The Exodus! Did it Really Happen?

[POI]

The Bible claims an Exodus took place. Many state it was not an actual event. Since the Bible makes a positive claim, in that an 'Exodus" took place, do we have positive evidence to support the claim?

For Debate:

1. Outside the Bible saying so, do we have evidence? If so, what?

2. If it should turn out that the Exodus did not take place, does this fact sway the Christian believer's position at all? Or, does it not matter one way or another?

[TRANSPONDER]

Perhaps, but there ought tobe evidence of a large enslaved population of Hebrews in Egypt and some indication of a sudden appearance of a conquering nation of Hebrews and an option (free of Egyptian imperial control) for them to do so, but there really isn't. So the problem is not just No evidence For, but all the evidence is against.

Maybe the greatest evidence is the unfinished structures and the decline of Egyptian empire.

Apart from some unfinished tombs , I can't think of any unfinished Pharonic structures, can you? But the decline of Egypt (which happened) was following the Bronze age collapse, and it was worse for other regimes. Egypt at least survived. But the real clincher is that it didn't happen until after the first few Ramessids and by then, Merneptah's stele says the Israelites were already on Canaan, and apparently taking advantage of the collapse to expand their territory. So, creditable try at fiddling history to fit the Bible, but it doesn't. Instead it shows that the Exodus is not historically credible.

[POI]

...This claim would leave behind evidence. Likely a lot of evidence...

Sorry, I don't think that is true. There is simply no reason to assume there would remain lot of evidence for the event.

A little birdie told me you do not watch videos. However, in THIS case, you might want to make an exception. This is why I brought up the Exodus specifically. Please watch the video in post 12.

I don't think it is worth watching, sorry. If you think there is some good point, please write it here shortly as one example.

I think you are afraid to watch it. It makes many points. But pictures are worth a thousand words. And there are many pictures. I do not want to "text-wall" you.

[1213]

Apart from some unfinished tombs , I can't think of any unfinished Pharonic structures, can you? But the decline of Egypt (which happened) was following the Bronze age collapse, and it was worse for other regimes. Egypt at least survived. But the real clincher is that it didn't happen until after the first few Ramessids and by then, Merneptah's stele says the Israelites were already on Canaan, and apparently taking advantage of the collapse to expand their territory. So, creditable try at fiddling history to fit the Bible, but it doesn't. Instead it shows that the Exodus is not historically credible.

But why assume your history is correct?

[TRANSPONDER]

Because there had been hundreds of years of records and discussion, from the Ptolemaic king - lists to debates about chronology. We know who was the son of whom and which pharaoh followed which. We know what kings they wrote to or went to war with and we have objects showing their influence or control. agreed, it wasn't as obvious as Genesis being wrong and Exodus looked credible for a long while. Even now there is still argument for it. But unless one does (yet again) science - denial, there are increasingly good reasons to question the Exodus, and all the believers can do is fiddle the evidence to try to fit the Bile and then deny it when it doesn't.

But again it seems that you still think it's having to get you to admit something in the Bible is wrong (which you won't do even if it claims there was daylight before the sun was made) when it is - as one apologists argued 'cumulative evidence'. The more evidence there is that the Bible -claims don't stack up and the more the Bible apologists have to dismiss and deny the evidence, the more the doubts and questions stack up for others, if not for you.

[POI]

Great news! The Tanager has maybe agreed to participate in this topic. I think it first depends on the answer to one of the OP questions (i.e.):

If it should turn out that the Exodus did not take place, does this fact sway the Christian believer's position at all? Or, does it not matter one way or another?

If The Tanager answers "it does not matter", then maybe we will receive no participation, as the veracity of this very claim becomes a moot point to his overall belief system anyways.

