Struggling with the Old Testament

[aussieguy55]

http://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-exodus-route-sinai-kadesh-barnea.htm#thirtyeight

[aussieguy55]

http://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-exodus-route-sinai-kadesh-barnea.htm#thirtyeight

"

Conclusion:

1.       The Bible is rather explicit that Israel spent 38 continuous years at Kadesh.

a.      The Bible says they spent 38 years at Kadesh even calling their time there "many days"

b.      There is no indication they ever left Kadesh.

c.       There is no itinerary of places they went had they left Kadesh (Num 33)

d.      There is no indication there was a second visit to Kadesh.

2.       The events of Numbers 20:1 can be clearly dated to the Nisan (1^st month) of the third year after leaving Goshen, not the 40^th year.

a.      The events of Num 20:1-13 (Korah, Miriam, water from rock etc.) cannot be fit into 2-4 months.

b.      Those who were part of the events of Num 20 had recently left Egypt.

3.       The material in Numbers is not in strict chronological order and the stories jump forward and backward, hence 20:1-13 happens before chapters 14-19 etc. The Material of Num 20:1-13 is elliptical.

4.       The demand for water would be the very first thing Israel would make of God in a dry place like Kadesh on their first visit not their second visit.

a.      In fact there is evidence that Moses' striking the rock for water happened BEFORE the spies were sent out from Kadesh to Hebron. They would not send out a scout troupe until their basic needs like water were met.

b.      Notice when the spied returned that only Joshua and Caleb would cross the Jordan, indicating that Moses and Aaron had already been barred entry into the promised land because of striking rather than speaking to the rock.

c.       "Surely you shall not come into the land in which I swore to settle you, except Caleb the son of Jephunneh and Joshua the son of Nun." (Numbers 14:30)

5.       The only Bible verse that suggests they left Kadesh is Numbers 14:25 where God commands them to leave Kadesh, but in fact Israel refused to leave and God may have changed his mind and allowed them to stay at Kadesh.

a.      After being told to leave Kadesh, there was a plague that killed the 10 bad spies and then they left Kadesh to invade Canaan without Moses who stayed in the camp at Kadesh with the ark.

b.      "But they went up heedlessly to the ridge of the hill country; neither the ark of the covenant of the Lord nor Moses left the camp." (Numbers 14:44)

c.       This would have been a great time to leave Kadesh towards the Red Sea at Ezion Geber in obedience to God but they stayed put at Kadesh.

6.       Just because many people believe there are two Kadesh visits, does not mean they are correct.

a.      They have mount Sinai wrong and even the location of Kadesh they have wrong. (Kadesh is located at Petra not Qudeirat)

7.       Israel arrived at Kadesh Barnea in the first month of the third year and never left until 38 years had passed. Then they headed south down the Arabah valley past Ezion Geber a second time, then east, then north around Edom and Moab."

Edited April 2, 2018 by aussieguy55

[RevTestament]

Steve Rudd is wrong about the exodus route, and wrong about the time in Kadesh. 

[aussieguy55]

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1179/033443510x12632070179504?journalCode=ytav20

I am no longer enrolled in Uni and so do not have access to the whole article. Might be interesting.  

 

Found it here  https://israelfinkelstein.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/kadesh-barnea-tel-aviv-37-1.pdf

 

Also  Finkelstein responded to  my inquiry  so I might get his comments about you arguments.

Edited April 2, 2018 by aussieguy55
more information

[MormonMason]

On ‎03‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 8:49 PM, aussieguy55 said:

I remember an apologetic site where they claim chariots had been found on the bottom of the Red Sea.

Sadly, that was fake news.

[aussieguy55]

On 3/31/2018 at 3:41 AM, MormonMason said:

Garstang, Sellin and Watzinger, Kenyon, Ussishkin, Hoerth, Wood, etc.  While I understand that some of these would put the date of the destruction of Jericho somewhat late, they all agree that Jericho once was a fortified city.  I recall that there are others but do not at the moment recall the names.

It's all a matter as to when the time of the putative conquest occurred.  But the Egyptian inscriptional evidence I've seen (Merenptah, and one other, the name of which I do not recall at the moment) has the Israelites already in Palestine as a people in 1205 BCE.  Circa 1400 BCE, if the other inscription's reconstruction holds.  It seems valid to me but there is a whole lot of disputation going on over that inscription.

If the Late Bronze Period dating is correct, then, yeah, there were at the time of the putative conquest no walls in Jericho.  But if earlier, then there indeed were walls.  Kenyon's 1550 BCE destruction dating may have been off because she did not appear to effectively date the pottery found in Jericho, and because her excavations were somewhat limited.  In addition, Egyptian scarabs and seals found in an active cemetery north Jericho show that the area was not abandoned in 1550 BCE.  Some of these scarabs are related to persons dated to long after the supposed 1550 BCE abandonment of Jericho.  A piece of charcoal from the remains of the fires of Jericho dated to 1410 BCE ± 40 years.  That means that Kenyon was mistaken as to her 1550 BCE dating of the destruction and abandonment of Jericho.  And that 1410 BCE dating puts it to within the time of the postulated early conquest date.

