The Exodus Decoded

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 2:52 am

Ah, yes....the Greek waves

how he got waves out of that...that is a real stretch but then again i am laughing at that whole greek hypothesis, every time someone reminds me of it.

i am still trying to figure out how james cameron got in the picture? he has no credentials and basicallyis a painin the keester. i think he is one of those that feels that the titanic should not be excavated or raised.

if those type of people got their way no site would be dug up and we would know very little of the past.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 2:57 am

Like you, he believes myths.

Myths sell.

--J.D.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:06 am

how he got waves out of that...that is a real stretch but then again i am laughing at that whole greek hypothesis, every time someone reminds me of it.

I'm still trying to figure out why Hendel let him off the hook with the Ahmose stele. There was one out of context word in the whole thing that Jacobovici tried to twist into a "mirror" of the exodus story.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:32 pm

I'm still trying to figure out why Hendel let him off the hook with the Ahmose stele. There was one out of context word in the whole thing that Jacobovici tried to twist into a "mirror" of the exodus story.

not only that but he left out the manathos papyrus (i think i spelled that right) which actually describes events similar to the plagues and would have beena better source touse than the stele. so either he is confused or just out and out lied.

one thing it does prove his research was horrid and only meant to find things to support his thinking and not what truly happened. then there is no record of any of the israelites branching off and sailing to greece (he never explained how they got htere) so why bring it up?

the artifacts were not good copies of anything and certainly did not reflect the design of the ark. how does he get 'griffins' out of cherubims?

And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt
thou make them, in the two ends of the mercy seat.
25:19 And make one cherub on the one end, and the other cherub on the
other end: even of the mercy seat shall ye make the cherubims on
the two ends thereof.
25:20 And the cherubims shall stretch forth their wings on high, covering
the mercy seat with their wings, and their faces shall look one to
another; toward the mercy seat shall the faces of the cherubims be.
25:21 And thou shalt put the mercy seat above upon the ark; and in the
ark thou shalt put the testimony that I shall give thee.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:43 pm

I believe Manetho's text referred to an Old Kingdom disaster, but, you're right about one thing. With his penchant for twisting history to suit his needs he could just as easily have said it was 1,000 years later and fit in with his program.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:13 pm

The idiot had a Roosevelt dime on the Titanic.

--J.D.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:41 pm

I believe Manetho's text referred to an Old Kingdom disaster

i will have to look it up again but it is closer to the plagues than the ahmose stele. in fact, gone with the wind is closer to the 10 plagues than that monument.

With his penchant for twisting history to suit his needs he could just as easily have said it was 1,000 years later and fit in with his program.

that is just it. this whole show was not done in a scholarly or even logical fashion but seemed to be an avenue for another pet theory no matter whom it contradicted.

the scholars were not used well and i am sure their interviews were heavily edited so the quotes used supported jacobovici and not their true positions.

as far as i am concerned, jacobovici, didn't clear anything up but just added another voice to the muddy waters.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:46 pm

in fact, gone with the wind is closer to the 10 plagues than that monument.

That's pretty good for you.

that is just it. this whole show was not done in a scholarly or even logical fashion but seemed to be an avenue for another pet theory no matter whom it contradicted.

Hendel's "infomercial" line was pretty much on the mark.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 5:27 pm

there is another problem in jacobovici's dating and it is found in Hendel's criticism--

The Egyptian pharaoh Ahmose I (ca. 1550-1525 B.C.E.) was the pharaoh of the Exodus & The migration of Jacob and his children to Egypt is depicted in a tomb mural from Beni Hasan (ca. 1880 B.C.E.).

there is no 400 year sojourn in that time frame, so jacobovici's math is off by a long shot.

Like the Biblical Israelites, they are wearing multi-colored tunics

here is another error on jacobivici's part. just because joseph had a coat of many colors does it mean that all hebrews wore one. this is a poor association and helps underscore his lack of research and credibility.

here to:

The Book of Genesis is clear that the famine that struck Canaan at the time of the migration of Jacob and his sons struck everybody. In other words, about 200 years prior to the Exodus one should find archaeological evidence of a Semitic migration into the Delta

why 200 years? that is far short of the 400 year time span. his looking for evidence is also skewered by this oversight.

The fact is that Mycenaeans and Egyptians were in close contact

if i recall correctly, it is the minoans not mycenaeans who had close contact with the egyptians. where is his proof that the mycenaeans were also such travelers prior to alexander?

Ipuwer papyrus

i put the wrong name in a previous post.

there is nmore but i will wait till another post to point them out.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:44 pm

1- There was no 400 year sojourn, period. There were no Hebrews to have it at that time. There was also no 480 years between the exodus and Solomon's building the temple. All of this nonsense was written later.

2- Joseph could have worn a pink suit and driven in a pimpmobile for all of the historical accuracy there is to the story. The wall painting most likely reflects the characteristic style of dress of the Semites as compared to the Egyptians who tended to wear minimal clothing according to their art work.

3- He's making this up as he went along. What's a couple of centuries among friends?

4- You are correct. The Minoans were deeply involved in commerce with the entire Eastern Mediterranean. The Minoan civilization dominated the Greek mainland probably up until the Santorini explosion when a weakened Crete was unable to retain control. Although not destroyed by the blast, Crete was most likely overrun by the resurgent Greeks a few centuries later. The fact of Cretan domination is reflected in the myth of Theseus and and minotaur, wherein Athens....which did not exist....was required to send seven youths and seven maidens to be sacrificed to the minotaur every year until Theseus slew the beast.

5- I knew what you meant. As far as I recall it tells a tale of foreign invasion, much the same as Manetho's description of the Hyksos invasion.

john · Post by **john** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:57 pm

from the back bench.

is it history or archaeology being argued here?

if history, you will spend the rest of your natural lives expelling words from your mouth, to no avail.

archaeology, now, that's another thing.

john

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 7:01 pm

There was no 400 year sojourn, period

too closed of a statement to encourage discussion. shows a closed mind to the issue. so i must respond thus: t'was too!!

The wall painting most likely reflects the characteristic style of dress of the Semites as compared to the Egyptians who tended to wear minimal clothing according to their art work.

again, it is a stretch of the biblical account to connect the 'evidence' to his theory.

He's making this up as he went along. What's a couple of centuries among friends

one would think he wold get the easy stuff right.

You are correct

yes but where did he get the idea that the early mycenaeans were as active as the minoans? he doesn't explain a lot.

i read further down the page and the response gets a response which gets a response and it seems to deteriorate as each response is posted.

john · Post by **john** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 7:08 pm

arch -

and the response gets a response which gets a response and it seems to deteriorate as each response is posted.

you have, at last, defined yourself perfectly.

john

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Sep 07, 2006 7:09 pm

What's to discuss? The bible was written a good seven centuries after Ahmose, at least in its initial form. Lots of stuff got made up to pad the pages.

Can't worry about the biblical account which is fictitious.

When you start off as wrong as he was there is no "easy stuff."

I've got no answer for that one, either. He needed some way to get from Canaan to Mycenae? Bad drugs?? Hallucinations???