The Dating of the Exodus

[arcadejunkie]

An Egyptian document from 1308 b.c.e. lists Israel as a conquered people. However, the Exodus is traditionally dated at earlier dates. Anybody have an explanation?

[Dave G]

I don't have an explanation, but I am curious which document it is.

[kofh2u]

An Egyptian document from 1308 b.c.e. lists Israel as a conquered people. However, the Exodus is traditionally dated at earlier dates. Anybody have an explanation?


A recent genetic testing of Jews seems to support the Exodus at @ 1300 BC as the very first moment in Judaism and as an independent Israeli peoples.

It confirms that the Jewish people have for 3300 years maintained their authenticity and familial integrity. In this, the record measuring 3300 years, we have an independent measurement of time, one which sets the date of the Exodus, during the life time of Aaron, at @1300BC.

From: journal Lancet

Applying the techniques of modern genetics to members of the ancient institution known as the Cohanim, the Jewish priesthood which predates the present system of Rabbi, genetics has allowed them to trace their origins back 3300 years.

Beginning with Aaron, priestly status has been passed down through the ages, from fathers to sons through word of mouth. To this day, all the Cohanim are seen as descendants of Aaron, not just figuratively but by blood. Many, but not all, have the surname Cohen, Kohen, Cohn, Kohn, Cone, Kone, Cahn, Kahn or Kahane. (Cohan in Hebrew means priest.)

In Orthodox and some Conservative congregations, they are accorded special respect and are the only ones who can perform certain important religious duties.

(My note:
The Cohanim Blessing is made by holding the hand with a split between the ring finger and the middle finger- a gesture decidedly similar in posture to the greeting of Dr. Spock's hand on "Star Trek.")

The test examined certain portions of the Y-chromosome, which, like the priestly distinction, belongs only to men, and is passed strictly from father to son. As the researchers reported in the journal Lancet, the men who had been told they were Cohanim shared certain distinctive genetic traits, indicating that they may represent a single line tracing back to one male forebearer, perhaps even Aaron.

Important to the dating of the time of Exodus, some Rabbis are quick to point out, the study not only confirms the genetic links among Cohanim, it also validates the reliability of the word-of-mouth, father -to- son transmission of the priesthood

[FirstSunday33ad]

An Egyptian document from 1308 b.c.e. lists Israel as a conquered people. However, the Exodus is traditionally dated at earlier dates. Anybody have an explanation?

According to the last archeological information I have read (which may be out-dated, I haven't really kept up with it) the Jews left Egypt in the chaos of the mid to late 13th century after the invasions of the Sea-People and the fall of the Hittites. This places the Exodus at (very) roughly between 1250 and 1200 BCE.

If accurate, this means that in 1308 BCE the Jews were a conquered people.

[Celsus]

According to the last archeological information I have read (which may be out-dated, I haven't really kept up with it) the Jews left Egypt in the chaos of the mid to late 13th century after the invasions of the Sea-People and the fall of the Hittites. This places the Exodus at (very) roughly between 1250 and 1200 BCE.
Your information must be at least 30 years out of date, since the only "archaeologists" or "biblical scholars" today who subscribe to an exodus are completely rejected by mainstream scholarship. Simply put, there is no evidence for an exodus, there are physical impossibilities relating to it--e.g., how come Egypt is so concerned about petty rivalries of village chieftains in Palestine in the 14th-12th centuries, as attested by the Amarna letters, yet completely oblivious to 2 million Israelites leaving their country--and Egypt rules Palestine during most of that period. The reason the 1250-1200 period is mentioned is that that period is the only time possible for millions of Israelites to sneak out of the country unnoticed (note that if the Biblical account is correct, then their population dwarfed ancient Egypts by an order of magnitude). There is absolutely no positive evidence for, and plenty of circumstancial evidence against, the exodus. Not only that, the entire generation should have died in the period of wandering, yet did not leave 600,000 skeletons in the desert, but in fact, left nothing at all. And they couldn't defeat the 50,000 or so people living throughout the entire Canaan, living in non-existent cities. Something doesn't add up. A friend of mine wrote a very good OP on this: The Exodus: 'A Dead Issue' (http://www.evcforum.net/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000060.html). I've written some things overlapping with this topic as part of an introduction to archaeology here (http://www.eblaforum.org/library/bcah/intbibarch03.html), which is based on current scholarship.
If accurate, this means that in 1308 BCE the Jews were a conquered people.
I think arcadejunkie actually means an Egyptian inscription dating to 1207/8 BCE known as the Merneptah stele which states that "I.si.ri.ar is laid waste, his seed is not." If there's something from 1308, I'm sure a lot of archaeologists would like to know about it. This campaign, of course, should have been noticed by Israelites if they were already in Canaan.

Joel

[kofh2u]

Your information must be at least 30 years out of date, since the only "archaeologists" or "biblical scholars" today who subscribe to an exodus are completely rejected by mainstream scholarship. Simply put, there is no evidence for an exodus, there are physical impossibilities relating to it--e.g., how come Egypt is so concerned about petty rivalries of village chieftains in Palestine in the 14th-12th centuries, as attested by the Amarna letters, yet completely oblivious to 2 million Israelites leaving their country--and Egypt rules Palestine during most of that period. The reason the 1250-1200 period is mentioned is that that period is the only time possible for millions of Israelites to sneak out of the country unnoticed (note that if the Biblical account is correct, then their population dwarfed ancient Egypts by an order of magnitude). There is absolutely no positive evidence for, and plenty of circumstancial evidence against, the exodus. Not only that, the entire generation should have died in the period of wandering, yet did not leave 600,000 skeletons in the desert, but in fact, left nothing at all. And they couldn't defeat the 50,000 or so people living throughout the entire Canaan, living in non-existent cities. Something doesn't add up. A friend of mine wrote a very good OP on this: The Exodus: 'A Dead Issue' (http://www.evcforum.net/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000060.html). I've written some things overlapping with this topic as part of an introduction to archaeology here (http://www.eblaforum.org/library/bcah/intbibarch03.html), which is based on current scholarship.

I think arcadejunkie actually means an Egyptian inscription dating to 1207/8 BCE known as the Merneptah stele which states that "I.si.ri.ar is laid waste, his seed is not." If there's something from 1308, I'm sure a lot of archaeologists would like to know about it. This campaign, of course, should have been noticed by Israelites if they were already in Canaan.

Joel


Yep.
The numbers inNumbers don't add up.

The apologists argue a case that the figures got messed up in the copying of the texts from generation to generation, but as clever as the agrument may be, its remains weak.

It is just as intersting tht this observation has only most recently been brought to our attention.
It bears witness to an irrational acceptance, in general, of the bible in any rigid literal sense. This most flagrant mis-statement in Numbers, concerning simple mathematics, has passed through countless generations and minds without critical reflection on a logical level of critical consideration.

So, what are we to make of this?

1) The Fundamentalist must review their approach to understanding the scriptures and back off from such unsupportable ideas as Creationism and inerrancy.

2) A 21st century criticism must be taken serious.

In this latter opinion, I suggest that the nature of this literature be reconsidered. This is NOTa simple straightforward literary work. It is in a gendre quite unique, and in that, it is totally alone.

It is the only totally complete works of an Ancient Mystery Cult.

As such, the first criticism of numbers in Numbers is that they may intentional b too SMALL!

[mikeledo]

I have made a recent discovery about how the Old Testament was written (book to follow). There is a problem in dating anything in the OT in a proper chronological sequence if one wants to heed archaeology. Moses conquers Heshbon, an Iron Age city. The next generation Joshua conquers Ai and falls the walls the Jericho. These later two events take place in the Early Bronze Age, preceding Heshbon by a thousand years.

Dr. Aardsma has already recognized this fact and has attempted to make the OT an Early Bronze Age history and then places a gap of 1000 or so years between Joshua and David. However as you can see Heshbon demands that this be an Iron Age document.

Those familiar with Wellhausen know the Bible has various authors within the same book. However in using the document hypothesis we find only the "Book of J" can stand alone. The is no "P" book or "E" document.

What the authors did (for reasons I will not divulge at this time) was to create a living document. The original text was a EB III work. Over time this was added to. However the authors didn't just add their history to the end, but rather inserted it in between passages. What they would normally do is repeat a phrase or idea and introduce material between those phrases. After the material was introduced, it was then added in a minor fashion to subsequent passages for continuity. This is why Noah loads his family three times and why they debark twice. This is why Solomon was made King twice, Saul dies twice, Joshua conquers the cities of the 5 kings twice (notice the second list differs slightly from the first-the first being all EB III cities, the second includes Iron Age cities).

The Exodus is a complex situation. It combines 3 Exodus into one story. The one that most scholars cling to is the expulsion of the Hyksos as first hypothesized by Josephus. There was however an Iron Age story involved as Heshbon became one of the conquered cities.

The original Exodus came in EB III during the Great Famine when Egypt was run amok with plagues as the Nile turned to blood according to their texts. The pharaoh (Pepi II) which welcomed Joseph's family was the same pharaoh who turned on Moses. The Midrash explains this pharaoh of Moses ruled from age 6 to age 100. There is only one pharaoh in all of Egyptian history that did this. That was Pepi II. The 400 years that was between Joseph and Moses was a later insertion, perhaps an attempt to link the Hyksos expulsion.

After Pepi II died Egypt was ruled by short reigned pharaohs of which we have mostly legend to base our stories. It would have been under one of these pharaohs that the first Exodus occurred.

[TheOneAndOnly]

The original text was a EB III work.

Written in Hieroglyphs? Isn't this a bit early for the Bible?

The original Exodus came in EB III during the Great Famine when Egypt was run amok with plagues as the Nile turned to blood according to their texts. The pharaoh (Pepi II) which welcomed Joseph's family was the same pharaoh who turned on Moses.

Genesis 46:29
Joseph had his chariot made ready and went to Goshen to meet his father Israel. As soon as Joseph appeared before him, he threw his arms around his father [ 46:29 Hebrew [ around him ] ] and wept for a long time.

