Physically challenged dating site

It is the Late Iron Age II Period, the 7th-6th centuries B. Some scholars have suggested on this archaeological basis that the Exodus account was composed towards "the end of the Late Iron Age II Period," the author and his audience being apparently _unaware_ that the cities in existence at this time were _not_ in existence (or if in existence, they were unoccupied) within the time frame the anonymous author cast the Exodus story in. For the reasons why "Sites mentioned in the Exodus narrative are real.

I understand that Genesis-2 Kings was composed in 560 B. A few were well known and apparently occupied in much earlier periods and much later periods- after the kingdom of Judah was established, when the text of the biblical narrative was set down in writing for the first time.

I WAS THUS FORCED TO QUESTION THE TRADITIONALLY HELD OPINION THAT THE MOSES-LED GROUP, ON ITS WAY FROM EGYPT TO THE LAND OF CANAAN, PASSED THROUGH/AROUND EDOM (AND MOAB) DURING THE LATE BRONZE-IRON I PERIODS.

On the basis of recent archaeological work, I concluded that a Moses-led group would have encountered little, if any, opposition if it had passed through the territories in question during the periods traditionally associated with this event.

Only then were most of the identified sites occupied; there is little or no evidence of their occupation during either the Iron I or early Iron II Age"My experience in the field of Near Eastern archaeology has led me to the general conclusion that the biblical stories about Transjordanian places and events best fit into the Iron II period and later.

This conclusion comes from a general knowledge of the results of current archaeological work throughout Jordan and specifically from my archaeological survey work south of Wadi al-Hasa, in the Southern Ghors and Northeast `Arabah, and in the Tafila-Busayra region (beginning 1999).

However, THE TEXTS IN QUESTION WERE MOST PROBABLY WRITTEN IN LIGHT OF THE SETTLEMENT CONDITIONS THAT PREVAILED IN THE IRON II PERIOD AND PROBABLY TOWARDS THE END OF THAT PERIOD. anonmyous Exilic author "thought" were in existence in the timeframe (1512/1446 B. As already noted by Finkelstein and Mac Donald not even the Late Iron Age II has _all_ the sites appearing in the narratives occupied.

Thus, the assumption here is that although the biblical writer may have used material that predates his time, he set that material into a context, namely, the Iron II AND LATER PERIODS, that would be meaningful to his readers." If Finkelstein and Mac Donald are right, and I believe they are, then this means that those scholars who are seeking to establish the "route" of the Exodus from its itinerary preserved in Numbers 33:1-50 have a daunting task before them. Anyone seeking to find sites in existence before the 7th-6th centuries B. for their Exodus will hit a brick wall: the fact that _no_ archaeological time period has _all_ the sites in existence and occupied.

Some conservative Catholic scholars date the Exodus to 1512 B. while some conservative Protestant scholars date it to 1446 B. on the basis of 1 Kings 6:1 statement that Solomon built the Temple 480 years after the Exodus. Hoffmeier appears to deny the biblical reason for Israel's not taking the way of the Philistines, was fear of Philistines, he claims that an Egyptian fortress guarded this track and Israel feared the Egyptian garrisons rather than Philistines:"Based on the archaeological, historical, and environmental data now available, the identification of Hebua with ancient Tjaru seems likely...

(Protestant Exodus date) in Canaan to oppose Israel's Exodus and entry into Canaan from Egypt and _cannot_ have been written by an eye-witness whether that be Moses or someone else. The latter number came into existence no earlier than the 12th century B. The Pentateuch and its Exodus narratives use 22 letters not the 30 letters of Moses' days.

We "know" Moses did _not_ write the Exodus account because it is presented in the third person format. The sites enumerated in Numbers 33:1-50 were most probably sites known to the narrator who wrote the account in the 7th/6th century B. so they most likely were in existence in his day (some may have been abandoned in his days while others were occupied but they did "exist" at least physically).

Moses' activities and speeches are presented in the third person, a format which would _not_ have been used by Moses had he really written the account appearing in the Holy Bible. Ge ) and they are feared by Israel upon her departure from Egypt (Ex ). Certain locations mentioned in the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, which also include the Exodus account, have been identified by archaeologists and excavated; the excavations revealed that these sites either were not in existence in Moses' days, or if they were in existence, they were abandoned and not occupied _contra_ the biblical portrayal of events. Had Moses (or some other eye-witness) written the Exodus account the number of letters used for writing would be 30 in 1552/1446 B. If some of the sites mentioned in the Pentateuch and Exodus narratives were not in existence or deserted in Moses' time (1512/1446 B. so there would be no need for the Exodus to avoid the way to the land of the Philistines.

Obviously someone else is writing about Moses and describing his activities (Cf. The Philistines are portrayed as being in Canaan in the days of Abraham (circa 2100 B. Archaeology has established that the Philistines are the Pelest of Ramesside era records and they did not settle in Canaan until circa 1175 B. Thus the Exodus account is _in error_ in having Philistines present circa 1512 B. The archaeological excavations revealed that some of the sites were in existence only in the 7th century B. so this anomaly suggests the Exodus account is no earlier. C.) "how" can one identify the route of the Exodus from the itinerary given in Numbers 33:1-50? That is to say, if there was an Exodus circa 1512/1446/1260 B. they probably did take "the way to the land of the Philistines" as the Philistines were not present to oppose them.

Search for physically challenged dating site:

physically challenged dating site-37physically challenged dating site-64

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One thought on “physically challenged dating site”