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 -

Biblical inerrancy


Doug1066
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

Occupation of Kish began in the Jemdet Nasr period.  All three Kish floods came after the Ur flood.  That confirms there were at least four floods.  Still looking for good dates on them.

Doug

Me too but so far I can find NO evidence that ANY 14C tests were actually performed which is annoying as hell. Would really like to find radiocarbon verification that the 3rd Kish flood is contemporary with the Shuruppak flood, or at least nearly so. Estimates are really useless in this case, beyond being suggestive. 

cormac

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also have to wonder to what extent the ending of the Persian Gulf Marine Transgression may have exacerbated the problem? 

cormac

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Piney said:

The Exodus never happened. The Jews developed in-situ the the hills of Canaan. Solomon was a petty warlord who controlled some copper pit mines and the Maccabee Rebellion was Jew against Jew. Not Jews against the Ptolemaic Empire.

And that's what Isreali archeology says.

I think the Exodus is a composite tale.  Beginning about 1500 BC, Amenhotep I re-opened the Sinai copper mines.  Most years after that, the Egyptians sent a military/mining expedition to Sinai.  It had three components:  a skilled artisan class (corresponding to the Kenites), a laboring class (stiff-necked people) and a military/ruling class.  The Exodus had the same organization.  There are at least three different Exodii described in the Bible, occurring at three radically different times.  The Bible story is a composite of the three.

Ramses III's war with the Pelest had a heavy impact on the story.  Moses couldn't use Horus Ways because it was blocked by the "Philistines."  They were moving southward along the coast and threatening the copper mines in Sinai.  The Exodus departed Egypt in April, assuring they would arrive in Sinai on the hottest part of the year.  Why?  The Pelest. It was a military emergency.  Ramses III defeated the Pelest in one of Egypt's few naval victories.

The destinations listed for the Exodus were all copper-mining centers.  The "molten calf" was not made of gold.  It was copper.

The Exodus began about 1187 BC and ended about 1147 BC when Ramses VI closed the copper mines, leaving the miners without a livelihood.  Some of them went home to Canaan where they settled in the Transjordan.  About 200 families settled there at the time - families who didn't keep pigs.

So, yes, there was an Exodus, but no, it didn't much resemble the biblical version.

Doug

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

I also have to wonder to what extent the ending of the Persian Gulf Marine Transgression may have exacerbated the problem? 

cormac

Lots of folks have wondered that.  It happened about 6000 - 5000 BP.  Rising waters in the gulf could force a reorganization of drainage farther upstream.  At maximum flood, the transgression reached about 0.3m higher than modern.  Doesn't seem like much, but the ground in the area is nearly flat.  That extra foot could have advanced the shore by 170 miles.  Add a hurricane-induced storm surge of ten feet or so and you have quite a flood.

But I wonder:  that storm surge would have been salt water, as was the marine transgression.  The flood deposits are all lacustrine.  Something doesn't add up.

Doug

Edited by Doug1066
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

I think the Exodus is a composite tale.  Beginning about 1500 BC, Amenhotep I re-opened the Sinai copper mines.  Most years after that, the Egyptians sent a military/mining expedition to Sinai.  It had three components:  a skilled artisan class (corresponding to the Kenites), a laboring class (stiff-necked people) and a military/ruling class.  The Exodus had the same organization.  There are at least three different Exodii described in the Bible, occurring at three radically different times.  The Bible story is a composite of the three.

Ramses III's war with the Pelest had a heavy impact on the story.  Moses couldn't use Horus Ways because it was blocked by the "Philistines."  They were moving southward along the coast and threatening the copper mines in Sinai.  The Exodus departed Egypt in April, assuring they would arrive in Sinai on the hottest part of the year.  Why?  The Pelest. It was a military emergency.  Ramses III defeated the Pelest in one of Egypt's few naval victories.

The destinations listed for the Exodus were all copper-mining centers.  The "molten calf" was not made of gold.  It was copper.

The Exodus began about 1187 BC and ended about 1147 BC when Ramses VI closed the copper mines, leaving the miners without a livelihood.  Some of them went home to Canaan where they settled in the Transjordan.  About 200 families settled there at the time - families who didn't keep pigs.

So, yes, there was an Exodus, but no, it didn't much resemble the biblical version.

Doug

There's a big problem considering there's no evidence that Moses existed. 

cormac

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

Lots of folks have wondered that.  It happened about 6000 - 5000 BP.  Rising waters in the gulf could force a reorganization of drainage farther upstream.  At maximum flood, the transgression reached about 0.3m higher than modern.  Doesn't seem like much, but the ground in the area is nearly flat.  That extra foot could have advanced the shore by 170 miles.  Add a hurricane-induced storm surge of ten feet or so and you have quite a flood.

But I wonder:  that storm surge would have been salt water, as was the marine transgression.  The flood deposits are all lacustrine.  Something doesn't add up.

Doug

Hold that thought ;)    A hurricane (or, rather, cyclone) would also bring heavy rain and riverine flooding as well.  

