Did the Biblical Exodus Happen? - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Rome, Greece, Egypt & other ancient history (c 4000 BCE - 476 CE) and pre-history.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
By ninurta
#13098140
Potemkin wrote:Yeah, but why mention liberals? Liberals, in the modern American sense, didn't exist back then. :eh:

Idk, I forgot.
User avatar
By QatzelOk
#13098534
Of course it happened.

Is the OP suggesting that it was just made up to inspire people to stick together like an extended family/institution?

I hope not, because that would be heresy - which used to be as illegal as holocaust denial.
By IamJoseph
#13747846
I'd like to be pragmatic and say it never happened, but it would not be honest. There is very great evidence of the Exodus - far more than whatever is written in the Gospels, Quran or most any other scriptures. Let me list a few of what I refer to as evidences.

1. No proof of Moses. This is technically correct, but then again, we have a text which clearly states Moses' burial will never be found - not quoting this makes the charge a lie by omission. This is a remarkable statement, because it ended up being correct, even when we see burial sites of almost every figure in the Hebrew bible, including older ones like Abraham and his family, Moses' brother Aaron and many others. Here, the absence of proof becomes the proof, and should we ever find Moses' burial place - the Hebrew bible becomes dis-credited.

With regard the exodus:

2. First and foremost we have PROOF the Israelites were in Egypt around the time of Moses. A 3,500 year Egyptian stelle mentions a 'WAR WITH ISRAEL'.

3. Thereafter we have PROOF the Israelites returned to Canaan and held that land its sovereign kingdom upto the Roman invasion of 70 CE. This begs the question, how did all the Israelites, accounted as 3 million in the book of Exodus, get to Canaan - and how can this not be termed an EXODUS? Did they fly there or just pop up?

4. We have a writing which records every cubit travsersed, with routes, nations, wars and a host of incidents which can be traced today. It begs the question where did the Israelites get this data - did they have access to a secret libraray? Did they make it up retrospectively? Can anyone make up 1000's of names, dates, genealogies of themselves and nations gone by - even with a super computer?

5. The descriptions of Egypt are the best we have, including of Egypt's then contemporary kings, cities, diets, religions and terrain - with not a single error. Of note, we do not find camels or tomatoes listed in Egypt.

Those are the factors which give credibility to the Exodus, to the extent it is not credible to deny it.
User avatar
By Godstud
#13748355
Yes, they have proof. None of that is proof of the "slavery" they were supposed to be escaping.

There not 3 million, and the 600,000 that were claimed to have left Egypt is inflated.

Interestingly...
Richard Gabriel Says Ancient Israelites Were Not Slaves
But by examining the Exodus from a military perspective, new light may be shed on this historic journey.

Aaron Shugar, PhD, Archaeomettalurgy, Lehigh University, “This is a tricky subject because outside the Bible there is no definitive corroborating text that can either support or refute the fact that the Israelites were slaves. But if we ask the simple question, could a nation of mere slaves, be able to go up against the mighty Egyptian army and survive? Logically, it doesn’t seem like they could.”

Mark Schwartz, Professor of Anthropology, Grand Valley State University, “Now what if they weren’t slaves? What if they actually were a group with military experience. Remember Abraham and some of his military exploits. Now a group of people leaving Egypt with a military arm puts a completely different spin on the story.”

http://www.wheatandtares.org/2011/04/18 ... egyptians/
By IamJoseph
#13748744
Yes, they have proof. None of that is proof of the "slavery" they were supposed to be escaping.


Your word against one made 1000's of years ago. Egypt had no laws which gave slaves rights; the Hebrew bible does.


There not 3 million, and the 600,000 that were claimed to have left Egypt is inflated.


Inflated by what amount - and for what purpose, when pages are allocated to sub-totals of tribes, in fractions? The 600 figure represents only men of war ages, not their families and the mixed non-Hebrew multitudes.

Shall I gather that you agree a large block of Israelites did leave Egypt and enter Canaan?
By pugsville
#13748792
Pfftt have you any idea of the logistics of moving 3 million people across the sinai in Ancient times. You can just plan count out the 3 million figure as impossible.
The 600,000 figure is impossible.
By IamJoseph
#13748838
Do the math. The 3 Million figure is credible, relative to its period and 400 years of population growth; Jacob to Moses. There is no apparent motive for bloating this figure. The 3M is in fact an honest assumption/estimation based on the accountung of 600 men of war age, namely 20 to 50 year olds. The accounting also marks the first scientific cencus ever recorded and first application of the term, NATION OF ISRAEL, previously called Tribe of Jacob.

The math may be correct or in error, admittedly - but its an honest, credible premise. It does not in any wise negate the term of an exodus transfer of a population, backed by a re-entry in Canaan after a great domestic war. The rejection of the Israelites by the six Canaanite kingdoms has an eerie alignment with events in our midst today: that the Jews have no right of re-entry to their historical homeland in Arabia following their bondage in Europe. Stunning parallels emerge.
By IamJoseph
#13748844
Pfftt have you any idea of the logistics of moving 3 million people across the sinai in Ancient times.


Agreed. It is incredible and challenges all norms. It is equally incredible the Israelites escaped the world's mightiest super power after 400 years of enslavement. The factor most pointed, IMHO, is the emergence of the Hebrew bible, an advanced literary, alphabetical book, telephone size, with world changing laws and paradigms. How could savage slaves manage this - in a desert, completing the works before entering Canaan?

It is also why I ask for equivalent literary works from Canaan - because the Hebrew is described as proto-Canaan; or from Egypt or any other place, in equal measure as the Hebrew bible. I found no such alphabetical books [in equal measure] anywhere else for 800 years after this dating. The latter is the real non-virtual miracle.
By pugsville
#13749375
How many miles a day, how many tons of supply, how do they carry the supplies, how long a line of march for 3 million, how long would it take. Work there these questions with regards to ancient logistics and the figure of 600,000 is totally impossible let alone 3 million. It could not be done with organized backing of the State of Egypt, to be done against it is just ludicrous.

How do we know Xeres didnt have a army of a million men, answer the logistics simply dont work.
By IamJoseph
#13749386
How many miles a day, how many tons of supply,


I agree it must also pass the test of natural laws - these are after all by the same One Creator. There is sufficient qualifications in the text which do this.

The period in question is 40 years, of a relatively small journey. There are 42 stops listed for the mass of humans, which encountered many attacks from other surrounding desert nations. There are instances which identify warer problems when no wells were found.

The issue here is not how many and how could they have managed this. That the Israelites were in Egyptian enslavement for 400 years, and then left, and then commenced a nation kingdom in Canaan - is not up for questioning. The reverse of the question applies: how could they not have journey. Did they appear on the other side by magic? That is what you are inferring when the texts are cherry picked to form a most unreasonable premise, thus rendering the text as unsupportive.
By pugsville
#13749614
The Sinai is going to support 3 million people for decades, again this is just ludicrous.
By IamJoseph
#13749631
The region which contains Sinai is a large area - bigger than all of Palestine. A host of ancient nations existed in that region, including the Mediantes. The report in the Hebrew bible does not lack plausability.
User avatar
By Oxymoron
#13749887
The Sinai is going to support 3 million people for decades, again this is just ludicrous.


it wouldnt be so difficult for people who are used to it, plus the enviroment there was more fertile then
By IamJoseph
#13750484
From a historically vindicated POV, there is no reason to doubt the exodus. We have a mass of people in Egypt - with an Egyptian Stelle affirming 'a war with Israel' in stone, then we have them in Canaan, speaking their own language, having their own books and belief system, and accounting 100's of historical imprints in between. One can be blind to all the evidences but eyes wide open to the most diabolical manipulations. I find it strange to question the numbers of a scientific cencus - when this makes no impact on the story. Its not as if the text is boasting how great and good those people were - in fact just the reverse. Why would the text be charged as false - for what purpose?
By pugsville
#13750496
What scientific consensus?

Historical Sources from a wide variety of times and places are often totally unreliable about numbers. They often quote quite exaggerated numbers. Hey I dont have any familiarity with the history at hand, but to talk of many hundred of thousands or millions just strikes me as very very wrong. I familiar with ancient army logistics and moving large numbers of people requires a lot of support. Primitive carts (before the development of decent harness) have a pretty short effective range before the animals are eating all the load, mule cartage is not great (though more flexible terrain wise) human portage very little range at all. In the ancient world rivers and seas were the only real way of moving goods effectively easily. Living of the land may be effective for small numbers but to gather food for thousands, (let alone) more is not feasible, plundering highly populated regions may work but not for long. 40 years of wandering, are they waiting for the crops to get in each year, semi nomadic agriculture is not going to support 100,000s. The Romans often quote huge numbers for semi nomadic Germanic tribes (defeated by Marius) well it's not that credible.
By IamJoseph
#13750503
Exaggeations needs a reason. The 600K figure for the men is not one of them, at least this is plausable. The text says 70 left Canaan as a group, made of 12 sons and their families. They numbered 600K after 400 years. What is exaggearted about such figues?
#13807537
Paradigm wrote:Many biblical scholars doubt it, even going so far as to say Moses never existed. Others say that it was a gradual migration of people from Egypt to Canaan that got blown up into an epic over time. Very few outside of fundamentalist circles now believe that it happened as the Bible says. So what do you think happened? Was there some historical basis? It seems to me that something must have happened which forever shaped the identity of the Jewish people.


The Exodus never happened. The most accurate story of the Exodus is (briefly) this:

9 of the tribes stayed in Canaan the entire time, while 4 of the tribes lived in Egypt. Eventually, the 4 tribes left of their own free will to reunite with the other 9 tribes.

The “Exodus Trilogy” (to coin a phrase) consisting of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers, is a National Unity Document. It is classic propaganda. Never underestimate the importance of National Unity. Two recent examples are Nazi Germany and the “white guilt” crowd. Most Americans fail to understand that Germans are an ethnic group who all speak German and who for over 1,000 years lived in the Alsace-Lorraine region in France all the way east to Kazakhstan in the Soviet Union, even to this day. The Nazis created the Aryan Race thing to foster National Unity among all Germans in the hopes of creating a giant political state, and used it to justify military action. The “white guilt” crowd has created the myth of the “Native American Indian” in an attempt to foster National Unity among the 100s of disparate aboriginal groups inhabiting the Americas for social, economic and political reasons.

The Hebrews have several problems that need to be resolved and the best way to do that is to create a myth. It is a political, social and national embarrassment that the tribes were separate; they want to show that the tribes were always unified. There are two disparate sets of religious beliefs; they need to be merged as one. There are two separate histories; they need to be unified. There are two sets of political beliefs, the monarchists and those supporting the Judges; those ideas need to be ameliorated. And it’s also necessary to justify the many conflicts that occurred in the region and explain the need for Hate Week.

I'll address the "Moses" issue first.

The reason no one can find evidence of "Moses" is because "Moses" is not a name. "Moses" is only part of a name. As an analogy in English, what everyone is attempting to do, is to find evidence of "Son." As you all know, "Son" is not a name, rather it is part of a name, like Williamson, Johnson, Hanson, Stevenson, etc et al. So it is with "Moses." In Egyptian (a consonantal language) Moses is rendered as Ms-s. It means “from emanated." It is prefixed with the name of a deity as so:

Ptahmoses = emanated from Ptah (aka Enki)

Tutmosis/Thutmose = emanated from Thoth (aka Ningishiddza)

Ramoses/Rameses = emanated from Ra (aka Marduk)

Ahmeses/Ahmoses/Ahmosis = emanated from "unsure" (I'm not sure of the corresponding Sumerian/Akkadian "god" but possibly the Sumerian An aka the Akkadian Anu which was the Egyptian On but the correct transliteration might be Ahm)

What was Moses’ real name? Some have suggested Mermose, an Egyptian general from roughly the same period. That’s a stretch. A general, a leader of men, who stutters and spits on everyone? I don't think so. Moses is portrayed as pathetic, running around like a chicken with his head off, “What I do now?I don’t understand.” “I don’t know what to do, oh, someone please tell me what to do?” and couldn’t even lead a fork to his mouth to eat. Aaron had to speak and act for Moses.

It’s obvious the prefix to Ms-s (Moses) was the name of a god, whom later Hebrews found offensive and struck it from texts (so much for the “historical integrity” of the bible). Which god? Ptahmoses is a good choice, the god of water, from whence Moses allegedly was found (and that story mirrors an earlier story from another culture – putting an infant in a basket and floating it down a river to be found by another). There’s also no rationale to hide his real name if it was Mermose. In what way is “Mermose” offensive, unless there is an Egyptian deity "Mer" (I'm not aware of any)? I have no idea what Moses’ real name might have been, but it would certainly be interesting to find out.

And now for the evidence.

First we'll look at the various examples of linguistic evidence. How is it even remotely possible that only the tribes of Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Benjamin have exclusively Egyptian names (no Canaanite names whatsoever), while the tribes of Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Ephraim and Manasseh all have exclusively Canaanite names (and not one single Egyptian name)?

The only possible answer is that Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Benjamin lived in Egypt, while Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Ephraim and Manasseh always lived in Canaan.

The Hebrew language also provides evidence. At the time Joseph went to Egypt circa 1850 BCE, the Israelites spoke Canaanite, since the Hebrew language did not exist yet. Over the next several centuries, the Ugaritic dialect emerged from Canaanite circa 1500 BCE. Ugarit, of course, is a city in present-day Syria, which bordered the northern 10 tribes, (specifically the tribes of Dan, Manasseh, and Naphtali). Later, what the Hebrews spoke evolved into a sub-dialect of Ugarit called proto-Hebrew, before evolving into the Hebrew language circa 950 BCE. Hebrew is simply Canaanite, specifically Ugarit without the case endings (I'm talking about the locative, vocative, dative, nominative and accusative cases). This progression of language is not possible if all of the Hebrews were living in Egypt for 400 years, and even more so it we accept the late date of the “exodus” in 1250 BCE. That would have given the Hebrews only 100 to 150 years to become totally saturated in the Ugaritic dialect, create their own dialect based on that, then form their own language. Why? Because Ugarit, the city, its people, culture and language were destroyed circa 1190 BCE and it ceased to exist from that point on.

How heavily were the Hebrews influenced by the Ugarits?

As I said, the Hebrew language stems from the Ugaritic dialect of Canaanite. I will give the Ugaritic roots plus Hebrew roots and then Hebrew with vowels:

Ugaritic tnn with the Hebrew tnn (tannin) i.e. sea monster

Ugaritic ’qltn with the Hebrew ’qltn (’agallaton) “squirming”

Ugaritic brh with the Hebrew brh (bariakh) usually translated “fast-moving”

That’s from the Ugaritic Leviathan Myth, which shows that not only was the Hebrew language influenced by Ugarit, so were Hebrew myths and religious thought.

Again, that is possible, if and only if, Hebrews were living in Canaan during the time they were supposed to be in Egypt. If all of the tribes of Hebrews had lived in Egypt, then there is no way Hebrew would have an affinity with Ugaritic Canaanite. As a point of fact, the Hebrew/Aramaic lexicons have fallen into disuse, and the preferred lexicon is Hebrew/Ugaritic. For example “A survey of the first 100 Phoenician words in the dictionary shows that 82 percent have the same meaning in Hebrew. Between Ugaritic and Hebrew the figure is about 79 percent” (Ugaritic by D. Pardee 1997).

The logical conclusion is that some Hebrew tribes were living in Canaan the entire time that they were allegedly in Egypt.

Second, the biblical evidence. Let’s look at what the “bible” really says. Abrahm is dated to the time of the destruction of Sodom, so if you follow the genealogy and the texts, Jacob ends up in Egypt with Joseph circa 1875 BCE.

Exodus 43:32 They set a place for him, a separate place for his brothers, and another for the Egyptians who were eating with him. (The Egyptians are not able to eat with Hebrews, for the Egyptians think it is disgusting to do so.)

Exodus 46:33 Pharaoh will summon you and say, ‘What is your occupation?’ 46:34 Tell him, ‘Your servants have taken care of cattle from our youth until now, both we and our fathers,’ so that you may live in the land of Goshen, for everyone who takes care of sheep is disgusting to the Egyptians.”

These verses (and several others) that are uniquely Egyptian clearly indicate Egyptians were running Egypt and not Asiatics or Hyksos. The Egyptians had linen, flaxen and cotton, so they didn’t need sheep for wool (if they wanted wool, they could trade for it) and they were into grazing cattle and oxen, not sheep.

Jacob’s death is a watershed event. To understand it, you have to understand Semitic customs. The Patriarch owns the land and all the animals. His sons are merely share-croppers (although over time they might be able to buy enough animals to have their own flocks). The “birth-right” is like a will. Because Reuben slept with his father’s concubine and Simeon and Levi murdered the men of Sheckem, the three of them get cut out of the “will” and get nothing, except the shirts on their backs and whatever animals they might have. Joseph forfeits his birth-right in favor of his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh. That leaves the land to be divided among Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin.

Why does Joseph get the birth-right? Again, Semitic custom, specifically Sumerian/Akkadian custom. But Joseph was not the first born. Yes, indeed, Joseph was the first-born. He was the first-born son of the preferred wife, who was Rachel. That's why Joseph get the birth-right and the largest portion of the land. Joseph forfeits his birth right in favor of his sons, and if you look at the maps, the lands of Manasseh and Ephraim are the largest tracts singly and taken together.

For those who don’t get it, once Jacob dies, Reuben, Simeon and Levi have no land to live on. There’s no place for them to go. Sure, they can pony up some money and buy land from someone else, but it may not have been possible to buy land adjacent to Jacob’s original tract of land (which has now been divided up among the other brothers). For them, the best option is to stay in Egypt where Joseph can fix them up with land for free. As for Benjamin, we’ll have to speculate. Being the youngest (and poorest) and wanting to be with his real brother (Rachel was the mother of Joseph and Benjamin) perhaps he gave up his birth-right to stay in Egypt with Joseph, or perhaps because he was the youngest, he received no birth-right.

After Jacob dies, the rest of the clans returned to Canaan to bury Jacob and they never went back to Egypt. The clans of Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Benjamin remained in Egypt, where the could be with Joseph and where they could have land and wealth.

Genesis 45:6 For these past two years the famine has been in the midst of the land and for five more years there will be neither plowing nor harvesting.

Genesis 47:4 Then they said to Pharaoh, “We have come to live as temporary residents in the land.


It doesn’t make much sense to leave one area in a region experiencing famine and move to another area experiencing the same famine. That would be like leaving a burning house to go into another burning house because it’s “safer.” I would also point out that the Hebrew word is "sojourn" which means a short stay and not permanent. I would also point out that only brothers went to Egypt. They left their retainers and slaves at home to manage the land they would be returning to later.

So one group of 10 Clans has left Egypt to return to their own lands and continue living, while another group of 4 Clans remains in Egypt. The two groups, one in Egypt and one in Canaan are trading, probably along the “King’s Way.” Once the famine ends, trade is less profitable. As conflict heats up, trade becomes less profitable still as caravans are lost to thieves and marauders because Egypt can’t secure its borders. Mercenaries are costly and not reliable and by the time the Hyksos take control circa 1720 BCE, all trade between the two groups stops, and they have no contact for the next several hundred years. During that time, the two groups diverge culturally, politically and religiously.

Following the texts, Joseph would have died circa 1805 BCE and 400 years or so would make the pharaoh “who did not know Joseph” one of the first several pharaohs of the 18th Dynasty, like Thutmose I. Based on that, you can reject the date of 1250 BCE for the “Exodus.”

Exodus 1:11 So they put foremen over the Israelites to oppress them with hard labor. As a result they built Pithom and Rameses as store cities for Pharaoh.

Because the city is Rameses, they incorrectly assume the pharaoh had to be Rameses II. That is impossible for any number of reasons, mainly because Moses cannot be alive during the reign of Rameses II, which means Rameses II can’t be alive during the “Exodus.” It would have taken 20 years or more years to build the city, then 80 more years before Moses appeared before Pharaoh, and then a couple of years for the plagues. That would make the reign of Rameses II over 100 years. Rameses II couldn’t be the pharaoh of the “Exodus” for another reason, namely that Moses fled after killing the Egyptian official and doesn’t return until after pharaoh dies. If the pharaoh who died was Rameses II, then he reigned from 1304 BCE until 1236 BCE and was succeeded by Merneptah. That would put the “Exodus” far too late.

I’m getting ahead of myself, but the archaeological evidence proves there was no “Exodus.” The Merneptah stela circa 1225 BCE (named after the pharaoh I just mentioned) refers to Israel as a settled nation in their land. Worse than that, the Merneptah stela references events that occurred 2 centuries earlier, meaning the Hebrews had already been settled in the region since the mid-1400s BCE.

The four clans in Egypt left of their own free will shortly after the start of the 18th Dynasty. I like the early date, say 1425 BCE.

Oxymoron wrote:How would slaves have so many resources? Jews left Egypt with lots of livestock, equipment and Gold how is that possible? This story has some basis but we dont know alot of details of what actually took place. There is evidence that Jews in fact were not slaves but rather living in Egypt and making a nice living, and left with out conflict due to economic or political reasons.


We can address that here:

Exodus 37:24 He made the lampstand and all its accessories with seventy-five pounds of pure gold… 38:24 All the gold that was used for the work, in all the work of the sanctuary (namely, the gold of the wave offering) was twenty-nine talents and 730 shekels, according to the sanctuary shekel.

That is over a ton of gold, and just for the sanctuary. It doesn’t include all of the other gold or silver used for other purposes. Slaves, laden with tons of gold and silver? Really? What kind of slaves are those? And now I will provide overwhelming evidence that refutes the Exodus Trilogy and shows that the bible lacks any historical integrity.

Kapanda wrote:Under Moses and Joshua, the Israelis exterminated complete cities and communities, by the word of the Bible, leaving no man, woman, elderly or children alive.


The bible claims that the Israelite army destroyed 16 cities. That’s just nonsense.

Archaeological excavations (conducted by a fanatical Christian archaeologist intent on proving the veracity of the "bible") show that only three cities present evidence of being destroyed. Those three cities were Bethel, Lachish and Hazor. Even though the archaeological evidence shows they were destroyed, it does not prove the Israelites did it and there is no evidence to support claims that the Israelites did. The only thing that can be proven is that those three cities were destroyed. Also, if you claim the Israelites destroyed those cities then you have no choice whatsoever and MUST accept the early date (circa 1425 BCE) of the “Exodus” and not the later date of 1250 BCE (those three cities were destroyed long before 1250 BCE). The sum total of the evidence suggests that at least one of those three cities were most likely destroyed by the Israelites, but there is nothing definitive.

To add insult to injury, seven of the cities claimed to be destroyed show no signs of destruction whatsoever (including Jericho, Ai and Gibeon), and most embarrassingly, three cities were not even occupied at the time the Israelites entered Canaan, and it doesn’t matter if you accept the early date of the “exodus” or the later date. And here’s a real side-splitting laugher: One of the “destroyed” cities was Jericho. The bible claims Joshua walked around the walls of Jericho seven times blowing a trumpet and the walls fell down. No, the walls didn’t fall down and there was no one even living in Jericho.

Six of the cities mentioned as being destroyed have not yet been located. At this point, for historical integrity, the bible is 3 for 16. Even if the other six cities are located, and all of them were destroyed and evidence proves it was the Israelites, that’s only 9 out of 16, just over 50%.

The bible mentions the names of twelve cities that were conquered but not destroyed. Five of those cities have been found, and they were not destroyed, but that does not prove the “Exodus.” Two other cities mentioned as not being conquered or destroyed were found, but it isn’t possible to determine if they were destroyed or not, or conquered by the Israelites or not.

There were twelve additional cities found during the excavations that date from the same relative time period, and all twelve were destroyed. If I recall correctly, 5 or 6 of these cities have been identified, but none were mentioned in the bible. The remaining cities have not been identified. At least 6 of the 12 cities are known to have been destroyed by either the Egyptians or by the Phoencians or Carthaginians.

It’s presently impossible to determine who destroyed the other six cities. Even if we were to assume that the Israelites did, that would be nine cities, and nine does not equal sixteen.

One of the interesting things discovered during these excavations is that it is virtually impossible to tell the difference between Canaanite settlements and Israelite settlements. Well, no kidding. The Israelites lived in Canaan from about 2100 BCE until 600 BCE. Of course they adopted Canaanite culture and customs and they spoke Canaanite dialects until the Israelites developed their own dialect (which I’ve already pointed out wouldn’t be possible unless the Israelites were in Canaan and not Egypt).

So how did the Israelites take over the land of the Canaanites? The Immigration Theory (which assumes there was an “Exodus”), says the Canaanites lived in the plains and the Israelites arriving from Egypt moved to the highlands, then they conquered the plains; that theory fails because the archaeological evidence is against it. Yes, there is archaeological evidence of sudden expansion of villages and towns in the highlands during the time frame in question, but the settlement expansions do not equal the 600,000+ people claimed to have left Egypt during the “Exodus.”

The Gradual Emergence Theory (which assumes the Exodus never happened) says the Israelites developed a distinct identity from the Canaanites, fled to the highlands then returned to conquer the plains.

I reject both theories in part. There is a kernel of common sense in them, but a better theory is that nine of the tribes were always living in Canaan, while the other four tribes lived in Egypt. The Israelites evolved and managed to take over the whole area. That would still explain the constant conflicts in Judges, plus it explains the archaeological evidence showing expanded and new settlements in the highlands for 25,000 to 30,000 people, that is, a single tribe of Israelites, not 14 tribes of Israelites.

It also fits the allotment of land. Assume for a moment that the nine tribes have already been living in Canaan for the last 500 years. Where does the clan of Reuben go? The only place it can, in the Highlands (where there is archaeological support showing expanded settlements). Simeon? That clan gets the scrub to the extreme south of Judah’s territory, the only direction the Israelites can quickly expand. Benjamin? No room for Benjamin’s clan, so Judah gives up a portion of its territory to Benjamin (then absorbs the tribe of Benjamin later). And the Levites? They don’t get a territory. They live in the temples in each of the tribes’ territories (until Jeremiah writes Deuteronomy and plants it in the temple for Josiah to find).

And that is what the Exodus Trilogy is designed to cleverly hide. I call it a trilogy because instead of writing the history in one book, it’s dispersed and interwoven with hideous laws across three books, just like you would expect a propaganda document supporting National Unity would be, to make it difficult to understand and to get people to focus on the laws and not on the actual history.

That at least some tribes lived in Egypt is obvious, not just from their names, but from this:

I have not cursed a god.
I have not killed people.
I have not robbed.
I have not committed adultery.
I have not coveted.
I have not told lies.
I have not trespassed.

No, that isn’t the 10 Commandments, that’s from the Egyptian Book of the Dead, written about 1,000 years before Joseph arrived in Egypt. It sure looks like the 10 Commandments, doesn’t it?

There’s one more issue, which debunks the “Exodus” and also gives a clue as to when the Exodus Trilogy was written. Why is the Kingdom of Israel over-run?

You’re a king. Country A has a very small population and a very small army, much smaller than yours, while Country B has a very large population and a very large army, equal in size to yours. Which country do you invade?

Definitely Country B. No doubt about it.

Why, because you’re on a suicide mission? No, because Country B is extraordinarily wealthy, and that’s what you want, the wealth of that country. You want to subordinate Country B and make it a vassal state, so that it pays you tribute annually and the wealth of Country B flows into your coffers.

Country B is the Kingdom of Israel, and Country A is the Kingdom of Judah. Judah was a backwoods, backwater red-neck Podunk country. It had no wealth. Judah had no cities; it had only small farming hamlets of maybe 80 people and a few towns of up to 1,000 people here and there. Jerusalem, the capital of Judah was the proverbial “one bar town” or “one stop-light town” or whatever you want to call it. If you blinked you would have missed it. It was a tiny 12 acres and had a population of only 1,000-2,000 people.

That's right. That is supposedly the capital city of the great of the Hebrew Kingdom and later the Kingdom of Judah (after the northern tribes seceded and formed the Kingdom of Israel) -- a whopping 1,000 to 2,000 people.

By contrast, Israel flowed with wealth. Each tribal district had several towns larger than Jerusalem in both size and population.

The critical thinker now asks why there were two kingdoms. There were two kingdoms because Solomon was dumber than Colonel General President Idi Amin Dada. The first thing idiot Solomon does is levy a tax increase on the northern 10 tribes (not wise). Then Solomon suspends taxes for the tribe of Judah (which now includes the tribes of Reuben, Simeon and Benjamin – not wise). Solomon then realigns the boundaries of the 10 tribes in the north which angers them (not wise). Next, Solomon levies a second tax on the new tribal boundaries (double taxation – not wise). Continuing with the stupidity, Solomon now levies a personal tax on all persons in the 10 northern tribes, requiring them to work for the kingdom for 30 days with no compensation, while exempting Judah (not wise). To add insult to injury, the 30 days of annual slavery (see Hebrew text – not the King Jerk Vision – regarding “officers of missim”) is spent on construction projects in Judah, mostly fortifications, roads, and irrigation projects (not wise).

When Solomon dies and Rehoboam becomes king, the tribal leaders of the northern 10 tribes ask Rehoboam if he is going to continue the insanity and stupidity instituted by Solomon. Rehoboam says “yes” and that’s the end of the single kingdom of all Hebrews.

So why did Solomon do those things? I told you why. The northern ten tribes were flowing with wealth and Judah was dirt poor. The northern 10 tribes would be like Luxembourg, and the Judah would be Somalia.

But why?

Because there was no Exodus.

The northern tribes were NEVER in Egypt.

The northern tribes spent 400 years not in Egypt, but in Canaan, cultivating vineyards. They spent 400 years not in Egypt, but in Canaan, planting orchards and orchards of dates and palms, and most importantly olives. They spent 400 years developing irrigation works for sheep pastures and crop fields. They spent 400 years learning how to manage their economy and develop the managerial skills and the economies of scale necessary to produce wine and olive oil and wool and develop massive profits and generate incredible wealth.

That’s why.

And now you see how the archaeological evidence fits in. Sixteen destroyed cities? No way, and archaeology has proven it.

The Israelites didn’t conquer Canaan, they out produced it and bought it. They were able to exert political and economic control over the surrounding areas, as they coalesced into a nation.

The tribe of Judah in the south was poorly situated geographically (on the Negev Desert) and never able to develop much of anything, especially wealth.

If you understand that, then you understand why the northern tribes agreed to a monarchy, and specifically why they agreed to a monarch from the tribe of Judah. Someone from the tribe of Judah would be an outsider and lessen political intrigue and in-fighting amount the politically and economically powerful northern tribes. They erroneously thought they could control the king, because they controlled the civil servants, since they had the experience and knowledge in management and administration. When the kingdom splits, all of the nobles, administrators and scribes in Jerusalem pack up and leave to take up new positions in the new Kingdom of Israel, and they take their wealth with them.

What happens when the Kingdom of Israel is over-run in 722 BCE?

The flow of refugees brings the wealthy nobles, administrators and scribes back to Jerusalem, along with their wealth. For those who doubt that, Jerusalem went from 12 acres to 150 acres and a population of 1,000-2,000 to about 120,000 in just 40 years.

About 150 years later, you have the “bible” as the J and E traditions are merged (remember the northern tribes have been exiled and the general view and belief among Hebrews is that those people are gone and will never be back).

Then the Exodus Trilogy is written.

Had Israel survived, we might have received a parallel, competing, and very different history. But with the Assyrian destruction of Samaria and the dismantling of its institutions of royal power, any such competing histories were silenced. Though prophets and priests from the north very likely joined the flow of refugees to find shelter in the cities and towns of Judah, biblical history would henceforth be written by the winners—or at least the survivors—and it would be fashioned exclusively according to the late Judahite Deuteronomistic beliefs….” (from Finklestein and Silberman).

If the Kingdom of Israel was never destroyed, then “bible” you’re reading now NEVER EXISTS. Who knows what you’d be reading. In fact, Christianity might not ever have existed, because there would have been no Essenes.

Potemkin wrote:Indeed. What is remarkable about the ancient Israelites was how weak their faith in monotheism actually was.


Paradigm wrote:According to a book I'm reading right now, the Israelites at the time of the Exodus were not monotheist. They were monolatrists at best, and only became monotheist during the Babylonian exile.


I used to fail students for even thinking about citing Pukipedia.

The Hebrews were never monotheists or monaltrists at any time. The Hebrews were, and still are to this day, Henotheists.

Monotheism is more than just the belief in one god. Monotheism is the belief in a universal god for all. Accordingly, the Hebrews and modern Jews cannot be monotheists since their god is for Jews and only Jews and no others.

That of course, suggests monaltry, the belief in one god to the exclusion of all other gods. Did the Hebrews believe other gods existed? They most certainly did:

Judges 11:24 Chemosh ’elohim (Moabite)
Samuel I 5:7 Dagon ’elohim (Philistine)
Kings I 11:33 Astarte ’elohim (Canannite goddess), Milcom ’elohim (Ammonite), Chemosh ’elohim (Moabite)
Kings II 19:37 Nisroch ’elohim (Assyrian)

At this point, I would simply state that if any of you intend to study the Old Testament, then you need to purchase or obtain a copy of the BHS, because if you're going to rely on the King James Version, then you will always be wrong.

The fact that the Hebrews believed other gods existed makes them Henotheists.

