The Exodus (Did it happen)

[Bee1]

That is so not true. I am in university studying theology for a certificate. I have never heard any of my professors say the bible is a story book!!

Although taking any book in a fundamental litteral way is not a good idea neither. Actually many scholars are of the concept that every part of the bible needs to be taken in its context and purpose. A poem is a poem and not a literal truth. Like the creation story. It portraits the power of God as the one who created. It does not meant ot was done in 6 litteral days and it does not meant it was Not done on 6 litteral days. Its purpose os not to tell is the days.


As for Exodus there are manu theories. One i like is that there are ppl who have touched the works of moses at a later date, maybe in Ezekiel time.... Some clarification were put in it we know for a fact. We don't know by whom and it's just théories. But if this theory is right then what could of happened is that a clarification was introduced in error. Thinking it must be this Pharoah or this date. Interesting and none of it makes me believe less in God.

My brother a none believer, attempted to take enuma elish as proof that the bible is copied from a bunch of legends.... But it may be that it was one story and several people tried to put it in writing...

We have am amazing God who used humans to tell his story. Not perfect. We dont worship the book. Nothing os perfect but God. But it does show us his redemption of a ppl who constantly leave him.

Did it happen. I think it did. I have no doubt it did. Archeology is a science that is not super accurate. Not finding something is nkt proof of it not happening.

And it definitely does not mean that it did.

Sent from my GT-P1010 using Tapatalk

 

[Bee1]

Here is seventeen exhibits that say the Exodus did not happen as described in the Old Testament.

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2006/09/debunking-the-exodus-decoded.aspx

If these exhibits are false or misleading please let me know so that I correct myself.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Here is seventeen exhibits that say the Exodus did not happen as described in the Old Testament.

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2006/09/debunking-the-exodus-decoded.aspx

If these exhibits are false or misleading please let me know so that I correct myself.

Hey, Bee1, did the events in Genesis 39-50 actually happen?

How long does the Bible say that Israel was within Egypt?

Is there any evidence of a semitic tribe of people coming to live in the land of Goshen? If so, how wealthy were they?

Is there any evidence to support the story of pharaoh slaughtering male children, while allowing the female children to live?

Is there any evidence of a semitic-born man in Egypt living as though he were a ruler?

 

[Bee1]

Hey, Bee1, did the events in Genesis 39-50 actually happen?

How long does the Bible say that Israel was within Egypt?

Is there any evidence of a semitic tribe of people coming to live in the land of Goshen? If so, how wealthy were they?

Is there any evidence to support the story of pharaoh slaughtering male children, while allowing the female children to live?

Is there any evidence of a semitic-born man in Egypt living as though he were a ruler?

Yes and no.

This is the best answer I can give at the moment,

Joseph

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_(Genesis)

19th century source criticism divided the Joseph story between the Jahwist, Elohistand Priestly sources of the documentary hypothesis.[29] In the early 20th century Hermann Gunkel suggested that, unlike the Abraham-Isaac-Jacob stories, the Joseph story formed a single unitary story with literary rather than oral origins.[29] In 1953 Gerhard von Rad made a detailed assessment of its literary artistry and drew attention to its identity as a Wisdom novella,[30] and in 1968 R. N. Why bray argued that unity and artistry implied a single author.[31] All three insights are now widely accepted,[32] and the majority of modern biblical scholars date the Joseph story in its current form to the 5th century BCE Persian era at the earliest.[33] There have been many attempts to trace the story's redaction history including work by Donald Redford. His theory states that a first "Reuben version" of the story originated in the northern kingdom of Israel and was intended to justify the domination by the “house of Joseph” over the other tribes; this was followed by a later “Judah-expansion” (chapters 38 and 49) elevating Judah as the rightful successor to Jacob; and finally various embellishments were added so that the novella would function as the bridge between the Abraham-Isaac-Jacob material in Genesis and the following story of Moses and the Exodus.[34


There were Semitic people who rule Egypt for 108 years (Hyksos), 18th to the 16th B.C.E. There were Canaanites living in the city of Avaris in 18th B.C.E.

Israelites supposedly lived in Eygpt for 400 years. But left no trace nor writing from or about them.

There was a mass grave of men between the age of 18 to 24 years old, no baby's, no old men. Soldiers who died in camp.

There was evidence of a hebrew living in the pharaoh's court.

Sent from my GT-P1010 using Tapatalk

 

[Lon]

Here is seventeen exhibits that say the Exodus did not happen as described in the Old Testament.

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2006/09/debunking-the-exodus-decoded.aspx

If these exhibits are false or misleading please let me know so that I correct myself.

Sure, some are misleading and others are incorrect.

