Archaeology finish dating letland dating sider

Traditional dates for the Old Testament stories involving Egypt remain unconfirmed by archaeology and actually contradict Scripture.

The characters of the Bible stories left no archaeological evidence of their existence in the times traditionally assigned to them.

Jean Champollion,18 the father of Egyptology, unwittingly gave support to biblically inconsistent chronology when he erroneously identified pharaoh Shoshenq as the Shishak of the Bible.

Champollion found an inscription about Shoshenq, founder of the 22nd dynasty, at the temple of Karnak.

archaeology finish dating-77

Eusebius, the fourth-century historian who quoted Manetho extensively, did not believe that Manetho intended for his regnal years to be added up consecutively. Manetho’s history is also inconsistent with contemporary Egyptian sources. Because Manetho’s history contradicts actual Egyptian records from the time of the pharaohs, historians should not consider Manetho’s history authoritative. Historians combine the Sothic cycle dates with Manetho’s history to get traditional Egyptian dates. History gives no hint that the Egyptians regularly dated important events from the rising of Sothis.Egyptology, originally expected to support the history recorded in the Old Testament, has produced a chronology that contradicts the Bible.This so-called traditional Egyptian chronology would have the pyramids predate the flood of Noah’s day; such cannot be the case, for pyramids could never withstand a worldwide flood.However, both Manetho’s history and the Sothic theory have flaws that make them an unreliable foundation for chronology.Ptolomy II commissioned a priest named Manetho to compile a history of Egypt.

Leave a Reply