'13-11-10, 22:12 CharlesChandler	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus Thomas Eshuis wrote: CharlesChandler wrote: Oldskeptic wrote: This is simply not true, there is archaeological evidence of wide spread destruction and fire in Jerusalem at the time of the siege. Do you have the references for this handy? http://www.archpark.org.il/ OK, I took a look at the link. They mention two things: the "House of the Bullae", and the "Burnt Room". I couldn't find any additional information on the latter, but here's what I found on the former: A group of forty-five bullae was discovered in the remains of a house – 'the House of the Bullae'. Documents, which had been kept there, were burned, but the fire baked the clay bullae, which had sealed them. The bullae bear a variety of names, as clearly the room served as an archive for 'incoming' mail. One of the bullae bears the name of 'Gemariah son of Shaphan', a personage mentioned in the Bible as a royal scribe in the reign of Jehoiakim, king of Judah (late seventh century BCE), in the days of the prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah 36:9-12). The house was destroyed in the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BCE. A house fire is "evidence of widespread destruction"? You can't be serious. Thomas Eshuis wrote: CharlesChandler wrote: Oldskeptic wrote: In fact there have been found numerous artifacts depicting the gods El and Ba'al and the goddess Asherah in Jewish settlements leading right up to the Babylonian conquest. And on into the Roman era... Failure to refute the point being made has been noted. No, I agree with that point. Here's what I said in a post that predated his: CharlesChandler wrote: There are artifacts of continued worship of the Canaanite gods during this period (especially Ba'al). Well, yes, OK, you have noted that I have failed to refute my own point. Thomas Eshuis wrote: CharlesChandler wrote: So to think that the Israelites became completely monotheistic during the captivity isn't correct. Where did Oldkeptic make that claim. More importantly how does this refute his point that the Jews very much had idols? OldSkeptic said: Oldskeptic wrote: In fact there have been found numerous artifacts depicting the gods El and Ba'al and the goddess Asherah in Jewish settlements leading right up to the Babylonian conquest. I was merely extending his point, that the artifacts are found in layers above that period as well.
'13-11-10, 22:21 Thomas Eshuis	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus CharlesChandler wrote: Thomas Eshuis wrote: CharlesChandler wrote: Oldskeptic wrote: This is simply not true, there is archaeological evidence of wide spread destruction and fire in Jerusalem at the time of the siege. Do you have the references for this handy? http://www.archpark.org.il/ OK, I took a look at the link. They mention two things: the "House of the Bullae", and the "Burnt Room". I couldn't find any additional information on the latter, but here's what I found on the former: A group of forty-five bullae was discovered in the remains of a house – 'the House of the Bullae'. Documents, which had been kept there, were burned, but the fire baked the clay bullae, which had sealed them. The bullae bear a variety of names, as clearly the room served as an archive for 'incoming' mail. One of the bullae bears the name of 'Gemariah son of Shaphan', a personage mentioned in the Bible as a royal scribe in the reign of Jehoiakim, king of Judah (late seventh century BCE), in the days of the prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah 36:9-12). The house was destroyed in the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BCE. A house fire is "evidence of widespread destruction"? You can't be serious. I see appeal to personal incredulity and ignorance are all you have to offer. CharlesChandler wrote: Thomas Eshuis wrote: CharlesChandler wrote: Oldskeptic wrote: In fact there have been found numerous artifacts depicting the gods El and Ba'al and the goddess Asherah in Jewish settlements leading right up to the Babylonian conquest. And on into the Roman era... Failure to refute the point being made has been noted. No, I agree with that point. Here's what I said in a post that predated his: CharlesChandler wrote: There are artifacts of continued worship of the Canaanite gods during this period (especially Ba'al). Well, yes, OK, you have noted that I have failed to refute my own point. Then why did you claim: CharlesChandler wrote: As concerns contemporary artifacts in support of an Egyptian theological influence, I acknowledge the absence. I can also explain the absence. In Judaism, idolatry is forbidden. So there just aren't going to be any little figurines laying around, depicting Aten or anything else like that. When in fact in Babylon they did have idols? CharlesChandler wrote: Thomas Eshuis wrote: CharlesChandler wrote: So to think that the Israelites became completely monotheistic during the captivity isn't correct. Where did Oldkeptic make that claim. More importantly how does this refute his point that the Jews very much had idols? OldSkeptic said: Oldskeptic wrote: In fact there have been found numerous artifacts depicting the gods El and Ba'al and the goddess Asherah in Jewish settlements leading right up to the Babylonian conquest. I was merely extending his point, that the artifacts are found in layers above that period as well. Which doesn't refute his point, that despite your claim to the contrary, Jews did worship idols.
