Did the exodus really happen? (soul, translation, Egyptian, genesis)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's not possible to be sure but the evidence is turning against it. The Jews begin to look as though they emerged out of the other Canaanite tribes (rather as Rome did out of the other Italian tribes) and had nothing to do with coming out of Ur, never mind Egypt.
The attempts to link the sojourn in Egypt with the Hyksos or habiru don't work and neither do the efforts to link the Moses story with Rameses II or Hatshepsut or the tempest stele.
Ron Wyatt's Moses site in Saudi Arabia is intriguing, but over imaginative and the 'calf altar' looks more like a pile of boulders with some herdmans' grafitti on it.
The chariot wheels in the Red sea are still not shown to be anything but unusual coral formations and the Solomon pillars prove nothing but that Solomon believed in the red sea crossing. In fact I have strong doubts about there being any Solomon pillars. One (with Wyatt's fishy translation) has 'vanished' and the other one has no inscription at all.
Finally the Bible account has a chronological problem. The only ancient mention of Israel in the Mereneptah stele recounting the Pharaoh's conquests of various states including Israel (it seems) suggests that Israel was a worthwhile state in his days. But it was later on that the Egyptians defeated the Sea peoples, - the 'Peleset' who, as the Philistines, settled on the coast and became embroiled in disputes with Israel.
But Exodus states that God directed Moses into Sinai rather than going direct to Canaan in order to avoid Philistia and not get involved in fighting them. Thus the exodus is set in a time long after the time when they had already become established as a state,
There are ways to argue all that, but the evidence does seem, as I say, to be turning against the Exodus as a real event.
The Israelites are leaving Egypt in a hurry. According to the bible, they left by marching five in a rank. This would make the column almost three-hundred miles long, not counting the millions of animals. Given the distance that can be covered in one day, maybe twenty miles at best, the first ranks would have to cover thirty miles for the last of the ranks to even make a start. This means that half of them could not have even gotten out of the city on the first day, let alone first gathering in Rameses. So the account that all of them made it to Succoth in one day is also impossible. It would have taken months.
It's not possible to be sure but the evidence is turning against it. The Jews begin to look as though they emerged out of the other Canaanite tribes (rather as Rome did out of the other Italian tribes) and had nothing to do with coming out of Ur, never mind Egypt.
The attempts to link the sojourn in Egypt with the Hyksos or habiru don't work and neither do the efforts to link the Moses story with Rameses II or Hatshepsut or the tempest stele.
Ron Wyatt's Moses site in Saudi Arabia is intriguing, but over imaginative and the 'calf altar' looks more like a pile of boulders with some herdmans' grafitti on it.
The chariot wheels in the Red sea are still not shown to be anything but unusual coral formations and the Solomon pillars prove nothing but that Solomon believed in the red sea crossing. In fact I have strong doubts about there being any Solomon pillars. One (with Wyatt's fishy translation) has 'vanished' and the other one has no inscription at all.
Finally the Bible account has a chronological problem. The only ancient mention of Israel in the Mereneptah stele recounting the Pharaoh's conquests of various states including Israel (it seems) suggests that Israel was a worthwhile state in his days. But it was later on that the Egyptians defeated the Sea peoples, - the 'Peleset' who, as the Philistines, settled on the coast and became embroiled in disputes with Israel.
But Exodus states that God directed Moses into Sinai rather than going direct to Canaan in order to avoid Philistia and not get involved in fighting them. Thus the exodus is set in a time long after the time when they had already become established as a state,
There are ways to argue all that, but the evidence does seem, as I say, to be turning against the Exodus as a real event.
Actually the hieroglyph referring to israel is one that identifies them as a people not a nation so it more likely a tribal confederation at this point. You also bring up a good point with the philistines because the arrival of the sea peoples, and the end of bronze age culture is felt all over that part of the world. Yet nothing of is mentioned, neither is the campaign of mereneptah, yet 300 years later the shishak/shoshenq invasion is mentioned. Of course we can't assume that the tribe of israel was even defeated in battle since often victory steles of that time used spin doctoring, and included details that didn't happened exactly the way they said they did.
I think the absences of both shows that it did not enter their cultural memory as a collective group thus never became part of the later myth of the exodus. I also feel the exodus is more a tale of the rise and fall of the hyksos. Which would have parallels from late genesis to the exodus itself in history. Not to mention we can't even being on the lack of conquest material from the time of joshua, or lack of induction of new types of pottery/traditions which we would have seen had their of been a massive conquest.
