Noahs' Ark- Better than New?

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by bntii

Hmmmm- I take the exodus story to be just one of the resident slave population splitting the pad when the culture that was enslaving them started to become unhinged.

The bible lays out that god got the party started- plagues, frogs etc... & in historical fact the migration probably happened over several generations as new lands were sought, and communities established.

But otherwise, whats not to like?
Same thing happened when the Aztec culture collapsed eh?
(or am I thinking Mayan?)


This case seems like a good example of the bible being a reliable historical text for a understandable event.

I am rusty perhaps- is this the 'exodus' story being discussed? You know, mosses parting the red sea burning bush tablets and that whole mess?

Speaking of tablets- anyone see 'The Invention of Lying'?

Not only did the Exodus really happen at a specific point in time, the Egyptians themselves actually wrote about it at the time.

http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

"This stele puts a terminus ante quem date of 1210 BC for the exodus (McCarter 1992, 132)."

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by MikeJohns

Ian Plimmers book 'Telling lies for God' was mentioned before and I took the time to read it, it's quite illuminating the level of "false witness" that gets promulgated by the biblical creation myth industry in the USA.

Floods are common events. A lot of flood myths were modified either from contact with missionaries or from earlier contact with Mesopotamian myths, which is where the Jewish one comes from.

I asked a Chinese friend about the boat Chinese symbol, he says it's a misrepresentation of the Glyph and the symbols on the right don't mean 8 people. "Like saying the written 18 is same as 100 because there is 1 and two zero...."

I still want to know how the Tasmanian Devil was dropped off here and here alone ! Also if you can't have evolution then every species specific disease and parasite had to be present in the animals on the Ark. And these points are just the start....
When you peruse the Ark myth its apparent that it requires huge amounts of magic (miracles) to make it happen. But categorically and relative to this forum it's clear that the Ark is a myth from a Naval Architecture approach. It's just not possible for a wooden ship structure of that size to remain intact ( without magic). There's some reference to a Korean University unpublished unreviewed 'Paper' that 'Proves' that it was structurally sound but when I was sent the article it turned out to be just more of the same desperate extravagance of reasoning.

There has been massive sea floods as Boston wrote, also ships carrying animals have also been found in various places in the Mediteranian.

The floods are self explanitary however the ships with animals have been proven to be the be wrecks of transport ships moving animals of all kinds the the Coleseum for the Roman games.

Beneath the floor was caged Lions , Tiger , etc all for slaughter and NOT as thought the Gladiators who rarely fought to the death, they were too expensive.

But the ark is a great story and thats all the whole Bible is.

[bntii]

I have scant time Bos but maybe we could toss it around a bit.

I'll take the 'validity of biblical references for the exodus' side...

[Boston]

always helps to "not" be preaching to the choir Bntii.

I'm feeling pretty confident that although many secular scholars have tried to suggest some evidence does exist for the exodus that as of yet none has been found. Which stands in stark contrast to the number of records from that time period that fail to mention it. The Egyptians were prodigious writers and if a pharaoh so much as farted, it got chiseled in something. Ten times over. Now thats not to say the records of the time don't note a dry spell, or that from time to time Egypt had to deal with invading tribes. But there's no evidence it was anything but normal weather fluctuations, resulting in a cleaning house type scenario.

this link delves into what some try and claim is evidence but as can be seen, two slaves escaping into a desert and chased by military personnel is hardly an exodus
from the Denver Seminary
http://www.denverseminary.edu/articl...tian-evidence/

and another
http://www.auss.info/auss_publicatio...nal=1&type=pdf

even hardcore christian pundits struggle to find any Egyptian record

Bimson, John J. Introduction to Redating the Exodus and Conquest, pp. 10-28.

The search for an historical Exodus has been stuck between the proverbial rock and a hard place. The evidence dug from the rocks has led archaeologists to date the event from the thirteenth century B.C.E. to no Exodus at all. The evidence from Egypt provides almost no support for such dating, and in Canaan it raises as many questions as it answers (Bimson 1978).

