I am not trying to discredit the Bible. Most archaeologists are not trying to discredit the Bible. The only archaeologists who intentionally worked in order to prove something (i.e. their preconceived biblical beliefs through archeology) are the ones who failed. That's the factual truth.
If, according to the Bible, hundreds of thousands of Hebrews lived in Egypt for 460 years and there is no trace of them archeologically, it is difficult to say archeology is wrong and the Bible is right.
Your line of thinking finds those, who base their doubt on someone else's failure, as "wrong!" What we have here is this: the Bible claims Hebrews lived in Egypot for 460 years; biblical archaeologists look for evidence and fail and that discredits those who express doubt in the veracity in the biblical claim?!? LOL!
The Israeli archaeologists have been looking feverishly for 41 years for traces of post-Exodus Hebrews in the Sinai since the Seven-Day War (1967)! They found zilch! According to the Bible, more than a million Hebrews left Egypt and stayed in Sinai for 40 years, mostly in one place, which has been found and positively identified. There are no traces of Hebrew in it. There are traces of Egyptians from the same time period all over Sinai, but not Hebrews.
We are talking a city of one million-plus people (what settlements had so many people in the ancient world?!?) and not a trace of it! A city of 1 million-plus people (the Bible says 600,000 men and their families), a settlement for most of the 40 years, and not a single artefact of any Hebrews in it!
You can deny it, but until such time as something is found we just have to assume that Exodus did not happen because evidence shows that it didn't. I realize lots of people teach that it did, but that is an unsubstantiated claim and the people who really failed are not those who doubt it, but who started to dig for evidence based on their preconceived biblical beliefs and found nothing.
Again, when something very threatening happens, the first reaction is denial, and nothing can be more threatening than for someone, who believes every word in the Bible, to discover that a whole chapter of it never happened! Quick, dig hole in sand, stick head in it!
Ze'ev Herzong, Director of the Institute of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University writes ("Deconstructing Walls of Jericho," Oct. 1999)
"This is what archaeologists have learned from their excavations in the Land of Israel: the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel. … the God of Israel, Jehovah, had a female consort [Aserah, and] the early Israelite religion adopted monotheism only in the waning period of the monarchy and not at Mount Sinai."
Now, I am sure he is not very popular among Evangelicals, but they can only hate what he says based on failed evidence . I can see that being threatening to many people who believe every word in it.
But we do know from other sources of learning, such as biblical criticism, that the bulk of the books of Exodus was composed from four different sources, and over a long period, each contributing different aspects of it. The largest revisions and additions to the book were made c. 400 BC, so we are talking a period of about 1,000 years. Again, this evidence is like a bombshell for those who put their blind trust in the Bible and naturally their reaction will be denial. I expect nothing short of that.
Now, which would one believe? Overwhelming amounts of evidence to the contrary or one's own personal testimony of a blind belief? LOL!
In my limited thinking, the Hebrew culture began to be differentiated beginning with the Exodus, not before.
Willing to be enlightened.
Archeology doesn't have to be wrong here for the Bible to be right. All archeology can say is that nothing has been found. That proves NOTHING other than they haven't found anything YET. It doesn't mean they will and it doesn't mean they won't. It is intellectual error to conclude that the Jews were never there because they haven't found anything yet. You have to know that.
You can deny it, but until such time as something is found we just have to assume that Exodus did not happen because evidence shows that it didn't.
Again, you are improperly using lack of evidence one way or the other as evidence. If my client was not at Wrigley Field on Saturday that does NOT prove that he was two blocks away committing the murder. Only someone with an agenda could use the reasoning you are talking about. Therefore, when you say that you are not trying to discredit the Bible, I have a real difficulty with your statement.
Ze'ev Herzong, Director of the Institute of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University writes ("Deconstructing Walls of Jericho," Oct. 1999)
And THIS is what you use to bolster your point??? Good Grief!!! Do you really believe that God's consort is Aserah? Why would you quote a certifiable LOON approvingly?
But we do know from other sources of learning, such as biblical criticism, that the bulk of the books of Exodus was composed from four different sources, and over a long period, each contributing different aspects of it. The largest revisions and additions to the book were made c. 400 BC, so we are talking a period of about 1,000 years.
These sources or scholars sound like they have the same integrity as Al Gore's with his proved facts that man has caused global warming. With the starting point being man himself, then scientists and scholars will come up with whatever is necessary to discredit God. God threatens man's sovereignty so He must be put down.