4
4
0
Religion
Christianity
Judaism
Ancient History
World History
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
2
2
0
I think when people believe that 2 people populated the entire planet, then 99.999999% of them drown, then a handful of people and two of every animal on a boat repopulated the entire planet they are not going to believe evidence or reason.
(2)
(0)
SPC John Smith
Eight people on that boat. five of whom were related (mom, dad, 3 sons) and it is believed that the three wives of the sons were sisters or first cousins. That's a pretty shallow gene pool.
(3)
(0)
SPC Stewart Smith
The discovery of DNA completely disproves the adam and eve story.
If eve were created from adams rib, they would have the exact same DNA. Their children would have the same DNA. Their childrens children etc.
If eve were created from adams rib, they would have the exact same DNA. Their children would have the same DNA. Their childrens children etc.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
0
0
0
When it comes to archeology...context is everything. Most of the "neutral" evidence suggests that if there was indeed an Exodus as described in the Bible...it most likely took place around the 13th Century BCE (based on validated names/places not in common use during other recorded periods of Egyptian history). The clip uses 15th Century BCE facts to try and insubstantiate 13th Century theories...which is in itself, "sloppy" research. They also seem to disregard physical evidence discovered at Amarna indicating a high mortality among relatively young persons suffering from malnutrition...suggestive, but interesting in supporting the "slave" hypothesis.
Beyond that, the video seems to use the axiom that, "if it hasn't been found...it doesn't exist". I could fill several pages with accounts of "missing" archeology recovered in relatively recent years, often in locations presumed to have been "thoroughly investigated" by earlier researchers, or at least superficially "exploited" by other activity. There's simply no way of determining how many burial sites, villages, etc. lie under car parks, city blocks, etc.
As to documentation, this is the "strongest" argument I believe the video makes. Yes-if an empire was as methodical in recounting other aspects of daily life...it wouldn't make sense to exclude the presence of a large, foreign, captive population would it? Trouble is, that "documentation" would've been recorded by Egyptians...not Hebrews, and certainly not the Greeks (another layer of Biblical translation that has to be taken into account). That means if you're looking for a specific reference...you'd need to fully understand the terms used by the contemporary sources. Is the Egyptian "Hapiru" synonymous with "Hebrew"? Are the Beni Amran (literally, "Sons of Amran") equal to the "Sons of AmraM"...i.e, Moses's supposed father?
Finally-DNA. If sufficient viable genetic material can be assessed...it can be quite accurate; it also comes with no bias. After four centuries living as a captive population, one would reasonably expect that intermingling of the DNA of conqueror and the conquered would be common place. How many Hebrews had Egyptian fathers, grandfathers, or even great-grand fathers? What's the difference between a "slave" as we view it through the lens of our own cultural history...and one viewed through that of ancient Egypt? Would they view our "working class" as being any different? Does having an Egyptian name, home, clothes, and even eating Egyptian food make the descendants of a foreign race any less so?
No serious student of history is going to claim that there's a "smoking gun" when it comes to proving the Biblical Exodus...at best, one can only draw inferences. However, the same logic works in reverse; being unproven is not equal to being false.
Beyond that, the video seems to use the axiom that, "if it hasn't been found...it doesn't exist". I could fill several pages with accounts of "missing" archeology recovered in relatively recent years, often in locations presumed to have been "thoroughly investigated" by earlier researchers, or at least superficially "exploited" by other activity. There's simply no way of determining how many burial sites, villages, etc. lie under car parks, city blocks, etc.
As to documentation, this is the "strongest" argument I believe the video makes. Yes-if an empire was as methodical in recounting other aspects of daily life...it wouldn't make sense to exclude the presence of a large, foreign, captive population would it? Trouble is, that "documentation" would've been recorded by Egyptians...not Hebrews, and certainly not the Greeks (another layer of Biblical translation that has to be taken into account). That means if you're looking for a specific reference...you'd need to fully understand the terms used by the contemporary sources. Is the Egyptian "Hapiru" synonymous with "Hebrew"? Are the Beni Amran (literally, "Sons of Amran") equal to the "Sons of AmraM"...i.e, Moses's supposed father?
Finally-DNA. If sufficient viable genetic material can be assessed...it can be quite accurate; it also comes with no bias. After four centuries living as a captive population, one would reasonably expect that intermingling of the DNA of conqueror and the conquered would be common place. How many Hebrews had Egyptian fathers, grandfathers, or even great-grand fathers? What's the difference between a "slave" as we view it through the lens of our own cultural history...and one viewed through that of ancient Egypt? Would they view our "working class" as being any different? Does having an Egyptian name, home, clothes, and even eating Egyptian food make the descendants of a foreign race any less so?
No serious student of history is going to claim that there's a "smoking gun" when it comes to proving the Biblical Exodus...at best, one can only draw inferences. However, the same logic works in reverse; being unproven is not equal to being false.
(0)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
There is vastly more scholarship on this issue, which also covers the 13th BCE period. It's addressed in detail in Finkelstein and Silberman's book on the subject. As for being neutral, both Finkelstein and Silberman fit that description, and their work doesn't indicate that the Exodus was "unproven", it indicates that it never happened.
(1)
(0)
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
Capt Gregory Prickett - You are correct-almost impossible to adequately cover the subject in a few posts. I will reiterate the fact that history/archeology has yet to "prove" the Exodus. However, it is interesting to note that Finklestein and Silberman drafted a rebuttal to William Denver's review of their book...essentially challenging Denver's view that "The Bible Unearthed" paints the whole of the Patriarchal narrative as "propaganda". Though hardly "theologians"...Finklestein and Silberman note the difficulty in deriving assertions without clear context of both the Assyrian Crisis and the emergence of Egypt as a major regional player in ancient Palestine. Strictly speaking, history indicates the Iliad was a work of fiction...however, it cannot "prove" that Achilles and Hector didn't exist, or that the two didn't fight to the death in front of the walls of the most certainly historic walls of Troy.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google