Ancient History and the Bible

CONTENTS:

I have started to collect some notes and web page references to share with people who question me about ancient history and the Bible. This should be an on-going project.

Egypt

Hieroglyphs – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_hieroglyphs

1. Hieroglyphs emerged from the preliterate artistic traditions of Egypt. For example, symbols on Gerzean pottery from circa 4000 BC resemble hieroglyphic writing.

2. In 1998 a German archaeological team under Günter Dreyer excavating at Abydos (modern Umm el-Qa'ab) uncovered tomb U-j of a Predynastic ruler, and recovered three hundred clay labels inscribed with proto-hieroglyphs, dating to the Naqada IIIA period of the 33rd century BC.

· The origins of writing, Discovery Channel (1998-12-15)

· Richard Mattessich (Jun 2002) The oldest writings, and inventory tags of Egypt, The Accounting Historians Journal.

3. The first full sentence written in hieroglyphs so far discovered was found on a seal impression found in the tomb of Seth-Peribsen at Umm el-Qa'ab, which dates from the Second Dynasty.

4. One of the earliest known hieroglyphic inscriptions was the Narmer Palette, found during excavations at Hierakonpolis (modern Kawm al-Ahmar) in the 1890s, dating to c. 3200-3000.

The Narmer Palette – (3000’s BCE) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narmer_Palette

The Narmer Palette, also known as the Great Hierakonpolis Palette or the Palette of Narmer, is a significant Egyptian archeological find, dating from about the 31st century BC, containing some of the earliest hieroglyphic inscriptions ever found.

* Ancient Lists of Egyptian Pharaohs – (covering periods from before 3050 to 30 BCE) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pharaohs

Lists are based on both ancient literature and ancient monuments. Details of these king lists have been confirmed by archeological finds and even carbon dating. Major king lists include the Palermo Stone (the oldest, 2400’s BCE), the Westcar Papyrus (1700’s – 1500’s), the Turin King List (1200’s), the list at Karnak (erected by Thutmose)(1400’s), two at Abydos (by Seti I and Ramesses)(1200’s), the Saqqara list by the priest Tenry, and Manetho’s King List (200’s). Famous confirmations include inscriptions under Djoser’s pyramid, the surviving pyramids themselves, and the ancient Greek historian Herodotus (400’s BCE).

Inscribed stone vessels under the Step Pyramid of Djoser – (contain the names of most kings from 1st-2nd dynasties) -- http://www.archaeology.org/9909/abstracts/pyramids.html

In galleries under the pyramid of the Dynasty 3 pharaoh Djoser more than 40,000 stone vessels were found. Inscriptions on them included most of the kings of Dynasty 1 and 2, but Djoser's name occurred only once. Perhaps Djoser gathered up the vases from the 200-year-old Archaic tombs at North Saqqara. In Dynasty 12, Amenemhet I actually took bits and pieces of Old Kingdom tomb chapels and pyramid temples (including those of the Giza Pyramids) and dumped them into the core of his pyramid at Lisht..

The Egyptian Pyramids, Including The Great Pyramids and the Sphinx –

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramids, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_Djozer, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giza_pyramid_complex, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hetepheres ,

There are over 100 pyramids in Egypt. Most were built as tombs for the country's Pharaohs and their consorts during the Old and Middle Kingdom periods.

The earliest known Egyptian pyramid is the Step Pyramid of Djozer, which was built during the third dynasty (2600’s BCE). This pyramid and its surrounding complex were designed by the architect Imhotep, and are generally considered to be the world's oldest monumental structures constructed of dressed masonry.

The best known Egyptian pyramids are those found at Giza, on the outskirts of Cairo. These pyramids were built during the Fourth Dynasty (2613 to 2498 BCE), and include the Pyramid of Khufu (a.k.a. the "Great Pyramid," the "Pyramid of Cheops"), the somewhat smaller Pyramid of Khafre (or Kephren), the relatively modest-sized Pyramid of Menkaure (or Mykerinus), along with a number of smaller satellite edifices known as "Queen's pyramids," and the Great Sphinx.

Of the three, only Khafre's pyramid retains part of its original polished limestone casing, near its apex. The Giza Necropolis has been a popular tourist destination since antiquity, and was popularized in Hellenistic times when the Great Pyramid was listed by Antipater of Sidon as one of the “Seven Wonders of the World.” Today it is the only one of those wonders still in existence.

