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

jaylemurph
1 hour ago, Pettytalk said:

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

Yep. 

“Our god sure has been around a long time,” coupled with “Our race sure has been here a long time”: useful propaganda if you’re living in an area with a high ownership turn-over rate, like Canaan was. 

Maybe if you spoke less, you’d hear more.

—Jaylemurph 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jodie.Lynne

A very interesting debate.

One of the reasons I enjoy these boards is because of the wealth of knowledge that so many have, and that they are willing to share that knowledge.

It's also interesting to see those who don't quite have the full grasp of the argument, attempting to nickel & dime their way in attempting to be accurate. 

And it's downright hilarious to see those who have no knowledge, attempting to appear wiser than they are.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


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

useful propaganda if you’re living in an area with a high ownership turn-over rate, like Canaan was. 

Man you're smart! I guess if you were ever to dig your own intellectual grave a shovel would not do, as you would need a bulldozer to dig such a large grave.

Edited by Pettytalk
gee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats
4 minutes ago, Pettytalk said:

Man you're smart! I guess if you were ever to dig your own intellectual grave a shovel would not do, as you would need a bulldozer to dig such a large grave.

Are you calling Jay fat?

why... he’s the very picture of health!

EDB38EF5-1B10-49E7-A712-C967A36D766B.jpeg.bbea7ccee0c90714a6aaf6c2d6237e1e.jpeg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jaylemurph
3 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Are you calling Jay fat?

why... he’s the very picture of health!

EDB38EF5-1B10-49E7-A712-C967A36D766B.jpeg.bbea7ccee0c90714a6aaf6c2d6237e1e.jpeg

I’m way more Basil Fawlty than Mr Creosote. 

—Jaylemurph 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Swede
9 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

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

cormac

Chuckle! Your "kindness" is noted. One could easily apply somewhat more harsh evaluations.

.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Swede
18 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

You have yet to provide a concise and verifiable genealogical timeline. Kindly elaborate.

Point being: Various perversions of Biblical genealogies incorporate lifespans that are not at all supported by bioanthropological research. Thus, any attempt at establishing a specific date based upon false data is inherently inaccurate.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
33 minutes ago, Swede said:

Chuckle! Your "kindness" is noted. One could easily apply somewhat more harsh evaluations.

.

No wonder they say that Nordic people are "cold".

No matter how harsh it could be, I would never "live" up to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pettytalk
25 minutes ago, Swede said:

You have yet to provide a concise and verifiable genealogical timeline. Kindly elaborate.

Point being: Various perversions of Biblical genealogies incorporate lifespans that are not at all supported by bioanthropological research. Thus, any attempt at establishing a specific date based upon false data is inherently inaccurate.

Stop preaching at Magnus, his phone went dead. You mean people don't live to the ripe age of over 800 years anymore? I can tell you one reason for that is they don't laugh enough these days, as they don't understand the jokes. Or perhaps it's because they have no sense of humor anymore.

Edited by Pettytalk
united stand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Wistman
6 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Stop preaching at Magnus, his phone went dead. You mean people don't live to the ripe age of over 800 years anymore? I can tell you one reason for that is they don't laugh enough these days, as they don't understand the jokes. Or perhaps it's because they have no sense of humor anymore.

The jokes are being hoarded and kept in exclusive, private clubs in Manhattan.  This keeps the population depressed and emotionally needy, so they buy more crap they don't want, just to feel better.  Meanwhile, the jokes are suffocating in the rarefied, oxygen depleted air the club members require to stop their aging.  The jokes must be set free, before it's too late.

When's Kmt_sesh returning?  He'd know what to do.  Though I wonder at his thing about pineapples.

Edited by The Wistman
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
On 6/1/2019 at 8:28 AM, 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 this isn't going to work.

Thutmose iii, as Hatshepsut's General of the Army and later as pharaoh, conquered most of the area of Palestine and Israel, making those countries effectively "Egypt."  There weren't any great plagues, etc, during her time or his time nor incredible famines or outbreaks of disease that killed most of the children.  And the Israelites would have had to run to Turkey and beyond to get away from Egypt.

Egypt's army at that time was well maintained and there's no evidence of significant loss of men.  In addition, Thutmose iii lived a very long life and was placed in his very famous tomb.  He wasn't drowned and lost at sea.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
11 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Except that this isn't going to work.