But for now, we'll assume that the falsification of this very large claim would redirect his Christian belief system in some capacity. As I told him, it would be best to refute the video presented in post 12. Rather than him watching it, he asked that I sum up the video's parts. Fair enough:



- Egyptians were meticulous record keepers, but no mention of keeping Israelite slaves, no plagues, no Moses, or no Exodus?
- Thousands of artifacts, preserved by the hot and dry desert, but nothing related to the slaves which inhabited this area for hundreds of years -- (they left no signs at all)?
- No mass graves/bones with Israeli DNA?
- Any path taken, from Egypt to "Canaan", shows no signs of a 40 year migration, where thousands would have died over the course of 40 years?
- Both Jewish and Egyptian archeologists concluded, after years of research, that there exist no findings for a Jewish slave populous during this era?
- During this era, Egypt stretched to what is currently modern-day Turkey. Their 40-year migration to "Canaan" would have landed them into more Egypt?
- Millions wandered this path for 40 years, while others did it in under 2 weeks?
- Millions more remained in Egypt and still no trace of their existence?
- The Pharaohs tried to wipe out history of opposing singular gods and singular mothers and failed. How could they wipe out the existence of millions who inhabited the same land for centuries?
- Who wrote the first 5 books of the Bible? Likely not Moses, being he recorded his own death and stated he was the most humble man on the planet? No, the person who wrote the book is referring to a town of Dan, which was the modern name, not associated with the time 'Moses' would have been alive.
- Why follow a book with little/no evidence, with evidence against it?

I advise you watch the video....

[1213]

...But unless one does (yet again) science - denial, there are increasingly good reasons to question the Exodus, and all the believers can do is fiddle the evidence to try to fit the Bile and then deny it when it doesn't.

But again it seems that you still think it's having to get you to admit something in the Bible is wrong (which you won't do even if it claims there was daylight before the sun was made) ....

Sorry, your opinions just are not that good that I could accept them as truth, without any good reasons.

[TRANSPONDER]

...But unless one does (yet again) science - denial, there are increasingly good reasons to question the Exodus, and all the believers can do is fiddle the evidence to try to fit the Bile and then deny it when it doesn't.

But again it seems that you still think it's having to get you to admit something in the Bible is wrong (which you won't do even if it claims there was daylight before the sun was made) ....

Sorry, your opinions just are not that good that I could accept them as truth, without any good reasons.

Ok, you dismiss everything as usual. As I've said before now, it doesn't matter what you thik or even what I think, but what the evidence says. And it says there are almost no reasons to credit the Biblical story (again, otseng made the best case anyone could) and a few good reasons to doubt it, even aside from the miracles and acts of God. And people will see that - IF they see it, which is the problem- getting the alternative to the well -funded and marketed Biblical propaganda out to the public. Your denial is irrelevant, your case is relevant, but I can't see that you have one.

[The Tanager]

First, I don’t think the Exodus being false would discredit Christianity from being true. Some Christian views of inerrancy? Sure.

Second, I have not done a deep dive into Exodus and archaeology. I do have some initial thoughts on these points, though.

(1) The points that are easily dismissed. The Bible gives the reason they wandered for 40 years, while it should have only taken 2 weeks. It’s not like they just got lost. The Bible doesn’t say millions of Jews were left behind, the author said the Talmud claims this. Who wrote the Pentateuch is irrelevant. Claiming that he has shown that the Pentateuch has little to no evidence to support because of his quick claims about what he thinks archaeology tells us about the supposed Exodus is ridiculous; that doesn’t logically follow at all.

Now, if you want to use the principle that one bit of error or untrustworthiness spoils the whole case, then you’d have to reject this video for the above reasons. I don’t think that principle is a good one, but you have seemed to use it against the Bible. I’m just saying one can’t have it both ways.

(2) A comment on a slightly better, but I still think unreasonable, point: the inability to erase mentions of the Jewish people or an Exodus. We know many rulers wouldn’t write embarrassing details about themselves or their rules. So, they wouldn’t necessarily record an event like the plagues or the exodus. They often would seek to cover up or destroy previous history and it’s possible that this would have been done concerning mentions of Jewish slaves if they eventually dashed. That some previous histories weren’t destroyed is not evidence that no such attempts could succeed. We would have no way to calculate how much was successful (of course, since the evidence would have been destroyed) and how much wasn’t to even get a probability to consider in our weighing of ideas.

This point, of course, doesn’t speak to other forms of evidence that we would expect to find.

