Tonight I watched Simcha Jacobivichi’s-the naked Archaeologist’s two parter on finding the mount on which Moses supposedly was given the commandments. Underneath the drama of it all, Jacob (for short), analyses the good book to trace the Exodus, and commences his search for same from Elim, the second leg of the supposed journey of the exiles. Jacob enlisted along the way the aid of other similar Jacobivichian like characters.

Jacob deduced that he was looking for a holy mountain evidenced by activity of religious ceremony, namely: a spring source from the summit and a mountain within distance of Elim as his pencil-compass determined it to be. Jacob calculates his way through various Sinai passageways by first assuming how far man, (no mention of the impact of woman, child, animals or payload) can travel over the desert in one day; multiplied that by the number of days journey from Elim to Mt. Sinai as per the Bible; plots his arc of probability with trusty pencil compass and goes off in pursuit of the nearest mountain falling within his radius, pardon me--revised radii.

Whatever drama effect Jacob may not have intended is limited to the mountains he first encounters and then summarily dismisses. His Jacobivichianites hype several mountains resembling large sand dunes hardened over time as the probable one, using as evidence-- this was a holy mountain; the plateau is large enough to hold a multitude; the rock formations show there was an alter; the pictograms of animals on the rocks is proof of religion practiced (by the Jews, I suppose). Alas, each mountain is either too far according to Jacob's pencil compass or lacking evidence of a spring.

Finally Jacob comes to Mt. Shina which bears all resemblance to the others to the undiscerning eye that is. It has a plateau; rock circles within rock circles (still laid bare in the desert some 3500 years later) which he quietly must have acknowledged only to himself as being of some significance to the one-God people; pictograms of animals which he does not even get into; and the ultimate evidence that a stream once flowed from the summit—that is, his Jacobivichianite plucked a calcified rock from the top of a bed of others which to the untrained eye (mine) looks like it was laid yesterday rather than forged by water millenia ago.

Jacob then declares that this is it! This is Mt. Sinai, the mountain where God gave the 10 commandments to Moses. And with that the show ends on a whimper. Case closed!

Now how much more proof than that can we ask for? And we can expect many will be unequivocally declaring on the www that Mt. Sinai was indeed found.

Have I missed something there?? I bet that wasn't on PBS (Public Broadcasting System)
You got a link to the shows web site?

Never mind I got it.

<********"http://www.simchaj.ca/blog/_archives/2005/8/25/1167948.html" target="_blank">LINK

He's not naked he wears cloths. lol
He's really not an archaeologist either.


An Israeli-born Canadian, Jacobovici received a B.A. in Philosophy and Political Science from McGill University, and an M.A. in International Relations from the University of Toronto.

Interesting I wonder what Mako will have to say.

Probably the same thing I'd say...the guy doing the show is either nuts,or suffers from a lot of delusions.

If a true archaeologist said that it was found,it would be far more credible.From someone who isn't an archaeologist however,it's far from being credible.

It's not impossible that the Ten Commandment account of the bible is true, as far as Moses going up into the mountains and coming back down with some engraved tablets of law. I just don't think that God gave them to him, or that any of the other laws and statutes that he created came from a deity. In my opinion, Moses did what countless preachers of today are doing, and used the people's gullibility to make them obey him.

I have watched the show in question a fair bit and the episodes that you are referring to.

He does come up with some interesting points of view, but you also have remember that he is not an expert he's a film maker.

And unfortunately there also seems to be a fair bit of bias in the information he presents.

