• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Archaeology and the Hebrew Bible

I'm not searching for anything.
I have no reason to believe that Jericho isn't one of the oldest "continuous" inhabited places on earth.. there's others scattered around.
I also have no reason to believe that the events in the bible prior to say Solomon are fact in any manner.
A fortuitous conflation of some ancient destruction added to a fanciful story of an invasion which never occurred is all the biblical version is.

Actually, given at least the 600-650 year long MB-IA abandonment, it is patent that Jericho was not continuously-occupied, by definition.

Then you're not looking at this as a learning opportunity and are set in your ways?

Oh, and why draw the line at Solomon? There's more evidence for David in the dirt than for Solomon(via the Bayt Daud Aramaean inscription in the Tel Dan stela).
 
Last edited:
Actually, given at least the 600-650 year long MB-IA abandonment, it is patent that Jericho was not continuously-occupied, by definition.

Then you're not looking at this as a learning opportunity and are set in your ways?

Oh, and why draw the line at Solomon? There's more evidence for David in the dirt than for Solomon(via the Bayt Daud Aramaean inscription in the Tel Dan stela).

Could Exodus be a garbled account of some remnant Priesthood of Ahkenhaten fleeing persecution and setting up Monotheistic Shop in Canaan?
 
Could Exodus be a garbled account of some remnant Priesthood of Ahkenhaten fleeing persecution and setting up Monotheistic Shop in Canaan?

Well, I'm kind of partial to an Exodus event around 1386 BCE anyway, so I'm sure it's possible.

I won't bore everyone with that unless someone requests it.
 
Last edited:
Actually, given at least the 600-650 year long MB-IA abandonment, it is patent that Jericho was not continuously-occupied, by definition.

Then you're not looking at this as a learning opportunity and are set in your ways?

Oh, and why draw the line at Solomon? There's more evidence for David in the dirt than for Solomon(via the Bayt Daud Aramaean inscription in the Tel Dan stela).
.
Semantics......ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww..
There is no evidence that the city fell/tottered/stubbed its toe during the alleged time the alleged Hebrew alleged escape from the alleged captivity in Egypt occurred.
The places Egypt and Jericho are the only real parts of the story.
Solomon?
Solomon was said to have -begun- the process of collecting the stories of the olden days.. the first such effort.
From his undistinguished pile of rocks on an insignificant hill in an area that was used for a camp ground by the forces in the region with actual military and political existence.
Everything prior to that time is hear-say. And boy, is it ever!
.
Gerald Larue on the Old Testament..
Page 11 begins the explanation....
http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/AA%20Old%20Testament%20Life%20and%20Literature.pdf
 
Last edited:
.
Everything prior to that time is hear-say. And boy, is it ever!
That's what you get when you base your entire philosophy on the collected myths of a small desert tribe.

I imagine Eskimo myths paint their ancestors as "larger than life" as well.

We just don't accept them as infallible truth.
 
Could Exodus be a garbled account of some remnant Priesthood of Ahkenhaten fleeing persecution and setting up Monotheistic Shop in Canaan?

You would not be the first to offer that suggestion. I have always found the concept attractive, but I am no way well read enough about Ahkenhaten and the fall of his cult to draw any conclusion
 
You would not be the first to offer that suggestion. I have always found the concept attractive, but I am no way well read enough about Ahkenhaten and the fall of his cult to draw any conclusion

It does seem like a pretty obvious conclusion to draw if one isn't tied to a literal interpretation of the OT.

I guess the Jews/Xtians/Muslims don't want to think that Adon is related to Atun, because the Egyptians were just superstitious Pagans or something...
 
Could Exodus be a garbled account of some remnant Priesthood of Ahkenhaten fleeing persecution and setting up Monotheistic Shop in Canaan?


You would not be the first to offer that suggestion. I have always found the concept attractive, but I am no way well read enough about Ahkenhaten and the fall of his cult to draw any conclusion


I'd distrust anyone who said that he had enough information on which to draw a conclusion about it one way or another.

Having said that though, I'm with you in finding the idea quite easy to accept simply because it appears to make sense in a lot of ways.


It does seem like a pretty obvious conclusion to draw if one isn't tied to a literal interpretation of the OT.


I don't know if I'd go as far as 'obvious', but it's certainly reasonable, I reckon.


I guess the Jews/Xtians/Muslims don't want to think that Adon is related to Atun, because the Egyptians were just superstitious Pagans or something...