Finkelsteins comments on the above

 

The text in blue is a reminiscence of scholarship in the 1940s or so:

1. There is no single-time wave of destructions.

2. There is no “Israel” as a unified force until the late 10th century.

3. Destructions at the end of the Late Bronze are part of a broader process geographically and chronologically in the eastern Mediterranean; one cannot plaque Canaan from the rest of the region.

4. The theory of Israel destroying cities at the end of the Middle Bronze has no foundation.

5. There was no composition of biblical texts before ca. 800 BCE or so.

And there are many more arguments.

[RevTestament]

On 3/30/2018 at 10:41 AM, MormonMason said:

Garstang, Sellin and Watzinger, Kenyon, Ussishkin, Hoerth, Wood, etc.  While I understand that some of these would put the date of the destruction of Jericho somewhat late, they all agree that Jericho once was a fortified city.  I recall that there are others but do not at the moment recall the names.

It's all a matter as to when the time of the putative conquest occurred.  But the Egyptian inscriptional evidence I've seen (Merenptah, and one other, the name of which I do not recall at the moment) has the Israelites already in Palestine as a people in 1205 BCE.  Circa 1400 BCE, if the other inscription's reconstruction holds.  It seems valid to me but there is a whole lot of disputation going on over that inscription.

My guess is you are trying to remember the so-called Berlin Pedestal. There are a few controversies surrounding it. It was "found" in the basement of the Berlin Museum. It had apparently been taken from a statue, so its proper context is somewhat debatable. Since the most applicable part is damaged, the reconstruction is also somewhat debated, but I am confident in it, and that it will hold. Here it is with the reconstructed part on the right:

The next thing debated is that as the Egyptians wrote it, it has a "sh" sound rather than an "S" sound. I don't find this controversial at all. Israel is not pronounced the way most English people pronounce it. It is pronounced Yish-ray-el with a "sh" sound. So that is how the Egyptians may have naturally written it. The "Israel" reconstruction is also supported by the fact that the name ring comes after rings for Ashkelon and Canaan. 

The last major debate issue about the inscription is its proper dating. Several scholars have dated the inscription to the early 14th century based on the  hieroglyphics - its paleography (the writing) and the  orthography (the spelling).  Egyptologist Raphael Giveon has  dated it at 1400 B.C.E. (during the  reign of Amenhotep III) - 200 years  earlier than the Merneptah Stele, which date would completely throw out the usual 13th century exodus musings of many if not most archaeologists.

Quote

If the Late Bronze Period dating is correct, then, yeah, there were at the time of the putative conquest no walls in Jericho.  But if earlier, then there indeed were walls.  Kenyon's 1550 BCE destruction dating may have been off because she did not appear to effectively date the pottery found in Jericho, and because her excavations were somewhat limited.  In addition, Egyptian scarabs and seals found in an active cemetery north Jericho show that the area was not abandoned in 1550 BCE.  Some of these scarabs are related to persons dated to long after the supposed 1550 BCE abandonment of Jericho.  A piece of charcoal from the remains of the fires of Jericho dated to 1410 BCE ± 40 years.  That means that Kenyon was mistaken as to her 1550 BCE dating of the destruction and abandonment of Jericho.  And that 1410 BCE dating puts it to within the time of the postulated early conquest date.

The thing is I believe Kenyon got her charcoal from an area on top of the fallen walls, which means the walls must have fallen before that charcoal got there. While it is possible for a really old piece of wood to be burnt on top of the fallen wall, multiple samples, seeds etc, arrived at similar dating. Later pieces of charcoal don't really help, but I believe there are other issues with that C14 dating. For one thing all C14 dating has a margin of error.

Where did the charcoal come from which you say was dated at 1410 BC? That is quite relevant data. Just because one piece of charcoal was C14 dated to 1410, does not mean Kenyon was "mistaken."

[RevTestament]

On 4/1/2018 at 5:55 PM, aussieguy55 said:

http://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-exodus-route-sinai-kadesh-barnea.htm#thirtyeight

JFYI Steve Rudd disagrees with Finkelstein about the locale of Kadesh Barnea - you may want to keep that in mind when trying to use Finkelstein as an ultimate authority on things.... or Rudd for that matter.