'13-11-10, 22:39 CharlesChandler	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus Continuing on about the Burnt House and the Burnt Room, I just can't resist this. I have this mental image of Nebuchadnezzar bragging about his conquest of Israel... Nebuchadnezzar wrote: Yessir, I went on up into Jerusalem, and I opened up a big can of whoop-ass on them! Loyal Subjects wrote: Do tell, King, what do you do? Nebuchadnezzar wrote: Well, first I set fire to a room. But then I went way, way off on them, and I up and burned down a whole house! Loyal Subjects wrote: [in a quivering voice] Oooooooooooooooooo... Sorry for the sarcasm... But if that's all you have as proof of the "destruction" of Jerusalem, you've got nothing. Thomas Eshuis wrote: I see appeal to personal incredulity and ignorance are all you have to offer. Ummm, no, argumentum ad hominem does not constitute evidence in support of said hypothesis. Thomas Eshuis wrote: Then why did you claim: CharlesChandler wrote: As concerns contemporary artifacts in support of an Egyptian theological influence, I acknowledge the absence. I can also explain the absence. In Judaism, idolatry is forbidden. So there just aren't going to be any little figurines laying around, depicting Aten or anything else like that. When in fact in Babylon they did have idols? I don't understand this. There aren't any idols of Yahweh, because Judaism prohibits it. Are you calling attention to the simple fact that not everybody in a Jewish community is a religious Jew? Thomas Eshuis wrote: CharlesChandler wrote: I was merely extending his point, that the artifacts are found in layers above that period as well. Which doesn't refute his point, that despite your claim to the contrary, Jews did worship idols. I'm saying the Judaism prohibits idolatry, and therefore, there aren't going to be any Jewish idols to be found in the archeological digs. But I never said that nobody in the vicinity could have been worshiping other gods. In fact, I have been saying the opposite all along.
'13-11-10, 22:49 Thomas Eshuis	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus CharlesChandler wrote: Continuing on about the Burnt House and the Burnt Room, I just can't resist this. I have this mental image of Nebuchadnezzar bragging about his conquest of Israel... Nebuchadnezzar wrote: Yessir, I went on up into Jerusalem, and I opened up a big can of whoop-ass on them! Loyal Subjects wrote: Do tell, King, what do you do? Nebuchadnezzar wrote: Well, first I set fire to a room. But then I went way, way off on them, and I up and burned down a whole house! Loyal Subjects wrote: [in a quivering voice] Oooooooooooooooooo... Sorry for the sarcasm... But if that's all you have as proof of the "destruction" of Jerusalem, you've got nothing. Thomas Eshuis wrote: I see appeal to personal incredulity and ignorance are all you have to offer. Ummm, no, argumentum ad hominem does not constitute evidence in support of said hypothesis. Quote me making an ad-hominem or retract this lie. Saying you're making an argument from ignorance isn't an ad-hominem. Also appeals to ridicule like the ones in this post are just as fallacious as the appeals to personal incredulity and ignorance you made in the previous post. CharlesChandler wrote: Thomas Eshuis wrote: Then why did you claim: CharlesChandler wrote: As concerns contemporary artifacts in support of an Egyptian theological influence, I acknowledge the absence. I can also explain the absence. In Judaism, idolatry is forbidden. So there just aren't going to be any little figurines laying around, depicting Aten or anything else like that. When in fact in Babylon they did have idols? I don't understand this. There aren't any idols of Yahweh, because Judaism prohibits it. Are you calling attention to the simple fact that not everybody in a Jewish community is a religious Jew? No I'm callingt to attention the fact that your resposnse to Oldskeptics refutation of your claims about Jews and idolatry are way of the mark. CharlesChandler wrote: Thomas Eshuis wrote: CharlesChandler wrote: I was merely extending his point, that the artifacts are found in layers above that period as well. Which doesn't refute his point, that despite your claim to the contrary, Jews did worship idols. I'm saying the Judaism prohibits idolatry, and therefore, there aren't going to be any Jewish idols to be found in the archeological digs. If the Jews took their religious symbolism from this supposed Egyptian elite, there still would've have been imagery, both from the Jews before they firmly established/created their own religion and certainly from this very elite you claim fled to Canaan. CharlesChandler wrote: But I never said that nobody in the vicinity could have been worshiping other gods. In fact, I have been saying the opposite all along. Except that you have been claiming the reason that there is no evidence for the presence of this Egyptian elite, is because the Jews didn't practice idolatry. Which, because of the reasons explained above, is simply false and fallacious.
