Leo has not posted here in over a year, I doubt she visits at all now. A shame, I enjoyed getting a free education from her erudite posts !
Does egyptian history conflict with bible history
by ninja_matty69 46 Replies latest members adult
-
-
ninja_matt
Thanks bohm
-
ninja_matt
Bart Belteshassur i can't explain why eygptologists place "dates for pharaoh Shishak's date as far back as 1828, and why Necho is given as 924BCE" because i have never heard this said. Shishak is said to be sheshonk who didn't appear on the scene in standard chronology until the 22nd dynasty which is after all the old king lists. I concentrated my studies on the old king lists so i also cannot easily advise how they position the later kings but i imagine the same method - but using later lists. If you see my initial paper it identifies all the lists i have studied and shishak doesn't appear on these - he is much later.
As to how egyptologists generally date things my studies suggest they use multiple and varied sources. King lists (engraved or paper), monuments, inscriptions etc. In some cases they can use dating techniques, incl star constellations see my report about these and the dating for the pyramids themselves, and also if there are other references they can cross date to other known historical dates. Whats really interesting is that over the past couple of hundred years the dates have varied wildly by perhaps a 3000 swing. I propose that they do in fact need to swing this back a little bit.
-
ninja_matt
"the evidence shows the Israelites being mostly of canaanite orgins" - don't get too hung up on this because they have indeed shared the same lands for 1000's of years so no problem
"king David and Solomon most likey did not exsist" this doesn't mean anything - in 100 years ppl might say you didn't exist but it is a pointless statement supported by nothingness
"the bible is full of stories taken from even older writings" - the easy answer is for me to say its the other way around my friend. Again pointless statement that you cannot substantiate and i cannot be bothered to substantiate. Why don't you try and answer my paper on egyptian history?
You mention babel so i will conclude by mentioning Excavations in and around the ruins of ancient Babylon have revealed the sites of several ziggurats, or pyramid like, staged temple-towers including the ruind temple of Etemenanki. One fragment found states “The building of this temple offended the gods. In a night they threw down what had been built/ They scattered them abroad, and made strange their speech. The progress they impeded |Bible and Spade, 1938, S. L. Caiger, page 29|
No need to fear persecution from bible groups with that one because it supports the bible... now why don't they teach that in schools today?
-
Bart Belteshassur
It does not appear as if you know very much on this subject, either biblical chronology prior to 1874, or Egyptology and the history of it's chronological dates.
As you quoted dates for Shishak and Necho in your OP I am suprised you claim to have no knowledge of them. It is always prudent when quoting dates to at least remember that you have, and second to at least understand how they were derived. You appear to claim you do not know either.
How can you write a paper which you expect to be taken seriously when you confess that you do not know the developement and origins of the dates you are quoting. I will enlighten you if you wish on the two seciefic dates in question as they are the first and most important to the placing of the Egyptian timeline of traditional Egyptian chronology which was first developed in 1828. It is a fact that all those who study this subject know, and without understanding this are not really in a position to discuss it.
BB
-
Crazyguy
LOL Ninja your a funny guy, Your responce to my statement "the bible is full of stories taken from even older writings" IS THIS,, the easy answer is for me to say its the other way around my friend. Again pointless statement that you cannot substantiate and i cannot be bothered to substantiate.
Really well thiers tons of documented evidence of writtings, old stories that have been dated way before any bible fragments the oldest being a silver cylindar dated to about the 7th century BCE. These stories Epic of Gilgamesh, Story Of Anthrases are thousands of years older. Other stories of the Garden of Edin, Enlil confusing the language of the humans still much older then any bible fragment. So I suggest you take your ignorance and go back and get an education.
-
AnnOMaly
You mention babel so i will conclude by mentioning Excavations in and around the ruins of ancient Babylon have revealed the sites of several ziggurats, or pyramid like, staged temple-towers including the ruind temple of Etemenanki. One fragment found states “The building of this temple offended the gods. In a night they threw down what had been built/ They scattered them abroad, and made strange their speech. The progress they impeded |Bible and Spade, 1938, S. L. Caiger, page 29
Caiger says this fragment refers to a ziggurat like the Etemenanki and other Babylonian ones. He doesn't associate it directly. Caiger's fragment quote comes from George Smith's The Chaldean Account of Genesis (1880, co-written with A.H. Sayce), p. 163-165. Smith excavated the Assyrian Ashurbanipal's library in Nineveh, and this seems to be the origin of the fragment which, on p. 163, is said to "shockingly mutilated." 'Shockingly mutilated' fragments are hard to read and meaningfully interpret (cf. Preface, p. ix-x). Smith/Sayce may have been a little over-zealous in finding a direct link between it and the Bible's tale of the tower of Babel.
An article by the Louvre titled 'Modern-era Travelers and Archaeological Excavations at Babylon' made this comment:
"In 1875 English Assyriologist George Smith had published a book titled, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, Containing the Description of the Creation, the Fall of Man, the Deluge, the Tower of Babel, the Time of the Patriarchs, and Nimrod; Babylonian Fables, and Legends of the Gods, from the Cuneiform Inscriptions. The promise of the title was a little ambitious: ancient Mesopotamia literature contains no mention of original sin, no history of the building of the tower, no Biblical patriarchs or Nimrod. However, the parallel of the deluge in the Epic of Gilgamesh with the Biblical Flood was itself sufficiently interesting, an interest that would only grow as exaggerated links between Babylon and the Bible were asserted."
The online Catholic Encyclopedia (1917) says:
"The descendants of Noah had migrated from the "east" ( Armenia ) first southward, along the course of the Tigris, then westward across the Tigris into "a plain in the land of Sennar". As their growing number forced them to live in localities more and more distant from their patriarchal homes, "they said: Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven ; and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands." The work was soon fairly under way; "and they had brick instead of stones, and slime (asphalt) instead of mortar." But God confounded their tongue, so that they did not understand one another's speech, and thus scattered them from that place into all lands, and they ceased to build the city.
"This is the Biblical account of the Tower of Babel. Thus far no Babylonian document has been discovered which refers clearly to the subject. Authorities like George Smith, Chad Boscawen, and Sayce believed they had discovered a reference to the Tower of Babel; but Fr. Delitzch pointed out that the translation of the precise words which determine the meaning of the text is most uncertain (Smith-Delitzsch. "Chaldaische Genesis", 1876, 120-124; Anmerk., p. 310)."
I ought to point out that I haven't found a copy of the German translation of Smith's work where Delitzsch discusses the uncertainty of the text, so I can't be sure if he's referring to the same text as the one above or a different one.
---
SOURCES
Caiger's quote in context. Scroll to the bottom.