9 hours ago, aussieguy55 said:

Finkelsteins comments on the above

 

The text in blue is a reminiscence of scholarship in the 1940s or so:

1. There is no single-time wave of destructions.

2. There is no “Israel” as a unified force until the late 10th century.

3. Destructions at the end of the Late Bronze are part of a broader process geographically and chronologically in the eastern Mediterranean; one cannot plaque Canaan from the rest of the region.

4. The theory of Israel destroying cities at the end of the Middle Bronze has no foundation.

5. There was no composition of biblical texts before ca. 800 BCE or so.

And there are many more arguments.

1. True. The destructions occurred over at least a 100 year period, and into the period of the judges.

2. Kinda true. Israel did not operate much as a unified force especially after Joshua died. They went to their appointed inheritances, and some expressly allowed the remaining Canaanites to stay although they may have collected some tribute. There was no centralized government nor "state of Israel" like came to be under Saul. When a centralized monarchy did finally arise with David and Solomon, internal disputations made it short lived. Many quickly decided not to live under the rule of Judah. There is almost no archaeological evidence for any centralized government before Saul - government seals or the like. The only concrete evidence I know for it actually comes from the Egyptians calling them Israel.

3. All of the nations were falling apart in the 13th century BC. Archaeologists have debated why that is - drought, disease, etc. It was the perfect time for Israel to have escaped Egypt and to grow in strength without being molested too much by other countries.

4. Debatable. The Armana letters show a people called the Apiru by the Canaanites were having an impact, and gaining control of some of the Canaanite cities previously ruled by Egypt.

5. Really just supposition. The Bible clearly had multiple scribes. I personally do not believe Moses sat down and wrote the Pentateuch as we have it today - clearly he didn't. But the Bible says Moses wrote the law, and also says Joshua wrote commandments received. It is possible Joshua or Caleb wrote the Pentateuch, but prior writings were apparently collected, and written into a narrative. When this happened is not known. The technology of the time was pretty basic, and the only way to indefinitely keep records was to copy them - or write them in stone. For the same reasons early NT manuscripts didn't survive, older manuscripts didn't survive. So suppositions that there were no earlier biblical texts are really just suppositions of textual scholars and archaeologists.

6. "And there are many more arguments."

I'm sure there are. It seems archaeologists have no end of arguments as to why there was no exodus nor Israel in the 2nd millennium BC. 

[Atheist Mormon]

On 3/22/2018 at 2:19 AM, mfbukowski said:

Symbolism. 

Read some Kabbala.

 

Not a great suggestion (IMO)...here I'm trying to untangle a Scripture, written 2thousand years ago by a Hebrew Tribesmen, which I am having difficult time to cope and you are trying to pile up another? 

[aussieguy55]

https://thesuperstitiousnakedape.wordpress.com/2016/06/26/kadesh-barnea-gaza-the-exodus/

 

Interesting comment about how a couple of million souls might not leave any evidence.

[aussieguy55]

For 2.5 million people, every day, three times a day? (a number that would have increased in the four decades to probably +3.5 million). Bear in mind, that is the population of Chicago.

You’re certainly free to argue that, but it’s not terribly persuasive. For starters, I’m almost certain news of 2.5 to 3.5 million people being fed miraculously in the desert for four decades would have drawn some (extra-biblical) attention.

[aussieguy55]

For 2.5 million people, every day, three times a day? (a number that would have increased in the four decades to probably +3.5 million). Bear in mind, that is the population of Chicago.

You’re certainly free to argue that, but it’s not terribly persuasive. For starters, I’m almost certain news of 2.5 to 3.5 million people being fed miraculously in the desert for four decades would have drawn some (extra-biblical) attention.

https://thesuperstitiousnakedape.wordpress.com/2014/01/02/how-we-know-the-pentateurch-is-historical-fiction-11/

Edited April 3, 2018 by aussieguy55
source

[aussieguy55]

Bart's thoughts   https://ehrmanblog.org/historical-problems-with-the-hebrew-bible-the-conquest-of-canaan/

[aussieguy55]

Looking at interesting book   Did Moses Exist :The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver by DM Murdock. She has some interesting youtube videos.

[Raymond Ellis]

There is good stuff in the Old Testament if you know where to find it. I'm talking about the book of Genesis. Genesis 29:20 'Jacob served for seven years for Rachel but they seemed like only a few days to him because of his love for her.' If we combine a meditation (Philippians 4:8)  on this saying with Genesis 41 then a great spiritual vision will be opened to us. Genesis 41 is the story of Pharaoh's dream of seven years of plenty followed by seven years of famine -- as interpreted by Joseph.

