i heard 3 narratives about the israelite exodus
5776-2016= 3760-2448= 1312 bc meaning: according to the religious jews, this year called 2016 is called 5776 and also the academic year of the "hebrew calendar@ in submission to the religious minority.
this is an example when religion attempts to influence history.
therefore: subtracting the years from bc, reveals the difference, that the year called 3760 is year one ad and the same idea: that the year one of religious jews is called -3760.
according to religious jews and rashi commentary to talmud aboda zara 2448 was the exit of israelites called exodus= 3760-2448=1312, hence 1312 bc and 40 years later 1270 entered israel- the problem is that at that time egypt empire ruled the area of the jordan river and 'crossing the jordan river' would be a return to egypt at that time.
'During the long reign of Ramses II (1279–1213 bc), there was...the battle of Kadesh, fought in his fifth regnal year [-1274]. These and extensive accompanying texts present the battle as an Egyptian victory, but in fact the opposing Hittite coalition fared at least as well as the Egyptians. ...In succeeding years Ramses II campaigned in Syria; after a decade of stalemate, a treaty in his 21st year=-1260 so we see at the time that religious jews claim -1270, that the israelites crossed the jordan river, from east to west, they would have been entering the egyptian empire at the time that ramses 2 battled in syria.
see map of tutmosis
'Thutmose III, (died 1426 bce), king (reigned 1479–26 bce) of the 18th dynasty, often regarded as the greatest of the rulers of ancient Egypt. Thutmose III was a skilled warrior who brought the Egyptian empire to the zenith of its power by conquering all of Syria,
to say the exodus happened 'before' 1312 is still a problem because of tutmosis.
a second narrative is not the religious jews but of josephus.
counting from -164 antiocus
count back 612,466,70,414 as detailed in book 20 of josephus
-578 cyrus allows self-rule
-648 temple destroyed by babylon according to josephus
-1114 solomon built temple j
-1726 exodus and crossing jordan -1680 yet we know that 'the 12th dynasty (1991–1786)- During these two centuries [1990-1790 bc] Egyptian control was established over Nubia, Libya, Palestine, and southern Syria' also in encyclopedia americana 12 dynasty. this was held until the 13 dynasty
'THE 13TH DYNASTY (C. 1756–C. 1630 BC)
Despite...the royal residence remained at Itjet-towy and the kings ruled the whole country. Egypt’s hold on Lower Nubia was maintained, as was its position as the leading state in the Middle East'
so we can be confident that josephus was "off" by a few years.
the third narrative already posted here is the one taught for high-school history claiming abraham 1800 bc and an exodus in 1660 bc with the same issue of the 13 dynasty and crossing the jordan in -1620 is entering egypt empire.
claiming an earlier exodus before the egyptian empire spread is still in conflict with sesostris='Sesostris I (or Senwosret, reigned 1908–1875 bc) An inscription of the next reign alludes to campaigns to Syria-Palestine in the time of Sesostris 1 also 3, 'most enduring reputation was Sesostris III (1836–18 bc), who extended Egyptian conquests to Semna, at the south end of the Second Cataract, while also mounting at least one campaign to Palestine=canaan. egyptian administrative seals of that period 1850 bc were found in digs in palestine.
the only way for josephus to fit what we know about egyptian empires is 1876 bc because-
'Little is known of the reigns of Amenemhet II (1876–42 bc) and Sesostris II (1844–37 bc) +the reign of Amenemhet III (1818–1770 bc). The king of the 12th dynasty with the most enduring reputation was Sesostris III (1836–18 bc), who extended Egyptian conquests to Semna, at the south end of the Second Cataract, while also mounting at least one campaign to Palestine'
this can be explained by the turmoil of the ten plagues in the book of exodus or if that is a legend which never occurred as an exodus and entering cannan when egypt was weak, then later as mentioned egypt ruled tthe israelites in israel -1818 until solomon in 1114 bc.
thus the phase of egypt ruling the area of the jordan river would be after the exodus in 1870 bc with josephus off by 150 years andthen being ruled by egypt after crossing the jordan river as described in
britannioca 'around 1505 bc 'Before the close of the 16th century bc, [1590-1501 bc] the native 18th dynasty rose in Egypt; it expelled the Hyksos and founded the New Kingdom. The New Kingdom rulers moved back into Syria-Palestine'
in summary each of the 3 narratives does not match what we know about ancient egypt.
the turmoil of an exodus and weak kingdoms coincides with 1870 bc amenemhet and if josephus was correct it was not 612 years but 1870-1820 bc is 700 years before solomons temple.
should we claim david never existed?
according to britanica 'Transjordan and western Palestine, the Hebrews founded a tribal confederation that was changed into a monarchy by Saul and David (c. 1020–960 bc).' this also solves the problem of crossing the jordan into egypt- because it was after egypt empire receded. if so the israelites did not exit egypt empire to move from place to place but stayed in one pplace and the egyptian empire failed in that region and that was the exit from egyptian control when egyptian control failed.
a second example of religion altering science is when those who insist that the world is YOUNG make claims about evolution.
i read today that "dna did not change for millions of years" and therefore "refutes the claim that man evolved from ape" in other words the dna did not change so man must be created by god not born from a common ancester with mutation because dna did not change for millions of years
they should limit themselves to religion.
first mammals changed from 120 million until sixty million as we see in fossils so apparently dna did change or dna did not change but something else did.
also the focus should not be on dna but on chromosomes !!
most apes have 24 pairs of chromosomes. humans have 23 pairs that is the change not dna so focussing on dna not change is stupid because thehuman change is a change in chromosomes
pbs explains most clearly that the "tail ends" are also in the middle of a certain chromosome and when this mutation was born "whereas a normal chromosome has readily identifiable, repeating DNA sequences called telomeres at both ends, chromosome 2 also has telomere sequences not only at both ends but also in the middle. " this convinces me that one of the 24 pairs fused with a second and that mutation was the first humans who mated with each other identifiable as today by the number of chromosomes. for more details
http://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/3393/evolutionarily-speaking-why-do-humans-have-46-chromosomes
I am most convinced by the last 3 lines of pbs.
