![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/07\/MoabMeshaStele.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
Atheist anti-theist Jonathan M. S. Pearce is the main writer on the blog,\u00a0A Tippling Philosopher<\/em><\/a>.\u00a0His\u00a0\u201cAbout\u201d page<\/a>\u00a0states: \u201cPearce is a philosopher, author, blogger, public speaker and teacher from Hampshire in the UK. He specialises in philosophy of religion, but likes to turn\u00a0his hand to science, psychology, politics and anything involved in investigating reality.\u201d His words will be in\u00a0blue<\/span>.<\/span><\/p>\n *****<\/p>\n I am responding to a portion of Pearce\u2019s article,\u00a0Exodus Sidebar: Replying to Armstrong about Camels<\/a>\u00a0(5-24-21). Pearce cites\u00a0Donald B. Redford<\/a>, whom he describes as an\u00a0\u201ceminent Canadian Egyptologist and archaeologist\u201d\u00a0as an ally of his relentless, irrational biblical skepticism:<\/p>\n The author knows of kings in Moab (Jud. 2:12-30 [typo: should be 3:12-30]; 11:25) and Ammon (Jud. 11:13, 28), although these monarchies did not take shape until well into the first millennium B.C. [Egypt, Canaan, and Israel In Ancient Times<\/em><\/a>,\u00a0Princeton University Press, 1992,\u00a0<\/em>p. 277]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Here are the supposedly anachronistic biblical passages in question:<\/p>\n Judges 3:12<\/strong> (RSV) . . .\u00a0and the LORD strengthened Eglon the king of Moab<\/span> against Israel . . .<\/p>\n Judges 3:14<\/strong> . . .\u00a0Eglon the king of Moab<\/span> . . . [same in 3:15, 17]<\/p>\n Judges 11:13<\/strong> . . .\u00a0the king of the Ammonites<\/span> . . . [same in 11:14, 28]<\/p>\n Judges 11:25<\/strong> . . .\u00a0Balak<\/span> the son of Zippor, king of Moab<\/span> . . . [cf. 11:17; Num 22:4, 10]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The web page, \u201cAncient Moabites of Jordan\u201d<\/a> states:<\/p>\n Origin: The Moabites were likely pastoral nomads settling in the trans-Jordanian highlands. They may have been among the raiders referred to as\u00a0Habiru\u00a0<\/a>in the\u00a0Amarna<\/a>\u00a0letters. Whether they were among the nations referred to in the Ancient Egyptian language as Shutu or Shasu is a matter of some debate among scholars. The existence of Moab\u00a0prior<\/i>\u00a0to the rise of the Israelite polity can be seen from the colossal statues erected at\u00a0Luxor<\/a>\u00a0by Pharaoh Ramesses II [r. 1279-1213 BC]. On the base of the second statue in front of the northern pylon of Rameses\u2019 temple [the word] Mu\u2019ab is listed among a series of nations conquered by the pharaoh.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The time-period of Ramesses II is right before the time of the book of Judges [c. 1200- c. 1037 BC]. Thus, we have archaeological evidence of some nation called Moab or Mu-ab in existence, when the book of Judges refers to it. The Luxor statue referencing Moab was written about in\u00a0Journal of Near Eastern Studies<\/em> (Vol. 52, No. 4. Oct., 1993<\/a>).<\/p>\n Precursors of forerunners of the Moabites may have been the Shasu<\/a>. Wikipedia describes them:<\/p>\n The\u00a0Shasu<\/b>\u00a0. . .\u00a0were\u00a0Semitic-speaking\u00a0cattle nomads\u00a0in the\u00a0Southern Levant<\/a>\u00a0from the late\u00a0Bronze Age<\/a>\u00a0to the Early\u00a0Iron Age<\/a>\u00a0or the\u00a0Third Intermediate Period of Egypt<\/a>. They were organized in clans under a tribal chieftain, and were described as\u00a0brigands\u00a0active from the\u00a0Jezreel Valley\u00a0to\u00a0Ashkelon\u00a0and the\u00a0Sinai. . . . [source given for this claim:\u00a0Chieftains of the Highland Clans: A History of Israel in the 12th and 11th Centuries BC<\/em><\/a>, Robert D. Miller II,\u00a0Wipf and Stock; Reprint edition, 2012, p. 95]<\/span><\/p>\n The earliest known reference to the Shasu occurs in a 15th-century BCE list of peoples in the\u00a0Transjordan region<\/a>. The name appears in a list of Egypt\u2019s enemies inscribed on column bases at the temple of\u00a0Soleb<\/a>\u00a0built by\u00a0Amenhotep III<\/a>. Copied later in the 13th century BCE either by\u00a0Seti I<\/a>\u00a0or by\u00a0Ramesses II<\/a>\u00a0at\u00a0Amarah-West<\/a>, the list mentions six groups of Shasu: the Shasu of\u00a0S\u2019rr<\/i>, the Shasu of\u00a0Rbn<\/i>, the Shasu of\u00a0Sm\u2019t<\/i>, the Shasu of\u00a0Wrbr<\/i>, the Shasu of\u00a0Yhw<\/i>, and the Shasu of\u00a0Pysps<\/i>.