One of the most unusual of his claims is that of the Cretans (Minoans) leaving Egypt with Moses and then “returning” to Mycenae (on the Greek mainland) by drawing a connection between a piece of Mycenaean jewelry from Grave Circle A and the famous biblical ark of the covenant. This totally ignores the fact that the Cretan civilization was well over 1300 years old at the period that Jacobovici wants to place the Exodus and was not related to the Mycenaean culture in any manner. It must be noted that in several respects, Jacobovici misstates the facts (intentionally or unintentionally) which does not help his case. (The question of intentionality only goes to whether Jacobovici is a sloppy reader or a slick charlatan, not to whether he is correct.) Many of his misrepresentations/sloppy mistakes are such as claiming that the Ark was crowned with lions and birds, when in all actuality it was crowned with Cherubim, (creatures with the head of a man, wings and the body of a bull) and in giving the height of the altar described in Exodus as 4.5 meters high. According to Exodus (Exodus 27:1) it was actually described as being 3 cubits high (a cubit was around 18 inches) which works out to abou 4.5 feet, not 4.5 meters. 3 cubits being about the height that was perfect for a normal person standing on the ground. It would seem that Jacobovici mistakenly took the measurements of the gigantic altar described in 2 Chronicles (2 Chron 4:1) for Solomon’s temple. This altar is said to have been 10 cubits high or about 15 feet (around 4.5 meters). He also adds a ramp to the altar, a detail not present in the Torah and prohibited by Exodus. Strangely for his theory, neither the descriptions of the tabernacle’s nor Solomon’s altar’s descriptions mention ramps or stairs. Jacobovici, in his attempt to support his contention that Greeks left Egypt with Moses, separating from the Exodus at an unidentified port along the way to the Holy Land and sailed to Greece, points out that Homer calls the people buried at Mycenae (a major Greece city-state) are called the “Danaoi”. He tries to tie this in by claiming that the tribe of Dan were instrumental in the construction of the Ark of the Covenant. In all actuality, according to Exodus, the chief artisan working on the project was Bezale of the tribe of Judah! However, his assistant was one Oholiab of the tribe of Dan. Hardly evidence of the tribe of Dan being responsible for the construction of the Ark! Jacobovici asks in his “The Exodus Decoded”, if this name similarity is a coincidence. If there does happen to be a coincidence between the tribe of Dan and the Danaoi of Mycenae, it probably was in reverse. The Danaoi were quite possibly among the “Sea Peoples” that migrated into the Levant and might have come into contact with the proto-Israelites, who might have absorbed a variation of the name. I think that this small critique of Jacobovici’s sloppy, illogical approach of a discipline in which he has no training shows that he is nothing more than a wannabe Ron Wyatt, attempting in the same manner as Wyatt to twist archaeology to support his religious beliefs by innuendo and out and out falsehoods when the evidence doesn’t support his beliefs. – Da Wolf.

very interesting read Da wolf....

Symcha, being an accredited archaeologist or not, is of no importance. A scholar may have the advantage of lateral institutional training behind him/her, but this does not make the non-scholar less capable of the rational understanding of what was found. Think Belzoni; Petrie et al. However, when it comes to viewers, those who just want to believe will do little or no research on the subject, and will just offer his nonsense as proof without ever attempting to verify that proof.

Here is an interesting exchange between Symcha and Hershel Shanks of the Biblical Archaeological Society with regard the Exodus.

http://www.bib-arch.org/bswbOOexodus.html

You are actually trying to compare a man with a background only in film making to pioneering archaeologists? Belzoni and Petrie at least had backgrounds that helped in their archeological quests (Engineering for Belzoni and Anthropology for Petrie) and worked at a period that almost nothing was known about the ancient world. Today Jacobovici is pulling theories out of his orifice and ignoring that they go contrary to recorded (and unrecorded but excavated) history...He is the type that takes things out of context and points and says, “Look, there is your proof”! And he does it not for knowledge, but to provide disinformation in the form of entertainment to the (all too often ignorant) masses! He is a talented entertainer, but I would take anything he theorizes with a ton of salt! – Da Wolf

Incidentially, I notice Hershel did not agree with him - even though Hershel as a Christian publisher wants to agree with him!

I just rank it all into the category of "People who are attempting to trick you into believing that they actually know what they're doing".

For me,it would take several *credible* archaeologists to agree with this person's findings before I would accept it as the truth.Of course,I highly doubt that will *ever* happen.

I agree with you Wolf - Da Wolf

I understand your scepticism towards those not trained in archaeology, but consider that with the advent of Napoleon in Egypt which resulted in the subsequent rush to acquire all things Egyptian, no one had any scholarly experience in the art of archaeology.

Belzoni was a penniless adventurer, artist and inventor when approached by Henry Salt, a collector of antiquities, who invited Belzoni to remove the bust of Rameses II from the Ramasseum. Belzoni’s expertise was worth no more than Jacob, probably even less with today’s knowledge.

Petrie, meanwhile, is considered the pioneer of modern archaeological methods. He apparently had minimal formal education and knew only geometry and surveying through the teachings of his father.

Jacobovici’s credentials in my opinion, is no less than that of those two. Given what information is available today about the Egyptians, he is not marching into Egypt with zero knowledge of the ancients as did Belzoni and Petrie, because he is expected to be versed in that which he pursues. I make no excuses for his bias toward the Biblical tales. I just make the case that his credentials were no worse than that of Belzoni or Petrie. How he chooses to utilize his accreditation in linguistics, fame or knowledge thereof, is what I am addressing. And I thought I was quite clear---he failed to convince me.

