Somewhat Sectarian Style, Semel

HGL'S F.B. WRITINGS: Somewhat Sectarian Style, Semel · Somewhat Sectarian Style, bis · Correspondence of Hans Georg Lundahl: No Answer from Dr. Liebi, So Far? · Stefan Claesemann tries to take it in private with me · Creation vs. Evolution : Let's Carbon Test Stefan Claesemann's Chronology · Correcting the Test

Stefan Clasemann

Admin

HAS THE RESEARCH FOR YET UNIDENTIFIED QUMRAN FRAGMENTS REVEALING EXODUS 1:8 AND JUBILEES 46,14 ANY CHANCE?

The Fragments of the Latin version from the 6th-century Book of Jubilees discovered in the old monastery library in Bobbio, Italy identifies the new King who arose after Joseph’s death and didn’t know Joseph:

“After having defeated the Egyptian King, the King of Canaan makes the plan to oppress the Israelites and executes his plan.”
Jubilees 46,14

The 6th-century original Latin critical sentence is:

"Et cogitauit rex Chanaam cogitationem pessimam ut adfligeret eos." Jubilees 46,14 Ambrosiana C 73 46:12-48:5

Together with the rediscovered original unfalsified Strict Bible Chronology (Dr. Roger Liebi) the Book of Jubilees identifies 1729 BC as the year of a Canaanite arising in enmity as new and foreign ruler over Egypt and enslaving Israel.

That this new strange foreign king is no one else than the first Canaanite Hyksos called Salitis/SakirHar/Sharek is confirmed by the Bible itself because Exodus1:8 is translated literally:

"There a ‘hadas malak’ = RULER OF FOREIGN LANDS = HYKSOS
who did not know of Joseph,

‘qum’ = ROSE UP IN ENMITY AGAINST Egypt .. and spoke to his people:

'Look, of the people of the children of Israel is many and more than us. Well on we want to dampen them with cunning, that of their will not become so many’”

"hadas" means generally new but it can also be translated as FOREIGN. In Yeremiah31:31 Hesekiel11:19 and Psalm33:3 it means primarily different, unknown, strange. In Deutoronomy32:17 "hadas" even means an unknown, strange and FOREIGN religion. Yesaya7:17 uses the same Hebrew word "malak" for a certain Ruler of Foreign Lands: The Ruler of Assur!

The Book of Jubilees Chapter 46 Verse 6 reveals an earlier attempt of the Canaanites of Assur in 1750 BC to invade Egypt:

"Because Makamaron (Makamaron in latin, Memkeron in ethiopian, Magron in SeferHaj1238), the King of Canaan, when he inhabited/occupied the land Assur, fought in the valley with the King of Egypt. And he killed him there and chased after the Egyptians until he reached the Gate of Ermon (Heropolis). And he was not able to enter because a second new king was King for Egypt and he was stronger than him ..

Assur/Ashur as the location of origin of the Canaanite 'Hyksos' Pharaohs is confirmed by Egyptologist Manfred Bietak's excavated evidence: Based particularly on temple architecture, Bietak argues for religious practices of the Hyksos at Avaris defining the "spiritual home" of the Hyksos as "in northernmost Syria and northern Mesopotamia" which matches the region Assur.

"qum": Deutoronomy22:26 Psalm3:2 Psalm68:2 Isaiah14:22 Isaiah28:21 and Amos7:9 all use "qum" as 'rising up in emnity against' somebody.

CONCLUSION:

The Bible even demands to translate "hadas malak" as Ruler of Foreign Lands or Hyksos and "qum" as rising up as enemy against.

Background explanations are provable on www.IsraelinEgypt.com/Hyksos

Here comes the question for the experts in this group:

If these both cites will literally be confirmed by not yet but in future identified Qumran Fragments of Exodus 1:8 and Jubilees 46,14 it couldn’t be ignored anymore - even not by Leading antibiblical Archeoligists - that two ancient sources of 200 BC confirm the Canaanites as ruler in the Egypt of the Second Intermediate Period having enslaved Israel 1729 BC.

Are there still as many unidentified Qumran fragments left that I can hope for the chance that this possibly will happen in the next decades? How are the chances?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

// Strict Bible Chronology (Dr. Roger Liebi) the Book of Jubilees identifies 1729 BC as the year of a Canaanite arising in enmity as new and foreign ruler over Egypt and enslaving Israel. //

I reckon with a short stay in Egypt proper, 215 years, and that the Exodus was in 1510 BC (Roman martyrology for 25th December). This puts Jacob's moving to Egypt into the year 1725 BC.

