So Rohl uses the Hittite treaty with Ramses to explain for an hour why Ramses is Shishack. This now moves the Hittites into the Israel sphere of influence at the time of Solomon and Rehoboam. Man, this Rohl guy thinks the bible has EVERYTHING wrong or what?
What is left? A Moses at a different time took the Hebrews to Palestine circa 1400?
Hmmm…. so if Ramses is concluding a treaty with the Hittites, does that mean that an ISrael and Judah (after Solomon passed) even existed?
I apologize. This guy seems to love to hear himself talk and talk and talk and…. well, you get the message. I cannot find anything about how his new timeline fits in with anything else. I can see why you would not be able to come up with a timeline from David Rohl. I cannot either. 😛
A Ramses ii at the timeline of Solomon and Rehoboam raises way more questions that it answers.
Also, what part of Egyptian chronology does Rohl collapse do to dual rulers? Where does the Shoshenk incursion come into play in the Bible now that Ramses has time traveled to 925 BC?
I can’t find anything but hundreds of hours of Rohl explaining how linguistically Shishak is Ramses. Purely fascinating that a Biblical author would misname someone from another country.
FocusMyView said
So those dates do not even line up with the biblical story?
What was going on in Egypt while Moses was doing his thing. What was the extent of Egypt? Were they under the Hyksos? Were they in the intermediate period?
Rohl presents the Hyksos entering Avaris around the time the Asiatics abandoned Avaris.
Did the Asiatic abandon Avaris only because of the plague or did they know the Hyksos were on their way?
FocusMyView said
In Part 4 of his you tube lectures. Rohl states that the Meggiddo site has Ramses ii contemporary with Solomon in the late Bronze age. Do you think Rohl is making a simple mistake here?
Is he saying the Bronze Age extended to the days of Solomon in 900 AD or is he saying that the Bible has also dated Solomon wrong and we should move Solomon back two hundred years?
Can you point me to a timeline in any lecture or any website page?
He had a timetable in the first part of this series with the heading “archeology” filled in with events from the Bible, lol. That was sorta cute!
I am on Part 1 of his for-purchase DVD Lectures.
On page 265 of his book, he has Solomon between 1000 and 900 BCE and he calls that Late Bronze Age IIB.
He has the Iron Age (IA 1) beginning at 900 BCE.
David and Solomon have traditionally been put during the 20th/21st Dynasty, 1000 BCE/900 BCE. But more than 10 years ago when I was in New York at the Met Museum, I came across the Amarna Letters where David and Saul were in disagreement, then. Amarna has been traditionally been part of the 18th Dynasty, 1400/1300 BCE.
THIS IS PRECISELY WHY people are so reluctant to try to align history with the biblical timeline.
Robert
Yes, of course it is. But the question was whether Bart (or any critical biblical schooar) should really be expected to provide evidence to refute your belief in astrology, reincarnation, and psychics? Or, wouldn’t it be more reasonable to ask believers in astrology, reincarnation, and psychics to first provide evidence for their beliefs. And then this putative evidence can be evaluated and subjected to rigorous scientific method. I’m no expert but I’m pretty sure this has already been done.
Steefen
This thread is not about your tangent on astrology, reincarnation, and psychics. Go start a thread on that.
FocusMyView
So Rohl uses the Hittite treaty with Ramses to explain for an hour why Ramses is Shishack. This now moves the Hittites into the Israel sphere of influence at the time of Solomon and Rehoboam. Man, this Rohl guy thinks the bible has EVERYTHING wrong or what?
What is left? A Moses at a different time took the Hebrews to Palestine circa 1400?
Hmmm…. so if Ramses is concluding a treaty with the Hittites, does that mean that an ISrael and Judah (after Solomon passed) even existed?
Steefen
That is one of the mistakes this Egyptology Chronologist is putting forth: Shishak is not Shoshenk.
In my book manuscript for publication, I am not attempting to bring everything Rohl says into it. Yes, I may be a Biblical Accuracy Investogator, but at this point in my career, I am bring forward the phase dealing with an earlier Moses than the Ramesses the Great – Moses version. As mentioned earlier, there is still the Amarna Letters problem with Saul and David.
I am thinking if Moses is pushed back in Time, Saul, David, and Solomon have to get pushed back in time–not for the redactors of the Hebrew Bible who were free-wheeling with accurate history.
My question is, to what extent is Zion Zoan?
Zoan (Hebrew: צֹועַן Ṣōʕan) was, according to the Hebrew Bible, a city of Egypt in the eastern Nile delta. Numbers 13:22 says that it was built seven years after Hebron was built. Psalm 78:12,43 identifies the “field of Zoan” as where Moses performed miracles before Pharaoh to persuade him to release Israel from his service. The city is also mentioned in Isaiah 19:11, 13, Isaiah 30:4 and Ezekiel 30:14.
The Greek Septuagint in all of these verses uses the Greek name Tanis.
