Name of Queen

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by Nogodnomasters

There is no IronAge Egyptian record of any pharaoh who conquered Gezer and gave it back as the Bible claims.

It's worth pointing out that a lot of the official Egyptian record of itself is an exercise in political propaganda - I still find the glorious description of Rameses the Great's victorious draw against the Hittites to be so superbly propagandist as to be almost self-parody.

[Devadatta]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Hello Devadatta,

No problem. First thing I did was read the biblical story of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba. I took note of the details that I considered of interest, such as her proving Solomon with hard questions, she traveled by caravan, brought 120 talents of gold, and more spices than Israel ever saw. I also noted that Solomon in the end gave her her every desire.

Second: I looked up the history of Sheba, and discovered there was such a place. It was also called Saba, and the people were a semitic race called Saabiens. The area was originally what is now the south west part of Arabia or Yemen. I discovered that there are records of Saba that go as far back as the 700s BC. These sources were taken from the encyclopedia, world history, and other references of secular construct.

Third: I remembered reading something from our friend Canuck about Sheba and Etheopia, so I started looking at Etheopian history (again in the encylopedia and world history references), and discovered there was a Sheba there as well as a Queen, preceeded by five kings (which I found interesting due to the fact that the arabian societies tended to be matriarchal back then). I also discovered that that area was in fact rich in gems, precious stones, gold and spices. Spices were worth their weight in gold practically!

Fourth: I checked to see just how influential Solomon's kingdom was at the time of this alleged story. It was quite vast, and with Solomon having a fleet of merchant ships (built for him as a result of the friendship between David and the King of Cyrus). I also looked for information about Solomon through Freemason references (there is a whole lot of information on Solomon through the Freemasons).

Finally, I sat and put the pieces together. Trade agreements were as important then as they are now, between nations. Why wouldn't the monarch of a nation dependent on trade, not want to strike a bargain with such an influential and apparently prosperous nation as Israel? Especially when Israel had the means to carry on trade more efficiently by sea than a nation with only camel caravans? And why wouldn't one leader want to meet such a one of fame as Solomon?

I did not think to go to the Qu'ran for reference as Brian notes, because I presumed that since Islam would not come to the forefront until 1200 years later, there would be no reference (which was a mistake on my part).

Oh, and I did find it interesting to note. One of the favorite past times of the well do do (in all areas of the middle east back then), was to tell stories and present riddles (Sheba proved Solomon with hard questions).

...What flows out for seven, remains in for nine, has two spouts for draught, but only one eats?

Though there is no hard evidence that the actual story is true, there is nothing about the story to the contrary of actual life or the needs of the nations to support eachother, as described at that time.

Hence my opinion that the story of The Queen Sheba and Solomon is not legend, but infact true to one degree or another.

NGNM just piqued my curiosity with his remark, so I decided to investigate.

Oh, I'm not so certain about the Ark of the covenant being taken to Sheba, however, once the temple was built, there would be no need for the Ark of the covenant, so perhaps it is true.

v/r

Q

Sounds like a reasonable enough procedure, except maybe for the freemasons part. Are you a member? Are you part of a secret cabal? Should we be afraid? !

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Devadatta

Sounds like a reasonable enough procedure, except maybe for the freemasons part. Are you a member? Are you part of a secret cabal? Should we be afraid? !

I assure you, I am not a Free Mason (though I do lay brick as part of my profession). Have nothing against Free Masons. I'm just not a member.

v/r

Q

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

It's worth pointing out that a lot of the official Egyptian record of itself is an exercise in political propaganda - I still find the glorious description of Rameses the Great's victorious draw against the Hittites to be so superbly propagandist as to be almost self-parody.

Are you writing tongue-in-cheek as to suppose the Bible is not Political propaganda? I would agree with your assertion, now why would they NOT report something that made them look good? Seems to me if the idea is to glorify the pharaoh, then its lack of reporting is even more suspect that there never was a conquest.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by Nogodnomasters

Are you writing tongue-in-cheek as to suppose the Bible is not Political propaganda? I would agree with your assertion, now why would they NOT report something that made them look good? Seems to me if the idea is to glorify the pharaoh, then its lack of reporting is even more suspect that there never was a conquest.

Events in the Old Testament that make the Jews look bad are very much the bricks of it - but I don't believe you can get any comparable level of self-humiliation in the Egyptian political record.

As for not reporting a conquest - I'm not a close follower of the history of Ramases (sorry, New Kingdom Egypt for myself focusses on Akhenaten) but you mention a conquest followed by Pharoah conceding territories. Sounds like a difficult situation to make political good of if you lost the very thing you fought for in the first place.

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

Events in the Old Testament that make the Jews look bad are very much the bricks of it - but I don't believe you can get any comparable level of self-humiliation in the Egyptian political record.

As for not reporting a conquest - I'm not a close follower of the history of Ramases (sorry, New Kingdom Egypt for myself focusses on Akhenaten) but you mention a conquest followed by Pharoah conceding territories. Sounds like a difficult situation to make political good of if you lost the very thing you fought for in the first place.

Normally that would be the case. Except in this one the pharaoh was Senuseret III who already had a great reputation as a conqueror, having taken Ethiopia. He records a conquest in Ephraim (Gezer) which is speculated to have been some sort of vendetta. He went there, conquered it and then left. Sort of like the Celtic conquests.