The Hebrews were heavily influenced by Ugarit culture, language, myth and religion, because they adopted all of it. Both Ezekiel and Isaiah quote Ugaritic myths and many of the Psalms are copies of Ugarit literature, not to mention the Old Testament mentions most of the Ugarit pantheon El, El Shaddai, El Elyon, El Berith, Yahweh, Baal, Mot, Yam and Ashera.

Recognize them? You should recognize El, El Shaddai, El Elyon, Yahweh, Baal, Mot, Yam and Ashera.

Note that the Mot the god of the dead is now the Jewish word for death (mot) and that Yam the god of the sea is also now a Hebrew word, see Yam Suf the Sea of Reeds. That shows the influence of Ugaritic Canaanite on the Hebrew language.

El Shaddai is an Akkadian fertility god who corresponds to the Sumerian Ningishiddza and El Shaddai is invoked in Genesis where ever there are fertility issues or where there is a blessing bestowed on Hebrews.

IamJoseph wrote:The region which contains Sinai is a large area - bigger than all of Palestine. A host of ancient nations existed in that region, including the Mediantes. The report in the Hebrew bible does not lack plausability.


600,000 people moving through an area urinating and defecating and cooking wood (charcoal) and leaving chicken bones and orange rinds everywhere should have left evidence. Where is it?

IamJoseph wrote:From a historically vindicated POV, there is no reason to doubt the exodus.


"No reason to doubt" is not a valid argument. It smacks of dogma.

IamJoseph wrote:We have a mass of people in Egypt - with an Egyptian Stelle affirming 'a war with Israel' in stone, then we have them in Canaan, speaking their own language, having their own books and belief system, and accounting 100's of historical imprints in between.


But that isn't true at all. The Hebrews have nothing original. Their language is merely the Ugaritic dialect of Canaanite without the case endings. Their books and belief systems are nothing more than poor copies of the original works produced by other cultures. For example, the original story of the destruction of Sodom, Gomorrah and the cities of the Plain is much more detailed than the poorly edited Hebrew version, which doesn't even mention the destruction of the cities of the Plain. The Hebrews were very good at borrowing from other cultures, like the 10 Commandments that I mentioned earlier.

IamJoseph wrote:Why would the text be charged as false - for what purpose?


Because it is false, and because people like me are seeking an objective truth.
#13820892
^ That is the most thought out response I've ever read on PoFo.

You should post more often.

.
#13821805
I agree with Arthur. But it's not well thought out. It's pretty common among people who disagree with the Bible unless, of course, borrowing rich below there are personal theories to this.

Their books and belief systems are nothing more than poor copies of the original works produced by other cultures.


And by the looks of it, you're in love with this poor copy. Who isn't a copy of a previous culture? Are we born in isolation?

600,000 people moving through an area urinating and defecating and cooking wood (charcoal) and leaving chicken bones and orange rinds everywhere should have left evidence. Where is it?


I guess you didn't read the Bible, then. They certainly didn't eat chickens or orange rinds (this is quite clear from the story). Where would they grow and feed chickens? Where would they grow oranges?! According to the story, and tradition, the stuff they ate (manna) was so holy nothing came out, especially excrement. The Hebrews didn't shit for 40 years! :) Thus, the evidence you demand isn't there, nor should it be. The unbelievable story is consistent with the "findings".

I'm not saying if the Exodus is true or not true. I honestly don't care. The spiritual teachings contained within the work are enough to last a lifetime, and more. That's all the books are really worth. Too bad you missed it. All you're worth is hate and distrust. Poor copies at best.

Yet I'm no one to disagree with archaeological findings. I've come to know about the incompatibilities of the Bible vs. evidence.

The only possible answer is that Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Benjamin lived in Egypt, while Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Ephraim and Manasseh always lived in Canaan.


Or maybe, wow, someone really liked names and they were borrowed from cultures, especially Egypt, or that they're all Hebrew names? The ONLY possible answer smells of dogma.

Because it is false, and because people like me are seeking an objective truth.


So why then pick it up and debunk it? What is the truth you seek? You already came up with the truth and absolutist explanations. Not a very historian/objective attitude.
Last edited by danholo on 30 Oct 2011 13:30, edited 1 time in total.
#13821887
@Mircea

Very interesting post. Is the linguistic name split between the tribes your own idea or did you get it from someone else, I've not see it before. That there are massive problems with the archaeology of the conquest is well accepted. I'm not a David Roh fan, the fact that he doesn't even mention the four document hypothesis, marks him out as a joker for me. However do you think there are any reasonable grounds for doubting the orthodox Egyptian chronology?

@danholo Is it not pretty much accepted orthodoxy amongst the Israeli archaeological community that the Exodus is a myth. I've heard it argued that often atheist Jewish Israelis are more attached to the literal historicity of these stories than many Judaists.

@KurtFF8 Litwin wages a psyops war here but we […]

[usermention=41202] @late[/usermention] Are you[…]

[usermention=41202] @late[/usermention] The[…]

I (still) have a dream

Because the child's cattle-like parents "fol[…]