= = =
James Hoffmeier mentions Sarah Groll and Papyrus Anastasia VIII as a possibility that there was some weather problems during the reign of Ramesses the Great that could put the Exodos at the time of Ramesses the Great. So, although weak, the redactors could be including memories from that time period into a composite Exodus story. The problem I am running into is that the internet has info on Papyrus Anastasia I but not on Papyrus Anastasia VIII.
Focus My View
I apologize. This guy seems to love to hear himself talk and talk and talk and…. well, you get the message. I cannot find anything about how his new timeline fits in with anything else. I can see why you would not be able to come up with a timeline from David Rohl. I cannot either. ????
A Ramses ii at the timeline of Solomon and Rehoboam raises way more questions that it answers.
Also, what part of Egyptian chronology does Rohl collapse do to dual rulers? Where does the Shoshenk incursion come into play in the Bible now that Ramses has time traveled to 925 BC?
I can’t find anything but hundreds of hours of Rohl explaining how linguistically Shishak is Ramses. Purely fascinating that a Biblical author would misname someone from another country.
Steefen
He want to play the expert and cannot make himself coherent and he cannot listen to people who have questions that would make his perspective coherent and in digestible chunks.
I am not going to try to eat his elephant. You think you see his elephant but what you have not brought up is that he also wants to re-date the eruption of Thera.
Riaan Booysen, author of a problematic book, Thera and the Exodus, also criticizes Rohl as follows:
The reasons why Rohl chose to move the dating of the Amarna era instead of the rather tenuous orthodox dating for the Israelite kingdom are discussed in the next section.
His revised chronology would appear to be dubious [no, IS dubious], as VAST amounts of datable evidence and records exist in Egypt and Egypt’s interaction with the neighbouring states it controlled is WELL DOCUMENTED from BOTH SIDES.
By contrast , there is hardly any evidence to be found that would unequivocally prove the existence of the Israelite kings Saul, David, and Solomon. In other words, Rohl should have moved the tenuous dates of the Israelite kings to the firmly established dating of the Amarna era and not the other way around.
ps 177-178, Chapter 12: “Saul, David, and Solomon – Amarna Contemporaries,” Thera and Exodus by Riaan Booyen
The final complication is that the redactors lifted information from the 20th and 21st Dynasties and Zoan in their creation of Zion and the United Kingdom under King David.
Moving the Exodus from 1250 BCE to 1455 BCE is a move of 205 years.
MOVING THE BIBLE’S TIMELINE 205 YEARS WOULD MOVE DAVID AND SOLOMON FROM 1000 BC/900 BC
TO 1200 BC/1100 BC.
This does not get us to 1340 BC and Amarna.
= = =
The corrected dating of the Exodus does not get us all the way to Amarna but it makes the Amarna Letters more plausible.
I’ve had the obvious standing question: given the evidence of the Amarna Letters to move Saul and David 400 years (1350 to 950), the Bible timeline will also have to lose 400 years some kind of way. The Bible timeline eventually becomes our accepted timeline.
Was there a period of time when nothing was happening Biblically?
I do not think during the Amarna period or a little after the Amarna Letters there was a United Kingdom in Zion.
The line of kings after David/Solmon into accepted timeline have to start somewhere.
If the redactors were so keen on Egypt, and if the Septuagint accurately names the town they call Zion Zoan, where do you think the redactors lived and what language were they writing in?
I have read that the scribe of Jeremiah, Baruch, wrote or at least edited the Deuteronomic History. That would mean Samuel and Kings as well. And we know Jeremiah fled the Babylonians by going to Egypt. So at least some version of the histories of Israel and Judea were probably written in Egypt!
As far as the Exodus’s final version, I think that was redacted in Egypt as well, in Heliopolis, which is mentioned as the district Joseph lived in. I think it may have been written down by Onias iv in Leontopolis ( a city or section of Heliopolis). So we can see why Egypt dominates the narrative of Israel’s existence.
If the final redactor lived in Heliopolis, he may have been familiar with the stories of a Osiriseph (Joseph) leading the lepers out of Egypt, or the various stories of a Moses leading lepers out of Egypt and founding Jerusalem.
I am still confused as to why you would think a Moses actually existed. I think the Bible itself contradicts this idea somewhat.
The idea of Moses is imposed on Isaiah awkwardly and very late. Isaiah focus is the rejection of God’s law being the basis for Israel’s punishment, yet he is not talking about a written law (which comes from Zion not Sinai) but a law we should instinctively know. If the original Isaiah did not know of Moses, why on earth think the idea of Moses is a very early tradition?
The Song of Miriam is one of the oldest inspirational songs around which the Bible is built up. It presupposes Philistines and living in Israel near mount Zion – supposedly as the waters are converging on the chariots in the Red Sea! But it does not mention Moses.
Again, various Semitic peoples living in Egypt at various times are a solid fact. Two examples are in this very comment, Jeremiah and Onias iv. There could easily be dozens if not hundreds of exoduses to Palestine throughout Egypt’s existence. If you move the timetable, change the actors (since the story of a Moses seems late), and eliminate the magic, there is not much left.
I am glad it sparked your interest and led you to research though. There is a lot we do not know, and may never know.
