Possible evidence of the Exodus found in Jordan

[cormac mac airt]

3 minutes ago, Opus Magnus said:

It is listed that Thutmose III reigned from 1458-1425 BC.

https://www.ancient.eu/Thutmose_III/

The Geneaologies are there for this purpose. This is just date they fall on. They've been counted and that is the date. Do you have any evidence that the 1st temple was not built in 966 BC? 

Radio-carbon dating says otherwise. Do you have evidence that Ramsey, et al. are wrong and YOU are right? 

http://img2.timg.co.il/forums/1_143488617.pdf

cormac

[Opus Magnus]

50 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Radio-carbon dating says otherwise. Do you have evidence that Ramsey, et al. are wrong and YOU are right? 

http://img2.timg.co.il/forums/1_143488617.pdf

cormac

Thanks. I read over it, and found this in your article, "Because reign length has been
included in our models, it is important to stress
that the outputs of the models cannot be used to
provide reign-length information."

 

So, the date given by Thutmose III in the article is the accession date or date he came into power as Pharoah they calculated. Thutmose III was thought to have ruled for 54 years, so it still covers the date of 1446 BC.

Thutmose III 24 1479 1479 1494 1483 1498 1474

[Swede]

1 hour ago, Opus Magnus said:

The Geneaologies are there for this purpose. This is just date they fall on. They've been counted and that is the date. Do you have any evidence that the 1st temple was not built in 966 BC? 

You may wish to start with your own reference:

...built in ancient Jerusalem in c. tenth century B.C.E....(emphasis added).

While contemporary scholarship challenges the Bible's story of Solomon's Temple's construction as either anachronistic or exaggerated, the account is worth considering in some detail.

Note: Archaeologists have called into question existence of so grand a building project in tenth-century Jerusalem. Evidence suggests that Judah was too sparsely populated, and Jerusalem far too small a village in David and Solomon's day to have supported construction, wealth, and a labor pool on the scale described. A possible alternative explanation is that that the Temple was built or expanded later in Judah's history and then ascribed to Solomon's era, which was seen by the Biblical authors as a Golden Age of unrivaled wealth, power, and (initially at least) religious piety.

https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Temple_of_Jerusalem

Edit: Format.

Edited June 1, 2019 by Swede

[jaylemurph]

1 hour ago, Opus Magnus said:

 

It is listed that Thutmose III reigned from 1458-1425 BC.

https://www.ancient.eu/Thutmose_III/

 

 

The Geneaologies are there for this purpose. This is just date they fall on. They've been counted and that is the date. Do you have any evidence that the 1st temple was not built in 966 BC? 

That’s not how evidence works. You can’t prove negatives. 

Also, that’s not what the genealogies are there for. 

—Jaylemurph 

[+Pettytalk]

2 hours ago, Opus Magnus said:

Do you have any evidence that the 1st temple was not built in 966 BC? 

Quoting me and the Mac on the same post, and then addressing the "you" without distinction of which of us, is the making for an embarrassing situation for the Mac. He considers me, if at all, as an archenemy, and I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that he would not be caught dead being on my side of things. 

If you are asking me for negative evidence, I would need to see the temple's building permit license, and check the dates on the projected start and finish dates, before negating the official Biblical dates.

The Destruction of the Temple and Signs of the End Times

1As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!”

2“Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4“Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”

O Magnus, can you date the destruction of the temple pointed out by Jesus? As that is the only date I'm concerned with, when it comes to Temples, whether it's the first, or the last..

 

 

 

[Opus Magnus]

3 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

Quoting me and the Mac on the same post, and then addressing the "you" without distinction of which of us, is the making for an embarrassing situation for the Mac. He considers me, if at all, as an archenemy, and I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that he would not be caught dead being on my side of things. 

If you are asking me for negative evidence, I would need to see the temple's building permit license, and check the dates on the projected start and finish dates, before negating the official Biblical dates.

The Destruction of the Temple and Signs of the End Times

1As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!”

2“Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4“Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”

O Magnus, can you date the destruction of the temple pointed out by Jesus? As that is the only date I'm concerned with, when it comes to Temples, whether it's the first, or the last..

 

 

 

Pretty sure their destruction dates are known by the same way.

