- May 31, 2004
- 3,809
- 102
samurai36,
I will continue my response after looking over it more.
No, I have weighed the evidence and found Rohl’s argument to be better supported with the tangible, written and calculated analyses available and found that most likely Rohl’s works are correct. Look, this is a very big debate that is going on right now among professional Egyptologist and Biblical scholars, I doubt very seriously if you and I would be able to conclude their arguments. All you can do is read the book or watch the video where Rohl actually travels to the places and points out his evidence and conclude for yourself rather he is right or wrong. But the basic argument for you and I would be, “did Moses and Akhenaten exist during the same time, if so could they have been the same persons”.Yours becomes the typical mode of debate, in that you have automatically condemned any other perspective, as you see your own as absolutely untennable.
I read enough of it to understand that it is based on Akhenaten existing 200 years before Moses. At that point I stopped because already we have a major conflict that is being debated among professional Egyptologist and scholars.Did you even read the info that I posted? Are you at all interested in the sources quoted therein?
I will continue my response after looking over it more.