For instance, the first? An argument that a date change can account for. IOW, the problem wouldn't be the information, but the time.

Why is this important? When I'm looking at facts of what does or does not coincide, I have to be sure the guy saying 'Nuh Uh!' isn't making it up either, lest his/her rebuttal is nothing but opinionated nonsense either.

Next, "D" the fourth item, the guy concedes 'Jacob' so it doesn't matter if he thinks it is a different 'Jacob.' This one would go to the film imho.
"E" also inconclusive, so not even worth mentioning or addressing. The guy conceded this one as well. He 'Debunked' nothing

"F" "the data is hotly contested..." Again, this isn't 'debunking' it is an unscholarly concession. You have a guy that labels his site 'Debunking' and then cannot deliver. To me? That's a problem. In effect, all he has done is said 'Nuh Uh! I don't believe it. It is hotly contested so I don't have too!' That's not an argument and certainly not 'debunking' anything.

I'll stop there because something more important needs to be stated: This ISN'T even an article "debunking" the Exodus. It is simply an article that is calling some things presented by a film inaccurate. Anybody reading this thread needs to understand that. The link is not given to debunk the Exodus, just the claims about it from a movie and importantly, doesn't deliver on them nor the historical Exodus itself. -Lon

 

[Lon]

Yes and no.

This is the best answer I can give at the moment,

Joseph

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_(Genesis)

19th century source criticism divided the Joseph story between the Jahwist, Elohistand Priestly sources of the documentary hypothesis.[29] In the early 20th century Hermann Gunkel suggested that, unlike the Abraham-Isaac-Jacob stories, the Joseph story formed a single unitary story with literary rather than oral origins.[29] In 1953 Gerhard von Rad made a detailed assessment of its literary artistry and drew attention to its identity as a Wisdom novella,[30] and in 1968 R. N. Why bray argued that unity and artistry implied a single author.[31] All three insights are now widely accepted,[32] and the majority of modern biblical scholars date the Joseph story in its current form to the 5th century BCE Persian era at the earliest.[33] There have been many attempts to trace the story's redaction history including work by Donald Redford. His theory states that a first "Reuben version" of the story originated in the northern kingdom of Israel and was intended to justify the domination by the “house of Joseph” over the other tribes; this was followed by a later “Judah-expansion” (chapters 38 and 49) elevating Judah as the rightful successor to Jacob; and finally various embellishments were added so that the novella would function as the bridge between the Abraham-Isaac-Jacob material in Genesis and the following story of Moses and the Exodus.[34


There were Semitic people who rule Egypt for 108 years (Hyksos), 18th to the 16th B.C.E. There were Canaanites living in the city of Avaris in 18th B.C.E.

Israelites supposedly lived in Eygpt for 400 years. But left no trace nor writing from or about them.

There was a mass grave of men between the age of 18 to 24 years old, no baby's, no old men. Soldiers who died in camp.

There was evidence of a hebrew living in the pharaoh's court.

:think:

There were Semitic people who rule Egypt for 108 years (Hyksos), 18th to the 16th B.C.E. There were Canaanites living in the city of Avaris in 18th B.C.E.

The "yes and no" doesn't help. If you claim there 'were' Semitic people, then try to say "no there weren't" you are contradicting yourself. Your statement above ALSO shows concessions and then the answer is remarkably "yes" and not "no" at all. There isn't a "No" in what you just admitted to as true. The answer has to then be "yes" and you are left holding a skeptics bag with nothing in it.

By contrast, we doubt Mormon claims of early white Americans simply for one reason: The author was a known liar and died with a gun in his hand killing others before he himself succumbed to bullet fire.


There is no good reason to doubt a nation or Moses. If you come up with a 'good' reason to do so, then such may be entertained, but a lack does not, in fact, give you reason. It simply must be unearthed JUST as the Dead Sea Scrolls had to be unearthed, proving skeptics and 'higher' critics incredibly wrong, and worse: liars and charlatans. NEVER purport to know something from lack of knowledge. It makes science and scholars at 'best' guessers, at worst, charlatans and gossips (liars). Don't ever be that guy or gal. Lying is a sin. Psalm 19:13

 

[Bee1]

I did not say there were no Semitic people in Egypt in 18 th century bce, I am saying there were no Israelites in Egypt in 18th century.

:think:


The "yes and no" doesn't help. If you claim there 'were' Semitic people, then try to say "no there weren't" you are contradicting yourself. Your statement above ALSO shows concessions and then the answer is remarkably "yes" and not "no" at all. There isn't a "No" in what you just admitted to as true. The answer has to then be "yes" and you are left holding a skeptics bag with nothing in it.