And while there is ample evidence of drought in the area there is none of any series of plagues or a forced release of any large groups of people Judaic or not.

from
http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

There is an interesting study done by Barbara Bell on the records of the Nile's water levels. She concluded that in the middle of the 12th Dynasty there were erratic Nile water levels that caused crop failure (Bell 1975, 223-269). Could this be Joseph's famine? There is "The Tradition of Seven Lean Years in Egypt" written during the Ptolemaic period about the reign of Djoser that states: To let thee know. I was in distress on the Great Throne, and those who are in the palace were in heart's affliction from a very great evil, since the Nile had not come in my time for a space of seven years. Grain was scant, fruits were dried up, and everything which they eat was short. Every man robbed his companion (ANET 1969, 31).

Being familiar with the reference Hoyt cited its pretty clear that they are not referring to an exodus as described in the bible story but an early attack outside Egypt borders on one of the neighboring tribes, the Hyksos who later became known as the Jews. A fact that might have been mentioned early on in the article but wasn't until much later giving the incorrect impression that the loosely nit tribes who together were known as the Hyksos and who later became the Judaic tribes were at the time even remotely practicing Jews. On the contrary, the article mentions the Egyptians were upset that they had focused on Baal worship. Even if you accept that there was a mas expulsion from Egypt of foreigners or slaves, who were putting a strain on the Egyptians ability to feed there own you still don't get anything even close to an exodus of Judaic mythology or a series of biblical plagues. Sure the Egyptians mentioned the tribes around then and also built fortifications to keep them out as well as war with them. But at no time was the entire people called the hyksos enslaved and at no time is a series of plagues mentioned that led to the release of large numbers of slaves, or any number for that mater. Sure there were likely Hyksos slaves in Egypt but there is absolutely no mention of any series of events synonymous with those described in the bible leading to the freeing of slaves. Interaction with the neighboring tribes, of course, exodus ?, no way.

From Hoyts cited article

The earliest document that describes the time of the Hyksos is from the Temple of Hat-shepsut (1486-1469 BC) At Speos Artemidos which says: Hear ye, all people and the folk as many as they may be, I have done these things through the counsel of my heart. I have not slept forgetfully, (but) I have restored that which had been ruined. I have raised up that which had gone to pieces formerly, since the Asiatics were in the midst of Avaris of the Northland, and vagabonds were in the midst of them, overthrowing that which had been made. They ruled without Re, and he did not act by divide command down to (the reign of) my majesty (ANET 1969, 231; Breasted 1988, 122-26; Shanks 1981, 49).The Hyksos worshipped Baal which was associated with the Egyptian god Seth. This led to the neglect of other gods and temples which upset the Egyptians. There is debate over the exact period of time that The Admonitions of Ipuwer describes. The text itself is from the 19th-20th Dynasty. John Van Seters strongly argues for the time of the Hyksos (1966, 103-120). It states: Foreigners have become people everywhere....the Nile is in flood....poor men have become the possessors of treasures....many dead are buried in the river....let us banish many from us....the River is blood (ANET 1969, 441; Lichtheim 1975, 1:151). This sounds similar to the event of the first plague against Egypt (Exodus 7:14-24). The river is not actually blood, but looks blood red because the Nile is flooding. Some speculate that the rest of the plagues are a result of the Nile flooding. The expulsion of the Hyksos was a series of campaigns which started with Kamose who was king in Thebes, and rebelled against the Hyksos. His son Ahmose was finally successful in pushing the Hyksos out. A commander named Ah-mose records in his tomb the victory over the Hyksos. He says: When the town of Avaris was besieged, then I showed valor on foot in the presence of his majesty. Thereupon I was appointed to the ship, 'Appearing in Memphis.' Then there was fighting on the water in the canal Pa-Djedku of Avaris. Thereupon I made a capture, and I carried away a hand. It was reported to the king's herald. Then the Gold of Valor was given to me. Thereupon there was fighting again in this place....Then Avaris was despoiled. Then I carried off spoil from there: one man, three woman, a total of four persons. Then his majesty gave them to me to be slaves. Then Sharuhen was besieged for three years. Then his majesty despoiled it (ANET 1969, 233). Note that Avaris was besieged, there is no mention of how Avaris was taken, and there is no burning of Avaris stated which still fits Josephus' account. Bietak who has been excavating ancient Avaris says that there is no evidence for a violent destruction of Avaris. He states: The archaeological material stops abruptly with the early 18th Dynasty. There are no scarabs of the 18th Dynasty type in Stratum D/2. The most likely interpretation is that Avaris was abandoned. No conflagration layer or corpses of slain soldiers have been found so far in the large and widely separated excavation areas A/II and A/V (Bietak 1988).