<\/p>\n Two Egyptian texts, one dated to the period of\u00a0Amenhotep III<\/a>\u00a0(14th century BCE), the other to the age of\u00a0Ramesses II\u00a0(13th century BCE), refer to\u00a0t3 \u01613\u015bw yhw<\/i>,\u00a0i.e. \u201cYahu in the land of the \u0160os\u016b-nomads\u201d, in which\u00a0yhw[3]<\/i>\/<\/i>Yahu\u00a0is a\u00a0toponym<\/a>.<\/i><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u00d8ystein Sakala LaBianca (Ph.D. Brandeis University 1987) is Professor of Anthropology in the Department of Behavioral Sciences and Associate Director of the Institute of Archaeology at Andrews University.\u00a0Randall W. Younker is\u00a0Professor of Archaeology and History of Antiquity at the same university. Together, they wrote the book chapter, \u201cThe Kingdoms of Ammon, Moab, and Edom: The Archaeology of Society in Late Bronze\/Iron Age Transjordan (Ca. 1400-500 BCE)\u201d<\/a> which is part of the book, The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land<\/em><\/a> (edited by Thomas E. Levy, London: Leicester University Press, 1995). Here are their opinions as to possible \u201ckings\u201d in the 11th and 12th c. BC in Moab and Ammon (present-day Jordan):<\/p>\n [T]he Ammonites, Moabites and Edomites were not true nation-states, but rather, are better described as \u2018tribal kingdoms\u2019. . . .<\/span><\/p>\n Nelson Glueck<\/a> . . . define[d] the territories of their respective kingdoms from a string of border forts which he believed had already been built to protect their boundaries by the end of the thirteenth century BCE. Glueck\u2019s conclusions were generally accepted by the scholars of his day . . .<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n When the authors discuss the Edomites (from the same general region), we see that their political situation was similar to the Moabites and Edomites and that the biblical accounts accurately reflect it:<\/span><\/p>\n Interestingly, the greater emphasis on network generating range-tied tribalism in the environmentally more severe territory of Edom may receive support from the \u2018Edomite king list\u2019 in Gen. 36. Scholars have long noted that none of the kings in this list was the son of his predecessor, and that each king is attributed to a different city. Moreover, these kings are introduced as \u2018the kings who reigned in<\/em> Edom, not kings of<\/em> Edom\u2019 . . . Regardless of when one would date this text . . . , it accurately reflects the proliferation of tribes and tribal chieftains which is typical of an ecologically hazardous region such as Edom.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Here are the relevant biblical passages:<\/span><\/p>\n Genesis 36:15-19, 21\u00a0<\/strong>These are the chiefs of the sons of Esau<\/span>. The sons of El\u2019iphaz the first-born of Esau: the chiefs<\/span> Teman, Omar, Zepho, Kenaz,\u00a0[16] Korah, Gatam, and Am\u2019alek; these are the chiefs of El\u2019iphaz in the land of Edom<\/span>; they are the sons of Adah.\u00a0[17] These are the sons of Reu\u2019el, Esau\u2019s son: the chiefs<\/span> Nahath, Zerah, Shammah, and Mizzah; these are the chiefs of Reu\u2019el in the land of Edom<\/span>; they are the sons of Bas\u2019emath, Esau\u2019s wife.\u00a0[18] These are the sons of Oholiba\u2019mah, Esau\u2019s wife: the chiefs<\/span> Je\u2019ush, Jalam, and Korah; these are the chiefs<\/span> born of Oholiba\u2019mah the daughter of Anah, Esau\u2019s wife.\u00a0[19] These are the sons of Esau (that is, Edom), and these are their chiefs<\/span>. . . .