Thutmose iii, as Hatshepsut's General of the Army and later as pharaoh, conquered most of the area of Palestine and Israel, making those countries effectively "Egypt."  There weren't any great plagues, etc, during her time or his time nor incredible famines or outbreaks of disease that killed most of the children.  And the Israelites would have had to run to Turkey and beyond to get away from Egypt.

Egypt's army at that time was well maintained and there's no evidence of significant loss of men.  In addition, Thutmose iii lived a very long life and was placed in his very famous tomb.  He wasn't drowned and lost at sea.

Much of the Old Testament is just a series of recycled propagandist stories to support a cult....

One of my old crusty Uncles once explained that all the 'grand opera' in the bible was probably reflective of a reality which was really this: A group of trouble makers were run out the local area and those doing the 'running out' stopped when they reached a stream that marked a border and it took 4 'hours' not 40 years. The individual doing that may have been an Egyptian provincial official or the hand of "Pharaoh'.

 

Edited by Hanslune
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
7 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Much of the Old Testament is just a series of recycled propagandist stories to support a cult....

One of my old crusty Uncles once explained that all the 'grand opera' in the bible was probably reflective of a reality which was really this: A group of trouble makers were run out the local area and those doing the 'running out' stopped when they reached a stream that marked a border and it took 4 'hours' not 40 years. The individual doing that may have been an Egyptian provincial official or the hand of "Pharaoh'.

They'd have had to be in some distant territory, then and not in Egypt proper.  Remember that there's almost no evidence of Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt at that time and certainly not in the numbers suggested by the Bible.  And then there's the issue of slaves... with the peasants of Egypt being essentially chattel, there wasn't a real need to import lots of troublesome foreign slaves.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

They'd have had to be in some distant territory, then and not in Egypt proper.  Remember that there's almost no evidence of Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt at that time and certainly not in the numbers suggested by the Bible.  And then there's the issue of slaves... with the peasants of Egypt being essentially chattel, there wasn't a real need to import lots of troublesome foreign slaves.

Yeah I would say they were already in the area the Egyptian had conquered (Palestine region). I would guess they were conquered in the past  and 'repressed' and had to do corvee type labour and got fed up with that and crossed or were forced to cross a river/stream and escaped into their own area or at least out of Egyptian control. Then over the generations filtered back in. They made up grand stories about it!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
58 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Except that this isn't going to work.

Thutmose iii, as Hatshepsut's General of the Army and later as pharaoh, conquered most of the area of Palestine and Israel, making those countries effectively "Egypt."  There weren't any great plagues, etc, during her time or his time nor incredible famines or outbreaks of disease that killed most of the children.  And the Israelites would have had to run to Turkey and beyond to get away from Egypt.

Egypt's army at that time was well maintained and there's no evidence of significant loss of men.  In addition, Thutmose iii lived a very long life and was placed in his very famous tomb.  He wasn't drowned and lost at sea.

Another reason it wouldn't work is the following, taken from the Judeo-Christian texts of The Bible, The Testament of Levi and Bava Batra 120a which are ALL just as valid as his chronology, yet just as unevidenced:                                                                                                                                           

Quote

 

Biblical Chronology

(Yes, the Jews have their own calendar which traditionally starts in circa 3761/3760 BC)

Adam -                              3760 BC - 2830 BC            Age: 930 years

Seth 3630 BC -                 2718 BC                             Age: 912 years

