When biblical and archaeological worlds collide

[Dover]

When biblical and archaeological worlds collide

Nov. 30, 2004

Fighting over the pharaoh: Who was the Egyptian pharaoh mentioned in Exodus? Might there have been more than one pharaoh?


Monday's item on the mysterious case of Amun-her Khepeshef, the firstborn son of Ramses II, stirred up a flurry of debate from Cosmic Log correspondents. The response definitely proves that some people take their biblical scholarship at least as seriously as researcher Kent Weeks takes his Egyptology.

Here's a selection of the e-mail feedback:

Anonymous: "I think you unfairly suggest that most theologians believe Ramses to be the pharoah of the exodus. This is simply not true. Most conservative scholars hold to Amenhotep. That is not discussed in your article. It seems to me that you are unfairly using your media to manipulate people into doubting God's Word. True scholarship presents both sides of a debate, fairly and accurately. You have failed to do this. Your article does not measure up to the scholarly work you would suggest it to be. In fact it comes closer to a genre called propaganda. Shame on you."

Wayne Medlin, Denver: "This is typical of the ongoing efforts of the intelligentsia to discredit the biblical account, no matter what the circumstance. Why is there no speculation that this may be someone else, a nephew, a different son, whatever? The Bible clearly indicates the person who died was a boy, not a 50 year-old general."

Dan Walker, Ph.D., M.Div., St. Louis: "This is the type of pseudo-science garbage that makes people laugh. The only point of this show and your article is to cast doubt on the historical records of the Old Testament. According to the written documents of the Old Testament, the pharaoh's firstborn was not killed in battle and was certainly killed while much younger, while in the pharaoh's household. Therefore, the discovery of a bashed-in skull sheds no light whatsoever on this question. One of the rules of the scientific method is to place greater weight on solid evidence and not give credence to bizarre speculations."...cont'd

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3217961/

Cosmic Log - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3053419/?qp=69982

[aquart]

1. The English translation confuses "firstborn" and "chosen."

Thereby leading to idiotic arguments.

When Egyptologists stop insisting on magic formulas for carbon dating instead of using the same numbers as the rest of the world, we can have a serious discussion of Egyptian history. Till then, it's all academic fairytales.

[muriel_volestrangler]

4. Can you expand on this?

Is this the majority of Egyptologists who are using a different scale? What is the effect of it? What is their reasoning - have they some record they insist must be accurate that wouldn't fit in with the accepted figures?

[tandot]

2. "...using your media to manipulate people into doubting God's Word"

and using the media to manipulate people into doubting that the world is flat, and that Eve was created from Adam's rib.

I just about had it. They can believe anything they want to. They can believe that the Bible is God's word, or call it a "historical record". Religion is a set of believes - not facts. Christians account for only about a third of the world population. This means that about 67% have a different belief system.

http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html

Stop shoving your particular religion down our throats. As much as you have the right to practice your religion, we have the right not to. Religion is your private business...YOUR particular belief system. It has ZERO, ZILCH, NADA, NOTHING to do with science. The majority of the world does NOT believe in what YOUR Bible says. Religion has no place in our schools and it should never be used to obstruct science and critical thinking.

[struggle4progress]

3. A lot of the scientific evidence that finally led to Darwinism ...

... was collected by nominal Biblical literalists who were trying to explain, on the basis of the scientific evidence, what routes the animals took to their final homes after Noah's ark alighted upon Mount Ararat.

Questions like "Exactly how did the kangaroos get from the Middle East to Australia?" at one time excited great attention.

If the Biblical literalists want to claim they are doing science, they really should try to answer such early modern questions.