The Christian View of the Old TestamentEiselen, Frederick Carl
Religion
The Christian View of the Old Testament
Eiselen, Frederick Carl
Bible. Old Testament -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
Perhaps the most surprising fact about these letters is that the
Palestinian governors used, in the correspondence with their superiors
in Egypt, not the Egyptian or native Canaanite, but the Babylonian
language, which seems conclusive evidence that for some time previously
Western Asia had been under Babylonian influence. Without doubt this
influence was primarily political, but naturally it would bring with it
elements of civilization, art, science, and religion. Now and then
words in the Canaanite language occur, either independently, or for the
purpose of explaining a Babylonian expression in the more familiar
dialect of the scribe. These Canaanite words are hardly
distinguishable from the Hebrew of the Old Testament. It is evident,
therefore, that the pre-Israelite inhabitants of Palestine were closely
akin to the Hebrews, and spoke substantially the same language. The
inscriptions of later Egyptian kings, during the thirteenth and the
early part of the twelfth century, throw little additional light on
conditions in Palestine, except that it becomes increasingly clear that
Egypt cannot maintain its hold on the land. Subsequent to Rameses III
(1198-1167) Palestine was entirely {128} lost to Egypt for several
centuries, which explains why the Hebrews were not disturbed by the
empire on the Nile in their attempts to establish themselves in
Palestine.
The first direct reference to Israel in the inscriptions apparently
takes us near the time of the exodus. Archaeology has nothing to say
directly about the exodus; but in the enumeration of his victories,
Merneptah II, thought to be the Pharaoh during whose reign the exodus
took place, uses these words: "Israel is lost, his seed is not." The
discovery of this inscription in 1896 was hailed with great rejoicing,
for at last the name "Israel" was found in an Egyptian inscription
coming, approximately at least, from the time of the exodus; but,
unfortunately, the reference is so indefinite that its exact
significance and bearing upon the date of the exodus is still under
discussion. It is to be noted that, whereas the other places or
peoples named in the inscription have the determinative for "country,"
"Israel" has the determinative for "men"; perhaps an evidence that the
reference is not to the land of Israel, or to Israel permanently
settled, but to a tribe or people at the time without a settled abode.
But where was Israel at the time? To this a variety of answers have
been given. D. R. Fotheringham suggests that the reference is to the
destruction of the crops of Israel in Goshen. {129} Israel, he thinks,
had just left, with the crops unharvested. These Merneptah claims to
have destroyed.[8] Others believe that the Israelites had already
entered Canaan when they suffered the defeat mentioned by Merneptah.
Petrie thinks that the Israelites defeated were in Palestine, but that
they had no connection with the tribes that had a part in the biblical
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account