Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Possible evidence of the Exodus found in Jordan

426 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

khazarkhum
12 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

According to my source, the name Moses means "I drew you out of the waters"

But I would also like to go on record, that we are spitting hairs, as the say, about words. Whereas Moses split the Red Sea. Or rather, parted, for those that split hairs.

The fact is that, also according to my same source, that the name of Moses would have become famous and everlasting. And no one can argue that it is, overwhelmingly, more popular and better know the world over than any other Egyptian name.

.

 

An awful lot of people have heard of Tutankhamun, and Ramses is popular, too. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
2 minutes ago, khazarkhum said:

An awful lot of people have heard of Tutankhamun, and Ramses is popular, too. 

and uh.....and uh......and uh........whatshisname???.....Yes, Jesus......Jesus......that's it......He is a well known fellow too. Every Spring angels roll  his rock aside and if he sees his shadow it's 6 more weeks of Winter. :yes:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
khazarkhum
6 minutes ago, Piney said:

and uh.....and uh......and uh........whatshisname???.....Yes, Jesus......Jesus......that's it......He is a well known fellow too. Every Spring angels roll  his rock aside and if he sees his shadow it's 6 more weeks of Winter. :yes:

I thought that was David, and some guy named Mike something made him into the rock. I'm not  sure we can say what body part has to cast the shadow.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
1 minute ago, khazarkhum said:

I thought that was David, and some guy named Mike something made him into the rock. I'm not  sure we can say what body part has to cast the shadow.

.....or does the light shine through his nail holes signifying the Solstice?????........Maybe Petticoat......I mean Pettiness...no, no, no,... PettyTalk knows.

I'm just a stupid Indian ranch boy.  :yes:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk

Perhaps the reason why there is little archeological evidence in Egypt for the Hebrews' presence there is most likely due to Moses himself. After all he wrote the first five books of the Old Testament, and he may have dropped and broken a few tablets that he wrote the history on. We know that he stuttered, therefore he could have also been clumsy, and dropped things all the time. There are some that believe that God wrote 15 commandments and not ten. Stone tablets can be broken.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
khazarkhum
Just now, Piney said:

.....or does the light shine through his nail holes signifying the Solstice?????........Maybe Petticoat......I mean Pettiness...no, no, no,... PettyTalk knows.

I'm just a stupid Indian ranch boy.  :yes:

The light shining through His nail holes marks the Greenwich meridian.

I'm a victim of public education myself.

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
5 minutes ago, khazarkhum said:

I'm a victim of public education myself.

Vo-tech, cutting down big trees and 64 miles of fenceline. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
29 minutes ago, Piney said:

.....or does the light shine through his nail holes signifying the Solstice?????........Maybe Petticoat......I mean Pettiness...no, no, no,... PettyTalk knows.

I'm just a stupid Indian ranch boy.  :yes:

If it's the right hand it's the summer, but if the left hand, then it's the winter solstice.

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
1 hour ago, Pettytalk said:

According to my source, the name Moses means "I drew you out of the waters"

But I would also like to go on record, that we are spitting hairs, as the say, about words. Whereas Moses split the Red Sea. Or rather, parted, for those that split hairs.

The fact is that, also according to my same source, that the name of Moses would have become famous and everlasting. And no one can argue that it is, overwhelmingly, more popular and better know the world over than any other Egyptian name.

Yes, the Bible says the name means "drawn from the waters."  That's different than "child of".   https://www.etymonline.com/word/Moses

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
8 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Yes, the Bible says the name means "drawn from the waters."  That's different than "child of".   https://www.etymonline.com/word/Moses

 

Seriously now. There is lots of water connected with Moses, and although he led his people to the "promised" land, he was not allowed to cross the Jordan river, to go into the land. There is much symbolism in the Bible, and there will never be any worthwhile evidence found of the various stories in the Bible. At best, all that will be found will just be coincidences, at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Piney
1 hour ago, Pettytalk said:

There are some that believe that God wrote 15 commandments and not ten.

Every Jewish person out there. :yes:

Mel was making a "nut shot" at Christians and you missed it. :rolleyes:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
docyabut2

It was explained of the four rivers in the Bible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
5 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Seriously now. There is lots of water connected with Moses, and although he led his people to the "promised" land, he was not allowed to cross the Jordan river, to go into the land. There is much symbolism in the Bible, and there will never be any worthwhile evidence found of the various stories in the Bible. At best, all that will be found will just be coincidences, at best.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

While the Bible does have symbolism, I greatly doubt that it has that MUCH symbolism -- and the midrashes support me on this point.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
7 hours ago, khazarkhum said:

An awful lot of people have heard of Tutankhamun, and Ramses is popular, too. 

