For a more academic treatment, please see this link for “Chapter II: Philistines - Settlement” (page 49) of Edward Lipinski’s 2006 book: “On the Skirts of Canaan in the Iron Age”.
On page 52 of this same book, we read something amazingly bold in its explicit specificity of the origins of the Philistines !!!
“It seems that the Anatolian provenance of the Philistines can be proved directly. One of the Hittites’ allies at the battle of Qadesh in 1275 B.C. was called P-d-s according to the Egyptian scribes [FN18 specifically p. 3 on P-d-s - K.A. kitchen, Ramesside Inscriptions II, Oxford 1969-79, p. 2-147]. … P-d-s is rightly taken as an equivalent of Hittite Pitassa [FN 19: G.F. del Monte - J. Tischler, Die Ortis- und Gewdssernamen der hethitischen Texte (RGTC 6), Wiesbaden 1978, p. 318-319…] , which was generally located in the area of the Salt Lake (Tuz Golu) and of the plain of Konya, but has also been equated with Pisidia. If there were several regions bearing this name, that may reappear later in Carian…, at least the Bronze Age Pitassa has to be located in West Anatolia, close to Arzawa, probably north-west of Konya, in the area of yalburt and of the present-day town of Ilgin.”] << Wow !!!
There is a PDF download (written by a different author) available at this address
What you are saying, @Mark_Moore, is that in a single tablet, both “EL” and “YAHWEH/YAH” are being used … and even when you line up multiple tablets, we find a coherent pattern for the “EL” vs. “YAHWEH”… even though centuries have elapsed between the time of one tablet and another tablet.
It is not special pleading.
The Bible in general and Genesis is no exception, is a account of God interacting with mankind and peoples imperfect response to that interaction. It is not an exhaustive history of he ancient near east. So this portion of Genesis is Abraham centric. That Egypt may have had a presence in the promised land is irrelevant to the account. Abraham may even had paid taxes or tribute to Egypt but if this was not relevant to his walk of faith with God it would not be part of Genesis any more than an account of Abraham buying and selling sheep.
While Egypt may have at least nominally rule the area, the Egyptians did not ‘Egyptify’ the area. No temples no monuments etc Canaanites continued to live and speak as Canaanites, perhaps as client states. It is these people that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob interacted with on a day to day basis so there would be no reason to mention the Egyptians.
The compilers of the Bible, the scribes as you call them,. May well have known some of the Egyptian vs Sea People history but it wasn’t their history so they would not comment on it.
Once an earlier date for Abraham is accepted and the use of a later place name to describe location ignoring ethnicity, the time of arrival of the Philistines no longer matters
With respect to the Exodus not being recorded in history. Virtually all of Egyptian history of this period comes to us in the form of monuments erected by the rulers for the purpose of solidifying their rule. So accounts of a defeat would not be recorded; victories only. Likewise three are no surviving chronicles from the Canaanites on any topic so the absence of Exodus or in their perspective, invasion is a subset of silence on all topics.
The notes from the ninth circle reference that you gave me is not the credible source I was looking for. I will at the sea peoples reference but at 100+ pages it will take a while
Special pleading is when you ask for all sorts of exceptions…which might be plausible when you just ask for one. But when you start lining up all your special exceptions, you are creating an impossible scenario … much like those who insist on special interpretations for all the various ways the age of the Earth is calculated or why brontosaurus and other massive dinosaurs drowned in the flood before modern style pigs did.
If the Bible does not ever mention Egyptian messengers, tax collectors and troops walking through Canaan, and pushing people around… and dominating the alleged bronze age cities in the region … there is only one reason: because the writers never saw it happen.
You write: “While Egypt may have at least nominally rule the area, the Egyptians did not ‘Egyptify’ the area. No temples no monuments …”
Wow, are you wrong. The region became saturated with Egyptian customs, monuments, and concerns. The Amarna texts show us how much Egypt dominated the area when Egypt wasn’t even paying attention to Canaan! Egyptian influence extended well into the highlands, past Jerusalem!
It depends on whom you feel wrote the Torah. If you are a literalist and believe as Billy Graham and I do, then you probably would say that Moses wrote the Torah. If you believe in the Wellhausen Theory, then you accept the JEDP hypothesis. I am not feeling well today; therefore, I may have made a slight error in spelling.
You’re missing a few options, it seems. Moses gave his people the Law, but what exactly did that consist of? The whole Pentateuch or just parts of it? We know for a fact it can’t all have been written by him, due to the account of Moses’s death and burial; but what else was written later?
Of course, there is always a middle ground, in that Moses wrote it originally, but it was rewritten in its final form much later, though attributed to him. It is obvious that is the case when in Genesis you see stuff like Ur of the Chaldeans written, and the Chaldeans were not around until 1000-600 BC. Also phrases like “until this time” which implies a much later writing.
Others here are better qualified to talk about this, but from what I’ve heard, just as evolutionary theory has seen significant updates and corrections since the time of Darwin, so also textual criticism of the Torah has moved on from Wellhausen (who was about 35 years younger than Darwin). The basic feel of it is similar, but I don’t think they talk in quite the same way about JEDP in newer versions of critical theory.
I will have to get more recent books on this subject. I studied it at Old Dominion University and Liberty University School of Divinity. That has been over forty years ago.
I myself haven’t studied anything on this subject — beside the occasional blog or forum comment here and there — in a good 20 years, and I never even attended seminary. If you find a good updated intro, let me know! I doubt I’ll find time to read it at this stage of my life, but it would be good to have the resource handy.