...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Deshret
»
Multidisciplinary approach to the origins of Isrealites: Kemetian or not?
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mystery Solver: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Mystery Solver: Manetho was not in dynastic Egypt, when the Merneptah stele mentions Israel for the first time, nor was he there, when the first Israelite kingdom appears in archaeology. In fact, biblical literature was being edited into its final form by around Manetho's time. By Manetho's time, as I told you but went on def ears, we are told that Israelite polities had been destroyed by Assyrian and Babylonian invasions. How the heck then, can you rely on Manetho in learning about the origins of the Israelites? Manetho's list is useful, but [b]not in the sense that you imagine it to be[/b].[/QUOTE][i]…I [b]compare Manetho’s reconstructed history with the Genesis birth-and-death chronology, demonstrating that dynasties One through Eighteen both contain virtually the same chronological history.[/b] Third, I [b]show that predynastic chronology in Genesis (from the birth of Adam to the birth Methuselah) is derived from the same source as Manetho’s chronology of the Egyptian gods, and that both are based on the Theban doctrine of Creation[/b]. The examination shows that the Bible’s seven days of Creation derive from Egyptian theology and that the story of Noah’s Flood revolves around Egyptian calendar cycles. Fourth, the precise [b]alignment between Genesis and Manetho chronologies enables us to resolve almost every major chronological dispute about Egyptian dynastic history prior to the Nineteenth Dynasty[/b]. At the core my study is a [b]comparison of the many inconsistencies in the different versions of Manetho[/b]. By [b]comparing them in each of their sources and placing them in the context of the archaeological record, I am able to reconstruct what Manetho must have originally written[/b]. The [b]evidence shows that Manetho’s redactors made two particular errors over and over, leading to a badly mangled version of what he wrote[/b]. First was the [b]failure of the redactors to properly account for co regencies[/b]. Second was the [b]constant misreading of lines of summation as descriptions of additional lines of kings, causing either dynastic totals to be double-counted or consecutive dynasties to be added together[/b]. [/i] And... [i]I also provide detailed arithmetic pattern analysis of the figures used in Manetho’s troubling Second Intermediate Period, [b]showing how his original dynastic chronology was distorted, what chronology he originally used for the Second Intermediate Period, and how Genesis has the same dynastic date sequence as Manetho for the Second Intermediate Period.[/b][/i] [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3