Name of Queen

[Nogodnomasters]

Events in the Old Testament that make the Jews look bad are very much the bricks of it - but I don't believe you can get any comparable level of self-humiliation in the Egyptian political record.

As for not reporting a conquest - I'm not a close follower of the history of Ramases (sorry, New Kingdom Egypt for myself focusses on Akhenaten) but you mention a conquest followed by Pharoah conceding territories. Sounds like a difficult situation to make political good of if you lost the very thing you fought for in the first place.

Normally that would be the case. Except in this one the pharaoh was Senuseret III who already had a great reputation as a conqueror, having taken Ethiopia. He records a conquest in Ephraim (Gezer) which is speculated to have been some sort of vendetta. He went there, conquered it and then left. Sort of like the Celtic conquests.

 

[Quahom1]

Getting off track are we?


Name of Queen is the topic.

v/r

Q

 

[Nogodnomasters]

Getting off track are we?


Name of Queen is the topic.

v/r

Q

There was no queen. It is like trying to name King Arthur's horse.

 

[Quahom1]

There was no queen. It is like trying to name King Arthur's horse.

Well then I suppose that Josephus was a liar...and you know everything...(btw he was a secular historian).

v/r

Q

 

[Nogodnomasters]

Well then I suppose that Josephus was a liar...and you know everything...(btw he was a secular historian).

v/r

Q

By nearly any account the event would have been 1000 years old when Josephus wrote about it. At that point it becomes hear-say, myth, legend, questionable data. Secular historian??? He was Jewish. Who was secular 2000 years ago?

There is much in Josephus that is inaccurate and down right false. You can accept all his writings on faith alone if you want. I do not- Especially when he speculates on things that happened 1000 years earlier. Do you also believe the Hyksos were Israeites because Josephus claims they were?

 

[Quahom1]

By nearly any account the event would have been 1000 years old when Josephus wrote about it. At that point it becomes hear-say, myth, legend, questionable data. Secular historian??? He was Jewish. Who was secular 2000 years ago?

There is much in Josephus that is inaccurate and down right false. You can accept all his writings on faith alone if you want. I do not- Especially when he speculates on things that happened 1000 years earlier. Do you also believe the Hyksos were Israeites because Josephus claims they were?

Based on what? Your say so? I find nothing in Josephus' writings claiming they were Israelites, to the contrary, it appears they were the original Amalekites, who warred with Saul and later, David.

Josephus' thousand year gap, is closer than our three thousand year gap, concerning said events and people. Do you also ignore the professed history of Etheopia, because it is of no consequence and does not fit your mold?

Josephus speculated on nothing. He claimed to have read Manetho, and quoted from such. But since we have no records of Manetho's writings, it can't be proved or disproved.

Your implication that there could be no secular historian back then, regardless of his/her faith, is ludicrous. Your targeting Josephus and challenging his "secular" bent when writing, because he was Jewish, is an interesting revelation, about you.

Q

 

[Nogodnomasters]

Based on what? Your say so? I find nothing in Josephus' writings claiming they were Israelites, to the contrary, it appears they were the original Amalekites, who warred with Saul and later, David.

Josephus' thousand year gap, is closer than our three thousand year gap, concerning said events and people. Do you also ignore the professed history of Etheopia, because it is of no consequence and does not fit your mold?

Josephus speculated on nothing. He claimed to have read Manetho, and quoted from such. But since we have no records of Manetho's writings, it can't be proved or disproved.

Your implication that there could be no secular historian back then, regardless of his/her faith, is ludicrous. Your targeting Josephus and challenging his "secular" bent when writing, because he was Jewish, is an interesting revelation, about you.

Q

In A III 39 Josephus claims Moses warred with the Amalekites. Not likely they would be the original Hebrews if we believe Josephus. Manetho relates a Rameside expulsion which the Bible appears to have adopted for the Exodus.

http://www.bibleorigins.net/ExodusJosephusVSManetho.html

Josephus believes the Hyksos (Against Apion 1:14) founded Jerusalem. This is of course INCORRECT as Jerusalem existed in the Early Bronze Age. Josephus claims the Hyksos expulsion preceeded the seige of Troy by over a 1000 years (also incorrect). Josephus then makes a statement comparing the Hyksos take over of Egypt and expulsion as one of his own... "...That we came out of another country into Egypt; and that withal our deliverance out of it was so ancient in time as to preceed the seige of Troy almost a 1000 years..."

Did you actually read the works of Josephus or just those passages that suit your position?

 

[queenofsheba]

Josephus believes the Hyksos (Against Apion 1:14) founded Jerusalem. This is of course INCORRECT as Jerusalem existed in the Early Bronze Age. Josephus claims the Hyksos expulsion preceeded the seige of Troy by over a 1000 years (also incorrect). Josephus then makes a statement comparing the Hyksos take over of Egypt and expulsion as one of his own... "

The Hyksos are a very mysterious people. They were semitic and ruled parts of Egypt between 2000 and 1500 BC. An old theory says that they are the Hebrews, but most scientists don't accept that anymore.

 

[Nogodnomasters]

The Hyksos are a very mysterious people. They were semitic and ruled parts of Egypt between 2000 and 1500 BC. An old theory says that they are the Hebrews, but most scientists don't accept that anymore.

Exactly. In fact the real evidence shows Judaism evolved out of the old canaanite religion. There are no sudden changes in language and culture of the Canaanites that one would expect had there been a real Exodus out of Egypt. I am convinced the story in the OT is based upon at least 3 times Asians left Egypt with the earliest account taking place during the Great Famine of the Early Bronze age.

 

[ProphetSmurf]

Contraire, when the 1st temple was built, the Ark was used yearly at Yom Kippur. The Ark is to set inside the Holy of Holies. The Ark was probably hidden by the Prophet Jeremiah. Some say he hid the last Ark on the nearby mountain Nebo near Jordan, others say he hid it inside a cavern or tunnel beneath the City, possibly Hezekiahs tunnels or even Jeremiahs grotto.

 

[pohaikawahine]

Contraire, when the 1st temple was built, the Ark was used yearly at Yom Kippur. The Ark is to set inside the Holy of Holies. The Ark was probably hidden by the Prophet Jeremiah. Some say he hid the last Ark on the nearby mountain Nebo near Jordan, others say he hid it inside a cavern or tunnel beneath the City, possibly Hezekiahs tunnels or even Jeremiahs grotto.

The answer to the question lies in the symbols above .... what is the ark, where is the holy of holies, the mountain and the cave .... when you look inside the symbols you will see who she is .... the hard questions can also be answered .... the beauty of the language of the ancients is that it teaches one to see inside the riddle .... these days we speak too bluntly and have lost the subtleness of language .... just some thoughts to share .... he hawai'i au, pohaikawahine