Evidence that substantiates ANYTHING that happened in the Bible.

[TimCallahan]

While DOC continues to hide out rather than answer my question about the Pharaoh of the Exodus, I've been looking the subject up on the web. I already posted material on a site that says Thutmose III (1504 - 1483 BCE as co-ruler with Hatshepsut; 1483 - 1450 BCE alone) was the Pharaoh of the Exodus This site says it was Thutmose II (1518 - 1504 BCE), while this site says it was Amenhotep II (1453 - 1419 BCE). These are both Christian sites. Thus Islamic site argues that Rameses II (the Great, 1279 - 1212 BCE) was the Pharaoh of the Exodus.

I've looked at a few other blogs and websites. All of them seem to divide between Rameses II and one pharaoh or another of the 18th. Dynasty. The only other choices involve radical redating to try to get dynasties as early as the 12th. to fit into the required time slot.

So, again, I ask DOC to step our of the shadows and up to the plate, to stop evading the question and to tell me who he thinks is the Pharaoh of the Exodus and why.

 

[DOC]

While DOC continues to hide out rather than answer my question about the Pharaoh of the Exodus, I've been looking the subject up on the web. I already posted material on a site that says Thutmose III (1504 - 1483 BCE as co-ruler with Hatshepsut; 1483 - 1450 BCE alone) was the Pharaoh of the Exodus This site says it was Thutmose II (1518 - 1504 BCE), while this site says it was Amenhotep II (1453 - 1419 BCE). These are both Christian sites. Thus Islamic site argues that Rameses II (the Great, 1279 - 1212 BCE) was the Pharaoh of the Exodus.

I've looked at a few other blogs and websites. All of them seem to divide between Rameses II and one pharaoh or another of the 18th. Dynasty. The only other choices involve radical redating to try to get dynasties as early as the 12th. to fit into the required time slot.

So, again, I ask DOC to step our of the shadows and up to the plate, to stop evading the question and to tell me who he thinks is the Pharaoh of the Exodus and why.

This thread is not about who I think was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and I was not hiding out, I was doing research for post 5620 of the "Why do you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence" thread.

 

[pakeha]

Gosh, DOC.
Wouldn't identifying the Pharaoh of the Exodus help show the bible got it right about something?
Because, really, the fact is no one has a plausible identification for this important person.
Nor for the Pharaoh of Joseph.

Why is this?

 

[Akhenaten]

This thread is not about who I think was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and I was not hiding out, I was doing research for post 5620 of the "Why do you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence" thread.

What you do in your spare time is irrelevant.

This thread is about evidence that substantiates anything that happened in the Bible and the evidence on which you base your conclusions vis-a-vis the Pharaoh of the biblical exodus would most certainly fall into that category.

If you have nothing to add on the subject, then well might one inquire as to why you are continuing to post here.

 

[RoboTimbo]

This thread is not about who I think was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and I was not hiding out, I was doing research for post 5620 of the "Why do you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence" thread.

DOC, now that you've had a chance to look at the two creation accounts objectively, have you seen some evidence that they are contradictory?

Isn't there some law about non-contradiction?

 

[TimCallahan]

This thread is not about who I think was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and I was not hiding out, I was doing research for post 5620 of the "Why do you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence" thread.

Well, I'm glad you finally responded. However, you seem to have missed the point of my question. If we have evidence supporting the Exodus and the subsequent conquest of Canaan by Joshua, that would constitute a significant evidence substantiating the historicity of the Bible. In order to establish the Exodus / Conquest narratives as historical, we need to be able to place them in time. For example, 1 Kgs. 14:25, 26 tell us that, in the fifth year of Rehoboam's reign, Shishak, king of Egypt came against Jerusalem and took away the treasures of the Temple. Since this wold be in the Iron Age, and since Shishak is probably Shoshenq I, founder of the Libyan Dynasty (22nd.), who reigned 945 - 924 BCE, we have a good idea of when this happened and why - the why being a brief revival of Egyptian hegemony in the Levant by a vigorous new leader. We can also understand why the Egyptian incursion was a passing problem: The Libyan Dynasty rapidly declined and with it so declined any political influence in the Levant.