By contrast, we doubt Mormon claims of early white Americans simply for one reason: The author was a known liar and died with a gun in his hand killing others before he himself succumbed to bullet fire.


There is no good reason to doubt a nation or Moses. If you come up with a 'good' reason to do so, then such may be entertained, but a lack does not, in fact, give you reason. It simply must be unearthed JUST as the Dead Sea Scrolls had to be unearthed, proving skeptics and 'higher' critics incredibly wrong, and worse: liars and charlatans. NEVER purport to know something from lack of knowledge. It makes science and scholars at 'best' guessers, at worst, charlatans and gossips (liars). Don't ever be that guy or gal. Lying is a sin. Psalm 19:13

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

 

[JudgeRightly]

I did not say there were no Semitic people in Egypt in 18 th century bce, I am saying there were no Israelites in Egypt in 18th century.

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

Israelites ARE a semitic people, dummy.

Semitic:

1. relating to or denoting a family of languages that includes Hebrew, Arabic, and Aramaic and certain ancient languages such as Phoenician and Akkadian, constituting the main subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic family.

2. relating to the peoples who speak the Semitic languages, especially Hebrew and Arabic.

 

[Bee1]

Now this is what I am talking about not knowing the major point being discussed , the whole argument is were there Israelites in Egypt in 18th century bce if there were than an argument for Exodus at that time is good. But the Israelites were were not a people distinct from other Canaanite groups, they are all a Semitic people just different belief and customs, until much later 13th bce at the earliest. Now do you understand my point, I fu*cking know they are Semitic people read the posts before you interject some frivolous gibberish.

Israelites ARE a semitic people, dummy.

Semitic:

1. relating to or denoting a family of languages that includes Hebrew, Arabic, and Aramaic and certain ancient languages such as Phoenician and Akkadian, constituting the main subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic family.

2. relating to the peoples who speak the Semitic languages, especially Hebrew and Arabic.

Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

 

[Lon]

I did not say there were no Semitic people in Egypt in 18 th century bce, I am saying there were no Israelites in Egypt in 18th century.

Seems a bit of a stretch to me. We can only identify what information we have, but once you say any Semitic people were in Egypt during this time, you have to concede there may well have been Jews in that crowd. Does that erase the doubt of an Exodus? No, but it doesn't eliminate it either. It shows there were Jews there. See here for instance. Note there is absolutely no controversy introduced about Israel tenure in Egypt. It is also important to note, that in Exodus, slavery isn't the term. Joseph's family was indentured to an Egyptian Pharaoh, however that employment or indenture worked out, we are left trying to fit pieces together with not a lot to go on. 'No' evidence that the Exodus happened? I wouldn't say that. There is sufficient room to think that the Biblical account is an historical account and no need to fabricate such. To date, there is really no reason for such because every other biblical historical place so far, is substantiated. Solomon's stables? Substantiated. Jerusalem, obviously, etc. etc. There are places underwater in Egypt to this day. There are places and objects deeply buried under sand. I don't know if you keep up on such archeology, but Cecil B Demille's Ten Commandments was buried under deep dunes after only 90 years. They have found jeeps and planes much deeper. Here is a good article that seeks to meet skepticism at the door as well as dispels myths and half-truths regarding 'no evidence.'

I'm not really an Exodus expert either, but I do try to imagine why anybody would 'want' to believe the Exodus didn't happen. The ten plagues? Perhaps, that part of the story lends to it, but I've seen miracles and heard of many many more. I KNOW God can and does move what seems immovable. I've no problem believing this part of the story. What then? That slaves went free? I've seen at least the result of such a thing happening so that for me is also no stretch. Whatever we have in print, I assume that because I find the rest reliable, I can trust that such things as an Exodus did, in fact happen. Do we translate and interpret correctly all the time? I'm sure we don't, but then it is a matter of me or you being corrected and correctable, rather than trying to correct God or second-guess a people of history. To me, it just doesn't seem the more reasonable approach. History is often a mystery to be sought WAY more often than a myth to dismiss, even by those who purposefully promulgated myths. Why? Because they were trying to teach something about reality in the metaphor, to draw inspiration from the simile. Native Americans have wonderful stories but the fact is, we are intelligent enough to know when they were employing story, when or if they were superstitious about such, and when, clearly, they weren't employing fiction at all. The Exodus simply doesn't read like fiction. It is Israel's history.

 

[chair]

It is false and was proven false with findings like the Dead Sea Scrolls. There is absolutely nothing to back up the poor academic theory that Moses didn't write the Pentateuch. ..

How do the Dead Sea Scrolls prove anything about the author of the Pentateuch?

 

[Lon]

How do the Dead Sea Scrolls prove anything about the author of the Pentateuch?

Sorry for the confusion. It was directed to a previous quote where the Dead Sea Scrolls proved Daniel was authentic among other things. I should have broken that into two paragraphs. I apologize for the confusion it caused.

The point was, so called skeptic 'scholars' came up with theories that were horrible and the Bible itself, found in jars, proved such nonsense false. There are Jews who doubt their own story, I read one yesterday that said 'completely false' as if he were any kind of know-it-all. I just cannot palate that kind of ignorant arrogance packaged in some kind of 'official authority' guise. He doesn't 'get' to speak for all of us. It is just that simple and he is foolish for the attempt. I've no idea where you fall on this topic, but I'm convinced academics do NOT point to a lack. The investigation is ongoing and any half-guess stated as if there is evidence or lack thereof is foolish. I'd liken this to a police investigation where the actual cops are telling so-called reporters to shut-up until their investigation is complete. In this case, it is nowhere near completed. We know a lot of Egyptian archeology is underwater. Snopes is really off base regarding this article. Why? Because they say WND is a 'satirical' website :doh: Shoddy work, Snopes fellas, shoddy work.

 

[Zeke]

History doesn't really matter when it's the spiritual equivalent is applied to now that counts 2Cor 3:6, history is a biased formula depending on culture dependencies based on this outward world's circular vanities Ecclesiastes 1:9, reinforcing the bottom line through religious peer pressure on the incoming class of receptive young minds with the preprogrammed need to fit in with religious talking points of generations past is a reciprocal and parasitic disease , the truth suffering under the supervision of intellectual extroverts more in league with Caesars world than the narrow road of introverted kingdom theology of timeless application to each soul Matthew 23:13, the Exodus like the human sacrifice is a type and shadow of it's spiritual application few dare to divide for the obvious cultural backlash they would have to face if Luke 17:20-21KJV was actually a known fact in their lives.
.

 

[Lon]

History doesn't really matter when it's the spiritual equivalent is applied to now 2Cor 3:6, history is a biased formula depending on culture dependencies based on this outward world's circular vanities Ecclesiastes 1:9, reinforcing the bottom line through religious peer pressure on the incoming class of receptive young minds with the preprogrammed need to fit in with religious talking points of generations past is a reciprocal and parasitic disease , the truth suffering under the supervision of intellectual extroverts more in league with Caesars world than the narrow road of introverted kingdom theology of timeless application to each soul Matthew 23:13, the Exodus like the human sacrifice is a type and shadow of it's spiritual application few dare to divide for the obvious cultural backlash they would have to face if Luke 17:20-21KJV was actually a known fact in their lives.
.

:doh: You have your own ideas, and they often contradict even your own theories. I REALLY wish you could see that. You are so Maverick, you no longer know Romans 12:5 or 1 Corinthians 12. You are a loner and therefore, suffer the false perceptions of lone-interpretations of those scriptures. Newsflash: They are NOT yours alone buddy. 2 Peter 1:20 We ALL get to weigh in. You lost before you even started. I'll hound you with this until the day one of us dies. You are NOT the soul interpreter of scriptures and must/necessarily rely on the Body or you are not part of the body. If you are not part of the body, you have no head, who is Christ. You are thus your own heretic and must own your own lordship, eschewing the Lord Jesus Christ. I mourn for you. -Lon

 

[Zeke]

:doh: You have your own ideas, and they often contradict even your own theories. I REALLY wish you could see that. You are so Maverick, you no longer know Romans 12:5 or 1 Corinthians 12. You are a loner and therefore, suffer the false perceptions of lone-interpretations of those scriptures. Newsflash: They are NOT yours alone buddy. 2 Peter 1:20 We ALL get to weigh in. You lost before you even started. I'll hound you with this until the day one of us dies. You are NOT the soul interpreter of scriptures and must/necessarily rely on the Body or you are not part of the body. If you are not part of the body, you have no head, who is Christ. You are thus your own heretic and must own your own lordship, eschewing the Lord Jesus Christ. I mourn for you. -Lon

2Peter 1:20 is referring to intellectual interpretation not spiritual revelation Galatians 1:12, Saul being a student of the OT yet void of spiritual revelation that bypasses mans intellectual barriers to God's foolishness had his own private interpretation reinforced by his traditional teachers, ignorant of the more excellent way your theology stumbles over in favor of Caesars historical presentations of dead letter traditions, it certainly satisfies your double minded intellectual doctrines that ignore Peter as well, the count is ongoing, so the loner clause is a far better position if! One actually believes Luke 17:20-21KJV, and 1Cor 3:16, your reluctance to accept that revelation exposes your worldly theology for the traditional thorn it is in your ability to except spiritual revelation that complies with Peters warnings.

