posted
In the fall/winter edition of KMT, there is an article that speaks of the daughter of Pharoah that took the babe Moses from the bulrushed\s and raised him. The point of the article was trying to prove that "the daughter of Pharoah" could have been Hapshepsut. To me, it was an astonding idea! But in the article, the assumption of Hapshepsut/Moses made great sense, although up to this time I had always thought of the Exodus as happing later. It was food for thought, though. My own personal belief concerning the Exodus is that it happened over a longer period of time--that it was a gradual migration of peoples, and not a sudden, God-inspired moving of a people from Egypt. If it had occured in such vast numbers and so suddenly, I'm sure there would have been written records from the Egyptians themselves mentioning it.
Posts: 174 | From: Long Beach, CA U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have never heard the theory of the Exodous occuring around the time period of the 18th dyansty during Hathshepsut's regin. I will not rule it out,but during this time the Delta already had mass amounts of Asiatics that settled in this region. The Asiatic tides of people that were driven out were never completely left the Delta. Because of the mass amounts of people in this area might mean that so many people would have went unoticed.
Have you read the book ''Egypt,Israel,and Caanan in Ancient Times by Donald Redford? He seems to indicate that the so-called Exodous was just a small migration of people possibly or Asiatics that settled in the Delta.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I always suspected it was just a small migration and the "pharaoh" of the Bible was in fact some local lord or governor. Otherwise it would have been mentioned in Egyptian documents since they recorded everything, stil Jews aren't eve mentioned till the reign of Merenptah (although it is possible that other mentioned tribes, like the 'habiru' are in fact the Jews.) I guess they wanted to create themselves a great and heroic history and a big exodus sounded better than "Uncle Moses and some of his friends left Egypt. Posts: 36 | From: Hungary | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This Hatshepsut theory is nothing new. There is probably more evidence supporting Exodus happening in this part of the 18th dynasty rather than the latter part or 19th dynasty but biblical scholars reject it because it screws up their timeline.
Posts: 338 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It seems more likely at this point the the Moses story was mostly myth. We are sure it was written around the 6th century BC by those wanting to create a Jewish national identity. I suspect almost not of it was true. It certanily did not happen in my reign or before.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well,if you examine the story of the baby Moses being found in the reeds you will notice that it is exactly like a story written during the Akkadaian period. In the Akkadian version the baby Saragon is placed in the reeds by his mother to avoid enemies killing him,and like Moses,he is found and saved. So one must ask themselves why this same story finds its way into the Old Testament.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just finished the Silverman book, 'The Bible Unearthed.' The book makes some great points about the Judah writers wanting to create a national history at the expense of the northern kingdom of Isreal. The books also examines the Exodus story and offers compelling evidence that it simply did not happen the way it is written if at all.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
How many creation or origin stories are anyone aware of that are not in some way embellished. I can name a number from peoples who have migrated to certain areas of the world only in the last 1000 years were their origin story have been shown to contain some truth but mixed with myth and legend. And many more whos history is older.
I am not sure why everyone expects the old or New Testament, the Torah or any other to be totally factual. Even the religious scholars from these religions support the message over the facts. It is not they who are trying to prove its details. They are happy with the message they express not the historical detail.
Posts: 448 | From: Australian living in Spain | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't you mean Israel Finkelstien? Learning that Biblical chracters are simply mythical beings that have no historical footing is heartbreak to Zionist who proclaim as validity to the political goals.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
ausar, for someone who champions the cause of religoiuse freedonm for his own people, you often show little respect for other religions, and at some points outright contempt.
I am not religiouse in any scence of the word, but I support, The Australian aboriginal to believe in his deamtime, I support the American Indian to believe in his Animal spirits, I support egyytians to believe in their AE religion and I support an Isrealy to belive in thier beliefs.
Without an exceptance of other religions, regardless of your opinion , I wonder how one can expect acceptance and respect to be returned.
Posts: 448 | From: Australian living in Spain | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am tolerate of anybody's relgion,but I feel that people should not use their relgion as political justification.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Their is a great difference between tolerance and acceptance.
