A Misleading Handbook to the OT, Vol. 2 (-reviewing and debunking atheist [etc] mythology)
Continuing from volume 1 (see my 1-star review), Joshua Bowen presents more misleading atheist (etc) mythology in this volume 2. Again, as with his previous books, the print and dimensions, and sentence spacing are oversized, which means the oversized book would be much smaller with a corrected sizing (at least half the size it is, maybe one-third size). Unfortunately, he still uses an immature sarcasm at times – “.. he determined that the city was destroyed around 1400 B.C.E. (go figure)” (page 93) and, “.. we will ‘dedicate’ ourselves (I’m so funny) to investigating ..” (page 216).
And, he writes on page 19, “.. two spies reach Jericho and enter the home of a prostitute named Rahab (what were they doing there we wonder? Probably not asking for directions, if you catch my drift ..” (cf. pages 83, 249). Unfortunately, he only uses that innuendo for his charge there and no text support. But, “.. Rahab was in charge of what was likely the fortress’s tavern or hostel … Traveling caravans and royal messengers would commonly stay overnight at such places during this period. The Code of Hammurabi parallels what we see in Joshua 2, complete with a female inn keeper: ‘If conspirators meet in the house of a [female] tavern-keeper, and these conspirators are not captured and delivered to the court, the tavern-keeper shall be put to death’ [§109] … What about the idea of a sexual liaison? The book of Joshua goes out of its way to state that no such activity took place. The text says the spies ‘stayed there’ not that they ‘stayed with her’ (2:1 NIV). And it says they ‘came into the house of .. Rahab’ (2:1) not that they ‘went in to Rahab,’ which would imply a sexual relationship. Consider Samson, by contrast, who ‘saw a harlot .. and went in to her’ (Judg. 16:1)” ( - Is God A Moral Monster?, 2011, page 177; by Paul Copan, Ph.D.).
On page 11, Bowen misquotes Genesis 2: “.. God created another set of animals in Genesis 2 that are referred to as ‘all the animals’.” The phrase “all the animals” does not appear in Gen. 2. Even his own translation and description in Volume 1 does not use the phrase “all the animals,” pages 173, 176-7. If you wish to read it in a literal way, Gen. 2:19, 20 refers to every beast and bird “God had formed” (ESV) (as in had already formed), which sounds like a recounting or reference back to the Gen. 1 general creation (1:20, 24-5), and they were brought to the man to name in the garden. It does not appear to be saying every animal was generated in the garden. This is also contra page 10 where Bowen has “Animals were created in Genesis 1 before humans, but after humans in Genesis 2” (cf. Vol. 1, page 176) – but, chapter 2 doesn’t say they were created in the garden, it simply recounts the earlier creation and that they were brought to the man in the garden. Similarly, he has a misleading graph on page 174 of Volume 1 listing the term “vegetation” for Gen. 1 and 2, making it sound like the same thing. But, only certain types of plants were generated in the garden/for the garden in 2:8, while 1:11 has more types of plants in the general creation.
He writes on page 34 about 1 Samuel 15:3: “The command is to annihilate everyone … There is no question that the divine command to annihilate the Amalekites was not an exaggeration ..” But, this is strange for Bowen to declare; he also agrees there is use of bravado in war texts – “.. there is clearly hyperbolic language in the Hebrew Bible – as throughout most of ancient Near Eastern literature … This could explain why, in certain passages, X group is said to be ‘completely wiped out,’ but the same group shows up again later in the text … there is little doubt that rhetoric and hyperbole are employed in the Old Testament conquest narratives ..” (pages 243-5, 248). Bravado is also the case with 1 Samuel 15:3 (Bowen misses it): “.. the Amalekites reappear in statements made by the same narrator (1 Samuel 27:8; 30:1-2, 18; 2 Sam 1:1) and elsewhere (1 Chron 4:41-43; .. Esther 3:1; 8:3; 9:24) .. The continued existence of the Amalekites strongly indicates that 1 Samuel 15 uses hyperbole ..” ( - Bloody, Brutal, and Barbaric?, 2019, page 212; co-author: Gordon Oeste, Ph.D.)