One must be very careful with words around here, as those people who have heard, and know the most about those Egyptians you named are the very mental giants around here. And they are awfully well advised on these matters. But as it's the case in many languages, words can have twists to them put on by using them in ways that have become to mean something different by very wise people. Therefore, having set a trend for those of us less trendy and less wise, so as for us to mimic those we admire and look up to. Case in point.

  awful

/ˈɔːf(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: awful
  1. 1.
    very bad or unpleasant.
    "the place smelled awful"
    synonyms: very unpleasant, disgusting, nasty, terrible, dreadful, ghastly, horrid, horrible, vile, foul, abominable, appalling, atrocious, horrendous, hideous, offensive, objectionable, obnoxious, frightful, loathsome, revolting, repulsive, repellent, repugnant, odious, sickening, nauseating, nauseous; More
    informalgruesome, diabolical, yucky, sick-making, godawful, gross, from hell, icky;
    informalgrotty, beastly;
    informalhellacious, lousy;
    literarynoisome;
    archaicdisgustful, loathly
    "the place smelled awful"
    very bad, poor, dreadful, terrible, frightful, atrocious, hopeless, inadequate, inferior, unsatisfactory, substandard, laughable, lamentable, execrable;
    informalcrummy, pathetic, rotten, useless, woeful, lousy, appalling, abysmal, dire, poxy, godawful;
    informalduff, chronic, rubbish, a load of pants;
    vulgar slangcrap, ****, chickenshit;
    rareegregious
    "I think it's an awful book"
    antonyms: lovely, wonderful, good, excellent
    • extremely shocking; horrific.
      "awful, bloody images"
      synonyms: serious, grave, bad, terrible, dreadful, alarming, critical
      "Ronnie's awful accident at the crossroads"
      antonyms: slight, minor
    • (of a person) very unwell or troubled.
      "I felt awful for being so angry with him"
      synonyms: ill, unwell, washed out, peaky; More
      sick, queasy, nauseous, nauseated, green about the gills;
      faint, dizzy, giddy;
      off, off colour, poorly;
      informalrough, lousy, rotten, terrible, dreadful, crummy;
      informalgrotty, ropy;
      informalwabbit, peely-wally;
      informalcrook;
      vulgar slangcrappy;
      datedqueer, seedy;
      rarepeaked, peakish
      "you look awful—you should go and lie down"
      remorseful, conscience-stricken, guilty, guilt-ridden, ashamed, chastened, contrite, sorry, full of regret, regretful, repentant, penitent, shamefaced, self-reproachful, apologetic
      "I felt awful for being so angry with him"
  2. 2.
    used to emphasize the extent of something, especially something unpleasant or negative.
    "I've made an awful fool of myself"
     
    Well, I said, and how fortunate are we in having Prodicus among us, at the
    right moment; for he has a wisdom, Protagoras, which, as I imagine, is more
    than human and of very ancient date, and may be as old as Simonides or even
    older. Learned as you are in many things, you appear to know nothing of this;
    but I know, for I am a disciple of his. And now, if I am not mistaken, you do not
    understand the word ’hard’ (chalepon) in the sense which Simonides intended;
    and I must correct you, as Prodicus corrects me when I use the word ’awful’
    (deinon) as a term of praise. If I say that Protagoras or any one else is an
    ’awfully’ wise man, he asks me if I am not ashamed of calling that which is
    good ’awful’; and then he explains to me that the term ’awful’ is always taken
    in a bad sense, and that no one speaks of being ’awfully’ healthy or wealthy,
    or of ’awful’ peace, but of ’awful’ disease, ’awful’ war, ’awful’ poverty, meaning
    by the term ’awful,’ evil. And I think that Simonides and his countrymen the
    Ceans, when they spoke of ’hard’ meant ’evil,’ or something which you do not
    understand. Let us ask Prodicus, for he ought to be able to answer questions
    about the dialect of Simonides. What did he mean, Prodicus, by the term
    ’hard’?
    Evil, said Prodicus
    .
     
    As we can see, from Plato's Protagoras, words and meanings, and names, especially, were difficult to decipher correctly even by those/these/them of those very ancient times for their own times. And therefore something that today's philologists would find it nearly impossible to determine "exactly" what was meant for somethings they have to interpret today. There are no certainties into meanings and names when taken out of time, content, locality, and above all, old graves and old temples, especially when there are pictures of things meant to symbolize, both words and events.
     