The body of Christ consists of 13 members -- and this is the bread of sacrament. The vision mentioned is about the wine of sacrament -- the wine is the blood of the body, or the life of the body, or the lifestyle of the city of God. Do you understand this symbolism? The body of Christ is New Jerusalem city, it is a square with the apostle inside and prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers around the outside: Ephesians 4:11. The four gospels have four slightly different Holy Spirits: Matthew is a prophet, Mark is the Evangelist, Luke is the pastor, and John has the teacher's spirit. Taken altogether they form a total expression of the personality of God. Paul is in the centre because he is all 4 (or all twelve tribes) in one man. You need to have a very firm understanding of the personality of God and then you can meditate on Genesis 29:20 and 41 with a powerful vision resulting.

I'm writing a short book about the vision I had when I meditated on Genesis 29:20 and 41, I was looking for the meaning of the number seven and God gave me a vision of New Jerusalem city of the Millennium instead, a city where holy work and holy sex are combined in perfect harmony -- something to look forward to. In John's gospel it says he who loves his life in this world will lose it and he who hates his life in this world will save it. In this world everything we do is unnatural, and the stress this causes makes us grow old and die -- even if were faithful in marriage and loyal at work. If you had the seven spirits of God in your life you would be capable of living from 500 to 900 years of age like they did in the beginning -- that's an indication of the power of the pearl.

There is some pleasure to be gained in this world and that comes as a result of finding the pearl within your heart that leads to harmony between the actions of your life. Abraham 3: 18-19 is a reference to this pearl of seven spirits within your heart. The spirits are eternal like the Holy Spirit is. Am also writing about this pearl. My book is called: 'The pearl: true harmony in your life.' 

Joseph's coat of many colours in the Old testament is symbolism of the seven spirits of God in your life, which spirits have different colours. The 7 pointed candelabra in the tent of meeting is another reference to having the spirits of God in your life.

In the new testament the pearl is referred to as a stone. Like Jesus calling Peter a stone NKJ version. 1Perter 3:5: living stones, and Zechariah 3:9: seven eyes on one stone. The seven spirits of the pearl are referred to in Revelation 4:5 and 5:6, but it describing they as spirits that roam throughout the earth is not very helpful to understanding them as spirits in your heart. The seven spirits taken together form an harmonic whole that feels like the sheen of a silver pearl looks like: a feeling distinct from the silvery feeling of the Holy Spirit.

If you read anything in the Bible look for meaning in it and don't just read it all. The church teachings have their own ideas about the meaning of the Old Testament, but your free to form your own ideas. 'Isn't it a remarkable feeling to belong to a church that embraces truth -- whatever the source -- and teaches that there is much more to come, that God "will yet reveal many important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God"' Ensign 2018 February page 80, Articles of Faith number 9.

 

 

[Thinking]

Deuteronomy 21:18-21

Quote

18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
19 Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
20 And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

 

[aussieguy55]

Imagine 2 million people going to the bathroom every  morning. They must have composted the desert all those years.

[RevTestament]

1 hour ago, aussieguy55 said:

Imagine 2 million people going to the bathroom every  morning. They must have composted the desert all those years.

If it was anything like the Utah desert, it would all just shrivel up and evaporate without a trace LOL. Deserts are kinda harsh that way - everything organic just dessicates into nothing. Of course if they are looking 80 miles away at the non-existent "Kadesh-Barnea" of Ain Qudeirat, one would expect them to find exactly nothing anyway. 

[RevTestament]

5 hours ago, Thinking said:

Deuteronomy 21:18-21

 

I don't know what your problem is. I stone all my rebellious children - that's why none of them decided to become rebellious.  

I wonder how much longer men will choose to be rebellious - knowing that death waits at the door...

[Thinking]

IMO the evolution of religion has followed the evolution of cultural standards, and some religions are slower to adapt than others.

[aussieguy55]

Numbers 31 seems to indicate one can make sex slaves of the women who have not known a man, just kill the rest of their family.

[mfbukowski]

13 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I don't know what your problem is. I stone all my rebellious children - that's why none of them decided to become rebellious.  

Well yeah, if you let them get stoned anyway of course they don't need to get rebellious. 

- Gracie Allen

(You have to be OLD to get that one... google her if you don't know)

 

[RevTestament]

8 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Well yeah, if you let them get stoned anyway of course they don't need to get rebellious. 

- Gracie Allen

(You have to be OLD to get that one... google her if you don't know)

Google doesn't seem to remember Gracie Allen saying that...

Or I'm just not as old as you grandpa.  

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, RevTestament said:

Google doesn't seem to remember Gracie Allen saying that...

Or I'm just not as old as you grandpa.  

yep I got to phone my eldest grandaughter today- it was wonderful- made my day.  She is going to start school soon.

OK I lied.

It was just a Gracie Allen-ish joke.  Hilarious stuff but of course her words have been banned and can no longer be spoken.

But she lives on you-tube still until they figure out that she must be banned.   Seriously if you don't know what I am talking about youtube search for "George Burns and Gracie Allen"

[aussieguy55]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus

 

Interesting comments