Despite the fact that the name of many characters mentioned in the Old Testament, like David, King of Israel, have been recently confirmed by archaeology as well as their epoch and the events in which they were involved, most archaeologists continue to deny the historicity of the Bible they view as pious fiction or a mythical account. They argue that the major events in the Bible such as the victory of Abraham against Chedorlaomer, an unknown king of Elam around 2000 BCE, the victory of Moses against an unknown Pharaoh around 1500 BCE or the victory of Esther, an unknown Persian Queen, against an unknown vizier of Xerxes, never existed because they left absolutely no evidence. They also explain that according to what we know today, these events could not have occurred. These logical arguments are impressive but a precise chronological analysis based on absolute dates, coupled with a rigorous historical investigation, shows that all those major events really took place at the dates and places indicated.
The David and Solomon's kingdoms are no longer considered as historical by minimalist archaeologists. According to Finkelstein and Silberman, for example, authors of The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts, at the time of the kingdoms of David and Solomon, Jerusalem was populated by only a few hundred residents or less. Some Biblical minimalists like Thompson go further, arguing that Jerusalem became a city and capable of being a state capital only in the mid-seventh century. Likewise, Finkelstein and others consider the claimed size of Solomon's temple implausible. A review of methods and arguments used by these minimalists shows that they are impostors for writing history. The historical testimonies dated by a chronology anchored on absolute dates (backbone of history) are replaced by archaeological remains dated by carbon-14 (backbone of modern myths). The goal of these unfounded claims is clearly the charring of biblical accounts.
The existence Moses as well as the Exodus is a crucial question because, according to the Bible, the character related to that famous event forms the basis of the Passover which meant the Promised Land for Jews and later the Paradise for Christians. However, according to most Egyptologists, there is absolutely no evidence of Moses and the Exodus in Egyptian documents, which leads them to conclude that the whole biblical story is a myth written for gullible people. However, according to Egyptian accounts the last king of the 15th dynasty named Apopi, “very pretty”, which was Moses' birth name (Ex 2:2), reigned 40 years in Egypt (1613-1573) and met Seqenenre Taa, 40 years later, the last pharaoh of the 17th dynasty who died in May 1533 BCE in dramatic and unclear circumstances (Ps 136:15). The state of his mummy proves that his body received severe injuries and remained abandoned for several days before being mummified. The eldest son of Seqenenre Taa, Ahmose Sapaïr, who was crown prince died in a dramatic and unexplained way shortly before his father (Ex 12:29). Prince Kamose, Seqenenre Taa's brother, assured interim of authority for 3 years and threatened attack the former pharaoh Apopi, new prince of Retenu (Palestine) who took the name Moses, according to Manetho, an Egyptian priest and historian. In the stele of the Tempest, Kamose also blames Apopi for all the disasters that come to fall upon Egypt, which caused many deaths. Ironically, those who believe Egyptologists are actually the real gullible ones
Chronology is the backbone of history" is usually taught in schools but in the same time the first fall of Babylon is fixed today (2016) either in 1595 BCE or in 1651, 1531, 1499 depending on historians! In Egyptology the situation is still worse because each Egyptologist has his own chronology (gap of 20 years)! Such a difference in timeline prevents one from reaching the historical truth. It is for this reason that from Herodotus, the "father of history", Greek historians established a system of scientific dating in order to write a universal history. Many astronomical phenomena, which are well identified such as eclipses, enable us today to synchronize these ancient dating systems and anchor them on absolute dates. As incredible as it may seem this is still not done. The purpose of the present brochure is to give the chronologies of the main ancient civilizations (Egyptian, Babylonian, Assyrian, Hittite, Israelite, etc.) with their synchronisms as well as all absolute dating based on astronomical events.
Historians as well as Bible scholars consider the biblical account about Chedorlaomer's campaign against Sodom as a pious fiction but a chronological reconstruction based on synchronisms shows that among dynasties from Sumerian lists the 3rd and last Elamite king of the Awan I dynasty was indeed Kudur-Lagamar (1990-1954). The route of Chedorlaomer shows that this king came to this region near Egypt in order to maintain control over this new land trade route. This ambitious project had to have worried Amenemhat I (1975-1946) and to block the progress of this powerful Mesopotamian king, he built the Walls of the Ruler and planned to create an Amorite rival confederation. In order to achieve his goal he proposed an alliance to Abram, who came from Shinar (Sumer), a region close to Elam, and began preparations by appointing Sarai as a bearer of offering to his personal service, then by marrying her to seal this alliance (Gn 12:19). The wedding was cancelled, but the statue remained.
