Again and again little men with paint brushes, dental picks, and pith helmets crawl over a mound somewhere in the area of biblical Israel; once again they find something they'd heard existed but didn't believe existed in the way they had been told.
Spin is the only answer ... for preserving the lies, that is! To admit the historicity of the area as told in the ancient Hebrew scriptures would be tantamount to admitting there is a real living God, and no one (with a college degree) can believe that ... at least believe it and keep on crawling over little mounds of dirt in the Middle East.
National Geographic, often playing the part of king's fool, has once again reported on events and discoveries which play a key role in confirming our ancient biblical truths.
I believe it was NGM that first confirmed (publicly) the ancient name of (and existence of) the warrior-king Sargon was not a fictional name but the actual name of a King in the fertile crescent ... not just one king, but three kings.
If my memory is faulty, I'm not surprised; the discoveries were at the hands of others, that's for sure.
Now, in this new report, NGM is filtering out of discoveries in Gaza peninsula that might lend support for the biblical-view of Joseph's ascendancy, Israel's captivity, and the Hebrew children's exodus account (see the "discussion" on this link also).The largest known fortress from ancient Egypt's days of the pharaohs has been unearthed near the Suez Canal, archaeologists announced on Sunday.So far, I see no reason this cannot harmonize nicely with the revelations of Moses in the Book of Exodus.
The massive fortress, discovered at a site called Tell-Huba, includes the graves of soldiers and horses and once featured a giant water-filled moat, scientists said.
The discovery dates back to ancient Egypt's struggle to reconquer the northern Sinai Peninsula from an occupying force known as the Hyksos (see Egypt map).
The campaign against the Hyksos was depicted in etchings on the ancient walls of the Karnak Temple, 450 miles (720 kilometers) south of Cairo.
Notice however, a caveat has been inserted into the record; a suggestion that the Hyksos were driven out of Egypt ... this would fit nicely into a rewrite of ancient history, a rewrite which would subtly ignore the miraculous narratives of Scripture (Exodus, Psalms, the minor and major prophets, the Gospels, and the Book of Hebrews to name a few).Wonderful! "Surprisingly accurate" you say? I think we've been here before.
Archaeologists said the new find shows those stone-chiseled tales to be surprisingly accurate.
"The bones of humans and horses found in the area attest dramatically to the reality of such battles," said Zahi Hawass, director general of Egypt's Supreme Council for Antiquities (SCA).
"Previously, the area was known only from depictions in temples elsewhere in Egypt. We had no first-hand evidence of what was happening there during the pharaonic period."Aha! We know this geography as the area of the wilderness, I think.
The fort, called Fort Tjaru (or Tharo), was unearthed by a team led by Mohammed Abdul Maqsoud of the SCA. The fort dates from the 18th and 19th Dynasties (from 1560 to 1081 B.C.).Tjaru's mud brick walls were 42 feet (13 meters) thick, enclosing an area 546 yards (500 meters) by 273 yards (250 meters). Twenty-four watchtowers loomed over the parapets. A deep moat ringed the entire complex.
It was the biggest in a chain of 11 fortresses that stretched from Suez to the present-day city of Rafah on Egypt's border with the Palestinian territories.
In the 17th century B.C., a people known as the Hyksos invaded from Canaan, sweeping across the Sinai to rule over the Nile Delta and northern Egypt.The dates don't pose a problem for me or Scripture; reasonable ancient historians [whether secular, Jewish, or Christian (even Muhammadan)] can reconcile these dates with Joseph, Jacob, the biblical ingress of the Jews, and their exodus four hundred years later.
The Hyksos' reign faded about a hundred years later. Subsequent pharaohs cast a wary eye to the east and militarized the northern Sinai.
By the reign of Ramses II, who ruled from 1279 to 1213 B.C., a new enemy was on the horizon: the Hittites, who came from present-day Turkey and battled the Egyptians until around 1258 B.C.
But notice the Hyksos "invaded" ... there is no more evidence for the kidnapping of Joseph and his sale to the Egyptians than there is for a Hyksos invasion; so why is the invasion presented as if it is hardened-history?
On another note: from what I read concerning Hyksos history they settled in Eastern and Southern Egypt, a rendition consistent with biblical history. I'm confused about NGM's presentation here!
Don't get me wrong; I am not dismissing NGM's report, it is a needed piece of the puzzle. It's just the world's dismissing of biblical history, for no other reason than it's biblical roots, is frustrating. I wish to do my share in pointing out the deficiency.