    After all, when it comes to Egyptian hieroglyphics, the Rosetta Stone content may have been just sarcasm, and from it the wrong meaning may have been extracted. And the possibility that  "our understanding" of this language was formulated on a faulty foundation, is a plausible question to pose.
     
    Case in point, with astronomy, Ptolemy worked out a perfectly, seemingly, logical explanation for the retrograde motion of the planets we can observe, math and all, until Kepler made a better case for it.
     
    Disclosure: I'm not a philologist, by any means, or/and by any meaning of the word.
     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
9 hours ago, Piney said:

and uh.....and uh......and uh........whatshisname???.....Yes, Jesus......Jesus......that's it......He is a well known fellow too. Every Spring angels roll  his rock aside and if he sees his shadow it's 6 more weeks of Winter. :yes:

When we live in a world of shadows, the shadows of shadows are awfully difficult to spot. Jesus casts a long shadow. A long shadow of doubt, mostly to those that forecast the weather by shadows.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
9 hours ago, Piney said:

Every Jewish person out there. :yes:

Mel was making a "nut shot" at Christians and you missed it. :rolleyes:

O dear! I'm always missing something. Perhaps I'm missing a screw, or I'm one card short of a full deck..As a play on words..I'm going slightly mad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
4 hours ago, Kenemet said:

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

While the Bible does have symbolism, I greatly doubt that it has that MUCH symbolism -- and the midrashes support me on this point.

Midrash? I develop rashes all over, as I'm allergic to a few things myself. Institutions, or groups, that vaunt exact knowledge in anything is one of those things I'm allergic to, as I breakout with urticaria. You realize that we need at least three points on which we can safely support our sitting posture, or sitting ideas. All symbolism given by the Oracle of Delphi was given from the tripod. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is a trinity that wants to stand on a single point; all three are one. Although not true, it's symbolism. We must look for symbolism in places where no well-informed authority has gone before.

The Bible contains truth hidden like yeast in dough, and it will make it rise to make the truth light. Then it will become crispy, sweet, and digestible bread of life, but only when it has been properly baked at the proper temperature, and in the proper time.

I find support in the exception, rather than in the rule; any ruling body. But opinions are opinions all the same, whether there are many same standing opinions, or just one opinion standing on one leg only..

I understand your position on the Bible, and I hope you understand mine, with all due respect between us. I enjoy the opportunity you give in sharing your ideas and knowledge with me. And I apologize if I don't contribute much to your piggy-bank of knowledge. If I can get a smile out of you, I feel I have at least paid a little for my lessons. Truthfully, I had to look up midrash, as I was not privy to the meaning.

Thanks,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Opus Magnus

My point is ----  that if you take 1 Kings 6:1 which says the date of the exodus was 480 years from the building of the first temple by Solomon. By tracing back the geneaologies in the Bible the first temple comes to year 966 BC. By adding the 480 years you come to year 1446 BC, exactly when Thutmose III reigned

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
3 hours ago, Opus Magnus said:

My point is ----  that if you take 1 Kings 6:1 which says the date of the exodus was 480 years from the building of the first temple by Solomon. By tracing back the geneaologies in the Bible the first temple comes to year 966 BC. By adding the 480 years you come to year 1446 BC, exactly when Thutmose III reigned

 

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

Tracing back historical event by the use of genealogies, especially those classified as theological genealogies, makes even a vise person look silly by those of authority. For example, let us take one that perhaps was the wisest of the seven wisest men of Hellenes and his times. None less than the wise Solon. Solon tried the same arguments with the even wiser than himself, the Saiis priests of the Egyptian Goddess Neith, said to be Athena herself, the Goddess of wisdom, no less.

Tell us, said the other, the whole story, and how and from whom Solon heard
this veritable tradition.
He replied:–In the Egyptian Delta, at the head of which the river Nile divides,
there is a certain district which is called the district of Sais, and the great city
of the district is also called Sais, and is the city from which King Amasis came.
The citizens have a deity for their foundress; she is called in the Egyptian tongue
Neith, and is asserted by them to be the same whom the Hellenes call Athene;
they are great lovers of the Athenians, and say that they are in some way related
to them. To this city came Solon, and was received there with great honour; he
asked the priests who were most skilful in such matters, about antiquity, and
made the discovery that neither he nor any other Hellene knew anything worth
mentioning about the times of old. On one occasion, wishing to draw them
on to speak of antiquity, he began to tell about the most ancient things in our
part of the world–about Phoroneus, who is called ’the first man,’ and about
Niobe; and after the Deluge, of the survival of Deucalion and Pyrrha
; and he
traced the genealogy of their descendants, and reckoning up the dates, tried to
compute how many years ago the events of which he was speaking happened.

