logo
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Theophilus  
#1 Posted : Thursday, April 16, 2009 5:37:16 PM(UTC)
Theophilus
Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 544
Man

Thanks: 4 times
I was interested in a book referenced by Yada in the more recently released chapters of Yada Yahweh by author David M. Rohl called "A Test of Time: From Myth to History". Tonight I learned at my local library that the book exists in the USA but is published here under the title "Pharaohs and Kings: A Biblical Quest".

When I asked my reference librarian if "A Test of Time" were available that it was listed as only available from the UK. They had "Pharaohs and Kings" on the shelf and saw on the bottom front dust jacket a note: Published in the United Kingdom and the rest of the world as A Test of Time: The Bible from Myth to History".

I hope that this helps anyone seeking this book. It looks like a substantial (text) book dated 1995, 425 pages with many photos. I hope that I can make headway before it's due.
Offline Matthew  
#2 Posted : Friday, April 17, 2009 2:10:58 AM(UTC)
Matthew
Joined: 10/3/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,191
Man
Location: São Paulo, Brazil

Was thanked: 3 time(s) in 2 post(s)
I see a number of Atheists have made negative comments on the book's Amazon listing, which is an indication that Rohl's work is speaking the truth. I'm buying it!!!

Thanks Theo!
Offline Theophilus  
#3 Posted : Friday, April 17, 2009 3:09:48 AM(UTC)
Theophilus
Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 544
Man

Thanks: 4 times
Matthew wrote:
I see a number of Atheists have made negative comments on the book's Amazon listing, which is an indication that Rohl's work is speaking the truth. I'm buying it!!!

Thanks Theo!


You're most welcome Matthew.

I'm just getting into the beginning of the book, but the author already notes the position of bibilical critics and the signifigence that traditional Egyptian chronology has on removing the events described in the Tanahk from history and suggesting these events were traditions and myths composed after the Babylonian Exile without a basis in truth. When the presumptions of the traditional Egyptian chronology are questioned and Rohl's new Egyptian chronology applied the records of Scripture appear to fit the archeological discoveries. I look forward to digging deeper into his case before considering the Atheistic counter position.
Offline Theophilus  
#4 Posted : Friday, April 17, 2009 6:33:08 AM(UTC)
Theophilus
Joined: 7/5/2007(UTC)
Posts: 544
Man

Thanks: 4 times
I thought that it might be helpful for the curious to link David Rohl's wikipedia article that outlines his new Chronology, further links as well as criticisms:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rohl

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Chronology

Of interest to me was Rohl's use of astro-archeology to established fixed dates to refered to events:

One of Rohl's methods includes the use of archaeo-astronomy, which he uses to fix the date of a solar eclipse which happened during the reign of Amenhotep IV and was observed in the city of Ugarit. He used a computer to calculate the exact time; the only possible time where such eclipse could be visible in Ugarit during the whole second millennium BC was 9 May 1012 BCE. According to conventional chronology, Ugarit was already destroyed in the 12th century BC and Amenothep IV (Akhenaton) reigned in 1353-1334 BC.

Rohl's redating is based on criticism of three of the four arguments which he considers are the foundations of the conventional Egyptian chronology:

He claims that the identification of "Shishaq ['Shishak'], King of Egypt" (1 Kings 14:25f; 2 Chronicles 12:2-9) with Shoshenq I, first proposed by Jean-François Champollion, is based on incorrect conclusions. Rohl argues instead that Shishaq should be identified with Ramesses II, which would move the date of Ramesses' reign forward some 300 years.
He claims that the record in the Ebers papyrus of the rising of Sirius in the ninth regnal year of Amenhotep I, which supposedly fixes the year to either 1542 BC or 1517 BC, is misread, and instead should be understood as evidence for a reform in the Egyptian Calendar.
Papyrus Leiden I.350, which dates to the 52nd year of Ramesses II, records lunar observations that place that year of Ramesses' reign in one of 1278, 1253, 1228 or 1203 BC. Having questioned the value of the Ebers Papyrus, Rohl argues that since these lunar observations are accurate every twenty-five years, they could also indicate dates 300 years later.


It occurs to me that this also has implications on challenging the early dating of the Ugarit community that has been used to suggest that the Israelites borrowed aspects of the Scriptures from there.
Users browsing this topic
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.