The end of Avaris may have involved a surrender, or as Josephus has stated, an arranged retreat to Palestine <------- here's a great example of bias in the interpretation of ancient texts. At the time there was no Palestine, Palestine is a term coined by the roman emperor Hadrian almost 2000 years out of context. The Hyksos some of whom later became the Jews either fled or migrated away from the hill country and into less hostile territory, still within the Canaan valley, is whats recorded, not a affirmation of the Judaic mythos of plagues and a defeat of Egyptian armed forces (Against Apion 1.14.88, Bietak 1991, 47).

This exit from Egypt by the Hyksos probably included the Israelites as well. The story of the Exodus is most likely bases(d) on the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt, for there is no other record of any mass exit from Egypt (Robertson 1990, 36; Halpern 1994, 89-96; Redford 1897, 150). The evidence seems to fit well with Josephus' account. Although the Egyptians saw the expulsion of the Hyksos as a great military victory, the Israelites viewed this as a great salvation victory for them. This seems similar to other events recorded in ancient history where both sides claim a great victory. Ramses II battled with the Hittites and almost lost his life, yet he calls this a great victory, but so do the Hittites. In reality it was a stalemate, so they both signed a treaty (ANET 1969, 201; Soggin 1993, 213) Ahab is seen as a powerful king (ANET 1969, 279). Sennacherib claims a great victory over the Jews by taking 46 cities and surrounding Jerusalem. Hezekiah is said to be "like a bird in a cage" (ANET 1969, 288), yet he claims a great victory because Jerusalem is not captured. In the Mesha or Moabite stone (ANET 1969, 320) the king of Moab, Mesha claims a great victory over Israel, yet Israel claims a great victory over Moab (II kings 3:4-27). So it seems that what the Egyptians saw as a great victory over the expulsion of the Hyksos, the Israelites saw as a great exodus victory of salvation.

It becomes pretty clear that once again the dogma doesn't match up. A bloody Nile is simply a common term for the Nile in flood and not a reference to actual blood or any reference to a plague. The Nile flood on the contrary was a welcomed event. While some suggest a military defeat is being claimed as a victory by the early Jewish chroniclers there is even greater weight of evidence to suggest there was no victory or defeat and the towns were just abandoned. In either case the biblical exodus story finds absolutely no support within either the archeological finds or the Egyptian records

oh well, history is unfortunately open to interpretation, but often the context of the times is forgotten.

Cheers
B

[Submarine Tom]

Or not understood...

-Tom

[rasorinc]

In the mid 90s, Bill Moyer did a 5 part series on the religions of the world and Houstin Smith was involved in all and 1 hour or more was an interview Moyers had with Smith. This was shown on public television. That man impressed me to no end. He showed the intertwining of the "enduring religions" and discussed in a way that would offend no one. He was a genus and I just loved the series and if anyone has a link to that please post it. No one in my lifetime ever made religion so interesting and understandable and he never offended anyone.

[Boston]

a little bit of tact goes a long way
I'm still working on that one ;-)

[Frosty]

If a god wanted to clear the earth surley all he needed to do was say it --like he made the sun. Why would he save one man and his family with such extravagance as an Ark.

And then what --made it rain for 40 days and this is supposed to be the whole world, and then Oh ha ha it dries up in a few weeks and a Dove that can not stay on the wing for 40 days or was it an albatross came with a stick.

Oh come on guys.

I wish I lived in America I could sell you guys anything.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Frosty

If a god wanted to clear the earth surley all he needed to do was say it --like he made the sun. Why would he save one man and his family with such extravagance as an Ark.

And then what --made it rain for 40 days and this is supposed to be the whole world, and then Oh ha ha it dries up in a few weeks and a Dove that can not stay on the wing for 40 days or was it an albatross came with a stick.

Oh come on guys.

I wish I lived in America I could sell you guys anything.

Hey... we didn't write those stories.

