Origins of life

[alextemplet]

Although the creation and flood stories can be questioned, they are only disprovable if they are interpreted literally. And the rest of the Bible stands very solidly upon historical evidence.

I donot find any historical evidence for the Egyptian pharoah Shishak who looted Solomn's treasure there is no such King in Egypt.Experts can only say it may be this King or that but no solid evidence.I have read in Egyptian inscriptions about the Israelites being slaves but no where about those Plagues.Also can you tell me during which kings period did moses appear.

The plagues are recorded in Egyptian hyroglyphs as well as the Bible, and this occurred during the reign of Rameses II. As for Pharoah Shishak, I think he is mentioned in the Egyptian record but under a different name; the same events are documented and that's how we know which king it was.

[David George]

Sheshonq-I is thought to be shishak.And can you provide me a link to the plagues written in egyptian.

[Linn]

google Egyptian history!!

This is weird!
the same thing discussion in Archeology.
I just wrote about this!
Yes, correct:
Shishak was an Egyptian king also known as Sheshonk (1)
from Egyptian records Shishak is regarded as the founder
of the Libyan dynasty, and generaly believed to have ruled
21 years.

according to biblical records,
Shishak invaded Judah in 993 B.C.E. captured
fortified cities and surrender from Jerusalem.
Archeological evidence to support this:
Stele fragment found at megiddo, in commemoration of his
victory, and also a relief on a temple wall at Karnak with the
list of numerous conquered cities, with a considerable number
listed that are located within the territory of the ten-tribe kingdom

The purpose of Shishaks campaign was to gain control of
important trade routes and thus extend Egyptian power.

I didn't read anything in these links yet myself,
but you may find some info in one of these links (in case you dont believe me)

http://aolsearch.aol.com/aol/search?enc ... r&ie=UTF-8

[Linn]

OK
on moses
born: 1593 B.C.E.
Pharaoh:??? research

toward the end of Moses 40 year "sojourn" he was commisioned to spearhead a movement to deliver Israel from Egyptian bondage,
so that is 1593 -40=1553 pharaoh was????
the bible does not name the Pharaoh , nor the Pharaoh before, and there is no secular writings about these events.

Ramses 11 is often suggested because of references to the building of cities of Pithom and Raamses by the Israelite laaborers.
that is Logical I say.


then there are the Amarna tablets,
found at Tell el-amarna on the Nile, which some
scholors think refer to "Habiru" as the Hebrews,
but this is not conclusive.

As far as the plaugues go, I doubt much would be found in Egyptian tablets, as They were notorious for only recording victories and things that made them look good. The best chance is to find other (secular) writings in addition to the bible.

"God's and Godesses" of Egypt, it is interesting to note that the ten plagues that God visited upon the Egyptians he humiliated them. Do you think they would record that? For example, the first plague the turning of the Nile in to blood, brought disgrace to the nile god Hapi.

[alextemplet]

I saw a documentary on the History Channel that showed how it was possible for all ten plagues to have occurred, and even explained how the Hebrews were able to cross the Red Sea (which in the original Hebrew text actually says Sea of Reeds). That same documentary also mentioned a heiroglyph that described a large of number of foreigners who lived in Egypt and left, and this record is dated to about the same time as the Biblical account.

[damien james]

Speaking of bible, what do people think here about the new Gospel of Judas that was found? About Jesus instructing Judas to turn him in? I thought it is interesting. There will be a special on THC pretty soon about it.

[alextemplet]

The Gospel of Judas is a bunch of lies; no credible historian should put his faith in it. For one thing, it was written almost 300 years after the other gospels, and that alone should say something about its inaccuracy. Also, the four Biblica gospels are among the most solid historical documents you can find. All four were written by people who never met each other and never met Jesus and yet they all agree on every major detail. Any historian will tell you that establishes their accuracy, and the fact that the so-calles "Gospel of Judas" contradicts them is only further proof of its inaccuracy.

A lot of scientists these days try to find ways to attack the Bible but all they do is make fools of themselves. I saw one guy on the news yesterday who claimed that John the Baptist and Jesus were co-Messiahs, and he claimed this was proven in the Gospels. Well he must not have read the Bible because the book clearly states that Jesus, not John, was the one true Messiah. I mean, people even asked John if he was the Messiah and he denied it, so how can this fool claim that he was?

Getting back to the Gospel of Judas, it was written by Gnostics, a group now know as heretics for their rejection of Biblical doctrine. The book's sole purpose was to spread their propaganda, and it failed. Christians knew back then that the Gospel of Judas was a bunch of lies, so why should we give it any credence now?

[Linn]

I saw a documentary on the History Channel that showed how it was possible for all ten plagues to have occurred, and even explained how the Hebrews were able to cross the Red Sea (which in the original Hebrew text actually says Sea of Reeds). That same documentary also mentioned a heiroglyph that described
a large of number of foreigners who lived in Egypt and left,
and this record is dated to about the same time as the Biblical
account.

oh I am not sure if I saw that, if it is going to be on again Alex,
please let me know, I love those type programs
cause I AM A GEEK!!
I did hear of experiments that were conducted, where
due to the topography of the red sea and the prevailing
wind current in this area, it woul be possible for the red
sea to have parted, and no doubt this is why we read about
the wind leading them.

And I think I did see a national geo doc on the plagues too.
interesting.

oops I had to add this: The red sea could only be parted in
one location only, I think that is what they said a narrow
corrider with deeper channels on each side. I believe that is the description.

[kiekyon]

i've also watch a discovery program which says that the 'parting of red sea' could actually mean 'the parting of reed sea'.
somehow, the early jew messed up their translation.

[damien james]

Well, I have no interest in bible really, but have never heard of Gospel of Judas until now.

[alextemplet]

i've also watch a discovery program which says that the 'parting of red sea' could actually mean 'the parting of reed sea'.
somehow, the early jew messed up their translation.

No, the Hebrew actually did say "Sea of Reeds"; it was when it was translated into Greek that it became "Red Sea".

[alextemplet]

Well, I have no interest in bible really, but have never heard of Gospel of Judas until now.

That's because it was only discovered recently, or rather, rediscovered. Like I said the early Church suppressed it for a reason, not the least of which was that the Canon of Scripture was already established by the time this "gospel" was written, so being written a few hundred years after the Bible the Gospel of Judas can in no way claim anything even close to equal authority to it.