A book was recommended to me that I've found very enjoyable so far, called The Bible Unearthed, by Finkelstein and Silberman. It is essentially a review of the archaeological evidence for the Old Testament stories--and perhaps not surprisingly they turn out to mostly be mythical. However what is a bit more surprising is the authors' conclusion: That the Torah and the other books of the Old Testament were re-written and compiled as a political maneuver in an attempt to unite the Semitic peoples in that corner of the Near East. I have just ordered another book, A History of God, by Karen Armstrong, which apparently traces the "evolution" of the books of the Old Testament. The single most interesting thing to me is that well into the first millennium, BCE, the Israelites, such as they were, were openly polytheistic. It is only the pieces of the Old Testament that were added later that express the new idea that only one god, Yahweh, exists. These authors also paper over the fact that Elohim and Yahweh were absolutely not the same god; they, along with Baal and other Canaanite gods, were all thought to exist. This video is what motivated me to buy Armstrong's book. I highly recommend spending the fifteen minutes to watch it.
I was watching H2 this past weekend and they had an excellent 2 hour program on the time period in Egyptian Dynastic history called the "Lost Pharaoh Dynasties". The early dynastic rulers were from circa 2,500 B.C. and on, for example the understood builder of the Sphinx during the reign of Khafra 2520–2492 BC to the popular legacy of Ramesses II a thousand years later in 1,200's B.C. iirc and the final rulers like Cleopatra in 51 B.C. Between the previous two mentioned was the time period archeologists refer to as the "Lost" era as Egypt had broken into Upper and Lower Nile domains where regional control was contested. What stood out for me was when going to the actual ruins and tombs, the archeologists were excellent readers of ancient hieroglyphics and guided the viewer around the archeological remains with ease. Also these Egyptologists as well frequently cited the Bible as a terrific source of insight of who ruled Egypt and when. The scholars spoke just so matter of fact of using the Bible, to which I have understood this to be true of course, but it bears mentioning again when the reliability and faithfulness in historical accuracy of Biblical archeology is brought up at our BigSoccer.com Spirituality and Religion forum. Once again, our modern scholars trust the Bible for its accuracy on Egyptology. This is specifically what being the Chosen People is all about. Them going from pagans to fulfilling the covenant/promise made to Abraham and the worshiping of the one true God of this Universe. At its core is the change in people from the life they previously had lead to the one their Creator has offered now that they are out of bondage, both literal and spiritual. The Ethiopian Christians hold on to the Book of Enoch which is from the pre-deluge and details out the interaction of the one God of our Universe and His angelic order. As well as the Book of Job where there is God, the one God, mentioned and the book of Job is cited as the first written post flood. So what you stated is incorrect.
This is so fanciful that I don't even know where to begin. I will, however, give you a general piece of advice: Don't bet the house on facts presented by the History Channel. It's there to draw in the most viewers it can, not to be accurate, and it certainly has no fiduciary reason to rile up the vast majority of its audience by telling it that one of its holy books is full of fairy tales and archaeologically impossible things.
Wait didnt the history channel just told me that aliens build the pyramids. I am confused. BTW the 3rd pyramid was built around 2505 right?
One thing very impressive to think on is the Egyptians living in that middle dynasty era, circa 1,300's B.C., and when they viewed the pyramids of Giza and the great Sphinx...all that had already been there in place for a thousand years. Yeah, they're real dummies over there at the History Channel aren't they.
Interesting, I'll check these out. I mentioned this in another thread, but I highly recommend James Kugel as another brilliant resource. How to Read the Bible is a fascinating, informative and extremely well-written and researched book.
In that respect, I also want to recommend the lecture series "From Israelite to Jew" which I've linked to in the Resources thread here: https://www.bigsoccer.com/community/threads/the-spiritual-religious-resources-thread.1642165/ It gives a great overview of the evolution of Judaism and the various influences.
I also highly recomend Karen Armstrong´s The Case for God, which builds on the history that she wrote about in A History of God (http://www.amazon.com/The-Case-God-Thorndike-Nonfiction/dp/1410421538).
I was reading some of the reviews at Amazon. Sounds like a very interesting read. I'll have to get it when I have some free time. Thanks.
A archaeologist friend of mine was recently offered a job by some producers at the History Channel to find Excalibur. He was made to understand that he was going to find Excalibur.
LOL, I can already see the production: "This is a nice scenic spot, let's burry the sword here...and we need more fog, who's in charge of the fog machine? I knew we should have stayed on the sound stage in LA..." History in the making...literally...
Apologies to all for resurrecting this thread after so many years. I was exploring the "dark corners" of NSR and came across this thread. Normally I wouldn't resurrect a thread, but there is just so much wrong with this post I couldn't let it rest in peace. It's a good reminder why you shouldn't trust the History Channel. The Early Dynastic Period went from about 3000 - 2686 BCE. Khafre is from the Old Kingdom, while Rameses II is in the New Kingdom, and Cleopatra was the final ruler of the Ptolemaic Period. No. Between the Old Kingdom and Middle Kingdom is the 1st Intermediate Period, which lasted about 100 years. Between the Middle Kingdom and the New Kingdom is the 2nd Intermediate Period, lasting a couple hundred years or so. Between the New Kingdom and the Late Period, which precedes the Ptolemaic Period, is the 3rd Intermediate Period, which lasted several hundred years. It is during the Intermediate Periods that Egypt is divided into rivals from Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt. During the other periods I mentioned Egypt is unified. No, modern scholars most certainly do not trust the Bible for its accuracy on ancient Egypt. The first Pharaoh named in the Bible is Sheshonq (Shishak), who plundered the Temple in Jerusalem in 925 BCE. He is also the earliest person in the Bible who can be verified archaeologically. (While the "House of David" is mentioned, there is nothing to connect that to King David as described in the Bible.). Prior to Sheshonq, the Bible never gives the name of the Egyptian ruler. Furthermore, the Bible frequently uses the wrong title when discussing Egyptian rulers. For example, in stories with Abraham interacting with the Egyptian ruler, the term Pharaoh is used. The problem is the term Pharaoh, or "Great House", originates with Akhenaten (Tutankhamun's father) in the mid 14th century BCE. Abraham would have lived about 600 years prior to the term Pharaoh originating. Additionally, the Bible talks about Abraham interacting with the Philistine king, even though the Philistines, an off-shoot of the infamous Sea Peoples, were not in the Eastern Mediterranean until the end of the Late Bronze Age, roughly 800 years or so after Abraham would have lived. Before settling in the Gaza Strip, the Sea Peoples were fended off by Rameses III when they tried to invade Egypt, a couple hundred years after Akhenaten. In short, the Bible is completely unreliable historically from Genesis through Solomon. Only after Hebrew becomes a written language, around the mid 10th century BCE, does the Bible start to become more reliable in examining history, from the point of view of the Israelites and Judahites. But even then, you have to be careful. For example, the Book of Daniel contains numerous historical errors, so much so you'd be better off treating it as fiction that just happens to use historical figures as characters. For example, Nebuchadnezzar was not the one to disappear for years, that was Nabonidus and it was not Darius who conquered Babylon, but Cyrus.
This is awesome! Someone that enjoys their archeology went long on digging up an old BigSoccer thread. Well done amigo mio! So don't trust the History Channel Check, got it! Up to the 10th century BCE. That's it???, centuries before Alexander the Great's conquests. That's pretty old school.