Enos 3525 BC -                2620 BC                             Age: 905 years

Cainan                              3435 BC - 2525 BC            Age: 910 years

Mahalaleel                        3365 BC - 2470 BC            Age: 895 years

Jared                                 3300 BC - 2338 BC           Age: 962 years

Enoch                                3138 BC - 2773 BC           Age: 365 years

Methuselah                       3073 BC - 2104 BC           Age: 969 years

Lamech                             2886 BC - 2109 BC           Age: 777 years

Noah                                 2704 BC - 1754 BC           Age: 950 years

Shem                                2204 BC - 1602 BC           Age: 602 years

                    Flood: 2104 BC

Arphaxad                          2102 BC - 1664 BC           Age: 438 years

Salah                                2067 BC - 1634 BC           Age: 433 years

Eber                                  2037 BC - 1573 BC          Age: 464 years

Peleg                                2003 BC - 1764 BC           Age: 239 years

Reu                                  1973 BC - 1734 BC           Age: 239 years

Serug                               1943 BC - 1713 BC           Age: 230 years

Nahor                               1913 BC - 1765 BC           Age: 148 years

Terah                                1884 BC - 1679 BC          Age: 205 years

Abraham                           1814 BC - 1639 BC          Age: 175 years

                    Sodom: 1675 BC

Isaac                                 1714 BC - 1534 BC          Age: 180 years

Jacob                                1654 BC - 1507 BC          Age: 147 years

Levi                                   1597 BC - 1460 BC          Age: 137 (Exodus 6:16)

Korath/Kehath                   1562 BC - 1429 BC          Age: 133   Testament of Levi: Father was 35 at birth

Amram                               1533 BC - 1397 BC          Age: 137 (Exodus 6:20) Testament of Levi: Grandfather was 64, Jochebed, aunt and daughter of Levi, born same day as Amram

                                          1503 BC - Amram/Jochebed wed   Testament of Levi: Grandfather, Levi, was 94

Moses                               1403 BC - 1283                Birth date based on Bava Batra 120a which suggests Jochebed was 130 years old -

                              https://www.sefaria.org/Bava_Batra.120a.1?lang=bi&with=Bava Batra&lang2=en and https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/tractate-bava-batra-chapter-8

                    Exodus 1323 BC- 1283 BC Moses was allegedly 80 – 120 years old

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
  • Like 6

Share this post


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

The jokes are being hoarded and kept in exclusive, private clubs in Manhattan.  This keeps the population depressed and emotionally needy, so they buy more crap they don't want, just to feel better.  Meanwhile, the jokes are suffocating in the rarefied, oxygen depleted air the club members require to stop their aging.  The jokes must be set free, before it's too late.

When's Kmt_sesh returning?  He'd know what to do.  Though I wonder at his thing about pineapples.

You are correct, I once snicked in one of those private, high-rise, clubs, and there was definitely a lot of joking going around. You may have noticed some of my jokes around here, as I'm really using plagiarized material from that club.

I miss Kmt_sesh too.

Share this post


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

Yeah I would say they were already in the area the Egyptian had conquered (Palestine region). I would guess they were conquered in the past  and 'repressed' and had to do corvee type labour and got fed up with that and crossed or were forced to cross a river/stream and escaped into their own area or at least out of Egyptian control. Then over the generations filtered back in. They made up grand stories about it!

You are completely wrong on your speculative idea.

Judging from the current Hebrews living in the tiny nation of Israel, and their war record against not only Egypt, but against the entire Goliath-size, Arab nations population surrounding "Little David", I would say that their wars and battle stories in the Bible are greatly underestimated, when it comes to the power and victory record over their "masters" of yesterdays.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jodie.Lynne

I seem to remember reading an article that stated that one of the cities destroyed by the Israelites on their meanderings through the Middle East, was given a name that translates as 'heap of ruins'.

The name of the city is recorded as "Ai", and it seems odd that the townspeople chose to name their city "heap of ruins".

Now, for propaganda purposes, I can understand referring to your enemies city as a heap of ruins, to attest to your complete mastery of them, but, wouldn't people record the actual name of their opponents city, for bragging rights?

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Yeah I would say they were already in the area the Egyptian had conquered (Palestine region). I would guess they were conquered in the past  and 'repressed' and had to do corvee type labour and got fed up with that and crossed or were forced to cross a river/stream and escaped into their own area or at least out of Egyptian control. Then over the generations filtered back in. They made up grand stories about it!

Yeah.  In Numbers 13, they go to spy on a city (of which we have archaeological evidence) and run back to Moses saying "we can't attack them.  It's full of giants!"  And, of course, there's no evidence that anyone in the town was unusually tall.  (It's my personal opinion that they were tired of Moses telling them to attack every town around and were afraid of losing more men in a senseless action.)

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

You are completely wrong on your speculative idea.

