Strong Evidence for a Literal King Solomon proves the Exodus is literal history

Faith & Science Conversation
1

Some Theistic Evolutionists appear to claim that King Solomon did not literally exist…that his story is symbolic, metaphorical…whatever.

However note 1 Kings Chapter 11…
Jeroboam is annointed by a prophet to to a successor to King Solomon, ruling over 10 tribes of Israels thus leaving Solomons lineage with just 1 tribe.

The signifianct historical archeological find relevant here is take note of where Jeroboam fled to Egypt

1kings 11.40 Solomon tried to kill Jeroboam, but Jeroboam fled to Egypt, to Shishak the king, and stayed there until Solomon’s death

The Biblical Shishak was

Hedjkheperre Setepenre Shoshenq I (Egyptian ššnq; reigned c. 943–922 BC)—also known as Shashank or Sheshonk or Sheshonq I[note 1]—was a pharaoh of ancient Egypt and the founder of the Twenty-second Dynasty of Egypt.

1000021927
10000219271812×2176 202 KB

Note the King Jeroboam was married to Shishak’s wifes sister!

Shishak/Sousakim was also related to Jeroboam: “the wife of Jeroboam” is a character in the Hebrew Bible. She is unnamed in the Masoretic Text, but according to the Septuagint, she was an Egyptian princess called Ano:

And Sousakim gave to Jeroboam Ano the eldest sister of Thekemina his wife, to him as wife; she was great among the king’s daughters…[18][19]

If we read the story about Solomons temple, it was built 480 years after the Exodus

1Kings 6.1 In the four hundred and eightieth[a] year after the Israelites came out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, the second month, he began to build the temple of the Lord.

If i take a middle ground 950 BC date when Solomon would have been in power, that means the Exodus was at least as early as 1430 BC.

What that means therefore is that we should not be looking for evidence of the Exodus from the 1200’s BC…we should be looking at least 200- 250 years earlier in the 1400’s BC.

When we check the 1400s, we do find a notable amount of Exodus evidence!

If the bible chronology is right about king Solomon (because of pharoah Shishak (Hedjkheperre Setepenre Shoshenq I), then its clearly right about the Exodus.

The Exodus is literal history.

2

Last Sunday the question arose about who in the Bible we could relate to most. For the speaker it was the apostle Peter. For me it is Solomon and Paul. I had a Solomon like moment in my life when I decided what I wanted most from life was an understanding of the most important things – the “secrets” of the universe. One of the things I eventually came to understanding was the profound limits on the value and power of understanding itself. We can understand not only what is right and wrong but even why and it still doesn’t mean we will do what is right and not do what is wrong. And that brings me to other person I relate to most in the Bible: Paul.

Romans 7:21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inmost self, 23 but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?

P.S. since he is on my ignore list, I do not see the content of the OP, only the title.

3 Likes
3

Given Mitchel cant read my posts, his own loss because he now has no idea about the true history here and misses out on important personal knowledge, I will just point out that instead of potentially gaining a valuable learning experience from this, he chooses to dig a hole in the sand and stick his head in that hole…such a shame and so very foolish. Should be a lesson for us all as it highlights just how little interest some individual on these forums have in researching truth vs error. These kinds of habits are indicative of individuals who demonstrate an interest in parroting rather than learning and discussing facts

Anyway, on to more important things and in the spirit of the OP…

Here is the chronological list of pharaohs from Thutmose I - Shoshenq I (Biblical Shishak 1 in Kings 11):

What we can know from the above is that it is almost a certainty that the Pharoahs during the Israelite Slavery period in Egypt were those of the Thutmosis family lineage.

What is even more interesting is that Ahmose I was the Pharoah who overthrew the Hyksos dynasty and kicked them right out of Egypt! That would explain why he was not sympathetic to the Israelites in Goshen (which btw is right near the Hyksos capital Avaris)…perhaps given both were from the Asiatic region, that they were friends of the Hyksos!

I have seen arguments for the pharaoh who was in power during the plagues of Egypt and the Exodus itself as being either Thutmosi=e 3 or Amenhotep 2.

It is also very notable that scholars believe that it was likely that Thutmose 3 or perhaps even Amenhotep 2 (consensus is Thutmose 3) that attempted to desecrate the Temple of Hatshepsut. That is consistent with the notion that he was really upset at her for a significant reason…it could have been because of her grasp of power forcing the continuance of a co regency starving him of his birthright for over 20 years, or…

perhaps it was because Hatshepsut was the Egyptian princess who adopted Moses and whichever of the surviving pharaohs after Moses left (Thutmoses II or Amenhotep II) was unforgiving of what Moses did to Egypt during the plagues and subsequent Exodus!

