The Egyptians did wipe out tons of records of events not favorable to themselves. Only recently have we learned of Aten and the monotheistic cult that worshiped him,
"Recently" being 1881 and the discovery of Akhenaten's tomb. In the 100 years plus since then, dozens of wall paintings and hundreds of texts have been discovered that describe the worship of Aten, the laws implemented by Akhenaten to supress the worship of other gods and other interesting details. In fact, we know quite a bit about that tiny period of Egyptian history. Many of the sources were Egyptian, mainly texts from tombs created during the reign of Akhenaton. In addition we know many details from sources outside of Egypt.
until they were wiped out (the city only more recently having been discovered).
Excavations at the site of the City of Aten began in 1913, soon after it's discovery. You have an odd sense of "recent."
In fact, one very intriguing theory (and I’m sorry, I don’t have the book here with me to title it) posits that Aten was Jehovah and it intertwines the Jewish history and the Egyptian history rather well. I’m not yet sold on the idea, but it is very intriguing!
And entirely debunked outside of a small circle of apologists (I use "apologist" in the respected, Christian sense, meaning someone strong enough in faith to defend it against the pagans.) It has been long established that the Hebrew religion was not monotheistic unil
after the Babylonian Captivity, centuries after the time given for the Exodus. Before that, it was henotheistic, ie acknowledged the existence of many gods while enforcing the worship of only one god.
As to the Ten Plagues, perhaps they were written hyperbolically and/or expunged from the official records.
Which sidesteps the question at hand. We have quite a bit of information about Atenism, from multiple Egyptian sources. We started finding this information -- in considerable detail, despite centuries of deliberate effort to supress it -- more than a century ago. We have found no Egyptian records of any series of disasters that in any way is similar to the Ten Plagues.
Further, we have lots of records of famines and widespread outbreaks of disease in Egypt from non-Egyptian sources. There are foreign emissaries who brought back detailed accounts of trade delegations when Egyptian crops failed. There are hundreds of thousands of commercial records detailing quantities, prices and reasons of sale for grain, cattle, dates and other materials from Ethiopia, Cush, Canaan and other civilizations, most of which mention "crop failure in Thebes" or "unseasonal flood caused widespread damage around Karnak." Not a single one of these -- well outside any attempt at supression by the Egyptians -- mentions anything resembling the Ten Plagues, even though the Bible makes it very, very clear that there was considerable damage to Egyptian food supplies, necessitating vast foreign imports.
Remember, the Jews were writing a history book as ancients did, full of hyperbole, probably some legend (remember, most history was oral for them), and historical meaning as to historical fact.
I make no judgement on yours or anyone else's personal beliefs, but it must be pointed out that the dominant form of Christianity in the United States, and one of the fastest growing forms worldwide, is literalist in nature. My questions, and I will assume also the questions posed by the OP, are aimed at such literalists and not at believers willing to see the Bible (or at least parts of it) as less than totally and literally accurate.
Much as Jesus spoke in parables (as other to this day do to get points across) history for ancient peoples was more about the meaning then the fact (as we know “fact” today). Also, more and more is being discovered every day. We barely know a thing about the Egyptians compared to their sum total knowledge. Egyptology is a very exciting place!
But we actually know quite a bit about most of Egyptian history. Scholars can tell you about every famine, every disease outbreak, every late flooding of the Nile, every year when the annual innundation was late or failed to arrive at all, for a period of almost 4,000 years. Nowhere in that vast record is there any mention of the Nile turning to blood, followed by a vast outbreak of frogs, followed by huge swarms of gnats, etc.
This is debated and there is reference to the Hibaru in the crescent area.
I did a Google search on "Hibaru" and all I found was mention of a city in Japan and references from various New Age sites. Nothing at all from legitimate, recognized scholarly sources. I don't suppose you could provide some links for study?
As to the slavery, I don’t have enough info to debate properly, but I would assume, somewhere in the record (lost or not) it would be mentioned. Lack of detailed record does not prove a negative, I don’t have records of my great-great-grandfather, but there were at one point.
Lack of detailed record does not prove a negative, true. However, we have a detailed record of much of Egyptian life that spans millennia. Nowhere in that record is there any mention of a group of people, numbering several tens of thousands, being kept in slavery for centuries because of their ethnicity; and with that lack, there is no mention of such a people being freed and taking with them their pick of Egypt's treasures, despite the massive economic hardship such an event would doubtless have caused. This absense from a detailed historic record is not conclusive, true, but it certainly places a lot of doubt on the supposition that such a people ever existed.
As for your great-great-grandfather, one can logically conclude that he existed. After all, logic dictates (sorry for the Spock-speak) that you have eight great-great-grandfathers. There is no logical basis for assuming that the one account of the Ten Plagues known to exist, the telling in the Torah, has any basis in historic fact.
Because, probably, it was a more localized flood that “felt” like a worldwide flood. When the world you know is small, a large event appears larger.
Again, your assertion violates one of the primary tenets of Protestant Christianity.
That is incorrect. It has been proven that copies of Antiquities were corrupted over the years, but the finding of a copy that predated the corrupt versions does in fact contain the Jesus reference, but as a historical figure that is being reported on, not a divine being. I’ll do some research this weekend and post more info on that claim to back it up, I don’t have it off hand.
And I will also do some research. I have not pursued the subject in some years; it will be fun to look in to it again. I might very well be remembering someone whose research has since been discredited, or perhaps I am misremembering Josephus.
Also, I hate linking, but I don’t have the time to write a similar bit, so here is another defense of historical Jesus:
http://educate-yourself.org/lte/provinghistoricJesus23m... Plus, to discredit Jesus, you discredit the first hand accounts of him. If you discount the first hand accounts of him, why would you believe second or third hand accounts if they exist?
First off, there is nothing that can reliably be held up as a first hand account. The earliest known Christian writings, Paul's letters, make it very clear that Paul had no direct, personal contact with Jesus, only visions and the same "God told me" that President Bush uses to justify his invasion of Iraq and his no-bid contracts to Haliburton. I would assert that visions and self-described voices do not count as personal accounts.
Second, I have in no way said that believe second or third hand accounts.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(230 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
