Thanks as I have been too lazy to do that research.

I'm not very familiar with these discussions.

What evidence is lacking that would be expected? The Exodus would have been 3,000ish years ago. I guess pottery-type artifacts?

Awesome stuff and I would love to hear what you've come across. I'm not well read in the subject, but from what I've seen in the last few years there is more and more physical evidence for King David's reign coming out all the time.

In regards to the Exodus, I've read some very smart people that think everyone is looking in the wrong place. They contend that the Israelites crossed further south and that we should be looking in the northwestern deserts of Saudi Arabia for evidence. Unfortunately it is very difficult if not impossible to get permission for this sort of research from the Saudi government. There are also widespread anecdotes of local Muslims officials and natives destroying any found evidence that supports any non-Islamic history. This is not a localized issue. It is a well-known phenomenon for people trying to study the Byzantines in Turkey or the Persians in Iran as well.

Apropos of your research, what about the alternative view that Mt. Sinai was actually in Arabia? I understand some artifacts found in the Red Sea suggest an alternative crossing site. I am afraid that much Biblical research of the late 19th/20th century was shaded by skepticism in the historicity of the period because of anti-supernaturalistic bias. Not unusual, because we are all prisoners of our experiences.

So I've read through your posts and all of your claims and references just feel too vague to even begin addressing. You talk about confirming or disproving "The Exodus" without bothering to nail down just what you mean by that all the while seeming to exploit allowances by some historians that parts of the narrative could be true. For instance, no one is disputing that Canaanite people lived in Egypt during the time period. The two locations are so close that of course there was some intermingling. Could some of them have been slaves? Sure. Does that prove any specific claim from the Bible? I wouldn't say so.

Please define exactly what you mean when you refer to the Exodus. Things like:

• Approximate date
• Number of people involved
• Which parts of the Biblical narrative you allege really happen
• Which parts of the Biblical narrative you think are fictional
• Etc.

I've probably read many of the same books you reference. Which pro-Exodus book would you point to as the most convincing, in your opinion?

Thanks. This is fascinating.

Please keep it coming.

dermdoc said:

---

Thanks. This is fascinating.

Please keep it coming.

---

Agree, good stuff.

Great posts, and this looks to be a pretty cool hobby you've discovered for yourself.
This seems like one of those things that your predisposition influences your opinion very much. Skeptics and non-believers are going to see proof of a non Exodus everywhere. And Believers will see the opposite. I think it's obvious which of the two mindsets you are looking at the evidence with.
Let a dummy like me with the opposite mindset cherry pick a few of your posts to poke holes at:

• Just because Jericho was seen to be destroyed in excavation doesn't mean that it happened in the way or for the reasons the Bible described. The Bible could have used the real Jericho destruction and fabricated it's own details to tell a story. Which is a pretty common method used at the time by historians. Basically the Bible would be early historical fiction.
• You look skeptically at dating methods of archeologists. Which isn't wrong to do, they are doing something really hard and often have some tolerances in their estimations that can make their dates look bad. But there should be equal, if not more, skepticism of dates derived from the Bible. I don't put any trust in the dates from the Bible.
• You claim a million people were involved. I'm assuming you mean a million Jewish slaves. You have good evidence for Jewish slavery in Egypt, but none of it points to the scale of a million slaves:

Quote:

---

A papyrus listing the slaves on an Egyptian estate. Approximately 20-30 or so of them have Hebrew names.
Indications of Hebrew slaves throughout Egypt, not just Avaris.
One of the distinctive forms of pottery found throughout Egypt and Canaan at that time (Middle Bronze - Late Bronze Ages) is called Tell el-Yahudiyeh ware. What does Tell el-Yahudiyeh mean? "Mound of the Jew."
A major canal built west of the Nile, possibly during that time period, is called Bar-Yusef. It is an ancient tradition in Egypt that it was built by Joseph when he was vizier of all Egypt.
A major palace was found at Avaris, constructed during the time period that Joseph would have been there. Manfred Bietak ascribes it to a "Semitic" high official in Egypt. Its central room, open to the sky, has twelve pillars on each side. Outside, in a cemetery, are 12 significant tombs. The largest tomb of all has a larger-than-life statue of a Semitic high official. The statue was later dismembered. Interestingly, the bones from the tomb are gone, even though tomb robbers apparently rarely remove bones. Many scholars, including mainstream scholars, suspect that this was the palace of Joseph, the tomb was his, the statue was of him, and his bones were removed for reburial in Canaan, just as described in the Bible.
Finally, what scholars see happening in Egypt during the time of the "Sojourn" accords exactly with the Biblical account. That is, the Levant was undergoing dramatic climate change, specifically droughts, and thousands of Canaanites and Semites abandoned it for Egypt.