Focus My View
As far as the Exodus’s final version, I think that was redacted in Egypt as well, in Heliopolis, which is mentioned as the district Joseph lived in.
Steefen
In this thread, David Rohl has presented archaeological evidence of Joseph, son of Jacob/Israel, living in Avaris. What is your rationale and evidence for putting Joseph in Heliopolis?
Focus My View
If the final redactor lived in Heliopolis, he may have been familiar with the stories of a Osiriseph (Joseph) leading the lepers out of Egypt, or the various stories of a Moses leading lepers out of Egypt and founding Jerusalem.
Steefen
In the Manetho account of Osarseph, Osarseph is called Moses and the Manetho account did not say the lepers were led out of Egypt. From a documentary I saw, they were led away from Ahket-aten.
You have not even fully researched extra-biblical accounts of Moses yet? 😛
Sure, Osarseph is said to be Moses, but Osar-seph translates to Joseph when you exchange Osiris for YHW in the theophoric name. I am unclear why they would not call him Moses since Moses is an Egyptian name. Another source gives Moses an alternative Egyptian name as well. What else can we expect from the Greeks anyway?
I put Joseph in Heliopolis. Actually its a footnote in many versions. Genesis 46:20. Joseph’s Egyptian wife is the daughter of the priest of On, with the footnote saying that is Heliopolis. I haven’t researched it deeply though. In 46:29, Joseph had to leave his place and go to Goshen to meet his father there. So Joseph’s early years, or his years spent serving the Pharaoh were not in Goshen.
FocusMyView said
You have not even fully researched extra-biblical accounts of Moses yet? 😛
Sure, Osarseph is said to be Moses, but Osar-seph translates to Joseph when you exchange Osiris for YHW in the theophoric name. I am unclear why they would not call him Moses since Moses is an Egyptian name. Another source gives Moses an alternative Egyptian name as well. What else can we expect from the Greeks anyway?
I put Joseph in Heliopolis. Actually its a footnote in many versions. Genesis 46:20. Joseph’s Egyptian wife is the daughter of the priest of On, with the footnote saying that is Heliopolis. I haven’t researched it deeply though. In 46:29, Joseph had to leave his place and go to Goshen to meet his father there. So Joseph’s early years, or his years spent serving the Pharaoh were not in Goshen.
Make a choice.
Manetho’s Moses is not the Biblical Joseph.
Second, Rohl’s Joseph is not Manetho’s Osar-seph/Moses.
Rohl’s Joseph is not Rohl’s Moses.
Rohl’s Moses is not Manetho’s Osar-seph/Moses.
= = =
Even with Joseph visiting On/Heliopolis, he was buried at Avaris in the cemetery of his Palace.
With Joseph visiting On/Heliopolis does not make him Osarseph/Moses. You agree are want to theorize and hold on to the theory?
I mean what is Rohl even proposing here? An actual Exodus event?
Is he proposing that Joshua destroyed the cities that Judges says still need to be conquered?
Also, you have had to add an extra century in to the dating of Moses to move him back whilst standing Egyptology on its head despite their many interactions with Assyrians and Hittites.
There is a Biblical Moses.
Some have, in error, said Moses and the Exodus are not historical.
Rohl produced a historical Moses: birth at Avaris in the Egyptian Delta, stepmother married off to a pharaoh in southern Egypt, Moses educated under that pharaoh. Moses becomes a successful military commander. Moses does not become the next pharaoh in southern Egypt. Asiatics leave Avaris. Jericho falls as described in the Bible within 40 years after the Semitic Asiatics leave Avaris.
The Bible has proposed an Exodus event. Rohl has moved the story to the right on the line from Fiction to History. Rohl has taken the Biblical narrative and has added history to that narrative.
Being an investigator of the bible’s historical accuracy myself, I see him verifying the bible.
So far as I am concerned, the Exodus was a composite event, a number of historical events joined into one biblical narrative. Just because Rohl has presented one layer of that composite story does not mean for me the timeline for that layer is the governing timeline.
Rohl probably does not deconstruct the biblical Exodus into two or more stories, so yes, he would be creating a problematic chronology. I mentioned that earlier when I said I was not buying what he is presenting hook, line, and sinker because he moved the dating of the Minoan eruption of the Thera volcano.
Steefen
I am watching Lecture 1: The Bible – Myth or History? (52 min.s, 41 seconds)
Forget Ramesses II, forget Pi-Ramesses.
History starts with the evidence of Jericho. There is a Jericho destroyed in the Middle Bronze Age IIB circa 1400 BCE.
Pick up at 27: 31 minutes where he starts with Joseph.
= = =
Conclusion of Lecture 1
Joseph is a historical figure.
Lecture 2: Moses and the Exodus
Artapanus was a historian.
Artapanus of Alexandria was a historian, of Jewish origin, who is believed to have lived in Alexandria, during the later half of the 3rd or 2nd century BCE.
Artapanus names the pharaoh who raised Moses. His name was Khe-noph-res/Kha-nefer-re thrown name of Sobek-hotep IV.
pick up at 17:33
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)