[cormac mac airt]

1 hour ago, Opus Magnus said:

Thanks. I read over it, and found this in your article, "Because reign length has been
included in our models, it is important to stress
that the outputs of the models cannot be used to
provide reign-length information."

 

So, the date given by Thutmose III in the article is the accession date or date he came into power as Pharoah they calculated. Thutmose III was thought to have ruled for 54 years, so it still covers the date of 1446 BC.

Thutmose III 24 1479 1479 1494 1483 1498 1474

Then we can throw your earlier linked date away as 1458 - 1425 is most definitely NOT 54 years that he ruled as a ruler in his own right but only 33. The rest were as part of a regency with Hatshepsut and Amenhotep II. If we use the earliest date per Ramsey, et al. of 1498 with that year counting as year 1 then year 54 would be 1445 BC, the year after your claimed date, and as his reign was actually 53 years, 10 months he was likely already dead by your date. If we use the latter date of 1474 with his sole reigning length at 33 years then it comes to 1442 BC which places it at or very near the time of Amenhotep II's reign per my link: 

Quote

Amenhotep II 1 1427 1425 1441 1431 1445 1423

cormac

[cormac mac airt]

7 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

Quoting me and the Mac on the same post, and then addressing the "you" without distinction of which of us, is the making for an embarrassing situation for the Mac. He considers me, if at all, as an archenemy, and I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that he would not be caught dead being on my side of things. 

If you are asking me for negative evidence, I would need to see the temple's building permit license, and check the dates on the projected start and finish dates, before negating the official Biblical dates.

The Destruction of the Temple and Signs of the End Times

1As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!”

2“Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4“Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”

O Magnus, can you date the destruction of the temple pointed out by Jesus? As that is the only date I'm concerned with, when it comes to Temples, whether it's the first, or the last..

You're not an archenemy, you're comedy relief. 

cormac

[+Pettytalk]

47 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

Also, that’s not what the genealogies are there for.

And why are they there, O Great one? I guess just to fill pages and add volume? Symbology speaks louder than mere plain words..

[Opus Magnus]

1 minute ago, cormac mac airt said:

Then we can throw your earlier linked date away as 1458 - 1425 is most definitely NOT 54 years that he ruled as a ruler in his own right but only 33. The rest were as part of a regency with Hatshepsut and Amenhotep II. If we use the earliest date per Ramsey, et al. of 1498 with that year counting as year 1 then year 54 would be 1445 BC, the year after your claimed date, and as his reign was actually 53 years, 10 months he was likely already dead by your date. If we use the latter date of 1474 with his sole reigning length at 33 years then it comes to 1442 BC which places it at or very near the time of Amenhotep II's reign per my link: 

cormac

Well, you can blame the Egyptologists for that. Regardless, most the source vary a bit. However, the carbon dating even confirms Thutmose III as having been around at 1446 BC. As there were many dates on your article only that earliest one is one year off meaning the science isn't even totally exact. Your own source confirms it.

[+Pettytalk]

7 minutes ago, Opus Magnus said:

Pretty sure their destruction dates are known by the same way.

What is your interest in this, just mere archeological/historical accuracy? Or are you wanting just to strengthen your faith by proving portions of the Bible give true historical dates, and therefore proving God wrote it, or inspired others to write it on His behalf? 

[Opus Magnus]

Just now, Pettytalk said:

What is your interest in this, just mere archeological/historical accuracy? Or are you wanting just to strengthen your faith by proving portions of the Bible give true historical dates, and therefore proving God wrote it, or inspired others to write it on His behalf? 

Balak Blocked.

[Opus Magnus]

11 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

 

Quoting me and the Mac on the same post, and then addressing the "you" without distinction of which of us, is the making for an embarrassing situation for the Mac. He considers me, if at all, as an archenemy, and I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that he would not be caught dead being on my side of things. 

If you are asking me for negative evidence, I would need to see the temple's building permit license, and check the dates on the projected start and finish dates, before negating the official Biblical dates.

The Destruction of the Temple and Signs of the End Times

1As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, “Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!”

2“Do you see all these great buildings?” replied Jesus. “Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

3As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, 4“Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?”

O Magnus, can you date the destruction of the temple pointed out by Jesus? As that is the only date I'm concerned with, when it comes to Temples, whether it's the first, or the last..

