Dr. Zahi Hawass: "Whispers of a Hebrew Presence in Egypt"

i think that a big part of the silence on this subject, by the Egyptian authorities has to do with the FIASCO going on in the area, with Gaza, et. al.

you all KNOW what i'm talkin' about!

if they had any reason to concede Hebrew habitation in ancient times, they might just find themselves in a dire predicament, not much different than some of their neighbors.

it is prudent to say nothing at all about any of it, i think - at least for Dr. Hawass and colleagues.

[toasted asks:]

There are a cpl of anomalies that never seem to get much traction at all.

A. The anglo-saxon chronicles recall being in bondage in Egypt. and

B. That the Jews told Christ they were never in bondage to any man!

I believe both comments are accurate, so

How does one reconcile that?

Who is really whom?



A. The Anglo-Saxons (Saxons = Isaac's Sons) were Israelites. The ten tribes were not absorbed in greater Assyria, but formed the core population of the Parthian Empire.

B. The Pharisees were mostly Edomite half-breeds. The Edomites were forcibly converted to Judiasm during Maccabean times, and the Jewish Encyclopedia admits this. True, their fathers were never in bondage.



[edit on 17-6-2010 by Lazarus Short]

reply to post by Lazarus Short

That the Jews told Christ they were never in bondage to any man!

While I don't see the immediate issue as one centring on theological debate, your assertion simply must be addressed.

The way you are interpreting this verse is wholly contrary to a truly vast proportion of the OT Scriptures — which those who were speaking would have known all their lives! To suggest they were implying there had been no Hebrew bondage in Egypt is, I'm afraid nothing short of ludicrous.

The only way anyone could conceivably claim this statement means what you suggest is if they have wrenched it entirely out of context and deliberately ignored the total impossibility stated above.

In context, here is what was said:

Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, "If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."

They answered Him, "We are Abraham's descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, 'You will become free'?"

Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.

The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever. "So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed."

Gospel of John 8:36

In context:

They answered him, i.e. specifically Jews who had believed in Him, and it was these specific people who said we —being descendants of Abraham— have never yet been enslaved. They were talking about themselves, not the entire Jewish nation!! This is self-evident to anyone reading the text in context.

It should be added that had they actually been suggesting the Jewish nation had never been enslaved they would have been the laughing stock of the crowd, not to mention the nation!

I have to say, my friend, if you have actually been given your out-of-context interpretation by someone else this is sufficient evidence to demonstrate they haven't the first clue about the Bible. Sadly.


[The other points you raise suggest also beggar belief, but as they are somewhat off-topic, suffice it to say that whoever claims:

The Anglo-Saxons (Saxons = Isaac's Sons) were Israelites

is either a complete ignoramus (particularly in terms of linguistic derivation) or a composer of idle fables.

And if we're talking Joseph Smith then the latter is a bullseye and the former is too mild, hoodwinker being the requisite appellation!]

Originally posted by Lazarus Short

[toasted asks:]

There are a cpl of anomalies that never seem to get much traction at all.

A. The anglo-saxon chronicles recall being in bondage in Egypt. and

B. That the Jews told Christ they were never in bondage to any man!

I believe both comments are accurate, so

How does one reconcile that?

Who is really whom?



A. The Anglo-Saxons (Saxons = Isaac's Sons) were Israelites. The ten tribes were not absorbed in greater Assyria, but formed the core population of the Parthian Empire.

B. The Pharisees were mostly Edomite half-breeds. The Edomites were forcibly converted to Judiasm during Maccabean times, and the Jewish Encyclopedia admits this. True, their fathers were never in bondage.



[edit on 17-6-2010 by Lazarus Short]


I would agree with that.

Tho someone thinks that is laffable....no matter.

for the skeptic;

www.orange-street-church.org...

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1278475922&sr=8-1

www.amazon.com...=pd_sim_b_10

www.amazon.com...=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1278476313&sr=1-1-spell


There's incontrovertible proofs , but yet the skeptix still mock and scoff.

Anyways, even if the Jews are not Judah [ and I don't believe they are ], they are exactly like those who wanted Christ dead. They were the ones He said were not His, and that His sheep heard His voice.

Israel, the state, is supposed to be all about the parable of the fig tree.

focusonjerusalem.com...

There probably are a few of our brother Judah there, but the rest are deceived.

I'm not going to produce any ancient manuscripts or anything

but A I thought the Jews celebrated Passover to commemorate there escape from Egyptian Bondage

B I thought Abraham's wife Sarah was taken to harem of the then Pharaoh of Egypt

C that Joesph took Mary and baby Christ to Egypt,why did he he go there unless he had some kind of tribal/familial traditions there

D Sitcha Jacobovich says there is an ancient Jewish Temple at Elephantine which is in Aswan which is Egypt then as now

and besides if Hawass found a 120 foot statue of Moses that had I'm a Jew carved on every inch of it and I was here on it he would only smash it to tiny pieces and pretend it never happened ,the guy has no credibility with me whatsoever