> Is it credible to conclude that the ancient
> written tradition of the Hebrews is trumped by the
> lack of written documentation by the Egyptians?
In the case of the Exodus, for example, as this is what was being discussed, the written tradition of the Hebrews is not contemporary with the events they describe having been written nearly 1,000yrs after the fact. Not to mention as a literary work and narrative of events is clearly parable infused with supernatural myth and revisionist history. Regardless, there is no lack of written documentation by the Egyptians during this period, far from it, which is the point being made obviously as they make no mention, among other things, of the supernatural events or characters as described in Exodus. Curiously, despite my citing and transcribing comparisons of the Ipuwer papyrus to Exodus, you ignore this then claim there are no written Egyptian records. I just gave you one that speaks of events eerily similar to Exodus, repeated at times almost verbatim by Exodus, yet the Egyptian account has nothing to do with Hebrews, Moses, Yahweh, or any miracles performed. And not only that, this event took place several centuries before Moses or there was such a thing as Hebrews or Yahweh.
Do you think it more credible that the events described in Exodus actually took place or that it is a much later fictionalized nationalized myth revolving around a mythical composite hero based on a well known Egyptian tale of a catastrophic event? Osiris, Moses, Dionysus, Bacchus. Hmm.
> How is it credible to compare the historical
> record of the history of the nation of
> Egypt and the nations of the
> Levant with the history provided by the
> Hebrews of the relationship of their handful of
> progenitors and the Egyptians?
> would one expect a nation as dominate as Egypt was
> to record that they were helpless in stopping a
> slave revolt within their kingdom? How could
> Yahweh have become a national god prior to the
> establishment of the nation of Isreal?
So, would you say that tales of Greek gods are "historical record"? If not then why not? What is different about the Odyssey compared to Exodus? What the reader will note is that you offer nothing factual to back up any of your arguments, or counter arguments, but instead offer contrived hypotheticals of a negative to create a positive that otherwise does not exist.
"Helpless in stopping a slave revolt"? Lol. Is this what Exodus boils down to, a "slave revolt", or maybe perhaps the real headline is the alleged supreme creator of the universe laying down one supernatural calamity after another on Egypt culminating in the parting of a sea?
Not to mention the pharaoh and an army of 600 chariots all died in this event. "Meh". Shit happens I guess and we sure don't want to let the cat out of the bag we can't control our slaves so we'll just pretend none of this ever happened. No one in Egypt shall write of it or speak of it ever again. And this is "credible" to you?
> Meanwhile for some unexplained reason you seem to
> accept the historicity of Abraham as recorded in
> the Hebrew record but not Joseph or Moses.
You literally just made this up. I did not mention Joseph and though there may have been a "Moses", though unlikely, there is a big difference between accepting the historicity of a character and the historicity of supernatural events. The idea of a Canaanite, Joseph for example, reaching a level of prominence in the AE government during this period is not far fetched if not expected particularly if this happened during the Hyksos period. I mean, even the pharaohs themselves at this time were not "Egyptian".
> appear to be trying to embolden your position by a
> lack of confirmation from foreign sources that had
> no plausible reason to record the history of the
> Hebrews given that their interactions were
> allegedly not beneficial to their national
> security or treasure.
So, when a foreign god, among other miracles, sends down plague after supernatural plague on you, including killing all of your first born males-not just humans but cattle as well, not to mention the parting of a sea, columns of fire et al in which the pharaoh and army of 600 chariots gets wiped out-whose history do you think this is exactly? Think about just the killing of all the first born males of both humans and animals-this would be millions of deaths. Carcasses would be piled like pyramids in the streets. How many centuries, if ever, would it take for any society to recover from such pervasive death of what would amount to roughly 30-40% of its population, not to mention its livestock?
This is what the LORD says: "About midnight I will go throughout Egypt. Every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn of the slave girl, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well. There will be loud wailing throughout Egypt—worse than there has ever been or ever will be again.
Ain't that the truth. Even Yahweh says there will be a "loud wailing throughout Egypt—worse than there has ever been or ever will be again." Yet not one Egyptian scribe thought to jot this down? Even if they changed the reason for this happening-how on earth could they just ignore even mentioning it happend at all? Where is the archeological evidence of the complete collapse of Egypt after millions of men and cattle dropped dead all of a sudden? Where are the mass burials, not just of the millions of dead, but of the countless to follow from widespread disease and famine? And this doesn't even include the devastation leading up to this from all the other plagues. From one end of the Nile to the other Egyptians would have woken up as well to a population now overwhelmingly female- is there any evidence of this? How would this affect birth rates going forward where the women outnumber the men 3 or 4 to 1 if not more? Given such wanton destruction it's a wonder Egyptian history did not effectively end right then and there, yet at best we would witness the greatest collapse of an advanced nation in the history of man. But it didn't. In fact, no one even seemed to notice these millions of living things died and Egypt just went on its merry way completely oblivious to these events. And you speak of "credible"? How about we just stick to reality.
As a few asides, the Hebrews are supposedly the slaves yet he also kills the first born of the slave girls? Hmm. That sucks. Also, Yahweh is supposedly the creator of the universe yet he needs the Hebrews to put lamb's blood on their doors so He does not mistake them for Egyptians and kill their first born as well. The all seeing all knowing God, creator of the universe and man, needs a sign on the front door to know who is who. I'm sorry, but this is just stupid. Also, so after this happens pharoah is mad and sad because he thinks he might be next. Forget about the millions of dead and the complete collapse of his nation. He then of course tells the Hebrews they can leave yet again and of course yet again pharaoh changes his mind. Yahweh just killed millions of your people and cattle and yet once again you change your mind and decide to yet again go against the will of a supernatural being who could do such things? Oh, but God "hardened the pharaoh's heart" that made him keep doing the same stupid thing over again. If one actually reads the tale of Exodus, it is moronic.
> Furthermore, you confirm your assumptions about
> cultural diffusionism based on minor simularities
> within the stories
Minor? Gee, I don't know, but I think the utterly complete omission from the older Mesopotamian Flood myths, for example, of the Hebrew God Yahweh is hardly "minor". I find it quite major actually so much so that it would seem proof positive this God did not exist nor did he have anything to do with these events. Which historically He did not when these stories were written regardless.
The diffusion of cultures in the Near East is hardly an "assumption". Near East history 101 I'm afraid.
> and the circumstances of
> proximity while ignoring the vast cultural and
> cosmological differences contained within.
"Cosmological differences"? Sounds impressive. "Vast cultural differences"? Oh my. Please give examples of each for example in the Flood myths of the Bible compared to the Mesopotamian tales? I have given you a link for a head start.
> You obviously have invested a lot in your
> conclusion and are intemperate of challenges.
I see. So for someone to challenge your interpretation of Biblical history means they must have an axe to grind against Christianity and if one rejects your beliefs, based on faith not fact, then this must mean this is the result of being "intemperate" of challenges to their own view. Yes, of course the problem must be me.
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 02-Jan-18 22:02 by Thanos5150.