One of the small pyramids contains the tomb of queen Hetepheres (discovered in 1925), sister and wife of Sneferu and the mother of Khufu. There was a town for the workers of Giza, which included a cemetery, bakeries, a beer factory and a copper smelting complex.

Dating the Pyramids –

First, there are the several king lists that sometimes include the activities of the pharaohs. Also, the Greek historian Herodotus of Halicarnassus (5th century BCE), in his Histories, describes the pyramids and the pharaohs with whom they were associated.

In addition to ancient literature, modern archeological finds (such as the inscribed stone vessels under Djoser’s pyramid) and carbon dating have confirmed the ancient literary accounts.

Here are two good articles on Dating the Egyptian Pyramids:

· Hawass, Dr. Zahi. "How Old are the Pyramids?" Ancient Egypt Research Associates. Retrieved on 2008-04-01. http://www.aeraweb.org/how_old.asp .

· David H. Koch Pyramids Radiocarbon Project. “Dating the Pyramids.” Archaeology. Volume 52 Number 5, September/October 1999. http://www.archaeology.org/9909/abstracts/pyramids.html

The Palermo Stone – (engraved 2400’s BCE – lists kings c. 3050 – 2345 BCE, dynasties 1-5) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palermo_Stone

The Palermo Stone is a large fragment of a stela called the Royal Annals of the Old Kingdom of Ancient Egypt. It contains the clearest inscriptions of the records of the pharaohs of the first dynasty through the fifth dynasty.

The Royal Annals is the correct name for the fragmentary ancient Egyptian stela comprised of black basalt that was engraved toward the end of the fifth dynasty during the twenty-fifth century B.C.

The Westcar Papyrus – (written 1700’s-1500’s BCE; used for history of the 4th dynasty, 2613 to 2498) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_Westcar

Westcar Papyrus (P. Berlin 3033) is a fragmentary ancient Egyptian text containing a cycle of five stories about marvels performed by priests. Each of these tales is being told at the court of Khufu by his sons.

The surviving copy of the Westcar Papyrus consists of twelve rolls. It was, written in the Hyksos period (18th to 16th century BC), but the tales appear to have originated some time in the 12th dynasty of the Middle Kingdom (ca. 20th century BC).[1] It has been used by historians as a literary resource for reconstituting the history of the 4th dynasty.

The Turin Royal Canon – (1200’s BCE; lists pharaohs from 1st – 16th dynasties, 3050 to 1535 BCE.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turin_King_List ; http://www.ancient-egypt.org/index.html.

The Turin King List, also known as the Turin Royal Canon, is a hieratic papyrus thought to date from the reign of Ramesses II, now in the Museo Egizio (Egyptian Museum) at Turin.

The papyrus was originally a tax roll, but on its back is written a list of the gods, demi-gods, spirits, and mythical and human kings traditionally thought to have ruled Egypt from the beginning.

The papyrus gives the names of rulers, giving the reign lengths in years, months and days for individual kings. In some cases they are grouped together by family, which approximately corresponds to the dynasties of Manetho’s outline. The list includes the names of ephemeral rulers or those ruling over small territories that may be unmentioned in other sources. The list even includes the Hyksos rulers (often left out of other King Lists), although they do not have cartouches, and a hieroglyphic sign is added to indicate that they were foreigners.

Herodotus – (400’s BCE, mentions information going back to 3050 and even before that)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histories_(Herodotus) -

Greek historian Herodotus of Halicarnassus (5th century BCE), in book two of his Histories, describes the pyramids at Giza and the pharaohs with whom they were associated. Herodotus was immensely popular in the ancient world, is sometimes called the “father of history,” and is still so popular that you can find an English translation in just about any good book store.

Herodotus devoted an entire book of his Histories to Egypt. He mentions or discusses many of the kings of Egypt – including Menes (1st king, c. 3050 BCE), Nitocris, Mœris, Sesostris, Pheron, Proteus, Rhampsinitus (and the story of the clever thief), Cheops (Khufu) and the building of the Great Pyramid (c. 2560 BCE), Chephren (Khafra, 2558–2532), Mycerinus (Menkaura, 2532–2503), Asychis, Anysis, Sethos, and later pharaohs.

Herodotus said that the Egyptian priests had information/lists passed down to them from generation to generation, and that this information went back much further than 4100 BC. In fact, Herodotus 2.43 says that Egyptian priests had lore going back 17,000 years. In 2.44 he also happens to mention that the Phoenician city of Tyre had been inhabited for 2,300 years, putting its initial settlement around 2750 BCE.