[Ad Hoc]

Originally Posted by troy2000

Hey... we didn't write those stories.

But you do believe in them

[Leo Lazauskas]

Originally Posted by Frosty

And then what --made it rain for 40 days...

He only did that so Scotland could have a summer holiday.

[Frosty]

Ever noticed all these storys tend to be around Jesuses home Syria etc.

I mean did they know there were other parts of the world.

You dont see a story like " And it came to pass that the Eskimo hunted the seal and the Polar bear got it first and the Eskimo did frown at this and did scorn the Polar bear,-- No you don't,--- proof that its all made up by people who lived in that area.

There is not a shadow of doubt in my head that this is all crap and I look deep into the eyes of believers to see if there is anything in there.

[Boston]

Who he ?????

Baal was always represented as a bull if I remember it right.

Its important to remember that the Hycsos ( "some" of whom would later become the Judaic people ) worshiped Baal at this time in history, according to the earliest Egyptian records noted by Hoyt. So the logical conclusion, assuming there was an expulsion of the Hyksos rather than a migration into the areas abandoned by the Egyptians due to the drought, is that Baal is the God behind the defeat of the Hyksos, again assuming there was a military campaign against them, Which the archeologists at the site of Averis report there is no evidence of . Not Yahweh or his wife Asherah ( who was later edited out of the bible story ). Its all about context, and anyone studying the progression of history needs to be careful to always stick to the contemporary context in which any event occurs. The older the event, the more important it is because the farther removed things are from our normal frames of reference.

PS
the flood story and the exodus story are worlds apart but one thing that always strikes me as being kinda odd is that since the flood story predates the exodus story how is it that the flood could have been caused by a god that the Hyksos had yet to worship ? They didn't worship Yahweh, at least not until long after, say some time around 2750 before present ( BP )

There is another Egyptian text found on the walls of a temple in Soleb, that references the Shasu of Yahweh, who are described a a Bedouin or semi nomadic people living throughout upper Mesopotamia, not specifically the more primitive Hyksos living in the Canaan valley, who are more generally attributed to have spun off the Judaic people. There we see the earliest mention of the term Yahweh, but its unclear if the reference is to a God or a location. All it says is a mention of the Shasu of Yahweh. Most agree that its most likely a God rather than a place since there is no other mention of a place named Yahweh in any historic record. But its written as if its a place. So its a bit premature to start singing from the rooftops but it would look like the Hyksos went through a number of Gods within the Egyptian pantheon before settling on someone elses God at some point long after the time of Egypt took Averis, in about 3500 BP

Speaking of which, if you consider place names the Judaic people mention within the story of the conquest of the canaan valley ( something else that never happened, but only exists in the mythos ) ; they are only all known to have existed at the same time right about 750 BC or 2750 BP. A time frame which also fits well with the archeological record of the Hyksos settling the long abandoned Canaan valley floor, having taken refuge in the hill areas from the Egyptians so many years before.

If there was any parting of the Red Sea, it would appear that its more likely Baal did it, since that was the God the Hyksos were most likely worshiping at the time. Yahweh was most likely the God of the Shasa who although also Semitic, were nomadic Bedouins who are still with us to this day, and are most likely not the ancestors of the Judaic people.

[Frosty]

Perhaps the hieroglyphs were additional to preach Christianity, were they dated.

Oh no --the Christians would not make it up would they.

Is there not Hieroglyphs of helicopters and space men.

Some despicable students make corn rings and say space ships have landed.

Some one playing with us perhaps and maybe did years ago.

[troy2000]

Originally Posted by Ad Hoc

But you do believe in them

Some more than others.

The Bible is a great book. It's a fascinating mix of history, allegories, fables, political science, military strategy and tactics, poetry, morality, justice, economics, and just about anything else you can think of -- including religion. I believe everyone should sit down and read it from beginning to end at least once, instead of just listening to the same old cherry-picked, out-of-context passages all their lives; they'll learn a lot about people and about themselves.

But it isn't science. Those who believe the Earth is literally only a few thousand years old, believe every animal alive today is the direct descendant of pairs that disembarked from a big ship made of gopher wood after a worldwide flood, and want that taught to my children in science classes, aren't playing with a full deck.