Matthew 5

¹⁷ “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸ For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.¹⁹ Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commandsand teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. ²⁰ For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Edited June 1, 2019 by Opus Magnus

[+Pettytalk]

9 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

You're not an archenemy, you're comedy relief. 

cormac

You know what they say, "laughter will add years to your life."

 

[cormac mac airt]

9 minutes ago, Opus Magnus said:

Well, you can blame the Egyptologists for that. Regardless, most the source vary a bit. However, the carbon dating even confirms Thutmose III as having been around at 1446 BC. As there were many dates on your article only that earliest one is one year off meaning the science isn't even totally exact. Your own source confirms it.

No, you're the only one to blame as using your date of 966 for the First Temple even the Bible claims that it took SEVEN YEARS to complete which means it wasn't finished until 959 BC. 480 years added to that gives a date of 1439. As anyone else knows you don't start a date for a building from the date construction STARTED, but when it FINISHED. Nice try though. And that's assuming any Biblical numbers are remotely accurate which is NOT in evidence. 

cormac

 

[Opus Magnus]

8 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

No, you're the only one to blame as using your date of 966 for the First Temple even the Bible claims that it took SEVEN YEARS to complete which means it wasn't finished until 959 BC. 480 years added to that gives a date of 1439. As anyone else knows you don't start a date for a building from the date construction STARTED, but when it FINISHED. Nice try though. And that's assuming any Biblical numbers are remotely accurate which is NOT in evidence. 

cormac

 

Yes, 1 Kings 6:1 dates the BEGINING of temple construction. As it is written.

Edited June 1, 2019 by Opus Magnus

[Herr Falukorv]

1 minute ago, Opus Magnus said:

Yes, 1 Kings 6:1 dates the BEGGINING of temple construction. As it is written.

Were they BEGGING for a temple construction???

Sorry.... couldnt help it...

 

[+Pettytalk]

12 minutes ago, Opus Magnus said:

Matthew 5

¹⁷ “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸ For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.¹⁹ Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commandsand teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. ²⁰ For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

You are preaching to the choir.

Edited June 1, 2019 by Pettytalk

[Opus Magnus]

Just now, Herr Falukorv said:

Were they BEGGING for a temple construction???

Sorry.... couldnt help it...

 

Yes, spelling noted. The temple was sort of begged to be built.

[Opus Magnus]

1 minute ago, Pettytalk said:

You are preaching to the choir.

Then don't preach to me. I don't know why you fight it it only makes sense. 

[Opus Magnus]

All you needed to do was consider it. Now my phone is low on battery I Am logging off.

[+Pettytalk]

5 minutes ago, Opus Magnus said:

Then don't preach to me. I don't know why you fight it it only makes sense. 

I meant me as the choir, as "they" are just academic heathens, comically speaking.

[khazarkhum]

16 minutes ago, Opus Magnus said:

Yes, 1 Kings 6:1 dates the BEGINING of temple construction. As it is written.

Do you believe that they calculated time in BC?AD? "Yeah, it's the first day of 988 BC, better get a move on to finish this temple by 981 BC"?

[+Pettytalk]

To preach to the choir. phrase. If you say that someone is preaching to the choir, you mean that they are presenting an argument or opinion to people who already agree with it.

If anyone cites the Bible to me, and intends to make a point with the meaning of the citation, to be an indirect response for a previous exchange of words or ideas, then I don't consider it as literal preaching.

If one has different opinions, and expresses them, it does not mean it's preaching in the literal sense of the word. Or if one believes that they have facts to contradict another's perceived facts, and relates them, it's still not literal preaching. If one makes a statement like, "I told you so", to mean to recall a previous warning given but not heeded, it's still not preaching, as this is reproaching for not heeding to the warning of a highly probable outcome, which was prophesied based on historical repetition.

Therefore what we have here is a failure to communicate just what, who, and when preaching was involved, literally.

And when one refuses to answer a properly put question, a question that is pertinent to the discussion at hand, then the situation demands preaching of the law.

 

 

[cormac mac airt]

51 minutes ago, Opus Magnus said:

Yes, 1 Kings 6:1 dates the BEGINING of temple construction. As it is written.

You suggested earlier they built it in 966. And yet no evidence exists of even a foundation for the alleged Temple of Solomon. Nor was there a sufficient population at the time to do so, especially at the scale it’s construction was supposed to have been. Using the Bible to validate the Bible is a fools bet.

cormac