More information on how Herodotus' information is far closer to reality than Biblical chronology:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egypt

- By the late Paleolithic period, the arid climate of Northern Africa became increasingly hot and dry, forcing the populations of the area to concentrate along the Nile valley, and since nomadic hunter-gatherers began living in the region during the Pleistocene some 1.8 million years ago, the Nile has been the lifeline of Egypt.[8] The fertile floodplain of the Nile gave humans the opportunity to develop a settled agricultural economy and a more sophisticated, centralized society that became a cornerstone in the history of human civilization.[9]

By about 5500 BC, small tribes living in the Nile valley had developed into a series of unique cultures demonstrating firm control of agriculture and animal husbandry, and identifiable by their unique pottery and personal items, such as combs, bracelets, and beads. The largest of these early cultures in upper Egypt, the Badari, was known for its high quality ceramics, stone tools, and its use of copper.[10]

In southern Egypt, the Naqada culture, similar in culture to the Badari, began to expand along the Nile by about 4000 BC.

Manetho’s Egyptian King List – (200’s BCE) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manetho

Manetho was an Egyptian historian and priest from Sebennytos (ancient Egyptian: Tjebnutjer) who lived during the Ptolemaic era, ca. 3rd century BC. Manetho wrote the Aegyptiaca (History of Egypt). His work is of great interest to Egyptologists, and is often used as evidence for the chronology of the reigns of pharaohs.

Although no sources for the dates of his life and death remain, his work is usually associated with the reigns of Ptolemy I Soter (323-283 BCE) and Ptolemy II Philadelphos (285-246 BCE). If the mention of Manetho in the Hibeh Papyri, dated to 241/40 BCE, is in fact Manetho the author of Aegyptiaca, then he may well have been working during the reign of Ptolemy III Euergetes (246-222 BCE) as well. Although he was Egyptian and his topics dealt with Egyptian matters, he wrote solely in Greek.

Aegyptiaca (also called Aigyptiaka), the "History of Egypt", was Manetho's largest work, and certainly the most important. It was organised chronologically and divided into three volumes, and his division of rulers into dynasties was an innovation. However, he did not use the term the way we do, by bloodlines, but rather, introduced new dynasties whenever he detected some sort of discontinuity whether geographical (Dynasty IV from Memphis, Dynasty V from Elephantine), or genealogical (especially in Dynasty I, he refers to each successive Pharaoh as the "son" of the previous to define what he means by "continuity"). Within the superstructure of a genealogical table of rulers, he fills in the gaps with substantial narratives of the Pharaonic rulers.

King lists

The king-list that Manetho had access to is unknown to us, but of the surviving king-lists, the one most similar to his is the Turin Royal Canon (or Turin Papyrus). The oldest source with which we can compare to Manetho are the Old Kingdom Annals (ca. 2500-2200 BCE). From the New Kingdom are the list at Karnak (erected by Thutmose), two at Abydos (by Seti I and Ramesses—the latter a duplicate but updated version of the former), and the Saqqara list by the priest Tenry.

The provenance of the Old Kingdom Annals is unknown, surviving as the Palermo Stone. The differences between the Annals and Manetho are vast. The Annals only reach to the fifth dynasty, but its pre-dynastic rulers are listed as the kings of Lower Egypt and kings of Upper Egypt. By contrast, Manetho lists several Greek and Egyptian gods beginning with Hephaistos and Helios. Secondly, the Annals give annual reports of the activities of the kings, while there is little probability that Manetho would have been able to go into such detail.

The New Kingdom lists are each selective in their listings: that of Seti I, for instance, lists seventy-six kings from Dynasties I to XIX omitting the Hyksos rulers and those associated with the heretic Akhenaten. The Saqqara list, contemporaneous with Ramesses II, has fifty-eight names, with similar omissions. If Manetho used these lists at all, he would have been unable to get all of his information from them alone, due to the selective nature of their records. Verbrugghe and Wickersham argue:

“ Furthermore, the purpose of these lists was to cover the walls of a sacred room in which the reigning Pharaoh (or other worshiper, as in the case of Tenry and his Saqqara list) made offerings or prayers to his or her predecessors, imagined as ancestors. Each royal house had a particular traditional list of these "ancestors," different from that of the other houses. The purpose of these lists is not historical but religious. It is not that they are trying and failing to give a complete list. They are not trying at all. Seti and Ramesses did not wish to make offerings to Akhenaten, Tutankhamen, or Hatshepsut, and that is why they are omitted, not because their existence was unknown or deliberately ignored in a broader historical sense. For this reason, the Pharaonic king-lists were generally wrong for Manetho's purposes, and we should commend Manetho for not basing his account on them (2000:105). ”