I've read arguments both in favour and against 'adonai' and aten' having a common etymology. The famous egyptologist Arthur Weigall and Sigmund Freud, for example, saw the names as being related, while another egyptologist, Jan Assmann argued against it, despite being of the belief that early Judaism was greatly influenced by Egyptian religion.

I don't think I know enough to have a proper opinion but I'd certainly file it under 'feasible'.
 
Last edited:
.
Semantics......ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww..
There is no evidence that the city fell/tottered/stubbed its toe during the alleged time the alleged Hebrew alleged escape from the alleged captivity in Egypt occurred.
The places Egypt and Jericho are the only real parts of the story.
Solomon?
Solomon was said to have -begun- the process of collecting the stories of the olden days.. the first such effort.
From his undistinguished pile of rocks on an insignificant hill in an area that was used for a camp ground by the forces in the region with actual military and political existence.
Everything prior to that time is hear-say. And boy, is it ever!
.
Gerald Larue on the Old Testament..
Page 11 begins the explanation....
http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/AA%20Old%20Testament%20Life%20and%20Literature.pdf
No, not semantics. I'm trying to make clear the reality of discoveries on the ground.

Your word picture of Jerusalem as "undistinguished pile of rocks on an insignificant hill" in all periods from Solomon and older is simply not true. The Amarna letters describe explicity an Egyptian garrison there for some decades, led by one Adbi Heba. We even have a request for soldiers to help suppress unrest of the locals at one point (this dates to before Solomon's putative reign - from ca 1400 to ca 1325 BCE). We have the Millo and the Stepped Stone Structure which date before any suggested dates for Solomon.

Read up on Eilat Mazar's ongoing work in the City of David area of Jerusalem. She connects the two structures (the Millo/Stepped Stone structure and the Large Stone structure) as part of a single foundational structure for a since-destroyed royal building. (read Mazar, Eilat, Excavations at the Summit of the City of David, Preliminary Report of Seasons 2005-2007, Shoham, Jerusalem and New York, 2009, p. 67).

Mazar dates the whole structure to the time of David (10th century), but this is in doubt, scholars from Tel Aviv led by Finkelstein suggest that some of the upper sections of the wall, and a mikveh ritual bath should more properly date from the Hasmonean Period. (see Israel Finkelstein, Ze'ev Herzog, Lily Singer-Avitz and David Ussishkin (2007), "Has King David's Palace in Jerusalem Been Found?", Tel Aviv: Journal of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University, 34(2), 142-164; p. 154)

Certainly, with the expanse and scale of the Structures, if the interpretation of them as foundational to a palace or fortress is accurate, then we have evidence in the dirt for quite a bit more than a minor "undistinguished pile of rocks on an insignificant hill".

I'm not quite sure where you got the idea that Solomon was said to have begun the process of collecting writings in the 10th century. Citation?
 
That's what you get when you base your entire philosophy on the collected myths of a small desert tribe.

I imagine Eskimo myths paint their ancestors as "larger than life" as well.

We just don't accept them as infallible truth.
I don't think anyone, myself included, is taking the biblical texts as infallible truth.

If I haven't been clear about that, my mistake.
 
You would not be the first to offer that suggestion. I have always found the concept attractive, but I am no way well read enough about Ahkenhaten and the fall of his cult to draw any conclusion
To me, there are fascinating synchronisms that connect the Atenists and the Yahwists.

Please read this in full.

http://www.seanet.com/~realistic/psalm104.html

I'll extract the point from it that I wanted to make:

The Eight points of comparison: Psalm 104 and the Hymn to Aten


The following text in [--] is from Psalm 104 while the remainder is quoted translation by J.H.Breasted, from Cambridge Ancient History, Vol. II, Chapters 5 & 6.. and "The Rock Tombs of Tell el Armarna", Archeological Survey, Egyptian Exploration Society (6vol, 1903) N. de G. Davis.

PSALM 104
[20. Thou makest darkness, and it is night, Wherein all the beasts of the forest creep forth. 21. The young Lions roar after their prey, And seek their food from God.] The tradition of Egyptian, Hindu, and Hebrew cultures starts the day at sunset. Today the day normally starts at sunrise.

AKENATEN'S THE HYMN TO THE SUN
When thou settest in the western horizon of the sky,
[1st comparison, verse 20]
The earth is in darkness like the dead.
They sleep in their chambers
Their heads are wrapped up.
Their nostrils are stopped
And none see the other.
While all their things are stolen
Which are under their heads
And they know it not
Every Lion cometh forth from his den
[2nd comparison, verse 21]
All Serpents they sting
Darkness The world is in silence.
He that made them resteth in his horizon.