Thereupon one of the priests, who was of a very great age, said: O Solon, Solon,
you Hellenes are never anything but children, and there is not an old man among
you. Solon in return asked him what he meant. I mean to say, he replied, that
in mind you are all young; there is no old opinion handed down among you by
ancient tradition, nor any science which is hoary with age. And I will tell you
why. There have been, and will be again, many destructions of mankind arising
out of many causes; the greatest have been brought about by the agencies of fire
and water, and other lesser ones by innumerable other causes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Truthfully, I had to look up midrash, as I was not privy to the meaning.

I was delving into them recently for a lecture series I'm giving on Wicked Women of Legend and Lore.  I had started out with Lilith (who may be derived from a generic Akkadian word for "demon") but yesterday I was examining Semiramis and how she went from being an Assyrian Queen who was regent for five years until her son ascended the throne to "*W*** of Babylon/Mystery Babylon" and a whole bunch of other things.  (the board's software won't let me type the w-word, but it's a synonym for woman who is a professional sex worker)

Edited by Kenemet
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph
4 hours ago, Opus Magnus said:

My point is ----  that if you take 1 Kings 6:1 which says the date of the exodus was 480 years from the building of the first temple by Solomon. By tracing back the geneaologies in the Bible the first temple comes to year 966 BC. By adding the 480 years you come to year 1446 BC, exactly when Thutmose III reigned

 

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

Well, that’s the great thing with Bible math: squint your eyes, fudge a few numbers, and boom: anything you like is “numerically” proven. 

You should ask yourself if anyone’s ever been proven wrong with Bible math. (Of course not!)

—Jaylemurph 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
4 hours ago, Opus Magnus said:

My point is ----  that if you take 1 Kings 6:1 which says the date of the exodus was 480 years from the building of the first temple by Solomon. By tracing back the geneaologies in the Bible the first temple comes to year 966 BC. By adding the 480 years you come to year 1446 BC, exactly when Thutmose III reigned

 

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

Except that doesn't really work. Per Radiocarbon-Based Chronology for Dynastic Egypt  (Christopher Bronk Ramsey, Michael W. Dee, Joanne M. Rowland, Thomas F. G. Higham, Stephen A. Harris, Fiona Brock, Anita Quiles, Eva M. Wild, Ezra S. Marcus, Andrew J. Shortland - 2010) the ranges given for Thutmose III are as follows: 

1)  68 percentile range:  1494 BC - 1483 BC - Accession date

     95 percentile range:  1498 BC - 1474 BC - Accession date

The closest for your 1446 BC date would be the 95 percentile range for Amenhotep II from 1445 BC to 1423 BC - Accession date. 

cormac

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
3 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

I was delving into them recently for a lecture series I'm giving on Wicked Women of Legend and Lore.  I had started out with Lilith (who may be derived from a generic Akkadian word for "demon") but yesterday I was examining Semiramis and how she went from being an Assyrian Queen who was regent for five years until her son ascended the throne to "***** of Babylon/Mystery Babylon" and a whole bunch of other things.  

As I said, you can lecture to me anytime, and I trust that I'll be better for it. But as you may well know by know, I'll pose lots of off-the-wall stuff, questioning everything I don't really know myself. But as the saying goes, trust, but verify. Only, who can I verify it with? To really verify one needs absolute standards. And for me, only God is the absolute standard, when it comes to knowledge. God seems out of reach, and the most godly person that I can use as second inline, as an absolute standard, is Socrates. And this Standard of mine always said that, "God only knows".