These large stelae stand in contrast to the Turin Royal Canon (like Saqqara, contemporaneous with Ramesses II), written in hieratic script. Like Manetho, it begins with the gods, and like Manetho, appears to be an epitome very similar in spirit and style to Manetho. Interestingly, the opposite side of the papyrus includes government records. Verbrugghe and Wickersham suggest that a comprehensive list like this would be necessary for a government office "to date contracts, leases, debts, titles, and other instruments (2000:106)" and so could not have been selective the way the king-lists in temples were. Despite numerous differences between the Turin Canon and Manetho, the format must have been available to him. As a priest (or chief priest), he would have had access to practically all written materials in the temple.

While the precise origins for Manetho's kinglist are unknown, it was certainly a Northern Lower Egyptian one. This can be deduced most noticeably from his selection of the kings for the Third Intermediate Period. Manetho consistently includes the Tanite Dynasty 21 and Dynasty 22 line in his Epitome such as Psusennes I, Amenemope and even such short-lived rulers here like Amenemnisu (5 years) and Osochor (6 years). In contrast, he ignores the existence of Theban kings such as Osorkon III, Takelot III, Harsiese A and Pinedjem I and rulers from Middle Egypt like Peftjaubast of Herakleopolis. This implies that Manetho derived the primary sources for his Epitome from a local city's temple library in the Delta Region which was under the control of the Tanite based Dynasty 21 and Dynasty 22 kings. The Middle and Upper Egyptian Pharaohs had no impact upon this specific region of the Delta; hence their exclusion from Manetho's king list.

- - -

I forgot to mention that some have suggested that Middle Kingdom records may be verified by comparing modern knowledge of astronomy and movements of the planet Venus with records kept by Egyptian priests. Like I said, this post is but the tip of a huge iceberg. Here is a clip from a page I visited:

The Egyptian Calendar

The ancient Egyptians actually used three calendars,

1. A lunar calendar of alternating twenty-nine and thirty-day months.
2. A civil calendar of 360 days plus five additional days
3. A calendar of 365¼ days based upon the heliacal return of the star Sirius.

The civil calendar of ancient Egypt was used for all official dating and recognized three seasons: Akhet or Inudation, Peret or Sowing and Growing, and Shemu or Harvest. Each season had four 30-day long periods with five additional days after the end of the harvest for a total of 365 days. Because the earth actually revolves around the sun once every 365 1/4 days, the Egyptian civil calendar was constantly losing one day every four years or a whole month over 120 years. As a result the civil seasons rarely coincided with natural seasons. Only once every 1,460 years did the civil and astronomical years occur on the same day. The rising of the star Sirius in the eastern horizon just before daybreak marks the official starting of the new year. The coincidence of New Year's Day and the rising of the star Sirius has been confirmed from the writings of the Roman author Censorius that the Sirius rose on New Year's Day A.D. 139. From this date we can calculate the coincidence occurring in 1317 B.C. and 2773 B.C. The astronomical record of Sirius has been deciphered from hieroglyphic texts which have enabled Egyptologist to correlate the New and Middle Kingdom regnal years and civil dates to our present day calendar. -http://www.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/connections/connections_dating_pyramids.html

This is a brief general outline. It should be sufficient, however, to give anyone a general idea of the solidity of basic information for the history of ancient Egypt. Sometimes articles will come out disputing minute details or differences of a few years or decades in certain time periods, but the basic framework is fairly solidly established by ancient literature which has survived, ancient monuments, archaeological artifacts, radiocarbon dating, other forms of dating used in archaeology, and comparison with other ancient cultures.

Mesopotamia:

The Sumerian King List – (oldest surviving copy is from 1953-1730) --

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_King_List

The earliest name on the list whose existence has been authenticated through recent archaeological discoveries is that of En-me-barage-si of Kish (ca. 2600 BC). The fact that his name is also mentioned in the Epic of Gilgamesh has led to speculation that Gilgamesh himself might be historical. [despite the mythical/legendary nature of the Epic of Gilgamesh]

Throughout its Bronze Age existence, the document evolved into a political tool. Its final and single attested version, dating to the Middle Bronze Age, aimed to legitimize Isin's claims to hegemony when Isin was vying for dominance with Larsa and other neighboring city-states in southern Mesopotamia. (Van De Mieroop, Marc (2004). A History of the Ancient Near East. Blackwell, p. 41.)