[Quahom1]

Getting off track are we?


Name of Queen is the topic.

v/r

Q

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Getting off track are we?


Name of Queen is the topic.

v/r

Q

There was no queen. It is like trying to name King Arthur's horse.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Nogodnomasters

There was no queen. It is like trying to name King Arthur's horse.

Well then I suppose that Josephus was a liar...and you know everything...(btw he was a secular historian).

v/r

Q

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Well then I suppose that Josephus was a liar...and you know everything...(btw he was a secular historian).

v/r

Q

By nearly any account the event would have been 1000 years old when Josephus wrote about it. At that point it becomes hear-say, myth, legend, questionable data. Secular historian??? He was Jewish. Who was secular 2000 years ago?

There is much in Josephus that is inaccurate and down right false. You can accept all his writings on faith alone if you want. I do not- Especially when he speculates on things that happened 1000 years earlier. Do you also believe the Hyksos were Israeites because Josephus claims they were?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Nogodnomasters

By nearly any account the event would have been 1000 years old when Josephus wrote about it. At that point it becomes hear-say, myth, legend, questionable data. Secular historian??? He was Jewish. Who was secular 2000 years ago?

There is much in Josephus that is inaccurate and down right false. You can accept all his writings on faith alone if you want. I do not- Especially when he speculates on things that happened 1000 years earlier. Do you also believe the Hyksos were Israeites because Josephus claims they were?

Based on what? Your say so? I find nothing in Josephus' writings claiming they were Israelites, to the contrary, it appears they were the original Amalekites, who warred with Saul and later, David.

Josephus' thousand year gap, is closer than our three thousand year gap, concerning said events and people. Do you also ignore the professed history of Etheopia, because it is of no consequence and does not fit your mold?

Josephus speculated on nothing. He claimed to have read Manetho, and quoted from such. But since we have no records of Manetho's writings, it can't be proved or disproved.

Your implication that there could be no secular historian back then, regardless of his/her faith, is ludicrous. Your targeting Josephus and challenging his "secular" bent when writing, because he was Jewish, is an interesting revelation, about you.

Q

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Based on what? Your say so? I find nothing in Josephus' writings claiming they were Israelites, to the contrary, it appears they were the original Amalekites, who warred with Saul and later, David.

Josephus' thousand year gap, is closer than our three thousand year gap, concerning said events and people. Do you also ignore the professed history of Etheopia, because it is of no consequence and does not fit your mold?

Josephus speculated on nothing. He claimed to have read Manetho, and quoted from such. But since we have no records of Manetho's writings, it can't be proved or disproved.

Your implication that there could be no secular historian back then, regardless of his/her faith, is ludicrous. Your targeting Josephus and challenging his "secular" bent when writing, because he was Jewish, is an interesting revelation, about you.

Q

In A III 39 Josephus claims Moses warred with the Amalekites. Not likely they would be the original Hebrews if we believe Josephus. Manetho relates a Rameside expulsion which the Bible appears to have adopted for the Exodus.

http://www.bibleorigins.net/ExodusJo...VSManetho.html

Josephus believes the Hyksos (Against Apion 1:14) founded Jerusalem. This is of course INCORRECT as Jerusalem existed in the Early Bronze Age. Josephus claims the Hyksos expulsion preceeded the seige of Troy by over a 1000 years (also incorrect). Josephus then makes a statement comparing the Hyksos take over of Egypt and expulsion as one of his own... "...That we came out of another country into Egypt; and that withal our deliverance out of it was so ancient in time as to preceed the seige of Troy almost a 1000 years..."

Did you actually read the works of Josephus or just those passages that suit your position?

[queenofsheba]

Originally Posted by Nogodnomasters

Josephus believes the Hyksos (Against Apion 1:14) founded Jerusalem. This is of course INCORRECT as Jerusalem existed in the Early Bronze Age. Josephus claims the Hyksos expulsion preceeded the seige of Troy by over a 1000 years (also incorrect). Josephus then makes a statement comparing the Hyksos take over of Egypt and expulsion as one of his own... "

The Hyksos are a very mysterious people. They were semitic and ruled parts of Egypt between 2000 and 1500 BC. An old theory says that they are the Hebrews, but most scientists don't accept that anymore.

[Nogodnomasters]

Originally Posted by queenofsheba

The Hyksos are a very mysterious people. They were semitic and ruled parts of Egypt between 2000 and 1500 BC. An old theory says that they are the Hebrews, but most scientists don't accept that anymore.

Exactly. In fact the real evidence shows Judaism evolved out of the old canaanite religion. There are no sudden changes in language and culture of the Canaanites that one would expect had there been a real Exodus out of Egypt. I am convinced the story in the OT is based upon at least 3 times Asians left Egypt with the earliest account taking place during the Great Famine of the Early Bronze age.

[ProphetSmurf]

Contraire, when the 1st temple was built, the Ark was used yearly at Yom Kippur. The Ark is to set inside the Holy of Holies. The Ark was probably hidden by the Prophet Jeremiah. Some say he hid the last Ark on the nearby mountain Nebo near Jordan, others say he hid it inside a cavern or tunnel beneath the City, possibly Hezekiahs tunnels or even Jeremiahs grotto.