Judging from the current Hebrews living in the tiny nation of Israel, and their war record against not only Egypt, but against the entire Goliath-size, Arab nations population surrounding "Little David", I would say that their wars and battle stories in the Bible are greatly underestimated, when it comes to the power and victory record over their "masters" of yesterdays.

You can't really use a modern population with professional soldier and modern armaments as a measure of what people did 3,000 years previously when they were basically wandering shepherd nomads with no professional army (unlike Egypt and other nations around them) and limited access to food and resources.  I understand that guerrilla actions can be quite effective in small areas but a tiny population really can't control any area of any size and is not able to lose a lot of men (unlike larger nations, who can throw cannon fodder at their enemies until they're overwhelmed.)

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune
4 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

Yeah.  In Numbers 13, they go to spy on a city (of which we have archaeological evidence) and run back to Moses saying "we can't attack them.  It's full of giants!"  And, of course, there's no evidence that anyone in the town was unusually tall.  (It's my personal opinion that they were tired of Moses telling them to attack every town around and were afraid of losing more men in a senseless action.)

Yes of course.

 

1 minute ago, Kenemet said:

You can't really use a modern population with professional soldier and modern armaments as a measure of what people did 3,000 years previously when they were basically wandering shepherd nomads with no professional army (unlike Egypt and other nations around them) and limited access to food and resources.  I understand that guerrilla actions can be quite effective in small areas but a tiny population really can't control any area of any size and is not able to lose a lot of men (unlike larger nations, who can throw cannon fodder at their enemies until they're overwhelmed.)

Maybe the forty years applies to how long they were bandits living on the outskirts of civilization.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

You are completely wrong on your speculative idea.

Judging from the current Hebrews living in the tiny nation of Israel, and their war record against not only Egypt, but against the entire Goliath-size, Arab nations population surrounding "Little David", I would say that their wars and battle stories in the Bible are greatly underestimated, when it comes to the power and victory record over their "masters" of yesterdays.

With American weapons and support. Lots of American weapons and support. Take that away and watched them get pounded to dust.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kenemet
55 minutes ago, Hanslune said:

Maybe the forty years applies to how long they were bandits living on the outskirts of civilization.

This is, of course, quite plausible... but since there are two sides to any story, the inhabitant of the area undoubtedly thought they were marauders and bandits and outlaws and they saw themselves as heroic people, denied a homeland, carving out a place for themselves.

....but the above is speculation on my part, of course.  I am not an expert in the history of the Middle East.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jodie.Lynne
42 minutes ago, Kenemet said:

when they were basically wandering shepherd nomads with no professional army

I always wondered how a population of slaves could become such proficient warriors in so short a time.

And the indication that this vast horde of former slaves were allowed to ransack their oppressors armory for weapons, always seemed a little bit suicidal on the Egyptians part.

Hell, in the war between the States, Southerners were horrified that their former property would be allowed weapons, for fear of reprisals.

 

So, if I have the story right, the Egyptians, fearing the vast multitudes of slaves (for which there is no historical evidence), after a series of alleged supernatural calamities (for which, the Egyptians failed to record), the Pharaoh decides to finally let the slaves depart. BUT, not before allowing them to basically pillage the nation for food and weapons.

Then, the Pharaoh (whom the Israelites failed to name, because, ya know, there was only one Egyptian king...) has a change of heart and takes the bulk of his forces to chase down the slaves in order to return them to captivity. I guess that he forgot that he armed them.

   QUESTION: If the Pharaoh was dead, and most of the army dead, then why didn't Egypt's enemies wipe them out?

In a Cecil B. Demille fashion, Pharaoh and his army are wiped out without a trace, and the Israelites then proceed to wander aimlessly across the desert for 40 years, when they could have easily followed the coastline. Apparently, men NEVER ask for directions!

And finally, the Israelites get to the promised land, but..... They have to eliminate all the indigenous people that happen to live there.

 

 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hanslune

That is an interesting point. in my youth and for many years afterwards I fought with medieval weapons in the Japanese  style and with the SCA ( a group that used mainly European weapons re-created use rattan weapons and wearing armor) and I can tell you you need training, lots of training to be effective in a battle - especially if fighting in a group against another trained army. Just adjusting and learning to move when wearing armor and utilizing a shield takes a great deal of effort and practice. You don't just pick it up.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

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.