(UNFINISHED)

COMMENTS AND REPLIES:

---

Truthbelt’s comments: 12/14/2008:

I don't have the qualifications nor time to respond to each of the examples you gave individually, but I would like to make a few general comments, if I may. Seems to me that ascribing dates to anything in ancient history is a rather uncertain process, and does not allow for dogmatism. Numerous assumptions are inevitably involved, even working with things like king lists and Carbon 14 dating. Not the least of the assumptions is the accuracy and reliability of the ancient documents. People have been known to exaggerate and otherwise twist the truth to their advantage, and there is no reason to suppose ancient cultures were immune to that temptation. The Sothic theory, long a staple of Egyptian chronology, was based on assumption, and has been shown to be unreliable (link). Even Carbon 14 does not guarantee an accurate date, since poor methodology can skew the results (link), even assuming the process as a whole is accurate, which is assuming quite a bit (link). Independent dating methods such as those you mentioned are also based on certain assumptions, and might not be as concrete as expected either (link)(link)(link). You dismiss the Bible lightly, but it is an ancient document in its own right, and its historicity has been verified time and time again, in numerous different areas. If independent historical evidence can be shown to fit the Biblical account, given a relatively modest modification of Egyptian chronology (as suggested by several Egyptologists [see here and here), then I can see no reason why such possibility should not be investigated. Not all who disagree with current Egyptian chronology are "fundamentalist creationists" by the way. Several non-creationist historians have challenged the status quo, eg., Peter James in Centuries of Darkness. In short, Egyptian chronology is not set in stone. One need not be "brainwashed" to reject it, nor is it all that far out to suggest that the Bible had it right.

Posted 12/14/2008 5:20 PM by TruthBelt - delete - block user – reply

- - -

MY REPLY To Truthbelt:

Thank you for stopping by and thanks for the comments. Some of the links are respectable, in my opinion. Peter James and his cohort are respectable enough. I do not think so highly of AnswersInGenesis or the creationist apologetics site, but I intend to address them all eventually, even if not today, for lack of time.

- - -

>>You wrote, "Not the least of the assumptions is the accuracy and reliability of the ancient documents."

I do not think I have ever suggested that ancient documents be accepted as accurate and reliable without investigation. Historians are always skeptical about ancient documents. No historian looks at Manetho and says, "Here is an infallible guide to history." Rather, Manetho's claims and king lists are compared and contrasted with other (and far more ancient) king lists, and all the king lists are fleshed out by looking at the huge amounts of inscriptions and monuments in Egypt. Historians acknowledge where Manetho appears to "get it right" and where he appears to be off the mark when compared with other evidence.

The people who really need your warning are those Christian fundamentalists who grow up believing the Bible in infallible, completely reliable, and completely accurate -- which is not a claim based on thorough knowledge and, indeed, is contradicted by the evidence.

Historians acknowledge that ancient literature was written by fallible humans. It is only the fundamentalists who imagine that Yahweh watched over the creation of the Bible and ensured its infallibility.

Claims about the gods were ubiquitous in the ancient world. The Jewish claims about their gods are not in some special category that makes them immune from criticism.

The early books of the Bible are quite comparable to Greek myth and epic, like Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. Most, if not all, of the places mentioned in these texts really existed, and archaeology can confirm some of the customs, artifacts, even that certain names were historical names and certain gods really were worshiped during the alleged time of the Trojan war. But does this mean that Athena really guided Odysseus, that Greek oracles and prophets were really true and valid, that the gods said all those things just as Homer described. To think so would be naive, and the same holds true for the Bible. At most, the Bible, the Iliad, the Odyssey, etc. are historical fiction -- containing elements of real history but also fabrication.

- Is the earth and/or humanity only about 6,000 years old? No. Such is Jewish myth, contradicted not only by biology, fossils, archaeology, etc., but even by the ancient literature of the older neighbors of the Jews. Archaeological evidence shows that Stone Age culture goes back much further than 50,000 BC, and people were around before the Stone Age. By 8,000 BC in Palestine, agriculture, animal domestication, and permanent town sites had already developed--and this is long before the Bible says Adam even existed! Even those radically conservative Christians who doubt scientists' dating methods should note that Adam supposedly lived 930 years; that means he would have died around 3181 BC, right around the time Egypt and Mesopotamia were developing into an advanced civilization and already had kings! Such a story simply does not fit with history.