'13-11-10, 23:31 Oldskeptic	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus Oldskeptic wrote: This is simply not true, there is archaeological evidence of wide spread destruction and fire in Jerusalem at the time of the siege. Do you have the references for this handy? http://books.google.com/books?id=78nRWg ... gy&f=false page 210 Oldskeptic wrote: In fact there have been found numerous artifacts depicting the gods El and Ba'al and the goddess Asherah in Jewish settlements leading right up to the Babylonian conquest. And on into the Roman era... Wikipedia wrote: The vita of Porphyry of Gaza, mentions the great god of Gaza, known as Marnas (Aramaic Marnā the "Lord"), who was regarded as the god of rain and grain and invoked against famine. Marna of Gaza appears on coinage of the time of Hadrian.[5] He was identified at Gaza with Cretan Zeus, Zeus Krētagenēs. It is likely that Marnas was the Hellenistic expression of Dagon. His temple, the Marneion—the last surviving great cult center of paganism—was burned by order of the Roman emperor in 402. Treading upon the sanctuary's paving-stones had been forbidden. Christians later used these same to pave the public marketplace. So to think that the Israelites became completely monotheistic during the captivity isn't correct. I never thought that and I never said that it was completed during the exile, and I don't think that anyone else has either. The trend beginning during the exile is not the same as it being completed during the exile. In fact I have stated, I think more that once, that it wasn't completed until around the 2nd century BCE. Are you under the impression that Gaza was a Jewish settlement or city? Oldskeptic wrote: What you have been presented with is evidence that your conclusions are not justified. Nor are yours. I'm not the person that is putting forth a far fetched hypothesis with easily rebutted evidence. My conclusions have been that your evidence does not hold up under scrutiny, and they are justified when I show that you are wrong.
'13-11-10, 23:35 hackenslash	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus stijndeloose wrote: Thomas Eshuis wrote: Also: Looking for something? We're sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site. I got the same thing... Apologies. Try this: http://www.amazon.com/Bloodline-Holy-Gr ... nskepti-20
'13-11-11, 00:27 CharlesChandler	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus Oldskeptic wrote: Oldskeptic wrote: This is simply not true, there is archaeological evidence of wide spread destruction and fire in Jerusalem at the time of the siege. Do you have the references for this handy? http://books.google.com/books?id=78nRWg ... gy&f=false page 210 Thanks! It will take me a while to get around to studying this, but it certainly looks reasonable.
'13-11-11, 00:45 hackenslash	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus More reasonable than plagiarism, certainly...
'13-11-11, 01:03 CharlesChandler	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus hackenslash wrote: More reasonable than plagiarism, certainly... Who did I plagiarize?
'13-11-11, 01:11 hackenslash	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus Read much? I made this more clear than you made your vapid excuses for thought. Try reading. I know you can, given that your thesis is stolen. I wouldn't mind but, for all his stupidity, at least the author whose ideas you stole were at least his. Lie all you want.
'13-11-11, 01:32 CharlesChandler	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus So it sounds like you're referring to Bloodline of the Holy Grail. I haven't read that one, so I don't know what I supposedly stole. This does not mean that the ideas are mine though. My primary source is Godly Kings and Early Ethics (1976) by Tertius Chandler, who was following Sigmund Freud's Moses and Monotheism (1939). If somebody is familiar with these works, they might be able to enlighten us as to who "stole" what from whom. But the last time I checked, following up on somebody else's work isn't stealing, so long as you quote your sources.
'13-11-11, 01:39 hackenslash	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus CharlesChandler wrote: So it sounds like you're referring to Bloodline of the Holy Grail. Sounds like, genius? No, I categorically stated it. I haven't read that one, so I don't know what I supposedly stole. You're lying. This does not mean that the ideas are mine though. My primary source is Godly Kings and Early Ethics (1976) by Tertius Chandler, who was following Sigmund Freud's Moses and Monotheism (1939). I doubt it. If somebody is familiar with these works, they might be able to enlighten us as to who "stole" what from whom. How about 'I can enlighten everybody'? You stole it all, whether from Gardner or otherwise. You presented as your own work something that was not your own work. You had no credbility to begin with, not least because you presented utter cock you know fuck all about, but you presented as your own that which had already been presented. No matter, they were all talking shit as well. But the last time I checked, following up on somebody else's work isn't stealing, so long as you quote your sources. You cited no sources, least of all those you plagiarised. You have nothing except that which you stole, and what you stole was fucking stupid. Case dismissed. I have plenty of respect for thought, I have no respect for you. You lied.