Posts: 448 | From: Australian living in Spain | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have a problem with religious freedom as long as it doesn't interfere with history.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ozzy,that depends on the time period wheater we are discussing the Old Kingdom or the later kingdom. According to Egyptology books,it appears that during the Old Kingdom regular Egyptians could not achieve a place in the Field of Reeds unless he was part of the per-aa family or a hig offical. Much later during the Middle Kingdom it was not so stratified that regular Egyptians culd dwell in the Field of Reeds.
Yes,in some reguards the Egyptian relgion was associated with politics,but there is also evidence that regular Egyptians were active partispates in this relgion.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would like to see one shread of evidence that Moses even existed. Not cojecture but a single shread of real evidence. If anyone has it many of us are all ears.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Horemheb, the validity of Moses as a living person was not the question at all--rather, if Moses WAS a real person, what was the chances for him being raised by Hapshepsut. All the fal-de-ral in the Bible, the large mass of people who exited Egypt after that civilivation was punished by God, etc. ect. was, in my opinion, just a tall tale told by later historians to prove to a people that they were the "Chosen Ones". We will probably never know the truth, but, also in my opinion, there was a man with the word "moses" in his name, that was born of Hebrew parents, raised by an Egyptian princess and became the leader of a small group of people that "escaped" from Egypt to a land to the east--probably Canaan.
Posts: 174 | From: Long Beach, CA U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Osiris, Thats fine but where is your evidence for that point of view???? How anyone can connect Hatchepsut with Moses is beyond me, as Walter Mondale said, "Where's the beef?"
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Horemheb, I refer you to the fall-winter issue of KMT. Read the article by Omar Zuhdi, who received his Egyptological masters from John Hopkins University. He is the well-known author of 10 articles in the journal. He is a teacher of ancient history and Latin in Shawnee, OK. The article, "Pharaoh's Daughter and Her Hebrew Adopted Son" is very thought-provoking and an interesting read. As I said before, we will never know for absolutely sure about Moses, but this article is one of the most logical arguments I've seen. Read it--I'd like to get your opinion. It can be found in the Fall-Winter 2003-04 issue of KMT.
Posts: 174 | From: Long Beach, CA U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"I would like to see one shread of evidence that Moses even existed. Not cojecture but a single shread of real evidence. If anyone has it many of us are all ears."
Jeez, Horemheb, haven't you seen the Disney movie 'Prince of Egypt'????...Haha.
"Osiris, Thats fine but where is your evidence for that point of view???? How anyone can connect Hatchepsut with Moses is beyond me, as Walter Mondale said, 'Where's the beef'?"
Wasn't it the old lady from those old Burger King commercials that said that?
posted
I would be glad to read the article...can you post the main parts as I don't have that edition? The first red flag that I saw was the town...Shawnee OK. That is the home of Oklahoma Baptist University. I'm not saying he has an agenda but you know how literalist a Baptist school can be. His points need to meet a very high standard. If you can't post it then outline his main points for all of us to see.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I believe the article goes back too 1993. The online KMT goes back as far as 1995 only. It may be difficult to find the original. Here is a Criticle article about the original. I don’t say it’s a good article but it has a good source to the original.
posted
True, Shanee, OK is the home of Oklahoma Baptist University, but Fuhdi is in no way affiliated with the University. He teaches in a local high school! In his spare time, he participates in an on-going dig in Egypt. As I said in my post, he has his Masters in Egyptology. I cannot post his article, my scanner is not working correctly. But I'm sure that you can obtain a copy of the relevant KMT. Do you have access to a good library? The periodical Department may have it, or a well-stocked bookstore that carries magazines--Border's comes to mind immediately.