Personally, I feel that the Exodus story mirrors the return of the Israelites to Jerusalem to build the second temple.
Seems that there is enough evidence to show that the Israelites who were in Egypt were not slaves at all. There were craftsmen, and there were elite warriors as well. [Same with certain Israelite military divisions within the Assyrian empire after the Northern Kingdom was absorbed.]
The flight from Egypt by any Israelite quite possibly was connected to the rebellion against Akhenaton.
As one interprets just the stories of Jacob and Joseph, the writers infer that the Israelites were far flung all up and down Palestine. Of course, these very same writers (writing probably in the 2nd Century b.c.) were very critical and sarcastic to those villages who were not of the "true" failth. Hence, the division between Esau (which becomes synonymous with Canaanites) and Jacob, between the sons of Leah (who are nearly always cast in a terrible light), and the sons of Rachel (one of whom is included in the lineage of Jesus). In any regard, any Israelite returning from Egypt in "real" time would have been at home with fellow Israelites.
Rather, here we have a people returning from captivity. The whole point of the Moses story is one of victory. God saves the remnant. The writers and redactors of the Exodus would not have presented Israelites in Egypt in their true form (i.e., successful business and military people, having an equal status with the Egyptians) but in a "slave" light, similar to what the returnees had just experienced.
The 2nd Century redactors had an agenda of their own: restoration of both the Northern and Southern kingdoms. Moses became the rallying point: God saved "us" from the big, bad, ol' Egyptians and, later, through Joshua, gave us back the land promised to Abraham. Now, God has brought us back from Assyria (the new Egypt), and we are going to retake the land promised to us through Abraham.
So, bottom line: I do not regard Exodus to be a factual story or account, although there may be some facts about the "ancient" history thrown in. Certainly some of the cities and landmarks in Exodus are of the more modern era, because some of them did not exist when Moses allegedly led the Israelites out of Egypt. However, the story is a great religious and political piece of propaganda (if one looks at it from that vantage point), around which the intelligentsia of the new Israel can rally around, build a God-fearing (and this certainly would be monotheistic--or else!) society, and eventually welcome a Deliverer from God who would reestablish the Davidic-Solomonic Kingdom.
The Israelites are leaving Egypt in a hurry. According to the bible, they left by marching five in a rank. This would make the column almost three-hundred miles long, not counting the millions of animals.
....and not a soul in Egypt thought a three-hundred mile line of escapees an important enough event to make a note of.
There are clearly problems in trying to place the exodus at any particular time in Egyptian history. I really doubt that the Hyksos - an Mid- eastern invader who effectively became a rival Egyptian dynasty with Pharonic titles and Egyptian religious icons (which should put Moses' people out of the picture) who had their own capital and who were driven out by a native Egyptian dynasty -were the Israelites depicted as groaning under the Egyptian yoke as slaves. There just isn't any good reason to link Exodus with them.
I take the point that Israel might not have been a proper state in the nineteenth dynasty (time of Mereneptah, 4th ruler) but must have been a community worth claiming a victory over.
There are clearly problems in trying to place the exodus at any particular time in Egyptian history. I really doubt that the Hyksos - an Mid- eastern invader who effectively became a rival Egyptian dynasty with Pharonic titles and Egyptian religious icons (which should put Moses' people out of the picture) who had their own capital and who were driven out by a native Egyptian dynasty -were the Israelites depicted as groaning under the Egyptian yoke as slaves. There just isn't any good reason to link Exodus with them.
I take the point that Israel might not have been a proper state in the nineteenth dynasty (time of Mereneptah, 4th ruler) but must have been a community worth claiming a victory over.
No but they did rise to positions of power in egyptian society, take over, and were driven out. Also we know that it was common in times of need for people from asiatic regions to inhabit the eastern delta. And we also find that the last king of the 13th dynasty was semitic. So i can believe that it was the core of the later exodus story with additions being made over time. Remember that chances are the original documents of the bible as redacted were not even their first versions. WHo knows what local tales eventually became the j or the e document. The point is the exodus did not happen and was most likely the culmination of different oral traditions mixed in with the end of the kingdom of judah. And obviously they were somewhat of a political force if they were mentioned i agree. However it's a far cry from the biblical version in which they exist as a major political force over the whole of what now is israel.
Last edited by ~HecateWhisperCat~; 04-08-2012 at 08:34 AM..
Personally, I feel that the Exodus story mirrors the return of the Israelites to Jerusalem to build the second temple.