On page 23, Bowen says God caused the sun to “stand still in the sky for an entire day (Joshua 10:12-14).” But, there is likely a translation issue, and it appears it is asking for a brief lapse to interfere with Amorite astro-superstition – in order to dishearten their attack: “The passage explicitly notes that the sun is over Gibeon and the moon over the Valley of Aijalon. Since Gibeon is east and Aijalon is west we must conclude that Joshua prays in the morning … the orb of the sun is fully visible above the eastern horizon line and the orb of the [full] moon is fully visible above the western horizon line for about four minutes. When we explore ancient celestial omen texts, we find that this is one of the most important times of the month for getting an important omen … Opposition on the wrong day was believed to be an omen of all sorts of disaster .. on the day of Joshua’s battle, he requests that the sun and moon would not give an omen that the Amorites would have hoped for … When the moon and/or sun do not wait, the moon sinks over the horizon before the sun rises and no opposition occurs. When the moon and sun wait or stand, it indicates that the opposition does occur .. they [Amorites] would have been hoping that opposition would not occur … The terminology suggests he [Joshua] requested that the sun and moon wait or stand, in opposition … the sun and moon do not act as they would on a ‘full-length’ day … when opposition occurred, it indicated that the month did not contain ‘full-length’ days” ( - NKJV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible, 2017, pages 396-7 with Faith, Tradition and History, 1994, pages 188-9; A.R. Millard, co-editor; John Walton, Ph.D., contributor). “I translate the prayer of Joshua in Josh 10:12-13 as follows: O sun, wait over Gibeon and moon over the valley of Aijalon. So the sun waited and the moon stood, before the nation took vengeance on its enemies .. ‘The sun stood in the midst of the sky and did not hurry to set as on a [favorable] day of full length’ ..” ( -ibid., 1994, pages 186-7).
On page 93, Bowen points to Kenyon’s excavation of Jericho in the 1950’s attempting to show it does not match the Biblical description. Jericho is part of the conquest of Canaan in the Bible (Joshua 6), c. 1400 BC. He writes, “She concluded that .. the walls of the city had not collapsed in 1400 … ‘Jericho had not been inhabited in 1400 BCE’ ..” Yet, he does not point out her flawed methods; for example, she dated Jericho based on pottery that was not there, instead of the pottery that was there.
Actually, Kenyon’s work was finally published decades later and re-evaluated. The New York Times summarizes: “After years of doubt among archeologists, a new analysis of excavations has yielded a wide range of evidence supporting the biblical account about the fall of Jericho ... A study of ceramic remnants, royal scarabs, carbon-14 dating, seismic activity in the region and even some ruins of tumbled walls produced what is being called impressive evidence that the fortified city was destroyed in the Late Bronze Age, about 1400 B.C. The prevailing view among scholars has been that the city was destroyed some 150 years earlier [1550 BC] and thus did not exist at the time of the Israelite invasion .. 1400 B.C.” ( - NY Times, Feb 22, 1990, Section A, page 8). For greater detail, see Biblical Archaeology Review, March 1990, pages 44-58; article by Bryant Wood, Ph.D. – “The pottery, stratigraphic considerations, scarab data and a Carbon-14 date all point to a destruction of the city around the end of Late Bronze I, about 1400 B.C.” (page 57).
On page 236, Bowen also focuses on Canaanite child sacrifices in his book for an example of the Bible not matching discoveries. The Bible has the practice of child sacrifice by Canaanites as a reason for Israel’s conquest of Canaan in Lev. 18:3, 21, 24; 20:2, 23-4; Deut. 9:4; the conquest is considered by some (and me) to have occurred in the 2nd millennium BC, around 1400 BC. He writes, “as we saw in chapter three of Volume 1, the claims of widespread child sacrifice cannot be substantiated by the evidence outside of the biblical texts.” And, in Volume 1 he writes in part, “.. the primary evidence for the practice of child sacrifice among the Canaanites – the Punic material – comes from the 1st millennium B.C.E., from the 7th through the 1st c. B.C.E. … there is insufficient extra-biblical evidence to support the biblical claim of grossly immoral population groups that practiced child sacrifice in Canaan during the 2nd millennium B.C.E. … the archaeological evidence that we have for child sacrifice does not come from the 2nd millennium, but from the middle and latter portions of the 1st millennium B.C.E. The evidence itself also does not come from the land of Canaan, but from Carthage and Punic colonies. Thus, we have no solid evidence of child sacrifice in Canaan proper ..” (pages 135, 137).