Lecturing on the wicked women? Are there really such a thing? As far as I'm concerned, from a man's standpoint, we cannot live with them, nor without. Man loves and also hates woman, because woman can be both, good and evil, all in one. The sour and the sweet. Sicilian cannoli desert, made with ricotta cheese, taste much better when the cheese is also mixed with a pinch of salt, besides the sugar. Also this concept of woman being both good and evil, and that man cannot live without or with, is rendered by an Italian (Neopalitan) funny looking fellow, now defunct, and who was mostly a comic, but wrote a very beautiful and truthful song about the evil woman (malafemmena).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATRTptMByk4

And if you are looking into the mystery Babylonian religion, the one in the book of Revelation, and having to do with evil women, the harlot of Babylon, guess who it is? Why! it's our American lady, the one that sits on many waters (many, if not all, people of the world and their languages are present in the USA), and on whose riches the entire world have traded and become rich themselves; the world follows Wall street, religiously. Materialism is the mystery religion of Babylon, and the USA is the biggest harlot of them all. She sells herself to the world as the richest one in material things, and whose religion the world is wont to have too. This is more so today, in the world of Donald Trump, our current descendant of Atlas' royal family, who places the value of luxury, the riches of gold and silver, above virtue. And who, like the Titan Atlas, the one who is symbolized as holding the world on his shoulder, with a push of the "largest" button can unload the whole world and let it fall, to shatter it completely by fire and brimstone. America, our lady of materialism, an American woman. The ten kings of Atlantis.

Then the angel said to me, “The waters where you saw the prostitute seated are peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues. 16And the ten horns and the beast that you saw will hate the prostitute. They will leave her desolate and naked, and will eat her flesh and burn her with fire.…

The fruit of your soul’s desire has departed from you; all your luxury and splendor have vanished, never to be seen again.” 15The merchants who sold these things and grew their wealth from her will stand at a distance, in fear of her torment. They will weep and mourn, 16saying: “Woe, woe to the great city, clothed in fine linen and purple and scarlet, adorned with gold and precious stones and pearls!…

 

American woman, Guess who? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCjnaBaPFsk

There is symbolism everywhere is one has an eye to spot it, along with the right key. The key to the kingdom of Atlantis.

 

Have you ever used music in your presentations?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Opus Magnus
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Tracing back historical event by the use of genealogies, especially those classified as theological genealogies, makes even a vise person look silly by those of authority. For example, let us take one that perhaps was the wisest of the seven wisest men of Hellenes and his times. None less than the wise Solon. Solon tried the same arguments with the even wiser than himself, the Saiis priests of the Egyptian Goddess Neith, said to be Athena herself, the Goddess of wisdom, no less.

Tell us, said the other, the whole story, and how and from whom Solon heard
this veritable tradition.
He replied:–In the Egyptian Delta, at the head of which the river Nile divides,
there is a certain district which is called the district of Sais, and the great city
of the district is also called Sais, and is the city from which King Amasis came.
The citizens have a deity for their foundress; she is called in the Egyptian tongue
Neith, and is asserted by them to be the same whom the Hellenes call Athene;
they are great lovers of the Athenians, and say that they are in some way related
to them. To this city came Solon, and was received there with great honour; he
asked the priests who were most skilful in such matters, about antiquity, and
made the discovery that neither he nor any other Hellene knew anything worth
mentioning about the times of old. On one occasion, wishing to draw them
on to speak of antiquity, he began to tell about the most ancient things in our
part of the world–about Phoroneus, who is called ’the first man,’ and about
Niobe; and after the Deluge, of the survival of Deucalion and Pyrrha
; and he
traced the genealogy of their descendants, and reckoning up the dates, tried to
compute how many years ago the events of which he was speaking happened.

Thereupon one of the priests, who was of a very great age, said: O Solon, Solon,
you Hellenes are never anything but children, and there is not an old man among
you. Solon in return asked him what he meant. I mean to say, he replied, that
in mind you are all young; there is no old opinion handed down among you by
ancient tradition, nor any science which is hoary with age. And I will tell you
why. There have been, and will be again, many destructions of mankind arising
out of many causes; the greatest have been brought about by the agencies of fire
and water, and other lesser ones by innumerable other causes. 

 

1 hour ago, cormac mac airt said:

Except that doesn't really work. Per Radiocarbon-Based Chronology for Dynastic Egypt  (Christopher Bronk Ramsey, Michael W. Dee, Joanne M. Rowland, Thomas F. G. Higham, Stephen A. Harris, Fiona Brock, Anita Quiles, Eva M. Wild, Ezra S. Marcus, Andrew J. Shortland - 2010) the ranges given for Thutmose III are as follows: 

1)  68 percentile range:  1494 BC - 1483 BC - Accession date

     95 percentile range:  1498 BC - 1474 BC - Accession date

The closest for your 1446 BC date would be the 95 percentile range for Amenhotep II from 1445 BC to 1423 BC - Accession date. 

cormac

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? 

Edited by Opus Magnus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.