What is really interesting is the timeline for the reign of the Thutmoses lineage of pharaohs…the only pharaoh who lived long enough to fit the Biblical text where God spoke to Moses in Midian telling him that the pharaoh who sought to kill him was dead…its ThutmoseIII

Now i dont think there is any particular problem with the Pharoah in power when Moses was born being any one of the other Thutmose family…as im sure that if it turned out that Moses half brother was Thutmose II…there would be no reason why he wouldnt have held a grudge against Moses and sought to kill him even after Thutmose I had died…its probably unlikely though because the Bible clealry says Moses was in MIdian for at 40 years and he was about 40 when he fled Egypt. (died at 120 after leading Israelites in the wilderness for another 40 years)

Moses being 80 years of age when he returned to Egypt points to the Exodus Pharoah as being Amehotep II and i think the key figure there is Hatshepsut…i believe she was a very likely candidate for his adoptive mother under the reign of Thutmose I

4

Don’t think those TE, whoever they might be, if they actually do exist, hang around here. In fact I seem to remember someone around here saying the Bible becomes actually sort of historically accurate around the time of Solomon.

But, finding one historical figure doesn’t validate that everything that came before is actual real history.

Around here we say, "Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and atomic bombs.

3 Likes
5

would that be the same for the TEist age of the universe there…its give or take how many million years?

I think you have more of a problem with nailing down to a specific credible time than YEC do there Bill…so your argument is self defeating without one even needing to referencing anything!

BTW, your statement there is ignorant of even secular Egyptologists views on the exact dates for Egyptian history…none of them are down to the exact day, month, or even year! So if we have a handful of years either way, there is no issue with that historically.

The reality is, the evidence of existence is the point here…im providing strong evidence for the literal historical life of King Solomon. The closer we can get to the Exodus, the closer we can get to providing equally strong evidence for the flood as literal history…

We have a pretty decent account from the bible of the chronology from Noah to Joseph and given Moses clearly talks about taking Joseph’s bones out of Egypt…we only have to critique the family tree from Shems son Arhpaxed to Nahour (which is only 5 children in between those two figures)…thats pretty darn close!

image
image800×629 107 KB

6

And there you go taking a humorous statement literally. I am beginning to think you can’t actually see anything as non-literal.

And I don’t think many here would question if Solomon was historical, so you really aren’t adding much to your position.

4 Likes
7

Strong Evidence for a Literal King Solomon proves the Exodus is literal history is multiply fallacious.

Proof of Iron Age King Solomon is not evidence for Bronze Age myth set centuries before the Bronze Age collapse, centuries before Solomon. Let alone strong evidence for 950 BCE history proving 1430 BCE myth. Or strong evidence for anything proving anything. From Biblical internal chronology it’s around 1445. Nothing in real history supports it in the slightest.

1 Like
8

thats because taking a personal jibe at someone in the way that you did…its not at all funny and im not so stupid as to not see that seemingly innocent attack.

You are welcome to alter your post there of course…then ill delete this…are you willing to do that or do you want to leave the so called humour (which is in very poor taste) as it is?

9

Im not the one who published the Chronologies there Apistos…these are available to anyone on the internet…id suggest that anyone disagreeing with my conclusions would do well to actually jot down the timelines on a sheet of paper and see for themselves…the facts dont lie nor are they really in contention and that is because of the consistency in the evidence.

When evidence is consistent…its usually proven on the balance of probabilities…thats how this works!

From the KNOWN EGYPTIAN CHRONOLOGIES of the relevant pharoahs from Ahmoses - Amehotep II - Shishak… we have very compelling evidence Pharoah Shishak was the one who conducted military campaign into Canaan during the time of Jeroboam…we know this from sources outside of the Bible.

This i think provides very strong support for the Bible chronology for king Solomon in the 950’s BC…it means he really existed.

If the existence of King Solomon is proven through Egyptian Chronology, then the Bible also proves Egyptian Chronology…the two are consistent with each other here. This means that the Bible timeline dating back to at least Terah (Abrahams father) is likely true. If its true back to Terah, then given the consistency of the narrative, then its also true back to Noah!