Actually, evidence of child sacrifice was found at Jericho (which is inside Canaan) as noted by excavator Kenyon, contrary to Bowen (etc); not sure what date is assigned to it, but it is pre-conquest and pre-1st millennium BC. She writes: “.. the earlier people had one thing in common with the later one. They also had a cult of skulls, … the skulls are found arranged in groups, in one case closely packed in a circle, all looking inwards … there is an unpleasant suggestion of infant sacrifices, for beneath a curious bath-like structure of mud-plaster there is, besides one complete infant burial, a collection of infant skulls with the neck vertebrae attached, showing that the heads were cut off and not merely collected from burials” ( - Digging Up Jericho, 1957, page 72; by Kathleen Kenyon).
And, evidence of child sacrifice was found at Gezer in Canaan at a Canaanite High Place by Macalister/Dever, but it was strangely later redated to not match with the Bible time (this may be another date correction waiting to happen, as with Jericho). It still dates to the 2nd millennium contrary to Bowen. And, it was (mis?)reinterpreted to be a sacrificial celebration instead of a religious sacrifice (still sounds like it would fit into what the Israelites were upset about) - “.. Macalister [excavated 1902-9] also discovered several burial jars containing the bones of infants. Macalister estimated the infants were less than one week old. Some of the infants’ bodies had been burned … The Gezer High Place probably celebrates and commemorates a covenant or contract … a covenant of tribes or towns” ( - Biblical Archaeology Review, January 2015, pages 64-5). Further, “Macalister .. interpreting the stelae as typical Canaanite asheroth and construing burial jars in the vicinity (now known to be earlier) as evidence for child sacrifice … renewed investigation of the high place in 1968 (field V) demonstrated that it was constructed in the Middle Bronze Age IIC [c. 1650-1500 BC] ..” ( - The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land, 1993, Vol. 2, pages 496-7, 501; article by William Dever, Ph.D.). Archaeologist Joel Kramer, notes: “.. in his excavation report, Macalister found a pit which he described being filled with a great number of bones of human beings in a confused heap. Nearby, was the skeleton of a young girl who had evidently been sawn asunder .. And along with this, found the skulls of two other girls who had been decapitated, and this could be determined by the cut marks through the vertebrae … The many idols found in the area provided evidence that this was a cultic site. Among the many idols found was a bronze serpent representing Molech, the king of the Amorite gods … the secular agenda, which basically teaches that man by nature is basically good, couldn’t have a bunch of Canaanites running around sacrificing children. And, so, the later interpretations were these alliances [covenants] and were these other explanations [instead] of what this evidence actually was ..” ( - from Joel Kramer’s You Tube; episode title: Excavated Canaanite High Place – “the sin of the Amorites”).
Bowen writes, “.. stories like the Exodus from Egypt .. are not supported by the archaeological and historical evidence at our disposal” (page 406), and he quotes Grabbe that “There is nothing in Egyptian texts that could be related to the story in the book of Exodus” (page 170; cf. 197, 204). Yet, there are good reasons why Egyptian texts do not specifically name the Exodus: “.. the most popular reason for rejecting the veracity of the exodus events, namely that nowhere in Egypt’s vast records is it documented. However, this dearth can be explained by the lack of Egyptian censuses and the tendency to write comparatively little about foreigners, especially slaves … the proud Egyptians should not be expected to have documented their own humiliating defeat, which would smear their records and tarnish the glorious legacy ..” ( - Origins of the Hebrews, 2021, page 185; by Douglas Petrovich, Ph.D.)
But, strikingly, corroborative matches have been found. Here, the main Egyptian city where the Israelites started was found: “[Genesis] 47:5a and 47:27 identify the place Jacob and his sons settled as ‘the region of Goshen,’ whereas 47:11 calls it ‘the region of Ramesses’ .. centuries before the city of Pi Ramesse was built … this statement is clearly recognized by scholars as an anachronism. A later biblical redactor [or copyist/scribe] has amended .. the text to locate that part of the Egyptian delta .. in terms of the geography or toponymy of his own day. He did so because the people living in his time would have known the location of Ramesses but probably not its older name of Goshen. So the redactor helps out his readers … Archaeologists have found no evidence for a large population of ‘Asiatics’ (Semitic-speaking people from the ancient Middle East) [includes Israelites] living in the .. city of Pi Ramesse – but beneath the expansive southern quarter of that Ramesside foundation lies a much older city which was almost entirely populated by Asiatics originating from Canaan .. named Avaris [in Egyptian] .. the name ‘Ramesses’ was synonymous with the city ..” ( - Exodus: Myth or History?, 2015, pages 20-2; by David Rohl, Egyptologist).