Posts: 174 | From: Long Beach, CA U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ozzy, Good points, and here is my problem. The Bible cannot be used as the key and only source. IMHO that is were many of these people screw up. If one uses the 480 years given in Exodus they must provide some evidence to back that up. We know Exodus was most likely written in the 6th century BC and we must have something to support it's accuracy. Greenberg's arguments are hard to refute because he is asking for evidence. The Bible simply cannot be the only source. If I wrote some scripture and told you they were correct would you not demand some evidence??? These has to be some evidence of a person named Moses associated with the court and involved in something at least close to what the Exodus account says. I, at this point at least, have to favor the view that Moses did not exist....based on the evidence pure and simple. That the Judah writers were attempting to create a Jewish national history in the 6th century. That does not in any way diminish the value of the writing from a RELIGIOUS point of view. They are religious writings, they are not historical writings.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Horemheb: Ozzy, Good points, and here is my problem. The Bible cannot be used as the key and only source. IMHO that is were many of these people screw up. If one uses the 480 years given in Exodus they must provide some evidence to back that up. We know Exodus was most likely written in the 6th century BC and we must have something to support it's accuracy. Greenberg's arguments are hard to refute because he is asking for evidence. The Bible simply cannot be the only source. If I wrote some scripture and told you they were correct would you not demand some evidence??? These has to be some evidence of a person named Moses associated with the court and involved in something at least close to what the Exodus account says. I, at this point at least, have to favor the view that Moses did not exist....based on the evidence pure and simple. That the Judah writers were attempting to create a Jewish national history in the 6th century. That does not in any way diminish the value of the writing from a RELIGIOUS point of view. They are religious writings, they are not historical writings.
Can you tell me if you believe the Ancient Egyptians may have believed in the stories of their god’s deeds and trials and indeed that some may have even appeared in the shape of half man and half animal? If there is any truth in the connection with AE stories and that of modern religious stories, then do you believe they had the same faith then in AE in those same stories as they do today? The likely hood is I feel yes.
We look at Ancient religions as Myth, Legend, Unfactual, and separate from history. In those ancient times their religion too was very much part of their history.
If we study any religion in the world ancient and current we will find figures and stories which are impossible to verify, nor prove. Myth and legend are part of religion, for many reasons, to many to list here.
I fail to understand why this particular religion is pressed for proof when others are not.
I do understand that there a factions who make it their quest to prove the historical value of the stories, but the fact is that you will find that a Christian priest or a Jewish Rabi will tell you the historical value is secondary to the message.
Personally I feel there is always going to be some fact, regardless of how small n religious stories. The story does not become important or real unless it can be associated with to the people of the time, so I feel the story will be contempary with the time period, hence it may well have an Egyptian origin. But the story as a whole is secondary to the message it attempt to deliver
Posts: 448 | From: Australian living in Spain | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ozzy, I'm not saying there is not any 'facts' involved but only that those facts have yet to be discovered. Until they are discovered the Moses story must be considered myth. Nobody believes the AE religious stories are facts, they are myths as well. If if NONE of the Old Testament stories are true the book would be valuable as a religious text.....not a historical text.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sometimes myths are simply parables or an attempt to explain enigmas that puzzle people. This is what I see ancient Kemetian[Egyptian] creation stories as being so. Just simply parables for different events in their history,or simply attempts to explain occurances that the Egyptians had very little understanding of.
The so-called deities enshrined in Egyptian spirtuality were probally no more than pre-dyanstic people that were forever immoratlized in their myths. This is what the titles like souls of Nekhen and souls of nekhen imply. Some have even sugested that the l;egends of Heru and Set were symbolic with unfication of Upper and Lower Kmt.
Posts: 8675 | From: Tukuler al~Takruri as Ardo since OCT2014 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ausar: Sometimes myths are simply parables or an attempt to explain enigmas that puzzle people. This is what I see ancient Kemetian[Egyptian] creation stories as being so. Just simply parables for different events in their history,or simply attempts to explain occurances that the Egyptians had very little understanding of.
The so-called deities enshrined in Egyptian spirtuality were probally no more than pre-dyanstic people that were forever immoratlized in their myths. This is what the titles like souls of Nekhen and souls of nekhen imply. Some have even sugested that the l;egends of Heru and Set were symbolic with unfication of Upper and Lower Kmt.
Ausar, Exactly my point. I am sure in their time the AE would have believed in many of those myths as fact and part of their history because some may have indead been based on fact. Much the same as many of todays religions do. And I have no doubt that some would have been based on as you say " pre-dyanstic people that were forever immoratlized in their myths".
Imagine after a few thousand years of AE religion existing trying to establish the myth from the fact of history. As difficult a task as it is today, hence the discussion we are having now.
So to say its total myth because it can not be established as total fact is not accepting it may be a bit of both.
Posts: 448 | From: Australian living in Spain | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It may be part fact but the only thing we can accept as fact is what has been proven.
Posts: 5822 | From: USA | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic