We have correspondence from the time period, and not a mention of a few hundred thousand Jews fleeing Egypt and heading on to Palestine (incidentally, nor is there in the diplomatic correspondence to Palestinian vassals in the reign of his son - and, no, apiru are not the Israelites as even a relatively quick read of the evidence will demonstrate). Rather than suffering from 10 plagues, the period is characterised as being one of great prosperity within Egypt. And whilst Amenhotep III's first born did pre-decease him, there is evidence that this happened before where some would like to place the 'plagues' as happening (eg the co-regency seems to have been 8 or so years with Amenhotep IV).

  You have no evidence to base the claim upon. You can't hammer the Egyptian chronology into fitting with an Exodus story which is clearly confused in itself. There is a market for it all the same, as is demonstrated by the regular publication of pseudo-historical guff which appeals to the faithful.
• 

  marmot

  Lars wouldn't see the truth if you slashed his eyeballs with Occam's razor.

  He just piles horseshit on top of delusional horseshit.
• 

  LorenzoSmithXVII

  konceptual9913 minutes agoThis is an aspect of the Bible I've not looked at in any great detail. Is there actually ANY evidence that Israelites were enslaved in Egypt, left en-mass, wandered in the Wilderness for 40 years and then conquered the Canaan?
  Where does the Bible and it's account of Israelite history match up with secular sources?

  This is my perspective. Akhenaten converted to monotheism because of the 10 plagues. It's just that simple. Right now, archaeological dating has painted themselves into a tight corner as far as the dating of the buildings by Solomon and the fall of Jericho. Either one of those references points to the Amarna Period as the time of the Exodus, not that historians hadn't already dated the Exodus at the end of the reign of Amenhotep III. So there is no excuse for wondering at this time when the Exodus occurred, at least not by the archaeologists. But they are avoiding linking the Exodus to Akhenaten. Probably because it would be the surest and most convincing evidence of the Exodus,

  So you ask about "secular sources"? Here's the most critical one:

  The closest reference we have of dating the Exodus by archaeology is the fall of Jericho. Archaeologist Dame Kathleen Kenyon concluded that the Israelites destroyed LBA Jericho sometime beteween 1350-1325 BCE.

  That's your SECULAR reference for when the Israelites destroyed Jericho. Kenyon noted that that did not support at least two popular theories for when the Exodus occurred. Here is her quote:

  Kathleen Kenyon: Digging Up Jericho, Jericho and the Coming of the
  Israelites, page 262:
  
  "As concerns the date of the destruction of Jericho by the Israelites, all
  that can be said is that the latest Bronze Age occupation should, in my
  view, be dated to the third quarter of the fourteenth century B.C. This is a
  date which suits neither the school of scholars which would date the entry
  of the Israelites into Palestine to c. 1400 B.C. nor the school which
  prefers a date of c. 1260 B.C."

  
  

  This is the beginning of your SECULAR evidence for the Israelites at this time. But few want to deal with this. It is a reference avoided like a plague. People get upset when I bring up this quote. But whether you agree with her or not, it's there. It is a "secular" reference that supports the Bible. It's just a matter of educating yourself to what's out there.

  
  

  Secular Reference problem #2: Radiocarbon-14 dating for Shishak. There was a sample of short-lived stored gain found at Rehov that archaeologists have tested with advanced radiocarbon-14 methods that point to c. 871 BCE as the date of the destruction of that level which is linked to Shishak. If that's the case, then that means year 39 of Solomon should have fallen c. 871 BCE. That forces us to date his 4th year to 906 BCE and the Exodus to 1386 BCE. It's just that simple.

  
  

  But when we compare the date of 1386 BCE for the Exodus to 40 years later in 1346 BCE for the fall of Jericho, we get a confirmation from Kenyon for that date.

  
  

  So you have two archaeological reasons to date the Exodus during the time of Amenhotep III, besides a historical reference by Syncellus in the 8th Century AD. Of course, once we look closer at whether Amenhotep III qualifies as the pharaoh of the Exodus, for instance, ruling for less than 40 years, which he does, then it becomes a dramatic eye opener. That's because of AKHENATEN. Akhenaten became a monotheist and suppressed all the gods of Egypt as "worthless."! That was the entire point of the 10 plagues, to prove Yahweh superior to the phony gods of Egypt. Akhenaten got the message and became a monotheist like the Jews. How obvious can it get?

  
  

  We start there. The evidence continues to mount up in support of the Bible's relative history for the Exodus to Shishak.

  
  

  At this point, though, or at some point, we have to deal with the "secular" dating for the Exodus. The WTS dates the Exodus to 1513 BCE, so it is not relevant to when archaeology is dating the Exodus. Others presume the Exodus occurred at the time of Rameses II whose reign ended in 1213 BC; way too late for the attack on Jericho in 1350 BC. So those dates don't seem to be accurate as far as archaeology goes. But what about the Bible's dating for the Exodus?

  
  

  Easy. The Exodus is the first celebrated jubilee of a covenant period of 70 jubilees. 70 jubilees is 3430 years (70 x 49 = 3430). A jubilee period is 49 years. The promise to the Jews to restore them to their homeland after a great tribulation. That great tribulation was the Holocaust and, indeed, the Jews were officially out of exile on November 30, 1947. That begins the 49-year period of the 70th jubilee, which occurs from 1947-1996. That means we can use 1947 to date the Exodus, skipping past all the chronology and historical issues connected to the Neo-Babylonian and Persian and Greek Periods! (i.e. no 607 vs. 587 BCE debates).

  
  

  If the 70 jubilees end in 1996, then they begin 3430 years earlier in 1435 BCE. The first jubilee event of this period would be 49 years later, understandably the Exodus, thus the Exodus per the Bible would be dated to 1386 BCE! Now that is interesting, because that is exactly the same date we get for the Exodus using radiocarbon-14 dating from Rehov! It matches the archaeological period for the fall of Jericho.

  
  

  So this is really a done deal. The bible dates the Exodus precisely where archaeology is dating it. So it's over. Akhenaten's monotheism is an obvious response to the 10 plagues, so it clearly must have happened. The Bible is vindicated. So SECULAR and the Bible are on the same page, at least for when we must date the Exodus. The Bible requires us to date the Exodus to the specific year of 1386 BCE, and archaeology points to the same dating. It's just that simple.

  
  

  But dating the Exodus specifically to this time apparently opens up a can of worms for the field of Biblical archaeology and so they choose to avoid this face down up until now. Truth or supporting Bible history is not their goal as much as bringing false criticism against the Bible as history. So you can't trust them. You have to blast them for their dishonesty and bias.

  
  

  
  

  And there is LOTS MORE!
  
  
• 

  Viviane

  This is my perspective. Akhenaten converted to monotheism because of the 10 plagues. It's just that simple. Right now, archaeological dating has painted themselves into a tight corner as far as the dating of the buildings by Solomon and the fall of Jericho

  Your perspective is wrong based on your lack of understanding of archaeology, history, logic and critical thinking. Your perspective IS simple and simply wrong.