I've also noted that various sites list any number of different pharaoh's as the Pharaoh of the Exodus. These vary in time from Thutmose III (1504 - 1450) to Rameses II (1279 -1212), a spread of about 300 years. So, who was the Pharaoh of the Exodus is extremely important for establishing the level of historicity of the Exodus and Conquest narratives. So, who do you think it was and why?

Here's another question for you: According to 2 Kgs. 19:35 the "angel of the LORD (i.e. YHWH)" annihilated the Assyrian army of King Sennacherib, 185,000 strong, in a single night. Do you believe this to be true?

 

[joobz]

This thread is not about who I think was the Pharaoh of the Exodus,

This thread is about evidence that substantiates ANYTHING in the bible. Discussion of who Exodus' Pharaoh is is exactly on topic.

and I was not hiding out, I was doing research for post 5620 of the "Why do you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence" thread.

You should have spent more time researching actual science. The argument you made in that post was woefully weak.

 

[John Jones]

This thread is not about who I think was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and I was not hiding out, I was doing research for post 5620 of the "Why do you believe naturalism to be the best explanation for our existence" thread.

It's not about evolution vs creationism but that did not stop you from derailing the thread.

However, this thread IS about Evidence that substantiates ANYTHING that happened in the Bible, and TimCallahan's question was certainly on topic to that.

 

[pakeha]

...You should have spent more time researching actual science. The argument you made in that post was woefully weak.

Dunno. I thought it fit in beautifully with the inherent morality meme.

 

[Akhenaten]

I wonder why the Seige of Masada doesn't appear in the Bible.

Supressed by teh Brutal Roman Empire™?

No paper?

Mistranslation of the original Latin?


What does Sir Geisler of Muncaster have to say about this episode, DOC?

 

[zooterkin]

Just got home from the pub, but I am so making a picture based on this when I gathers me wits about me.

How's the wit-gathering going?

 

[Belz...]

Killing them all is fine.
Putting up a barrier (mental or physical) to prevent their bad behaviour is Bad.
Only in the Bible...

It's also OK to send all but 144,000 Jewish males into hell. But not making your rules clear so they don't end up there. Oh, no. That would remove their free will !

 

[Janadele]

... According to 2 Kgs. 19:35 the "angel of the LORD (i.e. YHWH)" annihilated the Assyrian army of King Sennacherib, 185,000 strong, in a single night. Do you believe this to be true?

Of course... mockers be warned and repent. The Lord will not always stay His hand against the purposes of the wicked.

 

[The Norseman]

Of course... mockers be warned and repent. The Lord will not always stay His hand against the purposes of the wicked.

How do you know?

 

[Akhenaten]

How's the wit-gathering going?

I will respond to this by next Wednesday.

 

[Akhenaten]

... According to 2 Kgs. 19:35 the "angel of the LORD (i.e. YHWH)" annihilated the Assyrian army of King Sennacherib, 185,000 strong, in a single night. Do you believe this to be true?

Of course... mockers be warned and repent. The Lord will not always stay His hand against the purposes of the wicked.

Do you have any evidence that substantiates ANYTHING that happened in the Bible?

 

[zooterkin]

I will respond to this by next Wednesday.

So you're about half-way there?

 

[SezMe]

Of course... mockers be warned and repent. The Lord will not always stay His hand against the purposes of the wicked.

*snort*
*snicker*
*mock*
*LMAO*
*hack and wheeze*
*chuckle*
*bwhahahaha*

... no repentance ...

... no (apparent) consequence ...

By golly, you're right. There are times when the Lord does stay his hand. Why am I so blessed?

 

[Belz...]

Of course... mockers be warned and repent. The Lord will not always stay His hand against the purposes of the wicked.

Do you have any evidence that substantiates ANYTHING that you just said ?

 

[pakeha]

Of course... mockers be warned and repent. The Lord will not always stay His hand against the purposes of the wicked.

Is it wicked to ask the name of the Pharaoh of the Exodus?
Is it mocking to ask the name of the Pharaoh of Joseph?
Is it wicked to doubt the Exodus ever happened?
Is it mocking to doubt Joshua's military campaign ever took place?

I refuse to believe in lies, Janadele.
Why try to scare me into doing so?