- Was there a global flood in the 2400's BCE? No way. Such is Jewish myth, and the myth was not original to them. They adopted and adapted it from the Babylonians, who had adopted and adapted it from the Sumerians. Not only is the Jewish version not the original version, it also contradicts both science AND the ancient literature of the older neighbors of the Jews.

- Was there ever a flood? Of course. There were probably many. But they were not global, and no lone righteous man put 2 of every animal species in a big wooden boat-box. And rainbows do not owe their origin to a promise Yahweh made to Noah.

- Would God really allow a man's (Ham’s) descendants (not even the man himself) to be cursed just because he saw his father (Noah) naked? Anyway, what is so horrible about seeing someone naked? ... except that it was a moral hang-up for some ancient Jewish people. Would you let several generations of your great-grandchildren be cursed into slavery just because ONE of your children sees you naked? - First, this is ridiculous. Second, this is unjust. Third, this is an obvious example of a myth created to justify prejudice and ethnocentrism and to exalt Semitic peoples over their neighbors. Many other nations used myths for such purposes.

- Is the "Tower of Babel" story honestly the best explanation for the world's different languages? No. To people well-acquainted with ancient mythology, this story is obviously a myth. Anyway, we have concrete examples of how languages have evolved over time in various parts of the world.

- Concerning the tower of Babel, why would any real God punish people for trying to make a building to reach his home in the sky?! ... And if “Yahweh” DID punish people for that, why does Yahweh fail to knock down the skyscrapers people build today, which are much higher? And why does Yahweh not prevent the other nations from learning English, if he is opposed to all people speaking the same language?

- Did the God of the universe really talk to a man named “Exalted Father” (Abram) 4,000 years ago and promise him that his descendants could forever have the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean? Or did the Hebrews invent that story to feel justified in taking the land away from the people who already lived there, and to lay permanent claim to the region?

- Is it true that Yahweh turned Lot's wife into a pillar of salt for looking back as the family fled Sodom and Gomorrah, or is that story more likely a local myth associated with the large deposits of salt around the Dead Sea? The theme of disaster resulting for the person who looks back is a common mythological motif.

- Would a true universal God, creator of all, reveal "himself" only to one small portion of one small nation out of all the nations on earth, and then develop a book for them that sounded comparable to other nations' myths and contradicted evidence available from nature, archaeology, astronomy, etc., and everyday human experience? Such a story is obviously the ancient creation of the tribe that is favored in the story.

- Was there ever a real "Moses"? Maybe something remotely like him. I do not deny the possibility. Plenty of scholars have speculated.

- Was there ever a Moses exactly as the Bible depicts? No. The Moses birth story looks obviously like a variation on the much earlier birth story of Sargon of Akkad, or even of Horus being hidden from Seth by Isis, and the story is comparable to typical folk myths and exaggerations told of great leaders/heroes (see <A href="http://www.geocities.com/investigatingchristianity/OTChrono.html">http://www.geocities.com/investigatingchristianity/OTChrono.html</A>). Plus, it was written long after the alleged events. Plus, the writers of the story did not even have a clue as to who the pharaoh was – another indication of late authorship and fabrication. Plus, Ex 2:10 says Pharaoh's daughter gave him the name "Moses" saying "Because I drew him out of the water." But this is a word play (as is common in myth) AND the word play only works in Hebrew, whereas the pharaoh's daughter was supposed to be Egyptian! AND it could also be a double word play from Hebrew "masha" and can mean not only "he is drawn out" (i.e. from the water) but also "he draws out," symbolically referring to the character's role in leading the slaves out of Egypt (again, through water).

- Was there ever an Exodus? There may have been.