10

As I said, I have no problem with Iron Age records, real history. Bronze Age myth from before the virtual collapse of Mediterranean civilization can’t be validated by it.

Strong evidence is not proof. Even of the subject of strong evidence.

11

Well no. I still think it is funny.

Given “this” doesn’t cause me any heart burn why would I care if you do or don’t?

In the words of the immortal Barb.

So you have two sources which agree on one data point. But it is a stretch and I mean a really big stretch, to say the other points not even mentioned by the other are true.

12

Thats a logical fallacy. While some of the characters may be true, its mythologized history with more myth the further back you go. Was Joseph a real person? I believe so. Did he live to age 110? possibly but unlikely. Were Abraham, Isaac and Jacob real people? I believe so as there is some good narrative about them. Did they live to the ages listed? No… while 147 is a very huge stretch to be possible, 175 is definitely beyond any human lifespan. Was Noah a real person? I don’t think so. He was almost robotic in doing everything God told him to do.

1 Like
13

As a Theistic Evolutionist I can confirm that ancient human history has little or nothing to do with it. The pertinent period is long before the Bronze Age.
Furthermore, just because I take Genesis 1-11 as allegory does not mean that I take all Biblical history in the same manner.

Richard

2 Likes
14

Guys the point you are ignoring here is that these dates are not mythical.

King Solomon 100% existed in the time that the Bible itself claims that he did…we have EXTERNAL evidence that now proves it…that external evidence is from Egyptian archeology.

The Egyptian archaeology we have is from dozens of pharaohs, even their hieroglyphics… Shishak’s own record clearly illustrates his campaign into Canaan at the right time …it matches the claimed bible history as does his name…which is now agreed was the pharaoh Shoshenq.

When we then look at the bible history, we have a very consistent chronology in the genealogies from Christ all the way back to Abraham…given that is now well supported via very strong external evidence, its only 5 individuals that arent directly supported from Abraham to Noah.

We even have the pharaohs for the time of the Exodus and Israelite captivity…we know this was after the Hyksos dynasty and we also know why the Bible says that a new pharaoh came to power who cared nothing of Joseph…it was a change in dynasty at exactly the right time in history…the ages of the pharaohs even is close as well.

Then there is the reign of Hatshepsut… wouldn’t it make sense she took power given her husband died young and rather suddenly…under the circumstances its more than a coincidence that this just happened to also align with biblical Exodus?

Then look at Hatshepsut Temple…her own child and also grandchild defaced it… wouldn’t the most likely reason for that be because of the events of both the Exodus and her having adopted and protected Moses?

Then we find mummies of that same time period with evidence that seems to be scars from boils on them… that’s very, very interesting, and i think is close to a slam dunk for the existence of Moses.

If Moses really fits the Egyptian chronology, then the 10 commandments were literally written …that means the 4th (the Sabbath as a memorial of us being created in 6 days), is true

For me though, those 5 Abrahamic forefather individuals, Terah’s father,(1) grandfather(2), great grandfather(3), great great grandfather (4), great great great grandfather(5) thats very compelling as we are then right next to Noah in the lineage.

That is a very, very narrow gap by modern standards…the claimed age of the individuals isnt relevant…it clearly doesn’t account for millions of years, and that’s also the point here. Even if 10 people were missing between abraham and Noah…we are talking only a couple of hundred years at best by modern standards…the bible story would have to be missing a huge number of individuals and the timeline which, the focus of this OP shows, that is not historically supported in the timeline evidence we do have…we are attempting to discount only 5 Abrahamic forefather family members here before we hit Noah…sound chronology cant ignore that and call those 5 members a myth with this evidence.

Btw…i have noted that my other thread about the scars on the Egytpian pharoah mummies Thutmose 2,3 and Hatshepsut, has barely received a peep…that speaks volumes as it means even the naysayers here realise any position attacking a literal Exodus is in huge trouble and they are struggling to find an alternative that can be supported with historical evkdence that is stronger than the bible claim.

That should be a red flag right there.

15

Check

Check

This doesn’t follow from the two previous points. You keep saying it does, but that is just your opinion. Two lists that only contain one data point in common that agree doesn’t mean your entire list has been verified to be correct.

As if common skin diseases didn’t exist and these could only be from the plague.

Peep, peep. Sorry I didn’t respond over there, but here I am now.

No, you just spout so much verbiage it is hard to respond to it all.

5 Likes
16

Bill, you need to start attending some court hearings…in order for something to be proven beyond the balance of probabilities to be true, correlating evidence is well supported!