The book of Job is paradoxical regarding its historicity as well as its meaning. Although Job is clearly presented as a real, historical person (he lived from 1710 to 1500 near Bozra in Idumea), rabbis and bishops preferred to see it as a moral tale. Despite the main question all over the book being: "why evil prevails?" the answer would be: "please, look at the hippopotamus and the crocodile" (Job 40:1-42:6), which is poetic but quite absurd. However, as Maimonides had already understood a long time ago the Book of Job includes profound ideas and great mysteries and reveals the most important truths. Indeed, Job received a deep and detailed answer in order to know when and how the evil angel, Leviathan a.k.a. Satan, would be defeated by Behemoth the first creature of God (Job 40:19). In a surprising manner, archaeology has shown that all the geographical and historical details in the Book of Job are accurate and reliable.
Historians consider the Biblical account of Jonah's warning against Nineveh as pious fiction, but the Gospels refer to it as a real story (Lk 11:29-32). The book of Jonah, despite its brevity, gives some verifiable information regarding Nineveh, a very old city, which disappeared completely after its destruction in 612 BCE. The dimensions mentioned seem colossal, however they do agree with the accounts of Herodotus, Diodorus and Strabo. Jonah's mission coincided with Jeroboam II's accession (2 Ki 14:23-25) and Shalmaneser III's death in 824 BCE who had previously commissioned Shamshi-Adad V as new Crown prince to quell the revolt headed by his brother Assur-danin-pal, who had headed 27 cities including the renowned Nineveh. Jonah's mission was therefore a success since Assyrian expansionism to the Mediterranean coast would cease, at least for 80 years.
The understanding of God's name YHWH is so controversial that it is eventually the controversy of controversies, or the ultimate controversy. Indeed, why most of competent Hebrew scholars propagate patently false explanations about God's name? Why do the Jews refuse to read God's name as it is written and read Adonay "my Lord" (a plural of majesty) instead of it? Why God's name is usually punctuated e, â (shewa, qamats) by the Masoretes what makes its reading impossible, because the 4 consonants of the name YHWH must have at least 3 vowels (long or short) to be read, like the words 'aDoNâY and 'eLoHîM "God" (a plural of majesty), which have 4 consonants and 3 vowels? At last, why the obvious reading "Yehowah", according to theophoric names, which all begin by Yehô-, without exception, is so despised, and why the simple biblical meaning, "He will be" from Exodus 3:14, is rejected.
Historians consider the biblical account about Chedorlaomer's campaign against Sodom (1954 BCE) as a pious fiction. However, the Gospels refer to it as a real story (Heb 7:1) and a chronological reconstruction based on synchronisms shows that, among dynasties from Sumerian lists, the 3rd and last Elamite king of the Awan I dynasty was Kudur-Lagamar (1990-1954). The Spartoli tablets (c. 650 BCE) describe this famous attack of Babylonia by a coalition of evil kings named Kudur-KUKUmal, king of Elam, Tudḫula, king of Gutium, and Eri-Aku [king of Larsa]. The route of Chedorlaomer and the description of his actions show that this king came to this region near Egypt in order to maintain control over this new land trade route. This ambitious project had to have worried Amenemhat I because southern Canaan was a big source of supply. In order to protect Egypt, Amenemhat I built the "Walls of the Ruler". One can notice that the area of Sodom was called Sutu[m] in execration texts (then Moab after 1800 BCE).
For Egyptologists as well as archaeologists, and even now Bible scholars, the answer to the question: Who was the pharaoh of the Exodus, the answer is obvious: there was nobo because the biblical story was a myth (Dever: 2003, 233). Consequently, who to believe: Moses or Egyptologists? Several scholars (Finkelstein, Dever and others) posit that the Exodus narrative may have developed from collective memories of the Hyksos expulsions of Semitic Canaanites from Egypt, possibly elaborated on to encourage resistance to the 7th century domination of Judah by Egypt. For these scholars the liberation from Egypt after the "10 plagues", as it is written in the Book of Exodus, is quite different from the historical "war of liberation against the Hyksos". What are the Egyptian documents underlying this hypothesis: none, and what is the chronology of this mysterious war: nobody knows! Consequently, who to believe: Moses or Egyptologists? This study will give the answer.