(3) A more general point. Bias comes into everything humans do, even professional academics and archaeologists. You’ll get it from some Christians in their cases for the Exodus and from some non-Christians in their cases. People come into their finds with a belief in the Biblical Exodus and beliefs that it didn’t happen. That can color their accounts. So, we’ve got to make sure we don’t just accept something from someone because they get us the conclusion we want to be true.

(4) Another general point. Archaeology, especially ancient archaeology, even taking out bias, has limits, being more an art than a hard science. The artifacts that survive are a very small portion of what existed then. We are still finding ancient sites all the time. Of the sites we know, we are still excavating many of them. Of the ones fully excavated, we are still awaiting full publishing and data and then spreading that knowledge throughout academia, much less getting it to those of us who are not professionals. Where the location is also matters. Damp areas (like the Delta area the Hebrews supposedly lived in) would not be good for papyrus, leather, or wooden record keepers. The places where we have more of those kind of artifacts are from drier areas. This is not a knock on archaeology; I think it is an important and helpful endeavor, but it does have its limits. This limit will affect even the most meticulous of record keepers.

Now, note that this is not asking one for absolute proof for their claim that the Exodus didn’t happen and since that’s impossible, Christians can just maintain their faith. No, this is about let’s make sure that we are being reasonable and not just grabbing onto anything that will maintain our prior beliefs or rejection of certain beliefs.

(5) Now actually getting to it. As far as I can tell, the first big question is about dating the Exodus. The majority view for those who accept it reflects a historical core puts it around 1270 BC, with a minority arguing for an earlier date around 1450 BC, give or take. With the earlier dates, there seems to be more evidence that could fit.

Such as the decline of Egyptian military power under Amenhotep II, that his firstborn son doesn’t take over for him and he disappears from the records. Amenhotep II seems to have only had one military campaign early in his reign (the previous pharaoh led at least 17), and then later on leads a slave raid. Or the the death of Tuthmosis IV around 1406 BC and the subsequent collapse of the Egyptian dynasty after that, especially pulling out their presence in Canaan, even including one pharaoh abandoning the Egyptian pantheon of gods for monotheism.

Some talk of evidence of Hebrew slaves around 1700 BC in the Brooklyn Papyrus through Semitic names on the list, 9 of which match biblical Hebrew names (I’m not saying people, just names that were used). So, this seems to point to Hebrews being in Egypt prior to both the early and later dates academics argue for.

The Tell el-Dab’a site also supposedly has evidence (pottery, tools, weapons, burials, temple architecture, evidence of long-haired sheep from that area) of people coming from the Canaan area (as the Bible says Joseph and his family came from) around this time. They’ve also supposedly found statues depicting a situation like Joseph’s where people from the Canaan region rose up in the ranks.

The Tomb of Rekhmire has wall paintings showing Semitic slaves making mud bricks and building buildings with them.

We have supposedly found large storage facilities at Pharaoh’s palace on the Nile supporting the earlier date.

There is the Ipuwer Papyrus which seems to have parallels to the plagues that is dated at least earlier than 13th century BC because that is the date of the papyrus we have. It is a lamentation of various disasters that have struck Egypt. There is a river of blood, blood throughout the land, fields burned, pestilence throughout Egypt, death of children, burying people all over Egypt, the power of Ra (the sun god) not being seen, slaves that took gold and silver.

There is an inscription for Amenhotep III (on a pillar and a wall) around 1400 that speaks about various groups of wandering nomads, with one listed as Ta Shasu Yahweh (the nomads of Yahweh) placed around the area of Edom, Moab, and possibly Canaan.

Evidence of an influx of people in Canaan after 1400 BC through evidence of war, destruction, and upheaval. And a demographic shift where it was growing up to that point, then a big drop, then new settlements of different architecture.

The Amarna tablets supposedly are correspondence between the Canaanite kings and Egypt during this time and speak of the Habiru (which means marauding nomads and some scholars connect to Hebrews) people overtaking areas, and requesting help, but Pharaoh doesn’t respond with help. Another tablet also seems to speak of Lab’ayu, King of Shechem, allying with these people which matches the description in the Bible of Joshua not attacking Shechem.