---

• That's one of the biggest hurdles I see to prove Exodus. A million people traveling together that distance for that long would leave an unmistakable swath of bones, pottery, writings, destruction, etc. in their wake. By the way, what's you opinion on length of travel and length of time?
• None of your very interesting list of contextual confirmations is very convincing pro or con Exodus. They all sound like appropriate things to include if you consider the source were a bunch of dudes living near Egypt when it was the cultural center of the known world. Your Contextual Conventions post.

I'm getting a little out of my depth here, but I'll try to answer some of your points/questions.

Quote:

---

Secondly, there are only two viable candidates for its destroyers: Egypt and Israel, and there is no rational basis for believing that Egypt did the dirty deed.

---

Why did it have to be destroyed by neighboring countries? It could just have easily been an earthquake, mud slide, other geological problems, or even bad engineering. There could be simpler explanations.

Quote:

---

And when you say that writing fictional stories after the fact to fit the situation that previously occurred was a "pretty common method used at the time by historians", could you be more specific? I am not aware of that practice, nor of any historians at all from that time, outside of the Biblical writers.

---

Many if not most, of the earliest historians we know the name of and can attribute works to incorporated all kinds of mythology in their works to match the style of the time. If these guys are doing it, then you know the sources of Exodus would have been doing it too. Who gets the credit for writing Exodus? Is it Moses?

• Herodotus is neither a mere gatherer of data nor a simple teller of tales he is both. While Herodotus is certainly concerned with giving accurate accounts of events, this does not preclude for him the insertion of powerful mythological elements into his narrative, elements which will aid him in expressing the truth of matters under his study. Thus to understand what Herodotus is doing in the Histories, we must not impose strict demarcations between the man as mythologist and the man as historian, or between the work as myth and the work as history. As James Romm has written, Herodotus worked under a common ancient Greek cultural assumption that the way events are remembered and retold (e.g. in myths or legends) produces a valid kind of understanding, even when this retelling is not entirely factual. For Herodotus, then, it takes both myth and history to produce truthful understanding.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herodotus
• In labelling Persians as centaurs through the mouth of Cyrus, Xenophon plays upon the popular post-Persian-war propagandistic paradigm of using mythological imagery to represent the Greco-Persian conflict.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenophon
• In India, a country he never visited, Strabo described small flying reptiles that were long with a snake-like body and bat-like wings, winged scorpions, and other mythical creatures along with those that were factual. Other historians, such as Herodotus, Aristotle, and Flavius Josephus, mentioned similar creatures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strabo
• Many more

Quote:

---

Also, how do you know that we haven't found evidence of their travels?

---

Because then there would no question and no point of your research.

Quote:

---

A million people traveling together might leave an unmistakeable swath. But then again, perhaps not

---

I've always assumed a million people traveling a distance like that would bring with them maybe 2-3 times their numbers of beast of burden and domesticated livestock. 4 million animals leave Egypt needing to bring food, water, etc. for their travels.
A million Jews leave Egypt, how many arrive at their destination? 2-3 times the initial number on the low end, plus the population growth of their animals. On the low end, 12 million animals traveled together towards the end and we never noticed it?
Me including writings in my list was dumb, didn't think it through.

Quote:

---

There are lots of indications that the Israelites carried the bones of their dead with them for burial in Canaan.