Funny thing about your claim there…have you any actual evidence that the carbon 14 levels in any samples were at sufficent quantites to support the claim fossils are 100’s of thousands even 10’s millions of years old?

Fact is, you do not!

So why they above claim then? Your own argument is defeating your own world veiw there because you are dead set arguing against your own uniformitarian assumptions:

  1. that the level of C14 was sufficently high enough
  2. that the decay rate has not changed or been influenced by any environmental factors (such as a flood with huge volcanic activity, tectonic activity, water, and pressure of being buried such that most of the fossils are found in rock (which is also coinicdently enough, largely Sedimentary!

The problem is, for the Christian world view at least, if the Bible specifically makes the statement…no it claims actually. that sin corrupted the earth so badly God saw evil everywhere, then clearly the world after flood looked very different to the world before the flood. I am i think on pretty solid theological ground when i make the point that one of the reasons for the flood was to bury what evil mankind was accessing before the flood…the resources (if you like) they were using were largely taken away in the flood and hidden from them…along with that which they had corrupted so badly!

Because of the above, i think its relatively simple to make a theologically driven scientically evidenced case for the Bible narrative as its written (Without inserting or changing what is a plain reading of language in the text!)

Any before St Roymond gets on his hobby horse and starts whinnying…i have used the Masoretic text in a recent post to highlight that he is wrong on his usual claims there! (hopefully admins havent removed the AI image as they did the Maslows hierarchy one…which was laughable to be honest as its found all over the internet and is studied widely)

17

Actually I have served on several juries.

Never heard that in a trial. Did hear “reasonable doubt” and your evidence is well outside the bounds of reasonable doubt.

Funny how you go from this to a claim I actually have never made.

And you just exposed your lack of knowledge. C14 is only good for dates to roughly 50,000 years ago. You confusing the YEC arguments that try to discredit the dating method. There are several other methods used to date older rock layers. BTW, fossils aren’t dated but the rock layers above and below them are. And C14 dating is good enough to show there was no global flood.

Then I would suggest you do so. You would be the first person in the history of YEC to accomplish this.

3 Likes
18

That was an interesting topic– who in the Bible you could relate most to. As you said, the speaker could relate to Peter. For you it is Solomon and Paul. That in and of itself is worth a “posting” here. Moses had a temper that got him into an insane amount of trouble. Should be recognizable to some of us on these posts!

As for the rest of it….the Ramesside era is said by Kitchen, Hoffmeier and others to be most reflective of the details of the exodus era, as described in the biblical text. They take the numbers in 1 Kings 6 as not being literal but symbolic….

As for the reality of Solomon himself…..Dever said that “a generation ago,” skepticism about a Solomonic temple and Solomon was justifiable, but not so much now. “If the biblical Solomon had not constructed the Gezer gates and city walls, then we would have to invent a similar king by another name,” said Dever in What Did the Biblical Writers Know….one of his books. He gave the “terminus date” for the Gezer gate as “ca 925.”

Schneidewind noted that the names of officials and governors in 1 Kings 4 are “non-Yahwist” and thus quite ancient. Kofoed said that the Assyrian Royal Inscriptions and the Babylonian chronicles provide information corroborating the book of Kings “on a number of points.” The fiscal provisions attributed to Solomon in 1 Kings 4:7ff are mentioned in fiscal records of the era, according to Gray….

1 Like
19

Yeah it would be an interesting court case, “our records show Mr. Bill that you existed at a time when the crime was committed, and since you existed all these stories about you are all true."

4 Likes
20

Noah was robotic until he got drunk…..but I don’t know how robots act when drunk, so who knows? The biblical sketch is not enough to tell us that Noah did “everything God told him to do”–and the drunkenness would certainly be a deviation. But I agree…the biblical text is very sketchy about him….as it is about many others, frankly.

You made some good points here re the ancient geneaologies. Giving someone an age of 110 was supposed to be a statement of respect in ancient Egyptian thinking. He may have been a lot younger.There were other “age at death” numbers that were stated in order to show respect–but they were for other cultures. And genealogies might leapfrog over generations for various reasons. Genesis 10, for example, lists 70 Noahic descendants – a representative number. As for the name “Noah”–the New Bible Dictionary links it to a name in a Hurrian fragment of the Gilgamesh Epic….possibly a name known in that era and “all” that is ever said about him is “not so much”. That does not mean he may not have existed but I do see your point.

1 Like