Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just because something is disputed does not mean something is false!
Here is more from the link:
"The Ipuwer Papyrus recounts from an Egyptian perspective the effects
the ten plagues and loss of the army (at the closing of the sea) had on
Egypt. Perhaps more significant it implicitly contracts the time gap
between the old and mid kingdoms."
There is a disputed sea border between North and South Korea. That does not mean that the border is not real.
Eusebius, the Ipuwer Papyrus is about 'fictitious events'. Your own link says so.....
The theme of this work has previously been taken either as a lament inspired by the supposed chaos of the Second Intermediate Period, or as historical fiction depicting the fall of the Old Kingdom several centuries earlier, or possibly a combination of these."
...and do you believe REAL three-headed elephant exist?
Eusebius. The link you gave to the Ipuwer Papyrus was some form of 'Creation' website/article. They copied the parts from Wiki article that they wanted to be true but, rather disingenuously, left out the bits they didn't like. You would be well advised to go to the Wiki link used and read it all....especially the part headed......
Parallels with The Book of Exodus
"Some have interpreted the document as an Egyptian account of the Plagues of Egypt and the Exodus in the Old Testament of the Bible, and it is often cited as proof for the Biblical account by various religious organisations. The association of the Ipuwer Papyrus with the Exodus as describing the same event is generally rejected by Egyptologists." Ipuwer Papyrus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
No, I'm looking at it from common sense, reason and logic. Had the economy of Egypt collapsed from the 'exodus', if a huge portion of the Egyptian army had been lost etc, it would not have gone un-noticed.
It may not have gone un-noticed. However the link Driftwood2011 posted to an article on the subject did go un-noticed. Had you read that article then you would have found this: (i stand corrected on the tribe part)
Merneptah stele
"The text also implies that Israel was as strong as the other cities mentioned, and not just a small tribe."
<snipped>
"There are four scenes which Yurco correlates with the Merneptah stele. One scene is the battle against the city of Ashkelon which is specifically named. Yurco argues that the other two city scenes are Gezer and Yanoam. He concludes that the open country scene must be Israel. Rainey rejects this view because it shows them with chariots and infantry (1990, 56-60). Lawrence Stager suggests that the small horses pulling the chariot belong to pharaoh's army as in the Ashkelon scene (1985, 58). Rainey thinks the Shasu are Israelites, but others identify the Shasu as Edomites (Stager 1985, 60). Both scholars Yurco and Rainey agree that these battle scenes are from Merneptah's reign (Yurco 1991, 61; Rainey 1992, 73-4; Hess 1993, 134). Before the discovery of the Merneptah stele scholars placed the date of the exodus and entry into Canaan much later. They are now forced to admit that Israel was already in Canaan at the time of Merneptah. Israel was big and strong enough to challenge Egypt in battle. This stele puts a terminus ante quem date of 1210 BC for the exodus (McCarter 1992, 132)." IBSS - Biblical Archaeology - Evidence of the Exodus from Egypt
Israel was strong enough to challenge Egypt in battle.
Don't stop reading there...it gets good.
Questions, why would the economy of Egypt have to collapse from the Exodus? Is that the only record of proof that would be accepted that the event happened?
Also, just because a bunch of people hauled it up out of there and took off into the wilderness, doesn't mean that would cause a major influx or strain, on the country's economy and well being. Could be they had resources to sustain if and when the "builder" people went--away.
What we are looking for imho, is a record of a great battle followed by a huge migration of peoples. This record could be recorded on the artifacts found with the hieroglyphics imprinted upon the find. (the Bronze - Iron I age)
I'll have a look at it some time tomorrow when I have more time but we mustn't loose sight of the fact that we are talking about a 'Bible Archaeology' website here. ..the sort that digs with a trowel in one hand and a Bible in the other and when they find anything, they go out of their way to fit the artefact to what the Bible says rather than fitting it to the facts. Our friend Eilat Mazzar is a prime example of that sort of skulduggery.
I'll have a look at it some time tomorrow when I have more time but we mustn't loose sight of the fact that we are talking about a 'Bible Archaeology' website here. ..the sort that digs with a trowel in one hand and a Bible in the other and when they find anything, they go out of their way to fit the artefact to what the Bible says rather than fitting it to the facts. Our friend Eilat Mazzar is a prime example of that sort of skulduggery.
Understood. I'm not feeling well myself today either and the post to the article, I'll be reading the article several times before I will get it straight. See, I thought of that too, the same reservations that you have, I have them. So--I'm thinking they do the citations and those can be crossed reference. Also, look at the dates to those citations.
The Dead Sea Scrolls, now, that is a recent find. I'm going to do some back tracking, because I believe I read some where, that the Exodus was confirmed and I'm not referring to those of Biblical Science.
Archeologist are always finding something new and I find their discoveries, fascinating.
PS: It was a letter found written on a tablet to a pharaoh. Now where I found that so as I can document it...oh gees.
Last edited by Ellis Bell; 01-30-2011 at 01:32 PM..
Reason: ps
Just had a very quick look at a Wiki article on the Merneptah stele.
