When was the El Arish Shrine text written?

[cormac mac airt]

3 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

Is this actually something someone would "lie" about? But being a Hebrew does largely make on a Canaanite. 

Canaan is a geographical location with "Canaanites" being the various populations and ethnic group that lived there. The Hebrews lived in Canaan. Early Hebrews were culturally and materially very similar if not in some ways indistinguishable. Early Hebrews worshiped the same gods and the Canaanites. The Hebrew language is considered a "Canaanite language. 

I don't think Biblical scholar Mark S Smith is "lying" when he says: The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel p6-7:

Interesting how you had to flip what I said to make a non-existant point. Particularly when I specifically said being a Canaanite doesn’t make one a Hebrew or a Jew and you’ve provided nothing to invalidate that. Being Canaanite is an ethnic designation while being a Hebrew or Jew are both religious designations. Your apples and oranges comparison is therefore moot.  
 

cormac

[Thanos5150]

12 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

Interesting how you had to flip what I said to make a non-existant point. Particularly when I specifically said being a Canaanite doesn’t make one a Hebrew or a Jew and you’ve provided nothing to invalidate that. Being Canaanite is an ethnic designation while being a Hebrew or Jew are both religious designations. Your apples and oranges comparison is therefore moot.  
 

There is nothing to "invalidate". You seem to be trying to say something but I am not sure what the point of it is. 

You said: 

"It should be pointed out that being a Canaanite neither makes one a Hebrew nor a Jew. To state or imply otherwise would be a lie".

Again, is this a thing? It seems pretty important that you need to "point it out". Who "lies" about this?  The Bible says the exact opposite and not only makes their separation quite clear but this juxtaposition is a major theme throughout. So its not believers lying about it.  

So its non-believers that push the idea that if one is a Canaanite therefore they are a "Hebrew or "Jew"? Please give examples and explain what the point of lying about this would be let alone saying it for any reason. . 

[cormac mac airt]

3 hours ago, Thanos5150 said:

There is nothing to "invalidate". You seem to be trying to say something but I am not sure what the point of it is. 

You said: 

"It should be pointed out that being a Canaanite neither makes one a Hebrew nor a Jew. To state or imply otherwise would be a lie".

Again, is this a thing? It seems pretty important that you need to "point it out". Who "lies" about this?  The Bible says the exact opposite and not only makes their separation quite clear but this juxtaposition is a major theme throughout. So its not believers lying about it.  

So its non-believers that push the idea that if one is a Canaanite therefore they are a "Hebrew or "Jew"? Please give examples and explain what the point of lying about this would be let alone saying it for any reason. . 

You did however state the following to Piney:

Quote

 I think you mean "Jews" not necessarily "Hebrews", but regardless there is overwhelming archaeological evidence of not only Levantine/Canaanite peoples in Egypt throughout predynastic and Dynastic history,

No, “Jews” IS NOT what Piney meant and it’s irrelevant whether or not Canaanite peoples were ever in Egypt as being Canaanite doesn’t automatically make them either Hebrews or Jews. THAT WAS THE POINT. 
 

Considering my original post on this matter wasn’t specifically addressed to you but meant for the general reader your response was unnecessary. 
 

cormac