Quote:
|
I would prefer to follow comparative accounts that collaborate accounts, outside the bibilical texts, in order to form any relevant opinions.
|
***Why, is it because the bible contradicts what you want to believe? It certainly could not be because you think the bible to be an unimportant or unreliable source of historical information.
Quote:
|
There is no known exodus other than the Hyksos' and egyptologists move back and forth through the centuries like there is no tomorrow.
|
*** Well surely if you choose to ignore the historical account of the people who underwent the exodus it will not be surprising that you cannot find an account of it.
There is no known exodus save of the hyksos to those who wish to cleanse history of the exodus of the jews from egypt.
I hold no brief for the jews per se but as the records have it it was Joseph who brought the Pharaohs' office to real prominence by selling grain and buying up the land, taxing the egyptian cityizens etc to increase the wealth of the pharaoh of his day.
A clear indication could be seen of the after mart of this activity by Joseph in that from the record of the pharaohs it seems that that prosperity caused them to start having both the pharaoh and his wife sit as king and queen at the same time: two of the pharaohs after the time of drought in egypt sat with their wives as rulers and this seems to be a first for such practice.
Concerning the exodus there is a change of dynasty after the demise of ramasses II and that's because he was the one who was destroyed in the red sea after pursuing the children of israel.
Quote:
|
I get most of my information from this scientist I have followed for years - http://www.atlan.org/articles/sci.html - who places the flood back to the only point in history where collaborative accounts mesh a global cataclym and works from there - which is "pleistocene end" 10,500 B.C. approx.. It changes alot of factors.
|
*** Friend, that record you are referring to could not be a reliable source of information: the speculations of a philosopher Plato could hardly be construed as hardcore science and he certainly is not writing history either because he is not taking his story from those closest in time and place to the scene of the events.
The record of Noah, the main man of only eight human survivors of the global flood, is written in the bible and can be collaborated with other accounts: you can read the epic of gilgamesh [called nimrod in the bible] the king of uruk who evidently lived after the flood and who also wrote an independent report of the flood as he got it from Noah himself [called Utanaphisthim in the epic].
There were no humans living 10,500 years ago from all HISTORICAL accounts: the records the anthropologists conjure up from fossils could be at best cases of mistaken identity: if their radiometric dating methods are accurate (and I know too much about the science of matter and the integrity or lack thereof of some so called scientists to accept all that is printed in black and white as gospel truth) then those skulls etc that they are calling neanderthal man etc could be nothing more than the skulls of our predecessors the apes and monkeys.
So check the written records first: those of gilgamesh at least if you don't want to believe the bible and see that the flood occurred some 2000 years BC and not 10,500 as you are inclined to think.
The city of atlantist may be where it is if it is a mythical city but the garden of Eden was where the Persian gulf now is.
Roger