\u00a0[21] Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan; these are the chiefs of the Horites<\/span>, the sons of Se\u2019ir in the land of Edom.<\/p>\n Genesis 36:29-31, 40, 43\u00a0<\/strong>These are the chiefs of the Horites<\/span>: the chiefs<\/span> Lotan, Shobal, Zib\u2019eon, Anah,\u00a0[30] Dishon, Ezer, and Dishan; these are the chiefs of the Horites<\/span>, according to their clans<\/span> in the land of Se\u2019ir.\u00a0[31] These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom<\/span>, before any king reigned over the Israelites. . . . [40] These are the names of the chiefs of Esau<\/span>, . . . [43]\u00a0Mag\u2019diel, and Iram; these are the chiefs of Edom<\/span> (that is, Esau, the father of Edom), according to their dwelling places in the land of their possession<\/span>. [\u201creigned\u201d also appears ten times in Genesis 36<\/a>: obviously referring to either a chief or king: 36:31 [2]; 32-39]<\/p>\n Exodus 15:15\u00a0<\/strong>Now are the chiefs of\u00a0<\/b>Edom<\/span>\u00a0dismayed;\u00a0the leaders of Moab<\/span>, trembling seizes them; . . .<\/p>\n 1 Chronicles 1:43, 51-54<\/strong>\u00a0These are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom<\/span> before any king reigned over the Israelites: . . . [51]\u00a0And Hadad died. The chiefs of Edom<\/span> were: chiefs<\/span> Timna, Al\u2019iah, Jetheth,\u00a0[52] Oholiba\u2019mah, Elah, Pinon,\u00a0[53] Kenaz, Teman, Mibzar,\u00a0[54] Mag\u2019di-el, and Iram; these are the chiefs of Edom<\/span>.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Everything here strikingly fits what we know from archaeology. The texts refer to \u201cchiefs\u201d (i.e., chieftains<\/em>) of tribes \u201cin\u201d Edom (\u201cchiefs of El\u2019iphaz\u201d;\u00a0 \u201cchiefs of Reu\u2019el\u201d; \u201cchiefs of the Horites\u201d; \u201cchiefs of Edom . . . according to their dwelling places in the land of their possession\u201d). This fits with the understanding of Edom at this time being a collection of \u201ctribal kingdoms.\u201d In the two times they are referred to as \u201ckings\u201d (Gen 36:31; 1 Chr 1:43) the text says \u201ckings who reigned in<\/em> the land of Edom\u201d: which is clearly synonymous in context to \u201cchiefs\u201d rather than a king of all<\/em> of Edom. I think this gives us a clue as to the meaning of \u201cking of Moab\u201d and \u201cking of the Ammonites\u201d a little later in the book of Judges. Exodus 15:15 in an earlier period refers to \u201cleaders of Moab\u201d rather than kings, which is perhaps referring to chieftains also. But our authors have more to say about these matters:<\/span><\/p>\n Although it is true that an ancient Near Eastern \u2018king\u2019 (milk, malik, malk, sharru<\/em>) could include the head of an empire, state or tribe . . . there is evidence that the individuals who appropriated the title generally laid claim to power and influence that surpassed that of mere local bedouin shiekhs or village headmen. To see more precisely what the nature of this difference in power was,\u00a0 we shall take a closer look at the ninth century BCE polity of Mesha of Moab.<\/span><\/p>\n According to the Mesha inscription . . . Mesha identified himself as Dayboni<\/em>, that is, a Dibonite. His people were called Dibonites and his place of residence was the city of Dibon . . . . However, he clearly claimed authority beyond the boundaries of his home city and people, for he was not merely the ruler of Dibon or the Dibonites; rather, he was the \u2018king of Moab\u2019. During times of external threat he could call upon \u2018men from Moab\u2019, that is, individuals from beyond his kin circle of \u2018obedient\u2019 or \u2018loyal\u2019 Dibonites. His ability to call up the \u2018men from Moab\u2019 clearly elevated him beyond the level of a local Dibonite sheikh or chief. Even Mesha\u2019s enemies, the Israelites, who knew Mesha primarily as a \u2018cattle magnate\u2019 (noged<\/em>, 2 Kgs 3:4), also recognized him as \u2018king of Moab\u2019 [\u201cNow Mesha king of Moab was a sheep breeder . . .