The Merneptah Stele, dating from 13th BC, is a piece by a Pharaoh talking about his conquests over Canaan, mentioning that he laid waste to Israel, noting 3 cities conquered, one each in the north, center, and south, which shows us they were already there and the most powerful group there because why else would that be why the Pharaoh would single them out as the only mention?

A recent book connected to much of this I was coming across is Unearthing the Bible, by Dr. Kennedy, that I think would be worth checking out for anyone truly interested in this topic. Again, I’ve just started really looking into what the academics are saying on this, so I’m still open minded about it, but just what I’ve quickly come across and wanted to share a bit from the other side for anyone on this thread.

[POI]

First, I don’t think the Exodus being false would discredit Christianity from being true. Some Christian views of inerrancy? Sure.

As I stated in our other exchange, it depends on your perspective. If you adhere to "Sola Scriptura", then yes. Falsification of the Exodus will deem the Bible wrong. Otherwise, you could remain a believer because:

1. You are some versions of a 'minimal facts' believer.
2. This storyline was meant to be metaphorical.
3. Other...

Second, I have not done a deep dive into Exodus and archaeology. I do have some initial thoughts on these points, though.

As stated in the other exchange, sure. You can remain completely agnostic. This seems reasonable before you do decide to do a deep dive. But as you dive, you will find your position, in the pendulum will either swing to a) being convinced <or> b) becoming doubtful. I, myself, lean to the side of doubt.

I'm going to let your points below marinate, for now. Why? As stated above, IF evidence ultimately convinces you that this event did not happen, your position about Christianity will likely not waver. The point of this thread is to challenge the ones, where it would waiver. I guess this is why 1213 wants no part of this thread.

********************************************

(Your points below)

(1) The points that are easily dismissed. The Bible gives the reason they wandered for 40 years, while it should have only taken 2 weeks. It’s not like they just got lost. The Bible doesn’t say millions of Jews were left behind, the author said the Talmud claims this. Who wrote the Pentateuch is irrelevant. Claiming that he has shown that the Pentateuch has little to no evidence to support because of his quick claims about what he thinks archaeology tells us about the supposed Exodus is ridiculous; that doesn’t logically follow at all.

Now, if you want to use the principle that one bit of error or untrustworthiness spoils the whole case, then you’d have to reject this video for the above reasons. I don’t think that principle is a good one, but you have seemed to use it against the Bible. I’m just saying one can’t have it both ways.

(2) A comment on a slightly better, but I still think unreasonable, point: the inability to erase mentions of the Jewish people or an Exodus. We know many rulers wouldn’t write embarrassing details about themselves or their rules. So, they wouldn’t necessarily record an event like the plagues or the exodus. They often would seek to cover up or destroy previous history and it’s possible that this would have been done concerning mentions of Jewish slaves if they eventually dashed. That some previous histories weren’t destroyed is not evidence that no such attempts could succeed. We would have no way to calculate how much was successful (of course, since the evidence would have been destroyed) and how much wasn’t to even get a probability to consider in our weighing of ideas.

This point, of course, doesn’t speak to other forms of evidence that we would expect to find.

(3) A more general point. Bias comes into everything humans do, even professional academics and archaeologists. You’ll get it from some Christians in their cases for the Exodus and from some non-Christians in their cases. People come into their finds with a belief in the Biblical Exodus and beliefs that it didn’t happen. That can color their accounts. So, we’ve got to make sure we don’t just accept something from someone because they get us the conclusion we want to be true.

(4) Another general point. Archaeology, especially ancient archaeology, even taking out bias, has limits, being more an art than a hard science. The artifacts that survive are a very small portion of what existed then. We are still finding ancient sites all the time. Of the sites we know, we are still excavating many of them. Of the ones fully excavated, we are still awaiting full publishing and data and then spreading that knowledge throughout academia, much less getting it to those of us who are not professionals. Where the location is also matters. Damp areas (like the Delta area the Hebrews supposedly lived in) would not be good for papyrus, leather, or wooden record keepers. The places where we have more of those kind of artifacts are from drier areas. This is not a knock on archaeology; I think it is an important and helpful endeavor, but it does have its limits. This limit will affect even the most meticulous of record keepers.