The understanding of God's name YHWH is so controversial that it is eventually the controversy of controversies, or the ultimate controversy. Indeed, why most of competent Hebrew scholars propagate patently false explanations about God's name? Why do the Jews refuse to read God's name as it is written and read Adonay "my Lord" (a plural of majesty) instead of it? Why God's name is usually punctuated e, â (shewa, qamats) by the Masoretes what makes its reading impossible, because the 4 consonants of the name YHWH must have at least 3 vowels (long or short) to be read, like the words 'aDoNâY and 'eLoHîM "God" (a plural of majesty), which have 4 consonants and 3 vowels? At last, why the obvious reading "Yehowah", according to theophoric names, which all begin by Yehô-, without exception, is so despised, and why the simple biblical meaning, "He will be" from Exodus 3:14, is rejected.
Michael Servetus participated in the Protestant Reformation and translated the Hebrew Bible into Latin. In July 1531, he published his De Trinitatis Erroribus (On the Errors of the Trinity) in which he explained clearly that the Trinity was a 3-headed monster. Accordingly, Catholics and Protestants alike condemned him. He was then arrested in Geneva and burnt at the stake as a heretic by order of the city's Protestant governing council. This book was translated into English only in 1932, but still worse, the main arguments from part V were completely distorted. For example he explained that God's name was Iehouah because in Hebrew this name was close to the name of Iesuah (Jesus), or Iehosuah, which means "Iehouah is salvation". He also knew that according to Paulus de Heredia, a Christian Cabbalist, the meaning of God's name was "He causes to be" (yehauueh), but he never confused the pronunciation of God's name with its Kabbalistic meaning (yehaweh). For Servetus, Iehouah was the only true God.
The Trojan War is the foundation of Greek history. If Greek historians had little doubt of its existence they remained extremely sceptical regarding its mythological origin. Archaeology has confirmed one essential point: there was indeed a general conflagration in the Greek world around 1200 BCE, the assumed period of that war, which caused the disappearance of two powerful empires: Mycenaean on one hand and Hittite with its vassals on the other hand. The inscriptions of Ramses III's year 8 describe actually a general invasion of the Mediterranean by the "Sea Peoples". A precise chronological reconstruction shows that there was a confrontation between a Greek heterogeneous confederation, consisting of pirates, and a set of vassal kingdoms of the Hittite empire, such as Troy and Ugarit, which ended with their complete mutual destruction in 1185 BCE, the climax of the Trojan War. This conclusion was already that of Eratosthenes.
Historians as well as Bible scholars consider the biblical account about Chedorlaomer's campaign against Sodom as a pious fiction but a chronological reconstruction based on synchronisms shows that among dynasties from Sumerian lists the 3rd and last Elamite king of the Awan I dynasty was indeed Kudur-Lagamar (1990-1954). The route of Chedorlaomer shows that this king came to this region near Egypt in order to maintain control over this new land trade route. This ambitious project had to have worried Amenemhat I (1975-1946) and to block the progress of this powerful Mesopotamian king, he built the Walls of the Ruler and planned to create an Amorite rival confederation. In order to achieve his goal he proposed an alliance to Abram, who came from Shinar (Sumer), a region close to Elam, and began preparations by appointing Sarai as a bearer of offering to his personal service, then by marrying her to seal this alliance (Gn 12:19). The wedding was cancelled, but the statue remained.
Very few Bible scholars believe now in the historicity of the book of Esther but, surprisingly, their conclusion is based only on the following prejudice: this story looks like a fairy tale, consequently, it is a fairy tale! No chronological investigation and historical research have been carried out though chronology is the backbone of history and that it is impossible to write history without written testimonies. Worse still, to establish their chronology, scholars have blind faith in the Babylonian king lists which are nevertheless false (reporting no usurpation and no co-regency). Rather than taking into account the reality of chronological testimonies and ancient texts, most archaeologists have reinvented and mythicized history. In contrast, an extensive investigation of chronological, archaeological and historical evidence gives an amazing result: Esther (510-425) was the best attested Persian Queen.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.