'13-11-11, 02:01 theropod	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus Modern gold is made "pure" by electroplating. For there to be a "pure gold" overlay of the ark there would have to have been a method to remove the other metals ALWAYS present in "wild" gold. How did the Hebrews manage to obtain pure gold? Oh, and modern fine gold isn't even "pure" as .999 "FINE" gold still has impurities. So, there's another way the ark could not have existed as claimed. RS
'13-11-11, 02:14 RealityRules	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus As far as early Jewish history, there are plenty of library facilities including search-engines on-line. The references/bibliography on Wikipedia are worth a look. As is the Wikipedia entry on the Exodus per se. There is a section on the The extra-biblical accounts Here are some references (and links) on early Jewish/"Exodus" history from the Wikipedia bibliography, in alphabetical order of the authors surname - Dever, William (2001). What Did the Biblical Writers Know, and When Did They Know It? Eerdmans. Dever, William (2003). Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? Eerdmans. Enns, Peter (2012). The Evolution of Adam. Baker Books. Meyers, Carol (2005).Exodus. Cambridge University Press. Redmount, Carol A. (1998). "Bitter Lives: Israel In And Out of Egypt". In Coogan, Michael D. The Oxford History of the Biblical World. OUP.
'13-11-11, 07:37 Thomas Eshuis	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus hackenslash wrote: stijndeloose wrote: Thomas Eshuis wrote: Also: Looking for something? We're sorry. The Web address you entered is not a functioning page on our site. I got the same thing... Apologies. Try this: http://www.amazon.com/Bloodline-Holy-Gr ... nskepti-20
'13-11-11, 08:11 Agrippina	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus CharlesChandler wrote: Here's just one example: Agrippina wrote: There is no physical evidence whatsoever for the ark, thus it's a myth. There's no mistaking the fallacy there. There's no physical evidence for God, thus he's a myth There's no physical evidence for unicorns, thus they're mythological There's no physical evidence for fairies, thus they're mythological There's no physical evidence for the exodus, thus it's a myth There's no physical evidence for.... and so on. Logical fallacies? If any person, outside of the priestly hierarchy of Judaism had ever written anything historical about the ark, done a drawing of it, etched its image in stone, spoken about it to historians; had Herodotus even as much as made a mention of its existence; had the Philistines made a stone carving of it before giving it back to the Hebrews, I would admit that there is a faint possibility that enclosed behind some ornate curtains inside the temple, there was some sort of holy relic, even if it wasn't exactly what the Bible describes, but there isn't. It was a hoax perpetrated on a bunch of superstitious people, exactly like the mythical book that the Mormons claim they discovered. It never did, and doesn't exist. Get over it. Stop wasting your time on a quest for the Holy Grail.
'13-11-11, 14:06 CharlesChandler	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus In conclusion, would it be safe to say that the whole idea of a linkage between Akhenaten and the Hebrews just isn't terribly popular on this forum? If not, then perhaps we should stop wasting our time. Those who would like to continue to discuss the issues are welcome to register on my site, where constructive criticisms are welcome, and where senseless personal attacks are moved to a folder dedicated to the study of rhetoric (just in case somebody would find examples of it to be useful), leaving the discussions more informative. We encourage disagreement, since only in disagreement do we learn. But we don't set aside much time for adolescent emotional confrontations. Thanks very much to those who have provided useful information. While the common literature on the Babylonian captivity denies the existence of archeological evidence, one of the posts (out of 256 total on this thread so far) cited a legitimate reference, so it appears that there is more to that than the common literature portrays. I'm looking forward to learning more about that. Ciao.
'13-11-11, 14:20 theropod	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus Um, Chales, if you think there have been personal attacks posted here it is best you report those to the mods and allow them to deal with such matters. I think you may be confusing attacks on your position, and supposed evidence, as attacks against your person. I could be wrong, so report the posts. The mods can't be everywhere, and your input is critical to the smooth operation of the forum. So, rather than use the forum as a one trick pony, and exile yourself form the much more diverse forum as a whole, it will be you that misses a golden ticket to a vast level of free education and discussion on a wide spectrum of subjects. RS
'13-11-11, 14:22 Shrunk	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus That's known as the "pre-emptive self-ban", I believe. Not to be confused with the "Brave Sir Robin."
'13-11-11, 14:47 Agrippina	Re: The Pharaoh of the Exodus