---

They carried the bones of their dead? After 40 years of travel I could easily be carrying the skeletons of 4 grandparents, two parents, a sibling or two, and multiple children that unfortunately died young. That's maybe 12 skeletons, 2400 individual bones. How am I carrying all that? Is my donkey carrying that, including all the bones of his own ancestors, also including the bones of the animals I ate for 40 years. Multiply that out for the entire population. They have got to be the most ecologically conscious humans ever, or we passed the line of believability a while ago.

I established I'm generally a skeptic, but the size of the traveling party you are talking about being unnoticed seems ridiculous to me. I'd believe a couple thousand.

Patterns of Evidence: Exodus

I would recommend this video to everyone in the discussion if one can find where's it's located.

It's nice when science compliments scripture.
But it isn't the main role of either to do so for each other.

I'll give it a small go.


Herodotus was a Greek. He was the first to basically birth the historical record using systematic investigations as we know them. Herodotus lived from around 484 to 425 BCE. The Egyptians probably didn't catch on to this kind of recorded history before the Greeks. The Exodus may be dated around 1446 BCE, according to 1 Kings. Either way, it was way before the paradigm shift in how history was more faithfully recorded.

Even the Greeks had some history in the writings of Homer that we recognize. But a lot of it is questionable.

Homer being alive is usually placed around 800 BCE.
But some believe the Iliad was written in around 2000 BCE. Some even question Homer's existence. And it's a little easier, I would think, to find evidence from 800 BCE than it is to find evidence from somewhere around 1446 BCE and the Exodus.

Once again, the main way history was used by Homer and others before Herodotus was in the form of teaching a type of existential existence and was broader than mere dates and raw facts. Even Homer gives no dates. The Torah does.

Plus, only a few were historians. Even fewer could even read and write. A lot of it was written down later from the use of the oral tradition. Just as the Greeks used the oral tradition to create their mythology, the Torah used the oral tradition to convey spiritual or theological truths about God's relationship to his people.

Scripture recognizes it. It comes as it were out of the mouth of babes.


Psalm 8:2 ESV (David)

"Out of the mouth of babies and infants,
you have established strength because of your foes,
to still the enemy and the avenger."

Another factor to consider is that the Pharaoh in Egypt was basically God-incarnate to the Egyptians. Losses of the Egyptian army were probably not going to be inclined to have been recorded in those days. It would have reflected poorly upon the deity and authority of the Pharaoh. Victors get to write the history. But predating Herodotus, the defeated could just ignore even writing the history. Besides there were few who could even read. Not to mention that they didn't have any true powers holding them accountable. It would be embarrassing for Egyptians to recognize losing a good portion of their slave labor. Having slave labor was a sign of strength and ordained power in those times.

The scriptures discuss negotiations with the somewhat distant Egyptians. Sometimes the editors claim it's a good thing and other times it is deemed as a bad idea.


Another tidbit to consider is that Moses and the editors probably could read and write. The Jews had access to the Egyptian creation story likely predates their own or our own creation story, at least in its written form. We believe that God has dispersed his knowledge across the universe. That means that the writer or writers of the Yahweh centered account in Genesis 1 and 2 wrote their own God-breathed creation story down in a creative way.

The Jews may have had their own creation story passed down by the oral tradition before entering Egypt. We know that Genesis 1 is much older than Genesis 2 from textual criticism. But I don't think we should be bothered that Moses and others were inspired to write it down and put a Yahweh spin on the story from the Egyptian creation story.

It's just like Christians being concerned that the God-breathed words of the Apostle Paul were somehow lessened because he had access to Greek philosophy.

All truth is God's truth. -St. Augustine

It probably would be better stated that all wisdom is God's wisdom. Or that there is wisdom under every rock. Either way...

Yet another reason to truly believe in God's actual providence. Coincidence? No. Providence.

Exodus 14:21

"21 Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and the Lord drove the sea back by a strong east wind all night and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided."

Possibly a reflection of the strong east wind being second causes. The law of second causes doesn't just help us wrestle with understanding bad providence. It helps us understand good providence as a miracle of God working.

From the earliest dated book. The book of Job...

Job 1:19

"...and behold, a great wind came across the wilderness and struck the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young people, and they are dead, and I alone have escaped to tell you."