[22. The Sun riseth, they get them away,
and lay them down in their dens. 23. Man
goeth forth unto his work And to his labor until
the evening.]

Bright is the earth when thou riseth in the horizon.
[3rd , 22]
When thou shinest as Aten by day
Thou drivest away the darkness.
When thou sendest forth thy rays
The two lands (Egypt) are in daily festivity.
Awake and standing upon their feet
When thou has raised them up.
Their limbs bathed they take their clothing
Their arms uplifted in adoration to thy dawning
Then in all the world they do their work.. [4th, 23]

All cattle rest upon their pasturage
The trees and the plants flourish

[12. By them the birds of the heavens have their
habitation. They sing among the branches.]

The birds flutter in their marshes, [5th, 12]
Their wings uplifted in adoration to thee.
All sheep dance on their feet.
All winged things fly,
They live when thou hast shone upon them.

[25. Yonder is the sea great and wide. Wherein
are things creeping innumerable. Both small and
great beasts. 26. There go the ships.]

The barges sail upstream and downstream alike.
[6th, 26]
Every highway is open because thou dawnest.
The fish in the river leap before thee.
Thy rays are in the midst of the great green sea.
Creator of the germ in woman
Maker of the seed in man
Giving life to the son in the body of his mother
Soothing him that he may not weep.
Nurse (even) in the womb.

[29. Thou hidest thy face, they are troubled.
Thou takest away their breath and they die.
And return to their dust.]

Giver of breath to animals, every one that he maketh
When he cometh forth from the womb [7th, 29]
On the day of their birth
Thou openest his mouth in speech

[27. These wait all for thee. That thou may give them
food in due season.]

Thou suppliest his necessities.[8th, 27]

When the fledgling in the egg chirps in the shell
Thou givest him breath there-in to preserve him alive.
When thou hast brought him together
to (the point of) bursting it in the egg
To chirp with all his might,
He goeth about on his two feet
When he hath come forth therefrom.

How manifold are thy works,
They are hidden from before (us)
O Sole God, whose powers no other possesseth.
Thou didst create the earth according to thy heart
While thou wast alone
Man, all cattle, large and small
All that are upon the earth
That go about on their feet
(All) That are on high
That fly with their wings
The foreign countries, Syria and Kush,
The land of Egypt
Thou settest every man into his place
Thou suppliest their necessities
Everyone has his possessions
And his days are reckoned
The tongues are divers in speech
Their forms likewise and their skins are distinguished
(For) thou makest different the strangers."

http://katestange.net/egypt/literature.htm

For those who may not know, Akhenaten was considered by the orthodox priesthood to be a heretic, having changed his beliefs to reflect the primacy of the Aten over the other Egyptian deities. In fact, he turned his back on the worship of Amon, making it illegal in Egypt. He moved the capital to the city of Akhetaten (now called el-Amarna).

http://freepages.history.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~rgrosser/amarna/neywetaten/index.htm

The Hymn to the Aten was created during that heretical period. What there is no explanation for in the Egyptian historical record, is why did Akhenaten turn his back on his family (changing his name from Amenhotep IV to Akhenaten) and turn his back on his gods (making the worship of the old gods punishable by death? His was not a popular move, and certainly, in Egypt at least, did not last beyond his life.

So, the thing that is clear is that these texts are similar enough to conclude that one borrowed from the other. The only unanswered question is from which direction the inspiration was drawn. I have certain ideas about that, but of course, nothing unassailable, and certainly more speculative than I want to get into here.
 
Last edited:
My first contact with Akhenhaten was "The Egyptian" by Waltari.
Probably as good a source as any.
Linking that to the Hebrews is kind of a stretch.
 
My first contact with Akhenhaten was "The Egyptian" by Waltari.
Probably as good a source as any.
Linking that to the Hebrews is kind of a stretch.

A stretch in what way?

Could you drill down a little deeper with that thought?
 
Last edited:
"The Egyptian" apparently presented a fairly accurate life and times of that period.
The censorship of the words and displays of the earlier gods, etc..
The problems Akh.... ran into with the clergy, and the Hittites and really a ripping good yarn. (recalling from 60 years back, mind you. :) )
The bible is also only a ripping good yarn, with less reality than the book of fiction.
 