- Was there ever an Exodus exactly as described in the Bible? No way! In the 1400's BCE? with 2.5 million Hebrew slaves? (huge exaggeration.) after Yahweh performs magic tricks with Aaron's staff, turning it into a devouring snake? after the Nile turns to blood? after plagues of frogs, gnats, and flies that cover “the whole country”? after “ALL” (9:6) the Egyptians’ horses, donkeys, camels, herds, and flocks in the fields die from a pestilence? after boils come upon humans and animals “throughout the entire land of Egypt”? after thunder, fire, and hail strike down “everything in the open field throughout all the land of Egypt, both human and animal,” including “all the plants of the field,” and shatter “every tree”? after locusts cover the entire land so that the land is black and no one can even see the soil, and the locusts eat all the plants and fruit so that not a single green thing is left in the entire country, not a plant, not a tree? after darkness covers the entire land for 3 days? after Yahweh kills every single first-born male of humans and livestock “throughout the whole land of Egypt”? with a pillar of cloud leading the Israelites by day and a pillar of fire by night? after the sea is miraculous parted for the Israelites but then miraculously returns to its proportions and destroys the ENTIRE army of "pharaoh"? after a sadistic Yahweh repeatedly hardens the heart of “pharaoh” just so he can torture the Egyptians more and more and show how much more he loves the Israelites? (1.) The fictional nature of the story is immediately obvious to any educated person who has not been brainwashed or predisposed as a child/teenager to believe it. (2.) It is internally illogical, with “all the livestock” being destroyed on more than one occasion. (3.) It is extremely unjust and in no way descriptive of a universal God of love. (4.) It is ethnocentric and appears to be the creation of certain Jews who think they are more special than any other people on the face of the earth. (5.) It is very much contrary to observable human experience. (6.) There is nothing close to sufficient archaeological, historical, or scientific evidence specifically for this particular exaggerated (and deplorable) version of events, and even though Egypt experienced plenty of tumultuous periods, it never endured a disaster so complete. If it had, how would it even have recovered without a single plant (!!!) or farm animal (!) and with most of the people dead? Anyone who did survive would have thinned the population even further by resorting to cannibalism and/or would have died of starvation. Any nation in the world could have conquered all of Egypt after such an episode. (7.) The events of the story are far more characteristic of ancient myth than of real history. Ancient peoples filled their stories with Gods and miracles; they were generally superstitious and unscientific.

- If Yahweh were real and truly rained food for Israel in the desert, then “he” would have no excuse for not raining food for the starving people of today. Are modern humans less valuable? Were all the non-Jewish nations in history less valuable? No, but the Jewish authors of this story were not into “universal justice” at the time the story was written.

- Did the earth really open up and swallow Moses' enemies so that they went down alive into Sheol (Num.16:31-35)? No.

- Did Yahweh put a man to death just for collecting wood in the desert on the Sabbath (Num.15:32-36)? No. But humans may really have done such a despicable thing.

- The so-called “Law of Moses” is certainly nothing so amazing as to come from divine origin. It is primitive and is obviously a product of ancient people, not of a universal God. I wrote a bit about this topic here -http://www.xanga.com/WindOnReed2/637600035/the-evolution-of-even-christian-morality.html. [Now posted here.]

- Was “the law” written by Moses, or was most of it written by Jewish priests hundreds of years after the supposed time of Moses? Did Hammurabi (1700s BC) get his laws from God too? Why did so many ancient societies claim that their laws were from God(s)? Are any of their claims true? Hardly. The kings and priests claimed divine authority so that the superstitious populace would obey them. The “Mosaic law” is no more worthy of divine origin than the laws of Hammurabi, Zoroaster, Lycurgus, Romulus, or the Egyptian pharaohs.

- Did Yahweh make the sun and moon stand still in the sky for about a day while Joshua and the Israelites slaughtered their enemies (Jsh. 10)? No. But this kind of thing does happen in ancient fiction, along with rivers running backward and other such tales. If the sun had really stayed in the sky for 24 hours, none of the men would have felt like fighting anyway, as they would have been exhausted by the heat!

- Did Baalam's donkey really talk to him? No. But talking animals are typical of ancient fiction.

To make matters worse, the fundamentalists, those who buy into the ancient nonsense and teach it to their children and try to shove it onto others, have no semblance of divine or supernatural influence in their own lives, and this is totally obvious to everyone except the fundamentalists themselves. They can babble about the power of their imaginary god, but they themselves are as “spiritually” powerless as the next human and obviously have nothing to do with any “holy spirit” of any almighty God that is not common to ALL of humanity. They claim a “personal relationship” with Jesus, but they resemble other lowly humans of any cult you may pick, and their “personal relationship” with Jesus is no more realistic than and just as psychological as a modern reader’s relationship with Socrates or Buddha or any other dead ancient person or mythical hero/teacher. They claim Jesus still speaks to “his sheep,” but they can never demonstrate it, and they only know what they read – they do not have a real relationship with a personal, living being. They merely perpetuate false promises, create division, and hinder the progress of science and knowledge among humanity.