My 2 cents on the Exodus Story being "Overall True" with a little wiggle room.

Clarifiers:
1) We tend to see those who believe (Want the evidence to be true) allow for broad interpretation (Shotgun method) and those who are skeptics want narrow interpretation (Rifle Method). I think it is best to start broad and work to narrower.

2) The further we go back in time, the historical evidence becomes much more difficult to find. The claim, "there is no evidence" is fairly accurate because it was a long time ago and there is not much evidence and then what is found is open to interpretation by the experts. It does NOT mean ALL the evidence is in. I like this quote from KA Kitchens on Exodus (British Expert wrote in 2003)"

so those who squawk intermittently, " No trace of the Hebrews has ever been found" (so of course, no exodus!) are wasting their breath the entirety of Egypt's administrative records at all periods in the Delta is lost; and monumental texts are also nearly nil. And, as pharaohs ever monumentalized defeats on temple walls, no record of the successful exit of a large bunch of foreign slaves (with a loss of a full chariot squadron) would ever have been memorialized by any king, in temples in the Delta or anywhere else).

Basic concepts that I think are true. A group of Hebrews were slaves in Egypt, left/escaped and went back to Canaan

Do Not think the large number of 700K Hebrew men is accurate (might have been translation, interpretation error). Agree with skeptics that the numbers do not add up, would leave more of footprint

Evidence for Exodus:

1) "Overall" the Hebrew/ Jews get their history correct in the Old Testament/ New Testament (written by Christians- former Jews). They took it seriously. Working from more recent date to back in time. They were correct about their dealings and history with the Romans (50-90AD) Greeks (200/300s BC), Persians/Babylonians (400/500 BC), Assyrians (700s), King Solomon and King David and Temple really existed (900/1000 BC), Hebrews in Canaan in (1200s) right where the bible says they should be! (Egyptian Merneptah Stele). If the Hebrews get everything else right, why are they wrong here with Exodus?




2) We know Egypt was the dominant regional power, we know they had slaves, we know the Hebrews were in the area. We know many of the tribe names the Hebrews battled in the area are accurate.

3) We know Aaron and Moses are Egyptian Names

4) We know the ballpark timeline when the book of Exodus was written down and when the events happened, were not that far apart. 200-300 years. See good article from Jimmy Akin Jimmy Akin - Did the Exodus Happen

5) Finally, why would the Hebrews make a story that they were slaves if it were not true? This is huge! No one else does this.

Egyptian history then was likely comparable to the way North Koreans teach their history today. They leave things out and add in other things that are completely inaccurate. But even North Korea has more accountability in this modern age of information to be held more accountable than ancient Egypt as far as history goes.

Agreed, their history written on stone tablets (good thing, it lasts +3000 years) is what we have for limited evidence. We can work around their bias and still ascertain some useful tidbits of information.

Man, the way some of y'all try to object against the old testament is just eye rolling.

Apparently, we can be sure of nothing in history unless there was video evidence pulled together by Ken Burns.

I think the only evidence that may prove the Exodus to be true, is some Egyptian tablet that mentions some foreigner named " Joseph" who was in an important position of Egyptian authority.

I am partially joking, do not think this is likely. If it was documented, his name was probably changed to something else, would of been lost in sea of names and translation challenges.

Kind of like the name Jesus was common name back in day, form of Joshua.

Same with Mary, form of Maryam, it is difficult to keep track of which Mary is who in the New Testament.

Thanks and have missed your posting.

Quote:

---

Do Not think the large number of 700K Hebrew men is accurate (might have been translation, interpretation error). Agree with skeptics that the numbers do not add up, would leave more of footprint

---

I don't have a strong stance one way or the other, but I would note that number tallies in ancient languages can be pretty confusing. There was no numeral system in Hebrew until many centuries after the book of Numbers, and pretty much every word used can be interpreted in many ways. For instance, the word used for "thousand" can also mean "troop" or "leader".

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1585502?read-now=1&seq=7#page_scan_tab_contents

This article argues for 20,000 total people using mathematical analysis and analysis of the Hebrew language used, for instance