...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
ISRAEL, MISRAH AND CANAAN IN CONTEXT: AFRICANS IN ARABIA Part I
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by dana marniche: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Kalonji: [qb] Ahh, came back and no response. I guess it is settled then. -Claims that people involved with Levantine excavations like Finkelstein and Thompson support assertions that were made throughout this thread are false and have been misrepresented with questionable intentions. -Requests for the names of unexpressed ''other'' excavators and/or experts that agree with the assertion that Israel was located in Arabia were not provided. -Supplied ancient and extra biblical evidence that corroborate the correctness of status quo paradigms regarding mainstream identifications of biblical tribes were ignored again and again, while other sources like the biblical ones that were convient to notice, WERE noticed. Showing severe unwillingness to face the facts. -The kingdom of Israel was conceived to be in the levant by the authors of the bible. This can be inferred from the bible itself. Often mentioned arguments about the historical value of the bible have, while arguably correct when dealing with events, no bearing on biblical discriptions of their own geographical location relative to other tribes and populations. Hence Salibi's attempt to dislocate everything and force a duplicate in Arabia to try to make said biblical geographical locations still ''work''. -Identifications of ''Mizraim'' with an obscure village/tribe named Masruh who are vaguely identified with hyksos rulers, along with the Amalekites is ''out there'' by itself. But then to top it off, you claim the name Mizraim was magically swapped to Egypt after the Hyksos period. These claims fall flat on their back, since requests for dates, reasons, mechanisms and other specifics that can explain the emergence of said strange events were not provided but flat out declined and substituted with a link to Salibi's Blog. Which utilizes content of the same bible she says lacks historical value.. -The Egyptians perceived a northern threat and they built northern forts, al the way up in Gaza which is about as western as it gets (meaning extending to the left)in the levant, making it possible for us to logically infer that the Hyksos could only have come from the other side of the red sea if you are dreaming it. To accept that the Hyksos were Arabians is to imply that the Egyptians were dumb enough to place forts where no threat for retalliation existed. Also, it implies that they were dumb enough to leave everything between Gaza and the gulf of Aqada open for another wishful Masruh/Amalekite infiltration. -There is no starting academical trend or inclination towards an Arabian Israel, even though this was stated earlier, with absolutely no sources. The sources that WERE provided disagreed with this sentiment I guess that about sums it up. [/qb][/QUOTE]Thought you said our discussion was over Kalonji. My bad. Sorry I was busy as you can see. Glad you came back though. Yeah - it certainly is settled - and Once and for All! ;) http://www.egyptsearch.com/forums/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=8&t=006870#000000 [/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