\u201d: RSV]. . . . Mesha does not appear to have had jurisdiction over all land that was traditionally considered to be the land of Moab.\u00a0<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n We see, then (assuming the correctness of the above anthropological \/ archaeological analysis), that the biblical use of \u201cking of Moab\u201d and \u201cking of the Ammonites\u201d is perfectly in keeping with what we know of those places at that time. It is not<\/strong><\/em> a biblical anachronism.<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/span><\/p>\n Related Reading<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n Edomites: Archaeology Confirms the Bible (As Always)<\/a> [6-10-21]<\/span><\/p>\n Bible & Archaeology \/ Bible & Science (A Collection)<\/a><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Photo credit:<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0Mesha Stele<\/a>: stele of Mesha, king of Moab, recording his victories against the Kingdom of Israel. Basalt, ca. 800 BCE. From Dhiban, now in Jordan<\/span> [Wikimedia Commons<\/a> \/ Creative Commons<\/a>\u00a0Attribution-Share Alike\u00a03.0 Unported<\/a>,\u00a02.5 Generic<\/a>,\u00a02.0 Generic<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a01.0 Generic<\/a>\u00a0license]<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/span><\/p>\n Summary<\/em>:\u00a0Atheist anti-theist Jonathan MS Pearce thinks that the book of Judges referring to Moabite & Ammonite kings is historical anachronism. I enlist archaeology to disprove this.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Tags<\/em>: alleged Bible contradictions,\u00a0alleged biblical anachronisms,\u00a0Ammonite kings,\u00a0Ammonites,\u00a0ancient Hebrews,\u00a0ancient Israelites,\u00a0ancient Jews,\u00a0anti-theism,\u00a0archaeology & the Bible,\u00a0archaeology & the Old Testament,\u00a0atheists & the Bible,\u00a0Bible \u201ccontradictions\u201d,\u00a0Bible \u201cdifficulties\u201d,\u00a0Bible & History,\u00a0biblical accuracy,\u00a0biblical anachronisms,\u00a0biblical archaeology,\u00a0Bronze Age,\u00a0Hebrews,\u00a0Holy Bible,\u00a0infallibility,\u00a0Iron Age,\u00a0Late Bronze Age,\u00a0Moabite & Ammonite Kings,\u00a0Moabite kings,\u00a0Moabites,\u00a0Old Testament & history<\/span><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Broad Definition of \u201cKing\u201d in the Ancient Near East, + Biblical Use of\u00a0 \u201cChiefs of Edom\u201d\u00a0 Atheist anti-theist Jonathan M. S. Pearce is the main writer on the blog,\u00a0A Tippling Philosopher.\u00a0His\u00a0\u201cAbout\u201d page\u00a0states: \u201cPearce is a philosopher, author, blogger, public speaker and teacher from Hampshire in the UK. He specialises in philosophy of religion, but […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":58450,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[124,448],"tags":[4129,14227,14273,14260,14254,13772,13769,13766,1043,13841,14233,1472,525,524,170,1661,13861,638,13909,14270,13916,14267,3141,535,140,14218,4107,14236,14278,14276,14263,14257,14251,14230],"class_list":["post-58423","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-atheism-agnosticism","category-jews-judaism-old-testament","tag-alleged-bible-contradictions","tag-alleged-biblical-anachronisms","tag-ammon","tag-ammonite-kings","tag-ammonites","tag-ancient-hebrews","tag-ancient-israelites","tag-ancient-jews","tag-anti-theism","tag-archaeology-the-bible","tag-archaeology-the-old-testament","tag-atheists-the-bible","tag-bible-contradictions","tag-bible-difficulties","tag-bible-history","tag-biblical-accuracy","tag-biblical-anachronisms","tag-biblical-archaeology","tag-bronze-age","tag-chiefs-of-edom","tag-edom","tag-edomite-chiefs","tag-hebrews","tag-holy-bible","tag-infallibility","tag-iron-age","tag-jonathan-ms-pearce","tag-late-bronze-age","tag-mesha-stele","tag-moab","tag-moabite-ammonite-kings","tag-moabite-kings","tag-moabites","tag-old-testament-history"],"yoast_head":"\n