I had not heard of Waltari til now, but after Googling him, I am familiar with the translator of "The Egyptian" into English, Naomi Walford. It seems that, apart from a few liberties taken with the lives of Sinuhe and Akhenaten, Egyptologists think quite highly of it as a novel that respects history.

However, using the same critical eye you're giving to the biblical texts, we have to say that the "Story of Sinuhe" dates to about 600 years before Akhenaten. It is unclear that it actually represents a real person named Sinuhe at all (see James Karl Hoffmeier, Ancient Israel In Sinai: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Wilderness Tradition, Oxford University Press 2005, p.256).The consensus among Egyptologists is that it is a fictional work (see James Peter Allen, Middle Egyptian: An Introduction to the Language and Culture of Hieroglyphs, Cambridge University Press 2000, p.281), however, there is an ongoing debate about that. (see "In search of Sinuhe: “What's in a Name?”, Edmund S. Meltzer, Paper presented at The 58th Annual Meeting of the American Research Center in Egypt, Wyndham Toledo Hotel, Toledo, Ohio, Apr 20, 2007).

So, that said, "The Egyptian" is a work of narrative, historical fiction based - in part - on what is itself likely a 4000 year-old work of fiction. We've gone far beyond the point in time where anything definitive can be said about any historicity the "Story of Sinuhe" might contain, so to say that the work of fiction BASED upon it has more reality than the Hebrew bible is a bit unsubstantiated.
 
<snip>
I've read arguments both in favour and against 'adonai' and aten' having a common etymology. The famous egyptologist Arthur Weigall and Sigmund Freud, for example, saw the names as being related, while another egyptologist, Jan Assmann argued against it, despite being of the belief that early Judaism was greatly influenced by Egyptian religion.

I don't think I know enough to have a proper opinion but I'd certainly file it under 'feasible'.

Erm, I have to say that Sigmund Freud isn't my usual go-to guy for matters philological. Is there more to the argument than "they kind of sound alike"? I know diddly about ancient Semitic languages, but from what I do know about philology, apparent similarity between two words isn't enough to assume that they are related. There are usually consistent and predictable sound differences. Is that the case with Aten/Adonai?
 
Erm, I have to say that Sigmund Freud isn't my usual go-to guy for matters philological.


Nor mine, for that matter, but who am I to judge? :)

He expounded on the theory about Aten/Adonai in in his 1939 book Moses and Monotheism, which I'm now going to have to go and re-read before I get back to you with a decent answer.

It's available online if you'd like to have a read yourself.

I don't know whether Freud actually came up with the idea himself or was building on a theory of Arthur Weigall, an egyptologyst who worked with both Flinders Petrie and Howard Carter. Where Weigall got the idea from I'm afraid I do not know, but I'll see what I can find.


Is there more to the argument than "they kind of sound alike"? I know diddly about ancient Semitic languages, but from what I do know about philology, apparent similarity between two words isn't enough to assume that they are related. There are usually consistent and predictable sound differences. Is that the case with Aten/Adonai?


Some of those that do know about these things disagree with Freud, and say that there is no relationship between the two words. The afforementioned Jan Assmann is such a one, and he spoke of this in his books Moses the Egyptian and its follow-up, The Price of Monotheism.

Unfortunately I have neither of these books, so I'll continue searching for some online sources and report back with whatever I find.
 
I remember Ralph Ellis getting into some trouble with a theory of soundalikes, concluding that, not only were the Israelite kings properly identified as Hyksos, but that they never really left Egypt to go to Canaan, they stayed in Egypt until the time of Christ.

http://freespace.virgin.net/kena.edfu/sheba.html

On this page, he makes his spurious case for soundalikes. He uses little more than this, despite having self-published several books on this and ancillary topics.

Also, the late Kamil Salibi (professor of History at American University of Beirut) came up with the "Israel in Arabia" theory, which largely just looked for soundalike toponyms common between the Hebrew Bible and Arabia.
 
Only so many sounds the human mouth can make. There needs to be more evidence than simply "sounding alike" to tie words together.

In Russian, "through the window" sounds to an English speaker exactly like an emphatic "f*** no!"
 
Only so many sounds the human mouth can make. There needs to be more evidence than simply "sounding alike" to tie words together.

In Russian, "through the window" sounds to an English speaker exactly like an emphatic "f*** no!"
Same thing in Arabic. The word for "f***" sounds like "Neek" in English, so Allah help you if someone asks your name and your name is Nick.
 
Last edited:

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom