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?

[RBD]

Please show that you speak the truth and that you are not here to deceive. Please explain the differences we found in the Dead Sea scrolls.

It explains why they aren't in the Bible.

I asked you to explain the differences we discovered when the Dead Sea Scrolls were found because you claimed: "preserved intact exactly as first written".

Since there are differences, a claim about them being preserved intact exactly as first written is therefore false.

I see. You're talking about authenticity of a record being preserved exactly as first written. That's not the same as asking why they are different and not in the Bible.

No one is denying the Dead Sea scrolls are preserved as first written, but only that their differences with the Bible show why they aren't in the Bible: Because they aren't written by Bible writers. The same for perfectly preserved written gospels, that are different from the gospel in the Bible: they aren't in the Bible. because they are not the Bible gospel.

Gal 1:8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Why do some scrolls contain significant variations, including additions, omissions, or reordering of entire sections of text for example?

Because they aren't Bible.

I'm only interested in any supposed errors and contradictions within the Bible itself. This is about Bible inerrancy, not about other writings differing with the Bible.

[RBD]

- Goliath could not have both been six cubits and a span and also 4 cubits and a span.

Not to them that only believe what they have seen. And some people don't even believe their own eyes, when they've seen something.

Personal unbelief in the world is nothing new, and a far too common fallacy of proving something is not true.

- The Book of Jeremiah exhibits one of the largest textual differences. The Greek Septuagint version of Jeremiah is about one-eighth shorter than the Masoretic Text and has a different chapter order for the oracles.

Now you're talking about translations of the original Scriptures, that prove not to be complete. Though there is evidence of apostles quoting from the Septuagint, no one holds the Septuagint to be the Bible itself, apart from the Hebrew Bible.

Now, if there is an example of an apostle's reference from the Septuagint, that is not part of the Hebrew Bible, then we have an inconsistent error between the apostles of Jesus Christ writing in the Greek, and the prophets of Christ writing in the Hebrew.

Once again, my main interest is only in errors and contradictions within the Bible of the prophets and apostles from Gen 1:1 to Rev 22:21.

I'm not interested in theological opinions about the Bible by unbelievers. That includes about how to be a Christian.

Just more failure. You asked if anything is too hard for the LORD. I provided 3 examples

You gave three examples based upon unbelief, and so are not objective examples. I don't submit to the paradigm of others, and then follow them into their rabbit holes.

Someone can say it's impossible for there to be giants as recorded in the Bible, and then give that example of unbelief, as an example of something too hard for the LORD to do. I don't argue with people's unbelief and feigned examples of the power of the LORD.

and you now hide from your failure because you are not interested in theological opinions about the Bible by unbelievers.

I don't hide from the purpose at hand, which is proof of any Bible errancy. Such attempts come from unbelievers, and unbelieving believers alike.

If someone wants to argue doctrine and prophecy of the Bible, then I can do so, but it won't last long with someone, who only wants to find fault with what's written in the first place. They have no objective interest in what the Bible teaches and prophesies, much less make an objective argument about them.

Tit 3:9 But avoid foolish contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

While I understand some people don't believe in the Spirit nor in spiritual things, nevertheless, they can at least understand the concept of being inspired by a spirit to believe, write, speak, and do things.

And you falsely believe that people don't believe in these things because they desire the Bible to false.

So, you acknowledge some people are not objective readers of what's actually written in the Book, but only desire the Bible to be false.

That in itself does not preclude someone from believing in spiritual things.

Not because spirits have never in the history of humans been shown to be real nor needed to explain things. When you write your replies, I do not believe any spirits are helping you and there certainly is not an all knowing being helping you either.

It's only when someone refuses to consider the spiritual things of revelation, teaching, and prophecy, that they preclude themselves from reading the Bible and debating Bible teaching objectively, which is all spiritually inspired and revealed as true:

Jhn 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

This doesn't even address the unknown authors of the gospels.

I don't address unknown authors of other gospels, but only the four written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

It is unknown as to who wrote the gospels. It amazes me that you don't know this. [/quote]

I know this is what you and others say, not what we know.

1Jo 4:5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.


You do know you don't speak for everyone, right?

[RBD]

Do you know of any evidence that would suggest that millions wandered the Sinai during the time the exodus was to have taken place? I would like to examine it.

Read the eyewitness record and autobiography of Exodus, called the book of Moses.

Do you have any evidence of the Hebrews in Canaan, when Moses says he and they were in Egypt? I'd like to see that, because then there would be a contradiction with Exodus.

[Clownboat]

The evidence argument is run it's course. If you have anything new, I'd be glad to see it.

I have a very genuine question then...
Why do you think there isn't any evidence for the Exodus claim as told in the Bible?

[Clownboat]

- You failed to show that the Exodus is an eyewitness account (the Bible is not an authority).

Someone's unbelief in a Book does not negate what it says about itself, nor make it untrue.

This failed to address your failure about being able to show that the Exodus is an eyewitness account.

The author of the Koran contradicts himself about which God he is writing about, and so the Koran cannot all be true, whether some of it is true or not.

As was already explained to you, the Quran is correcting your Bible. Need I show you claims from the Quran that prove that the claims are not only claims, but also the claims are evidence?

The Bible is the Book that remains unerring without internal contradiction between the Author, His words, or outside evidence.

What's actually going on here:
The Bible is RBD's idol. They worship this idol as if it were unerring, without any internal contradictions and as if it was authored by a being that created the entire universe and then told us not to masturbate.

[Clownboat]

Do you know of any evidence that would suggest that millions wandered the Sinai during the time the exodus was to have taken place? I would like to examine it.

Read the eyewitness record and autobiography of Exodus, called the book of Moses.

That is just the claim and isn't interesting by itself and you have already been educated as to why it is called the book of Moses.
So with that said, why do you think there isn't any evidence for millions of people wandering the Sinai as told in the Bible?

Do you have any evidence of the Hebrews in Canaan, when Moses says he and they were in Egypt? I'd like to see that, because then there would be a contradiction with Exodus.

This was provided by POI.

[otseng]

My question is if the Hyksos were not the Israelites, then how were the Hyksos able to reside in Egypt and take over the best land?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_a ... the_Exodus

The Exodus is the founding myth of the Israelites. The scholarly consensus is that the Exodus, as described in the Torah, is not historical, even though there may be a historical core behind the Biblical narrative.

Still haven't answered my questions.

But I'll go ahead and answer it for you - there is no answer from the skeptics on this. The only reasonable explanation was Manetho's account that the Hyksos were invaders and took over the land forcefully. This would make sense, if it were true. For thousands of years, it was accepted as true since there was no data to disprove it. However, with the excavation at Tell el-Dab'a by Manfred Bietak in the 1980's, the archaeological evidence refutes this claim. They came into the land peacefully. What can reasonably account for this? The only explanation on the table is the Biblical account.

Modern archaeologists believe that the Israelites were indigenous to Canaan and were never in ancient Egypt, and if there is any historical basis to the Exodus it can apply only to a small segment of the population of Israelites at large.

On what evidence do they base this on? Certainly not Biblical evidence. And what archaeological evidence is there? I'm more inclined they want to believe this based on a political motivation.

Nevertheless, it is also commonly argued that some historical event may have inspired these traditions, even if Moses and the Exodus narrative belong to the collective cultural memory rather than history.

According to Avraham Faust "most scholars agree that the narrative has a historical core, and that some of the highland settlers came, one way or another, from Egypt."

I totally agree there is some historical event that inspired the account of the Exodus. The question is how much ovelap is there between the two? Of course, I believe there is a significant overlap between the historical event and the Bible.

I've already covered some of the similarities:

Both the Israelites and the Hyksos overlap in:
1) Who they were - Semitic people
2) Where they came from - Canaan
3) Where they went to - land of Goshen
4) How they were able to take over the land - peacefully inhabited it
5) When they occupied lower Egypt - 12th dynasty to 19th dynasty
6) They both grew in number to threaten the Egyptians

There are more similarities than what I've listed so far, but this is sufficient evidence to support my case. Multiple points of congruence is hard to explain in any other way. And I've pointed out there is no alternative coherent explanation to how the Hyksos were able to peacefully take over the best land.

Given all this evidence from archaeology and the Bible, it is a reasonable position to hold the Exodus account was historically true.

[POI]

They came into the land peacefully. What can reasonably account for this? The only explanation on the table is the Biblical account.

The timeline is off, way off. I've already explained more than once.

On what evidence do they base this on? Certainly not Biblical evidence. And what archaeological evidence is there? I'm more inclined they want to believe this based on a political motivation.

1. Archaeological Evidence:

Continuity of Culture: Archaeological findings, particularly in pottery and other material culture, indicate a strong degree of cultural continuity between the pre-Israelite Canaanite period and the emerging Israelite culture.

Gradual Settlement: Dozens of hill-country sites dating back to the Iron Age I (roughly 1200-1000 BCE) suggest a gradual, localized settlement process rather than a sudden influx of people.

Periodic Settlements: Some sites show periods of both settlement and abandonment, suggesting the Israelites may have been nomadic pastoralists who periodically settled in the Central Hill Country.

2. Genetic Evidence:

Common Ancestry: Studies comparing the genetic makeup of modern Jewish populations to ancient Israelite remains and other populations in the region suggest a shared ancestry with the ancient Canaanites.

Samaritan Connection: Samaritans, an ethnic group in the Levant who consider themselves descendants of the Israelite tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, show a closer genetic relationship to ancient Israelite samples than other Jewish groups.