Does Dr. Roger Liebi prefer George Syncellus over the Roman martyrology?

Stefan Clasemann

Auteur / Admin

Hans-Georg Lundahl I invite You to study his chronology on www.IsraelinEgypt.com/Chronology (for deeper interest links are integrated) It’s not about prefering anything, it’s about detecting bible falsifications regarding its figures & maths and following without any compromises the Word of God regarding its full amount of included time data without manipulating or ignoring one single number.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

I am sorry, but that is the agenda for ANY Biblical chronology, and I was asking which one you prefer among existing ones. I know Ussher (Jewish calendar chronology has a "reduced Ussher" due to shorting the "intertestamental period), Roman martyrology (from Historia scholastica, from St. Jerome) and George Syncellus.

Or is his one another new take? Dr. Roger Liebi's?

Stefan Clasemann

Auteur / Admin

Yes. All known Chronologies ignore or change biblical time figures (eg. by parallelizing reign times). Dr. Liebi is Europe’s most respected OT Translator (Schlachter2000) and proves that this is unnecessary and inadmissable. The complete amount of the entire amount of biblical time figures does work out fine and matches all essential archeological evidence (eg. Jericho).

Simply check the maths. And it’s proved by over 100 exemplars of archeological evidence discovered and elaborated in my work on www.IsraelinEgypt.com

The Word of God tells You to "prove all things and hold fast that which is good." 1Thess5:21

Hans-Georg Lundahl

Could you instead of linking to the global extent of your work link to and mention one Biblical time figure where Roman martyrology goes wrong and how this is corrected by Dr. Liebi?

"The complete amount of the entire amount of biblical time figures does work out fine and matches all essential archeological evidence (eg. Jericho)."

You might be referring to the carbon 14 dating 1550 BC, by Kenyon?

Stefan Clasemann

Auteur / Admin

I‘m sorry Hans-Georg but this is not a debating forum for different chronologies. If You reject to study and prove Dr. Liebi‘s first and only unfalsified rediscovered strictly biblical chronology You can try to debate with HIM while rejecting to study it beforehand.

Stefan Clasemann

Auteur / Admin

With ME You can only discuss my over 100 discovered archeological evidence exemplars proving this Strict Bible Chronology being the right one but only AFTER you’ve studied and proved all evidence in my work

Stefan Clasemann

Auteur / Admin

because Your debate attempts only bore & bother the ones in this group who HAVE studied the chronology and the complete amount of confirming & proving evidence in my work, thanks for understanding this.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

In other words, the carbon dates of archaeology are to you:

• relevant for the chronology
• and to be taken as given by archaeologists?

For instance, no reinterpreting 1550 BC in carbon to 1470 BC in real time, or things like that, allowed?

Btw, I'd be happy to take a debate with Dr. Liebi on it if you have his contact info.

No contact info

was given. I have tried to contact Dr. Liebi by separately looking him up. He was not in the group when I looked today. A freemason was, so I left the group and unfriended Clasemann.

Informations concernant la suppression de votre commentaire

Vous pourrez voir ces informations jusqu’au 19 oct. 2021.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

1 octobre, 14:33

// Strict Bible Chronology (Dr. Roger Liebi) the Book of Jubilees identifies 1729 BC as the year of a Canaanite arising in enmity as new and foreign ruler over Egypt and enslaving Israel. //

I reckon with a short stay in Egypt proper, 215 years, and that the Exodus was in 1510 BC (Roman martyrology for 25th December). This puts Jacob's moving to Egypt into the year 1725 BC.

Does Dr. Roger Liebi prefer George Syncellus over the Roman martyrology?

Règles du groupe non respectées

1Only topic - Israel in Egypt - related input
only topic - ancient literal or archeological evidence of Israel in Egypt - related input, questions or answers please, thankyou Voir moins

If he places such a weight on chronological questions, I can't see how my point on the chronology of Israel's Exodus is NOT related to Israel in Egypt. It can be added I am at present neither contesting nor confirming the main point, Chanaanites being Hyksos invaders and oppressors.

He pretended I was perfectly free to contact Dr. Liebi, but provided no help for doing so./HGL