"Historian Philip R. Davies noted in 2008: "Assuming we have Merneptah’s dates correctly as 1213-1203, and that the reading “Israel” is correct, the reference places an Israel in Palestine in the thirteenth century." Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Just had a very quick look at a Wiki article on the Merneptah stele.
"Historian Philip R. Davies noted in 2008: "Assuming we have Merneptah’s dates correctly as 1213-1203, and that the reading “Israel” is correct, the reference places an Israel in Palestine in the thirteenth century." Merneptah Stele - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In any case...how does it prove the exodus??
That may not, but this may. (also, i will find the tablet, just not now, i need to hook up my dsl)
note the word, wilderness---
"The exodus is to be identified with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt by Ahmose (1570 BC). Then they wandered in the wilderness being included among the Shasu, and caused the fall of MBIIIC cities in Canaan (the conquest). The Conquest was not total but just in the highlands for Egypt controlled the lower lands and coast. They were called Hapiru (from which the name Hebrew originates) in the Amarna period (time of the judges) until their league was consolidated into 12 tribes which became the nation of Israel in the Iron Age." IBSS - Biblical Archaeology - Evidence of the Exodus from Egypt
PS: It was a letter found written on a tablet to a pharaoh. Now where I found that so as I can document it...oh gees.
I have a big problem with 'Bible Archaeology (and that's not because I'm atheist). They will twist the facts to fit the find rather that let the find speak for itself. I’ve seen this loads of times. Something interesting...ainscription or item is found that comes from ancient Israel and it's not long before we have an announcement that it's "the earliest" or "the best" example of X or, "proof of" the historicity of some biblical person or event.
Do you remember back in 2008 when they found some inscription in Israel dating to around 1000 BCE which coincided with the alleged time of David? Some Bible archaeologist called Hoggins/Hobbins (or something similar) said he had deciphered it and claimed it mentioned a whole Davidic Kingdom......well that is until the university of Haifa got hold of it. Turned out it didn't even mention any 'David'.
Then there was Mazzar who found some kind of 'seal' with an inscription that (according to her) proved that King David existed. Turned out that Ms Mazzar was reading the inscription from left to right instead of the correct way, left to right!! Aaaaaahahahahahaha!!!
Matt 10:23 "But when they persecute you in this city, flee you into another: for truly I say to you, You shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come."
Going once again by the plain meaning of words, there is nothing in Matt 10:23 that says that the apostles will have gone thought ALL the cities of Israel before the Son of Man returns. In fact, it specifically says that they will not have. Obviously Eusebius misreads this passage.
However, Jesus was in error here.
No, Jesus was not in error. It is actually you misunderstand what He said. They have not gone through all the cities of Israel yet and Christ has not returned yet. There is no problem. The only problem exists in your own atheist mind.
Quote:
Recent posts show that the readers have identified Eusebius' bending of the plain meaning of words in scripture and then tries (unsuccessfully) to maintain a literalist view of scripture.
Yea, sure, whatever. They beat me to a pulp. Everything I have said so far has been wrong. Yea, sure. And there really is a Santa that flies around the earth giving good kids presents.
Quote:
But Eusebius hasn't yet shown that the following writings (previosuly cited) don't mean what they clearly say, but were in error. Collectively they are evidence that Jesus taught that he would return within his generation.
Quote:
I'm sure we'd all be interested in your explanation (other than yet another cut and paste reply).
Sure, like you've never cut and pasted. LOL. Gheesh!
Quote:
Matt 23:63-64
Quote:
Then the high priest said to him, ‘I put you under oath before the living God, tell us if you are the Messiah the Son of God.’ Jesus said to him, ‘You have said so. But I tell you From now on you will see the Son of Manseated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven.’
The term "from now on" is a very poor translation. Many better translations have it "Henceforth" or "hereafter" you will see the Son of Man seated . . . and coming on the clouds of heaven. He was obviously telling Caiaphas of his resurrection in the future in which he will see Christ's return.
Quote:
Did the high preiet see this in his lifetime????
Did he? Do you have proof that Caiaphas did not see Christ sitting at the right hand of power? It is a two part prophecy Christ gave to Caiaphas.
1. Caiaphas will see Christ sitting at the right hand of power.
2. Caiaphas will see Christ coming on the clouds of heaven.
It is possible that after Christ rose from the dead that He went into the temple and sat down on the mercy seat and that when the chief priest went into the holy of holies he would have seen Christ sitting at the right hand of power.
Quote:
1 Thes 4:15-17
15For this we declare to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will by no means precede those who have died. 16For the Lord himself, with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call and with the sound of God’s trumpet, will descend from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord for ever.
Did Paul's followers (who were still alive) get caught up in the clouds?
We who are alive will not precede those who have died in the Lord. Have we? No we have not. Paul then says "we who are alive" does not mean he is saying "we who are alive NOW will be alive when the Lord returns.
Quote:
Again, Jesus was in error in both.
No, you just don't understand what He said.
Quote:
In all of these I'll allowing that Jesus actually said what he is quoted as saying. Possibly he did not, and that, too, would be an error in scripture
Quote:
.
No, it would just be an error in your understanding of what he said.
Last edited by Eusebius; 01-30-2011 at 03:54 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