Bronze Age-Iron Age Continuity: One study even found genetic continuity between the Bronze Age and Iron Age populations of the southern Levant, including Israelites and Judahites.

3. Linguistic Evidence:

Canaanite Languages: The languages spoken by the ancient Israelites were closely related to Canaanite languages.

In Conclusion: The archaeological and genetic evidence points towards a more nuanced picture of the Israelites as a group who evolved within the existing Canaanite landscape. This suggests a process of gradual settlement, cultural integration, and possibly even the absorption of existing Canaanite populations.

I totally agree there is some historical event that inspired the account of the Exodus. The question is how much ovelap is there between the two?

This is why I asked, where do you draw the hard line in the sand when stating, why trust the Bible if it is not inerrant? But in this case, it seems the Bible is just a little more 'errant.'

[RBD]

They attempt to show evidence of contradiction between writings of the prophets of Jehovah, with that of the apostles of Jesus Christ. They fail, but are still free to reject Jesus Christ the promised Son and risen LORD God of Israel.

Perhaps you are not aware, but from just one sentence, if we are to take your words seriously, we must agree:
That humans can prophecy the future.

No, we don't agree, because you speak from unbelief in the words of the Bible, while I only teach them as written.

Humans do not prophecy/predict the future. At best anyone can do educated guesswork, make a wish, or pose as psychic channels.

None of that is the Spirit of the LORD giving His believing servant the words of everlasting life, as well as the surety of future events.

2 Tim 3:16All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2Pe 1:20 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

1Pe 1:10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

And so, we see the clear and simple difference between the thinking and speaking of natural humanists, vs those believing and speaking the Scriptures of the Bible.

1Jo 4:5They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

1Pe 4:11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God.

That Jesus was the son of a God.

These are words of the Bible. He was the Son of God in the flesh on earth, and now is the risen Son of God sitting on the right hand of heaven's throne.

That a 3 day old decomposing body of Jesus reanimated to life.

Once again, this is an unbeliever's words, blind to what the Scriptures say.

Act 2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption...He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.


His body was not decomposing in the tomb, but being preserved by the Spirit of life. Nor did He reanimate His body, as with some heart defibrillator, but rather His living soul and breath reentered into His old dead body, to become a whole new immortal body of living flesh and bone.

I know you don't realize it, but you are asking a lot.

The only thing I ask for from anyone, is the same courtesy I try and give to them: That we argue with what the other actually says. Not with what we just think others are saying, based upon our own understanding. Until we learn exactly what another is saying, so that we could accurately repeat it, only then we can accurately agree or disagree.

As in the examples above, you only said 1 thing out of 3, that accurately shows what I believe and argue. The other 2 are just your own spin on something, that I would never say, because it's the humanist's way of seeing things, not Scripture's.

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

[RBD]

Right. That would be a parenthetical insert, and a conclusion added by the writer of Judges. Anything else you want to know about posthumous insertions/additions to an autobiography?

Mose's expressed humility was written in Numbers, not Judges, and is 'supposed' to have been written by Moses.

The writer of the parenthetical insert spoke of Moses' meekness above all others of the day. A contradiction would be the Bible saying that Moses was not the meekest of his day, or that another during his time was as meek as he...

Mose's recorded death was written in Deuteronomy, not Judges,

The last words of Deuteronomy lead into the continued record of the children of Israel in Judges. Naming 'books' in the Bible, is for reference, not for identification of who is writing something.

The first five books of the Bible, also known as the Pentateuch or Torah, are traditionally attributed to Moses. Care to augment anything yet?

Sure, he also wrote Genesis and Job, which can be proven the same for writing Exodus, which is called the book of Moses. No need to rely on unsure 'traditions'.

Luk 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Every prophesy of the Messiah written before the other prophets, was written by Moses. Therefore, Moses wrote the earliest prophecies of the LORD coming to earth in Gen 3 and Job 19. Moses wrote Genesis and Job...

The Pentateuch, also known as the Torah or the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, was likely written over a period of time, with the final redaction and canonization occurring during the Babylonian Exile (6th-5th century BCE).

The Bible is not governed by what unbelievers say about it. Especially not by the pseudo unbelieving-'believers', that say they believe but then teach what not to believe.

Rev{3:16} So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.


The only way to teach the Bible accurately, is to teach the Bible as written. If anything in the Bible contradicts Jesus called Exodus the book of Moses, then there is a contradiction. Likewise, if there is another prophecy of Himself written before the prophet David in Psalms, written by someone other than Moses. And, of course, if the Bible ever says there is more than one writer of the Pentateuch, then we must believe it.

3) Were all of them "eyewitnesses"?

Moses was obviously not an eyewitness for Genesis and Job.