And the early Sumerian myths appear to refer to terrific winds with thunder and lightning.

Of course, it's also possible the story that ended up being recorded by the Sumerians and later adopted by the Judeans and incorporated into the Bible, could have been an combination of several different events.   A bit like how the stories of King Arthur and Robin Hood were probably based on several different individuals.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

Lots of folks have wondered that.  It happened about 6000 - 5000 BP.  Rising waters in the gulf could force a reorganization of drainage farther upstream.  At maximum flood, the transgression reached about 0.3m higher than modern.  Doesn't seem like much, but the ground in the area is nearly flat.  That extra foot could have advanced the shore by 170 miles.  Add a hurricane-induced storm surge of ten feet or so and you have quite a flood.

But I wonder:  that storm surge would have been salt water, as was the marine transgression.  The flood deposits are all lacustrine.  Something doesn't add up.

Doug

Lacustrine deposits have to stop somewhere when potentially colliding with marine deposits. There should be some sort of boundary, however diffuse. 

cormac

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Lacustrine deposits have to stop somewhere when potentially colliding with marine deposits. There should be some sort of boundary, however diffuse. 

cormac

If the primary event that led to the flood myth occurred when sea levels were lower then that point might now be somewhere in the Red Sea ....  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Essan said:

If the primary event that led to the flood myth occurred when sea levels were lower then that point might now be somewhere in the Red Sea ....  

Sea levels were higher during the Marine Transgression of the Persian Gulf circa 4000 - 3000 BC. Where does the Red Sea come into it? 

cormac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

There's a big problem considering there's no evidence that Moses existed. 

cormac

Moses is based on prototypes of at least three, maybe four or five people.  He, too, is a conflation.

These include:  Amenmesses, a renegade Pharaoh;  Osar-Seph, a priest caught up in Seti I's roundup of undesirables, who then led a slave revolt at Avaris;  Djehuty, a courtier of Queen Hatshepsut who had to flee for his life when she died;  Amos I, who holds kind of an honorary role in the legend; and a member of Ramses II's court who seems to hold many of the requisite characteristics.  So I rate Moses as a legend.

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Sea levels were higher during the Marine Transgression of the Persian Gulf circa 4000 - 3000 BC. Where does the Red Sea come into it? 

cormac

Sorry, my chronology (and geography) is out - I was thinking in terms of the initial post glacial transgression when the Persian Gulf flooded.

The Red Sea most definitely does not come in to it though! 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Lacustrine deposits have to stop somewhere when potentially colliding with marine deposits. There should be some sort of boundary, however diffuse. 

cormac

Apparently that boundary has not yet been found - or I haven't found it in the literature.

The flood layer at Uruk occurs within the Uruk period deposits.  That makes it Bronze Age.  We have now eliminated all deposits except for Woolley's flood deposit.  By elimination, at has to be the Great Flood.  Unless there are some more out there we don't know about.  While Woolley guessed the date on his flood layer to be about 3500 BC, he also mentioned another one about 2900 BC.  That may coincide with the oldest layer at Kish.

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Essan said:

If the primary event that led to the flood myth occurred when sea levels were lower then that point might now be somewhere in the Red Sea ....  

I would bet that the Red Sea was also involved:  the hurricane that produced the storm surge in the Persian Gulf would also produce one in the Red Sea.  The Shallufa Sill was only about 3.5 feet above sea level at the time, so a storm surge, potentially as high as ten feet, could pour over it into the Heroopolitic Red Sea basin, flooding it.  The basin was 60 miles long and 20 miles wide, so that would like one huge flood.

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

Moses is based on prototypes of at least three, maybe four or five people.  He, too, is a conflation.

These include:  Amenmesses, a renegade Pharaoh;  Osar-Seph, a priest caught up in Seti I's roundup of undesirables, who then led a slave revolt at Avaris;  Djehuty, a courtier of Queen Hatshepsut who had to flee for his life when she died;  Amos I, who holds kind of an honorary role in the legend; and a member of Ramses II's court who seems to hold many of the requisite characteristics.  So I rate Moses as a legend.

Doug

I rate Moses as a myth as Osar-Seph is neither an Egyptian NOR Hebrew name. Etymologically "Moses" has been linked both to Hebrew Moshe (to draw out) and Egyptian mosis meaning "son of" neither of which are the same thing.  The whole theory has more holes than Swiss cheese. 

cormac

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Doug1066 said:

I would bet that the Red Sea was also involved:  the hurricane that produced the storm surge in the Persian Gulf would also produce one in the Red Sea.  The Shallufa Sill was only about 3.5 feet above sea level at the time, so a storm surge, potentially as high as ten feet, could pour over it into the Heroopolitic Red Sea basin, flooding it.  The basin was 60 miles long and 20 miles wide, so that would like one huge flood.