Now, note that this is not asking one for absolute proof for their claim that the Exodus didn’t happen and since that’s impossible, Christians can just maintain their faith. No, this is about let’s make sure that we are being reasonable and not just grabbing onto anything that will maintain our prior beliefs or rejection of certain beliefs.

(5) Now actually getting to it. As far as I can tell, the first big question is about dating the Exodus. The majority view for those who accept it reflects a historical core puts it around 1270 BC, with a minority arguing for an earlier date around 1450 BC, give or take. With the earlier dates, there seems to be more evidence that could fit.

Such as the decline of Egyptian military power under Amenhotep II, that his firstborn son doesn’t take over for him and he disappears from the records. Amenhotep II seems to have only had one military campaign early in his reign (the previous pharaoh led at least 17), and then later on leads a slave raid. Or the the death of Tuthmosis IV around 1406 BC and the subsequent collapse of the Egyptian dynasty after that, especially pulling out their presence in Canaan, even including one pharaoh abandoning the Egyptian pantheon of gods for monotheism.

Some talk of evidence of Hebrew slaves around 1700 BC in the Brooklyn Papyrus through Semitic names on the list, 9 of which match biblical Hebrew names (I’m not saying people, just names that were used). So, this seems to point to Hebrews being in Egypt prior to both the early and later dates academics argue for.

The Tell el-Dab’a site also supposedly has evidence (pottery, tools, weapons, burials, temple architecture, evidence of long-haired sheep from that area) of people coming from the Canaan area (as the Bible says Joseph and his family came from) around this time. They’ve also supposedly found statues depicting a situation like Joseph’s where people from the Canaan region rose up in the ranks.

The Tomb of Rekhmire has wall paintings showing Semitic slaves making mud bricks and building buildings with them.

We have supposedly found large storage facilities at Pharaoh’s palace on the Nile supporting the earlier date.

There is the Ipuwer Papyrus which seems to have parallels to the plagues that is dated at least earlier than 13th century BC because that is the date of the papyrus we have. It is a lamentation of various disasters that have struck Egypt. There is a river of blood, blood throughout the land, fields burned, pestilence throughout Egypt, death of children, burying people all over Egypt, the power of Ra (the sun god) not being seen, slaves that took gold and silver.

There is an inscription for Amenhotep III (on a pillar and a wall) around 1400 that speaks about various groups of wandering nomads, with one listed as Ta Shasu Yahweh (the nomads of Yahweh) placed around the area of Edom, Moab, and possibly Canaan.

Evidence of an influx of people in Canaan after 1400 BC through evidence of war, destruction, and upheaval. And a demographic shift where it was growing up to that point, then a big drop, then new settlements of different architecture.

The Amarna tablets supposedly are correspondence between the Canaanite kings and Egypt during this time and speak of the Habiru (which means marauding nomads and some scholars connect to Hebrews) people overtaking areas, and requesting help, but Pharaoh doesn’t respond with help. Another tablet also seems to speak of Lab’ayu, King of Shechem, allying with these people which matches the description in the Bible of Joshua not attacking Shechem.

The Merneptah Stele, dating from 13th BC, is a piece by a Pharaoh talking about his conquests over Canaan, mentioning that he laid waste to Israel, noting 3 cities conquered, one each in the north, center, and south, which shows us they were already there and the most powerful group there because why else would that be why the Pharaoh would single them out as the only mention?

A recent book connected to much of this I was coming across is Unearthing the Bible, by Dr. Kennedy, that I think would be worth checking out for anyone truly interested in this topic. Again, I’ve just started really looking into what the academics are saying on this, so I’m still open minded about it, but just what I’ve quickly come across and wanted to share a bit from the other side for anyone on this thread.
[/quote]

[1213]

...what the evidence says....

And it seems the evidence says exactly what you want to hear. If someone else listens the evidence, it may be silent or speak entirely different story.