Now, if you would judge every person based on their scholarly credentials, then you would have to exclude yourself and all others who voice an opinion on a topic that does not fall into the realm of their institutional education.

[quote]An Israeli-born Canadian, Jacobovici received a B.A. in Philosophy and Political Science from McGill University, and an M.A. in International Relations from the University of Toronto.

Hmm...

These credentials are so far removed from those of Belzoni and Petrie that it would be utterly ridiculous to accept that the man even has an inkling of what he's doing.

True,while Belzoni and Petrie were not exactly knowledgeable in the fledgling field of archaeology,they at least had an inkling of how to proceed with what they did without making too much of a mess of things.Jacobovici seems to be relying more on pure speculation than any knowledge of the field of archaeology.This is why everything he does should be suspect.

Also,as stated,Belzoni was commissioned to do what he did by a collector,while Petrie did many things because of his own curiosity.What motivation does Jacobovici have in attempting to find Mt.Sinai? Who is flipping the bill for his search? The answers to these questions are very important,as they may shed some light on the whole scenario,possibly enough to determine whether it is for propaganda purposes or something completely different.

Taken from http://www.visiontv.ca/NakedArchaeologist/who_is_he.htm

[/quote]"My goal,” says Jacobovici, “is to demystify the Bible in general, and archaeology in particular, to brush away the cobwebs and burst academic bubbles.”

Drawing on years of personal research and his experience in bringing history to life on the screen, Jacobovici fearlessly probes some of the most controversial new theories in Biblical archaeology: that an African army rescued Jerusalem in the 8th Century B.C.; that the invention of the alphabet contributed to the Biblical Exodus; and that recently discovered Bronze Age ceramic penises may explain why Delilah fell for Samson.

It sounds like Jacobovici just wants to be controversial.

Sorry,but I have this tendency to disbelieve those who do not have a proper background when it comes to things like archaeology,especially when it appears that they have a personal bias involved.

[/quote] And I thought I was quite clear---he failed to convince me.

Ummm...it wasn't all that clear.It's a bit hard to understand whether something is cynicism or sarcasm just from their words online.

[/quote] Now, if you would judge every person based on their scholarly credentials, then you would have to exclude yourself and all others who voice an opinion on a topic that does not fall into the realm of their institutional education.

Very true.Yet,we are still free to speculate.It's all in the process of learning about a specific field or topic.But,it is necessary for even the speculators to determine whether or not someone being discussed has the proper credentials in order to be believable.

Interestingly, I am a professional historian in the employ of the Federal Government and have a degree in Archaeology (as has been pointed out by my collegues Mako and Consummate Deist at various times on this website), I will admit that Syrio-Palestinian Archaeology is not my specialty and that I have not participated in a dig recently, but I do have the background and knowledge (and contacts) to state that Jacobovici's credibility and ability is extremely lacking. - Da Wolf

Someone help me out here, I thought that Petrie found Mount Sinai?
I read some of his book Researches in Sinai.......he followed the biblical route to sinai and found it......is this not the case?

Petrie made the claim, but there is no real archaeological evidence that the Israelites were even in Egypt, much less did the "Exodus Gig". Remember Petrie was "of another age" and much has been learned since his time. As far as Jacobovici's film goes, I decided to check with some of my friends that are still active in the field and see if any of them had any input on this subject. Najar Arfan pointed me to an article in the November/December 2006 Biblical Archaeological Review by the Egyptologist Manfred Bietak, titled “The Volcano Explains Everything – or does it?”. Dr Bietak was one of the experts interviewed by Jacobovici in the film and had little good to say about the film. Bietak contends that few archaeologists of today support Josephus’ belief, that the Exodus was tied to the expulsion of the Hykosos, in any manner. Those that do not totally dismiss it out of hand as a myth; attribute it (the Exodus) as taking place during the Ramesside period (1295-1070 BCE), which is 250 – 350 years after the Hykosos expulsion by Ahmose (1540-1515 BCE). He further states that the Tempest Stele of Ahmose (one of the key elements of Jacobovici’s theory) has nothing to do with the eruption of Thera, which actually erupted around 150 years later, during the reign of Queen Hatshepsut.
Bietak revealed that Jacobovici manipulated interviews with prominent historians and archaeologists, taking snippets that gave the impression of agreement with his theory. One example is Dr. Donald Redford of Penn State, who seems to (in the film) agree with Jacobovici, but actually dismisses the films points as fantasy. Bietak makes several points that show that Jacobovici’s premise is ridiculous, ranging from the dearth of proto-Israelite evidence prior to 1200 BCE, to Jacobovici’s murky assignment of Pharoah Seqenenre’s death to Israelites (based on the fact that he was killed by a battle axe of the type used by all cultures of the Near East) to the prevailing winds of that area which would have carried the volcanic debris away from Egypt and towards Northeastern Asia Minor (the dark clouds would have been over Syria and couldn’t cause the darkness described on the Tempest Stele). Many of the “facts” given by Jacobovici are actually dated long before or long after the period he assigns to them.