Doug

I actually meant the Persian Gulf - must be the heat getting to me ;)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, cormac mac airt said:

I rate Moses as a myth as Osar-Seph is neither an Egyptian NOR Hebrew name. Etymologically "Moses" has been linked both to Hebrew Moshe (to draw out) and Egyptian mosis meaning "son of" neither of which are the same thing.  The whole theory has more holes than Swiss cheese. 

cormac

Moses was an Egyptian.  His name is Egyptian, meaning "Child."  The "drawn from the water" reference is the Bible making a pun.  There are several such puns in it.  In the wilderness he met some women at a spring. They told their father that an Egyptian had saved them from their tormentors.  Moses was not circumcised.

Of course, we're arguing over a character who didn't really exist, at least as described.  Reminds me of Dan Quail and Murphy Brown.

Osar  --  Joser

Seph --  Seth

Joseph - Great Seth.

Doug

Edited by Doug1066
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

Apparently that boundary has not yet been found - or I haven't found it in the literature.

The flood layer at Uruk occurs within the Uruk period deposits.  That makes it Bronze Age.  We have now eliminated all deposits except for Woolley's flood deposit.  By elimination, at has to be the Great Flood.  Unless there are some more out there we don't know about.  While Woolley guessed the date on his flood layer to be about 3500 BC, he also mentioned another one about 2900 BC.  That may coincide with the oldest layer at Kish.

Doug

933844014_Mesopotamianfloodlayout.jpg.c2fdeb7705cefb612c89a11590b10b9d.jpg

cormac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

933844014_Mesopotamianfloodlayout.jpg.c2fdeb7705cefb612c89a11590b10b9d.jpg

cormac

Thanks.

Doug

Edited by Doug1066
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

Moses was an Egyptian.  His name is Egyptian, meaning "Child."  The "drawn from the water" reference is the Bible making a pun.  There are several such puns in it.  In the wilderness he met some women at a spring. They told their father that an Egyptian had saved them from their tormentors.  Moses was not circumcised.

Of course, we're arguing over a character who didn't really exist, at least as described.

Osar  --  Joser

Seph --  Seth

Joseph - Great Seth.

Doug

As stated in the Bible Moses was a Hebrew ADOPTED by an Egyptian. You're essentially reinterpreting a story to suit your agenda. I'm out. 

cormac

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

As stated in the Bible Moses was a Hebrew ADOPTED by an Egyptian. You're essentially reinterpreting a story to suit your agenda. I'm out. 

cormac

I can't help what's in the Bible.  If you disagree, please explain what it should have said.

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, cormac mac airt said:

There's just as much evidence that the so-called Burckle Crater may be the result of hydrothermal venting as there is for a hypothetical impactor. 

cormac

From the wikipage about the Burckle Crater:

"Unusual calcite (CaCO3) crystals, translucent carbon spherules, fragments of basaltic glass and native metals (native iron and nickel) are reported near the crater and associated with impact ejecta or hot water precipitates. Seawater at the depth of the crater is undersaturated with respect to calcite and rapid burial would have been needed to preserve those crystals.[4] "

You mean to say the above mentioned crystals could have been formed by a hydrothermal vent?

Edit:

I need to check my eyes: the quote mentions "hot water". Hydrothermal vents.

Edited by Abramelin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Abramelin said:

From the wikipage about the Burckle Crater:

"Unusual calcite (CaCO3) crystals, translucent carbon spherules, fragments of basaltic glass and native metals (native iron and nickel) are reported near the crater and associated with impact ejecta or hot water precipitates. Seawater at the depth of the crater is undersaturated with respect to calcite and rapid burial would have been needed to preserve those crystals.[4] "

You mean to say the above mentioned crystals could have been formed by a hydrothermal vent?

Pay attention to the bold above. 

cormac

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, cormac mac airt said:

Pay attention to the bold above. 

cormac

You should always give me a minute to edit.

:lol:

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

I can't help what's in the Bible.  If you disagree, please explain what it should have said.

Doug

As the only reason you have a Moses to even mention is because of the Bible and it gives a familial lineage amongst the Hebrews tell me who this mythical Moses with a made up name, Osar-Seph, which appears nowhere in recorded Egyptian (nor even Hebrew) history "really" was. 

ETA:  Sounds more like a corruption of Irsu during the reign of Setnakht circa 12th century BC. 

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
spelling
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, cormac mac airt said:

As the only reason you have a Moses to even mention is because of the Bible and it gives a familial lineage amongst the Hebrews tell me who this mythical Moses with a made up name, Osar-Seph, which appears nowhere in recorded Egyptian (nor even Hebrew) history "really" was. 

cormac

Family lineages:

Bible:                          16th Dynasty (Hyksos)

Jacob-Israel               Jacob-Baal               Both names mean "Follower of God"

Isaac                          Yakbam                    Yak transliterates into "Isaac"

Kohath                       Yoam

Amram                        Amu                         Both names mean "Father"

Moses                        Ahmose I                  Both names contain Moses (Child)

Moses' genealogy is a Hyksos king list.

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The topic was locked
  • The topic was unlocked
  • This topic was locked and unlocked
  • This topic was locked and unlocked

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
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.