“.. the building of the city of Ramesses mentioned in Exodus 1:11. The Hebrews are making bricks to build this city of Ramesses … Most scholars will say if you look at the city of Ramesses, there are no Asiatics [Hebrews] there. There are no Semites … But dig down a little bit deeper and you do find a city full of Asiatics … this particular mention of the city of Ramesses – the building of Ramesses – is what we call an anachronism. It’s something that’s been added into the text later .. what the editor [copyist/scribe] is basically saying is, ‘This is the place where the Israelites built the store city, and we know it today as Ramesses’ … the Bible’s use of the word Ramesses might not be connected to a specific date but only to a place … The people of the Bible would’ve known where Ramesses was and where therefore their ancestors actually built the city. In the ancient times it was called Avaris [the Egyptian name] ..” ( - Patterns of Evidence: Exodus, 2015, pages 85, 117; by Tim Mahoney; interviewing: James Hoffmeier, Ph.D. and David Rohl, Egyptologist). “.. Hoffmeier also sees evidence of Semitic slavery in Egypt. ‘We have the depiction in the tomb of Rekhmire. And there we can see POWs, Semites from both Canaan and Syria, working alongside prisoners of war from Nubia .. they are making bricks, overseen by Egyptian taskmasters with sticks. Exodus 1:14 says they actually worked in brick and mortar and agriculture. We have agricultural scenes, especially work in vineyards, where the workers again are Semites, Nubians … So interestingly, the very two areas the Bible says the Israelites were forced to work in, agriculture and construction work, are the very two places we see this sort of work going on in private tombs in Egypt in the 15th century BC’ … what happened at Avaris? .. We’ve got a situation of prosperity followed by a lack of prosperity and a shortage of life. We begin to see in the graves of these people Harris Lines in the bones, which indicate shortage of food and nutrients. These people suddenly have become impoverished, and they are dying at an [earlier] age .. What would explain this dramatic change? .. The obvious answer is slavery” ( - Patterns of Evidence: Exodus, 2015, pages 155-6; by Tim Mahoney; interviewing: James Hoffmeier, Ph.D. and David Rohl, Egyptologist).
“Commonly called the Brooklyn Papyrus, it’s a middle Kingdom Egyptian papyrus with a list of slave names … 70 percent of them are Semitic names. And some of these names actually occur in the Bible: Menahem; Issachar and Asher, the names of two of the tribes of Israel; Shiphrah, one of the Hebrew midwives in the Exodus story … This is real evidence for the time when the Israelites were in Egypt as slaves … There are ninety-five servants listed in the document .. The implication of this large number of Asiatic domestic slaves found on a Theban estate in Upper (i.e., southern) Egypt during the reign of Sobekhotep III [c. 1740 BC] (when the papyrus was written) is quite obvious. The Semitic population had indeed spread throughout the land – just as the Bible states [Exo. 1:9] ..” ( - Patterns of Evidence: Exodus, 2015, pages 161-3; by Tim Mahoney; interviewing: David Rohl, Egyptologist with Exodus: Myth or History?, 2015, page 135; by David Rohl).
It appears the name Moses has been found on an early rock inscription from Egypt – on the Sinai Peninsula, at a turquois mine, near the time of the Exodus. The rock is named Sinai 361, written by a polytheistic Hebrew. The ancient writer gives credit to “the Lady,” referring to the area deity (Hathor/Ba’alath): “Stunning extra-biblical affirmation of these societally-devastating events is found within the text of Sinai 361 from Serabit el-Khadim [at a turquois mine] .., which biblical chronology dates to 1446 BC, although there is no date inscribed on the stone. The inscription concludes with these words, ‘.. Our bound servitude had lingered. Moses then provoked astonishment. It is a year of astonishment because of the Lady’ ” ( - Origins of the Hebrews, 2021, page 209, 266; by Douglas Petrovich, Ph.D. - Syro-Palestinian Archaeology/Egyptian Language, Professor of Biblical History and Exegesis, Brookes Bible College, Missouri).
Shortened review due to space limit.