 

[Lon]

This needs to smart, Zeke. Are you an only (self-willed) child? It looks like, has every indication. You've got 'spoiled' written all over you. This is all your private agenda having nothing to do with YET ANOTHER THREAD!

2Peter 1:20 is referring to intellectual interpretation not spiritual revelation Galatians 1:12, Saul being a student of the OT yet void of spiritual revelation that bypasses mans intellectual barriers to God's foolishness had his own private interpretation reinforced by his traditional teachers, ignorant of the more excellent way your theology stumbles over in favor of Caesars historical presentations of dead letter traditions

:blah: blah blah blah blah. You wrote a run-on sentence so MUST listen to your betters because you CAN'T interpret scripture correctly (again) by yourself when you cannot even write. ALL you did was substantiated everything I said about you. You are your own private guru with this "I don't like the Apostle Paul" nonsense :dizzy: At that point, you eschew the God of the Bible, Zeke. Do you realize that? I'd literally have to disregard the bible and for some odd and unintelligible reason, to "follow Zeke! (who cannot write a cogent sentence, let alone understand scripture correctly because he cannot recognize or employ correct parts of speech)." :doh:

it certainly satisfies your double minded intellectual doctrines that ignore Peter as well

YOUR bad again. YOU just asserted YOUR tiny forgettable opinion over the whole church. YOU did. All by your lonesome, Zeke. Guess what? I'm even smarter than you. That should give you great pause. There are more intelligent folks than the two of us put together and little ol' Zeke thinks HE is the cat's meow! :doh: I don't know if you get it. YOU demonstrate your lack of prowess and ability. Done deal, you just aren't too bright but THINK you are! :dizzy: How deluded do you have to be? (I'm trying to REACH you! I know it is confrontational, but somebody needs to shake you out of your high and mighty opinion of yourself, you are wrong!) YOU are all by yourself AND WITHOUT the where-with-all. Worse? YOU KNOW IT! Your reason for rejecting God is ALL about your dismal life service to God prior and now is nothing but excuse making AND making a religion so you don't have to do ANYTHING! I hate that, Zeke! You quit! That's all there is to this story, you couldn't or wouldn't measure up nor follow, thus went off on a tangent theology that is all Zeke and all by yourself. We all see it in you. You need to see it in yourself. Your "Zeke-god" isn't my god, just yours, and yours alone. The God of the Bible is one who calls for unity. You aren't even striving for that, just ripping constantly at the Body. You are doing it here with nothing to do with this thread! You are in good company with millions of other little gods running their own little kingdoms and worlds. Remember Joshua 24:15 See? A standard to match up to, NOT make up all on your own.

the count is ongoing, so the loner clause is a far better position if!

ONLY if you want your own god in your own making. Job said this: Even if God slay me, YET will I trust Him Job 13:15 Not Zeke. He became disenfranchised and rejected Him. REGARDLESS of who He is, Jacob wrestled with God, not Zeke. Zeke sought a god in his own incredibly poor image. You either get on board ala Romans 12:5 and 1 Corinthians 12:12 or you aren't a Christian or a follower of Christ. You became a liar the day you rejected God AND His people. HE will make His bride pure and you are left foolish. Be reconciled to God!

(look, anybody else reading along, I'm trying to get Zeke to quit rejecting the Lord Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. He may never listen, but it will not be because I didn't try and tell him plainly to be reconciled to God. 2 Corinthians 5:20, Zeke's soul is on the line, if God leads, keep his toes to the fire of God's sword)

One actually believes Luke 17:20-21KJV, and 1Cor 3:16, your reluctance to accept that revelation exposes your worldly theology for the traditional thorn it is in your ability to except spiritual revelation that complies with Peters warnings.

"ACCEPT!" You can't even write a cogent sentence, nor use the correct word, and then THINK you have the wherewithal to correct me???! You are woefully behind and a complete rookie young'un. Grow up and learn from your elders and betters. You are a child in a man's body with incredibly immature haughty ignorance. Grow up! You need the body, and you need elders. Matthew 10:24 Sit there and learn from your betters! You have nothing on me, so are doing far worse in the company of 'our' betters. Sit there and keep quiet and learn something and follow Paul as he follows Christ you ignorant little spoiled immature child. YOU KNOW you went off on a tangent because you couldn't hack Joshua's dare. As for me and my house...WE will be followers, not shoddy ignorant amateur wanna-bee going our own selfish ego driven way. -Lon

 

[Tnkrbl123!]

oops delete