The Genesis Fraud

[michaelsherlock]

I've read some of Herzog's articles...whenever I can get one in English. He's actually the guy who started the whole ball rolling back in 1999 in Haaretz.

He is priceless!

[Minimalist]

[Undeceived]

[NoMoreFaith]

Herzog also relies heavily on gaps arguments, meaning he uses lack of evidence for something as proof it didn't exist.

So you would rather he uses a gap argument, and a lack of evidence, to prove something does exist?

Oh, you mean like a gap in the fossil record is "proof" macroevolution doesn't exist. Ignoring any and all plausible evidence?

You might be interested to know, that literally only a few weeks ago, a US researcher used satellite technology to locate ancient settlements, by observing soil discolouration and mounds caused when mud-brick settlements collapsed.

The model will be tested when the situation in Syria calms down, or maybe in the Kurdish provinces of Northern Iraq.

[michaelsherlock]

[Epimethean]

More than a little cheeky, especially since there is no pottery record of these people, and the general contention of the Hyksos is that they were polytheistic Asiatics-possibly a mish-mash of cultures, including Hittites. Not exactly compelling evidence for them being the mythical wandering tribe of Israel.

[Minimalist]

Whatever religion existed in pre-Persian Canaan seems to have been based on the Canaanite pantheon based on El, Baal and Asherah. Yahweh is, at best, a minor character. Might he have been some sort of local god of the southern nomads? Sure. In fact that makes sense and as the state grew ( the notion that Judah was a fully fleshed out "state" prior to the 8th century BC has been dealt with best by Finkelstein) Yahweh got a promotion.

It is only after the Persians arrive that we start to see actual evidence of Yahweh as some sort of single creator god ( a la the Persian's Ahura Mazda) and even that evidence is thin because Yehud ( as the Persians called it) was an insignificant shithole of a region.

As for Hershel Shanks, he's a fucking lawyer who used to work for the Justice Department and hangs out with such notable con artists as Simcha Jacobovici and Oded Golan. Shanks' main function is to sell books and magazines to idiot theists. It has been a lucrative profession for him but no one takes him seriously as a "scholar."

[Undeceived]

This is a huge leap. Firstly, how does proving a group called the Hyksos, suggest a "real, historical" pre-history of the Israelites in Egypt? To establish this, you would first have to establish that the Hyksos were the Israelites, but proving that they were Asiatic does not in itself prove they were Israelites. There is no credible evidence that the Hyksos were the Israelites. Leap!

Then you agree we can't determine either way. That's the way history thousands of years ago works--don't make definitive statements unless you have definitive support. In his argument, Herzog uses lack of evidence as his proof that the Israelites weren't in Egypt. Hershel takes the supposed gap and fills it with evidence Herzog either ignored or did not know. All this does is creates a plausibility. Hershel himself admits this when he says,

Herzog's point is perhaps that the story could have been invented years later. Of course that it is possible. But the reverse is equally possible. He has surely not proved that Israel was not there.

Hershel is not out to prove the Israelites were in Egypt, only that there is a space for them in history and no conclusive evidence against their being there. I might add that there are indications the Hyksos were Israelites. They mingled with the Egyptians in the 11th dynasty, and ruled by the 15th. At the end of the 17th, they were "expelled" (wikipedia). The name "Hyksos" means "ruler(s) of foreign countries," and Manetho, a 3rd century BC Egyptian, called them "Asiatic." This fits with the story of Joseph, who marked the change from original to Hebrew rulership. Generations later, the Egyptians saw how quickly the Hebrews were multiplying and made them slaves to keep the land pure. The 15th dynasty lasted from ~1650-1550 BC, which is about the time Joseph lived, according to Biblical analysis. This evidence is by no means conclusive, but it fits. Saying the Israelites were never in Egypt puts a whole new burden on the 6th century writers to research and basically hijack a couple Egyptian dynasties to make the Bible convincing.

[michaelsherlock]

Then you agree we can't determine either way. That's the way history thousands of years ago works--don't make definitive statements unless you have definitive support. In his argument, Herzog uses lack of evidence as his proof that the Israelites weren't in Egypt.

I agree. We cannot make definitve statements about ancient history (in most cases) because the types of tests and evidences available to the historian and archaeologist are often less than 100%. So yes, I agree. This is why I find 'historically grounded' religions (religion's whose stories have been woven into human history) ridiculous.

Hershel takes the supposed gap and fills it with evidence Herzog either ignored or did not know.

A little cheeky, "Un-deceived". You can fill any gap with evidence, yet can you fill it with good quality evidence? This, for me, is the most important part of what you did not say.

All this does is creates a plausibility. Hershel himself admits this when he says,
Herzog's point is perhaps that the story could have been invented years later. Of course that it is possible. But the reverse is equally possible. He has surely not proved that Israel was not there.

I agree, both ways of looking at the situation should remain open to investigation. Recently, I have begun reading a brilliant book by a guy called Gmirkin, on the priority of the Septuigant. He provides some very sound evidence that many of the books from the OT, especially Gen and Ex. were written after the Septuigant, by authors who used the Library of Alexandria as thier source for many of the names, prices of slaves, and other pieces of historical information found within the OT. I would highly recommend this book.

Hershel is not out to prove the Israelites were in Egypt, only that there is a space for them in history and no conclusive evidence against their being there.

Why? What is his motivation? One cannot overlook this question, for it, in my mind, is the most important with regards to assessing the quality of his arguments.

I might add that there are indications the Hyksos were Israelites. They mingled with the Egyptians in the 11th dynasty, and ruled by the 15th. At the end of the 17th, they were "expelled" (wikipedia). The name "Hyksos" means "ruler(s) of foreign countries," and Manetho, a 3rd century BC Egyptian, called them "Asiatic." This fits with the story of Joseph, who marked the change from original to Hebrew rulership. Generations later, the Egyptians saw how quickly the Hebrews were multiplying and made them slaves to keep the land pure. The 15th dynasty lasted from ~1650-1550 BC, which is about the time Joseph lived, according to Biblical analysis. This evidence is by no means conclusive, but it fits.

By golly gosh, it is them! The bible is true! Quick run, lock up your daughters, the Hebrews are comming!

No, it fits because you want it to! When looking into such matters, the best place to start, is the self. Look at some of the psychological pressures which cause your mind to perceive information in the way you do. Investigate cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias, disconfirmation bias, adaptational strategies, rationalization, etc, and investigate how these pressures effect perception. this is, I think, a good place to start.

Saying the Israelites were never in Egypt puts a whole new burden on the 6th century writers to research and basically hijack a couple Egyptian dynasties to make the Bible convincing.

Again, I agree with you re; definitive statement.

[Epimethean]

Though the Hyksos may well have been Semitic, there is not evidence that they were homogeneous enough to even consider the silliness of calling them Israelites. Since the term is generic, and since they may have included Hittites and Khurrites among them, that contention is very weak.