-- -- -- -- --- -- --

>> You wrote, “People have been known to exaggerate and otherwise twist the truth to their advantage, and there is no reason to suppose ancient cultures were immune to that temptation.”

Right! Very right! So why in the world would you mistakenly suppose that Jewish priests were immune from this human fallibility!?!?! The same holds for the early creators of Christianity.

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

>> You wrote, “Even Carbon 14 does not guarantee an accurate date, since poor methodology can skew the results (link), even assuming the process as a whole is accurate, which is assuming quite a bit (link). Independent dating methods such as those you mentioned are also based on certain assumptions, and might not be as concrete as expected either (link)(link)(link).”

You write as if radiocarbon experts are unaware of the importance of methodology. Some of the links you have sent me are older than the links and information which I have provided in my comments above. You should check out those links -- Posted 12/5/2008 10:04 PM. Just scroll up. The precision of radiocarbon dating has only increased in recent times.

You also referred me to the home page for the book “Centuries of Darkness,” written by Peter James, I. J. Thorpe, Nikos Kokkinos, Robert Morkot, & John Frankish. These men are actually serious Egyptologists and archaeologists, and I would have you note that they themselves acknowledge in the validity of radiocarbon dating, as long as careful method is followed and multiple labs are used to cross-check one another. They also acknowledge the validity of the use of tree rings to establish chronology. See http://www.centuries.co.uk/faq.htm. If you read their work, you will also notice that they are CERTAINLY NOT Christian fundamentalists. Their proposals are being debated, but you should note that even if they are eventually accepted by the scholarly community at large, that will in no way “save the Bible” from the already numerous demonstrations of its human origins and fallibility. You should also note that these scholars disagree with the majority of the work of David Rohl, to whose book “A Test of Time” and web page you also referred me. You should also note that even if all of these proposals were accepted (which is impossible, as they contradict each other), the result would still not rescue the Bible from its “debunked” status as far as the details are concerned. The Biblical exaggerations, errors, and myths, which I have briefly sketched above, are beyond “repair” or fundamentalist apologetics.

The Greek Achilleus may have existed. But even if he did, that does not mean his mother was really a goddess. Moses may have really existed, but that would not mean the Bible is “the infallible word of god.”

-- -- -- -- -- --

>> You wrote, “You dismiss the Bible lightly, but it is an ancient document in its own right, and its historicity has been verified time and time again, ...”

1. I do not dismiss the Bible. I study it. I compare it to and contrast it with other comparable ancient literature. I have ceased, however, to create a false idol out of it.

2. “lightly”? hardly. I spent 23 years of my life immersed in fundamentalist Christianity. I believed it. I taught it. I dedicated my life to it. My “deconversion” was not easy. Here is a description of the process I went through https://sites.google.com/site/investigatingchristianity/home/mydeconversionstory. You are also welcome to visit my site https://sites.google.com/site/investigatingchristianity/home (although I never finished it), and you are welcome to explore my xanga posts (such as http://www.xanga.com/WindOnReed2/640522016/the-words-of-jesus.html,http://www.xanga.com/WindOnReed2/643236583/resurrection-problems.html, or http://www.xanga.com/WindOnReed2/650081546/prayer.html, among many). I have been free from fundamentalism for 11 years, and getting free from it was one of the best things that ever happened to me. I study ancient history and literature for a living, and my views have not developed “lightly.”

3. Yes, many aspects of the Bible have been verified, but the parts that have been verified are NOT the supernatural or controversial parts. The gist of your statement suggests something comparable to someone saying, “Troy has been discovered; therefore, Homer’s Iliad is the truth.” Archaeological confirmations of geographical places and customs do not amount to a confirmation of the supernatural message/aspect of the Bible or any other book. As I said above, the early books of the Bible are quite comparable to Greek myth and epic, like Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. Most, if not all, of the places mentioned in these texts really existed, and archaeology can confirm some of the customs, artifacts, even that certain names were historical names and certain gods really were worshiped during the alleged time of the Trojan war. But does this mean that Athena and Zeus really guided Odysseus, that Greek oracles and prophets were really true and valid, that the gods said all those things just as Homer described. To think so would be naive, and the same holds true for the Bible. At most, the Bible, the Iliad, the Odyssey, etc., are historical fiction -- containing elements of real history but also fabrication.

- - - -- -- -- --

I will try to continue this dialogue at a later date. I will soon be traveling for the holidays and may be a little short on time. However, I intend to address all your links/comments more carefully eventually.