Seems that there is enough evidence to show that the Israelites who were in Egypt were not slaves at all. There were craftsmen, and there were elite warriors as well. [Same with certain Israelite military divisions within the Assyrian empire after the Northern Kingdom was absorbed.]
The flight from Egypt by any Israelite quite possibly was connected to the rebellion against Akhenaton.
As one interprets just the stories of Jacob and Joseph, the writers infer that the Israelites were far flung all up and down Palestine. Of course, these very same writers (writing probably in the 2nd Century b.c.) were very critical and sarcastic to those villages who were not of the "true" failth. Hence, the division between Esau (which becomes synonymous with Canaanites) and Jacob, between the sons of Leah (who are nearly always cast in a terrible light), and the sons of Rachel (one of whom is included in the lineage of Jesus). In any regard, any Israelite returning from Egypt in "real" time would have been at home with fellow Israelites.
Rather, here we have a people returning from captivity. The whole point of the Moses story is one of victory. God saves the remnant. The writers and redactors of the Exodus would not have presented Israelites in Egypt in their true form (i.e., successful business and military people, having an equal status with the Egyptians) but in a "slave" light, similar to what the returnees had just experienced.
The 2nd Century redactors had an agenda of their own: restoration of both the Northern and Southern kingdoms. Moses became the rallying point: God saved "us" from the big, bad, ol' Egyptians and, later, through Joshua, gave us back the land promised to Abraham. Now, God has brought us back from Assyria (the new Egypt), and we are going to retake the land promised to us through Abraham.
So, bottom line: I do not regard Exodus to be a factual story or account, although there may be some facts about the "ancient" history thrown in. Certainly some of the cities and landmarks in Exodus are of the more modern era, because some of them did not exist when Moses allegedly led the Israelites out of Egypt. However, the story is a great religious and political piece of propaganda (if one looks at it from that vantage point), around which the intelligentsia of the new Israel can rally around, build a God-fearing (and this certainly would be monotheistic--or else!) society, and eventually welcome a Deliverer from God who would reestablish the Davidic-Solomonic Kingdom.
No but they did rise to positions of power in egyptian society, take over, and were driven out. Also we know that it was common in times of need for people from asiatic regions to inhabit the eastern delta. And we also find that the last king of the 13th dynasty was semitic. So i can believe that it was the core of the later exodus story with additions being made over time. Remember that chances are the original documents of the bible as redacted were not even their first versions. WHo knows what local tales eventually became the j or the e document. The point is the exodus did not happen and was most likely the culmination of different oral traditions mixed in with the end of the kingdom of judah. And obviously they were somewhat of a political force if they were mentioned i agree. However it's a far cry from the biblical version in which they exist as a major political force over the whole of what now is israel.
In principle, that is possible. I don't doubt that many middle- easterners traded, lived and worked in Egypt and perhaps obtained official positions.
That said, I agree that there is no real evidence that anything substantially resembling the Exodus actually took place and Israel is more likely to have evolved in Canaan. And I would still say that the Hyksos have nothing to do with that story. The Hyksos were finally expelled surprisingly late - by Ahmose I of the 18th Dynasty 1539 - 1514
I'll have a look at this 13th dynasty king. The last king of the 13th was Merik-ka-re, which sounds totally Egyptian. There was a king Jacob -Baal of the 16th dynasty (ending 1663 BC). There are some who (quite understandably) identify him with the Biblical Jacob. He is followed by some other names that sound non - Egyptian; Yakbam, Yoam and someone whose name began Amu. Then some 'others' before the next Egyptian dynasty.
The Hyksos were before that (2nd intermediate round about the 1780's BC.) and were defeated by Kamose who established the 13th dynasty. So they can't possibly be the followers of Moses after that Jacob -Baal, because he came decades later, so the clues look suggestive but won't fit the Bible account.
Ah..well... the problem is that evidence is scanty, some Pharonic names are found only once and the Hyksos and the vassal Egyptian 13th dynasty to the south overlapped. I have seen a note placing Jacob- baal as one of the Hyksos. Which is again a bit of a problem making the Hyksos expulsion the Exodus considerably after Patriarch Jacob. I shall have a look but the dates may have to remain open. However, we are centuries short of Ramesses II 1279 - 1213 who is often a prime choice as the pharaoh of the Exodus.
Any feedback welcome.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 04-08-2012 at 10:26 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Hyksos were finally expelled surprisingly late - by Ahmose I of the 18th Dynasty 1539 - 1514 