He makes two statements that show how the profession views Jacobovici’s film:

“To the non-Egyptologist, the argumentation in the film may look great, but the specialist is left to wonder and scratch his head at what educational value a film like this can provide the public.”

“From a technical point of view, the film is brilliant. If this film were presented as a work of fiction, it would be engaging and entertaining. But it is not presented as a work of fiction. It makes the public believe it is based on a serious investigation. It is a pity that the theory behind the film has been so superficially researched and does not stand up to close scrutiny.”
Da Wolf

It is obvious that the three of us are in agreement that Simcha does not have the credentials of an archaeologist. Where I disagree however is that his particular conclusions should be dismissed simply because he has no such accreditation. He is a filmmaker making documentaries concerning (his accepted ) truths in The Bible, and so should be dismissed based on his obvious bias and purposeful attempts at clouding the facts, not his lack of credentials simply because we do not agree with the man's conclusions. After all he has had a full 10 years of indulging in the pursuit of Biblical history/archaeology which may not mean much if he has the intellect of an idiot, but it is a gauge by which some of his detractors should realize that they too can be measured for their authority to speak on the subject.

We actually do not know what informal instruction or what if any research he has undertaken on the available information, but remember, available information is that which is produced by those who are accredited, and subsequently researched and studied by the layman—Jacobivici included. One does not need to have been with Carnarvon as he unearthed Tut’s tomb, to speak of the terrain, tomb or funerary and religious objects uncovered.

The attempt to establish Petrie’s archaeological ability at the time he first set foot in Egypt as being superior to Jacobivici is wanting, since, 164 years of knowledge on ancient Egypt has been accumulated since Petrie’s death, or more aptly put—we, including Jacobivici but excluding Petrie, are privy to 164 years of accumulated knowledge. Jacobivici’s intentional bias, notwithstanding. I somehow doubt that anyone would try to make the case that knowledege comes only from institutionally endorsed study .

But back to the point of my opening post---Somewhere down the line, those who just want to believe, will be offering Jacob’s documentary as proof that Mt. Sinai was found.

I pointed out that not only does Jacobovici not have the creditials to be taken seriously in archaeology, but that he has committed fraud in his presentations. He has attempted to skew evidence, to make it seem that authorities agree with his findings, when in fact they hold them to be totally against all evidence, recorded history and archaeological. Jacobovici not only does not have the creditials, he is nothing more than a panderer to the ignorant and barely educated. - Da Wolf

where you been my friend?they found that out at least 10 years ago.
it's on a mountain inside of saudi arabia,and there is a saudi defense
operation sitting dead on top of it!

I'll have to check out the Naked Archaeologist show, it sounds pretty interesting. The other day I bought th eLost Tomb of Jesus DVD done by the same guy and I find him pretty entertaining. Kind of like a scientific version of the Crocodile Hunter.

Jacobovici is either really good or really bad. Sadly he lets personal beliefs influence his show. Faith and proper scholarship do not mix. On one occasion, he stated unequivocally that he was going into the field and prove--yes, prove!--that the Torah was written by Moses. Well, he proved it alright (to himself) ... by ignoring the overwhelming majority of scholars and accepting the words of a couple very zealous rabbis who stated "What do these scholars know?" I kid you not! Every since then, it has been difficult to watch his show--which is a terrible shame, because it can be quite good at times.

Sean

the problem is, that orthodox and many other jews really believed moses wrote the five books, as they are today. I think it is too weird to accept that he knew about his own death, and wrote about it in past tense. there is a passage, I believe in Deuteronomy, where it says that the "torah" was written down, and copies given to each tribe. This probably refers to the laws, only, perhaps only a remnant of which remains in today's "torah". Moses certainly wrote something, but not the "five books", any more than Confucius wrote the five books of Confucius. A lot of place names in Israel are eponymous, like Sinai and Nazareth. THe mountain named Sinai today may or may not be the real one, and we may never know. As many here have discussed, nazareth at the time of jesus is about as real as camelot.