Didn't the Hyksos introduce the chariot to Egypt? Wouldn't Gen 46:29 (among other verses) indicate that Joseph lived post-Hyksos invasion? If the Exodus happened shortly after the VI Dynasty what were the Israelites doing for all those centuries before the creation of Israel etc.? Is there any signs of monotheism developing in the Middle East around 2000 BC (after the Old Kingdom ended)?

The 400 years that was between Joseph and Moses was a later insertion, perhaps an attempt to link the Hyksos expulsion.

So if there were less than 100 years between Joseph and Moses how many Israelites were involved in the Exodus? It seems like a few dozen at most. How and why were these people enslaved by the Egyptians?

After Pepi II died Egypt was ruled by short reigned pharaohs of which we have mostly legend to base our stories. It would have been under one of these pharaohs that the first Exodus occurred.

What do you mean by "first Exodus"? Your theory sounds pretty interesting.

[CatholicSage]

If the Exodus actually did happen before 1308 BC, I don't think the Egyptian document is terribly confusing. The Egyptians may have just been being stubborn, with some modern examples being China's continued claim that it owns Taiwan and the US's refusal to recognize Red China until the 70s. Heh. I guess I've got China on the mind or something :shrug:

[mikeledo]

Written in Hieroglyphs? Isn't this a bit early for the Bible?


My best guess of the original language is Phoenician Canaanite. This was the language used in Jerusalem during this period. Some scholars claim this was the roots of Hebrew.




Didn't the Hyksos introduce the chariot to Egypt? Wouldn't Gen 46:29 (among other verses) indicate that Joseph lived post-Hyksos invasion? If the Exodus happened shortly after the VI Dynasty what were the Israelites doing for all those centuries before the creation of Israel etc.? Is there any signs of monotheism developing in the Middle East around 2000 BC (after the Old Kingdom ended)?

You are correct about the chariot. That verse(s) is not in my original text. This was not a monothestic religion. YHWH is Yerah the Canaanite moon God. El does not appear, but Baal is present. Bethsheba represents Ishtar. The patriarchs are more or less Gods themselves. Samson is Shamash the sun god. The Israelites were mostly sunning themselves in Jerusalem prior to this I suppose. They have no magically beginning. They would most likely have traced their roots to Babylon and Eden (Dilmun).



So if there were less than 100 years between Joseph and Moses how many Israelites were involved in the Exodus? It seems like a few dozen at most. How and why were these people enslaved by the Egyptians?

They were not enslaved. The Great Famine caused many Asians to migrate to Egypt. Because of the Nile being used for irrigation Egypt was initially uneffected. When the famine hit Egypt and the river turned to "blood" (Hathor drank of it in the Egyptian myth) things got worse. The graineries were raided and foreigners were despised by the Egyptians. The record of their expulsion is not recorded in Egypt as I supposed they just up and left. Pottery found at Mt. Yeroham, some believe to be Mt. Sinai date to this period. Admonitions of Ipuwer, which can be found on-line is the Egyptian account of the famine/plague period although what period it actually refers to is in dispute.

"Indeed, the river is blood, yet men drink of it. Men shrink from human beings and thirst after water."

"Indeed, the desert is throughout the land, the nomes are laid waste, and barbarians from abroad have come to Egypt."

"Indeed, great and small [say]: "I wish I might die." Little children say: "He should not have caused [me] to live."
Indeed, the children of princes are dashed against walls, and the children of the neck [IV/1] are laid out on the high ground [IV/2]. "


"Indeed, public offices are opened and their inventories are taken away; the serf has become an owner of serfs."

"Indeed, the writings of the scribes of the cadaster are destroyed, and the corn of Egypt is common property. "




What do you mean by "first Exodus"? Your theory sounds pretty interesting.
This EB III Exodus would have been the first one, or the basic story on which other history was added. There are also references to the rebuilding of a city in Egypt. This was a certainly a Hyksos reference. Their massive expulsion from Egypt may have prompted those fantastic numbers of people used in the text.

There may have been a third expulsion (this is an item for further study) as Heshbon is an Iron Age city and would have come after the Hyksos. Or it may have been Heshbon was never conquered and was simply added to the Bible when it became an important trading center. It would have to have been added to the Bible where the other Amorite cities were mentioned for continuity. Heshbon is added via a poem. It is inserted between two similar passages where Moses occupies the cities of the Amorites (this was how some later editors inserted material). Once Heshbon was inserted, the phrase was then added "King of Heshbon" or "Ruler of Heshbon" was then scattered over the next paragraph or so.

Other odd facts in the original text: Eve is not named. The woman is NOT cursed or kicked out of Eden (only the man is kicked out). Adam takes a second or different wife.

There was no great loading of animals onto the ark and it never landed on Mt. Ararat.

Abraham never went to Egypt. There was no Hagar or Ishmael. Lott never slept with his daughters, nor did his wife turn into a pillar of salt. Abraham never bargained for the lives of Sodom etc. He was pleased YHWH snuffed them.

Sarah did not have a barren birth nor did Abraham attempt to kill Isaac.

Philistine is a mistranslated word. It sould be Phoenecian.

There was no story of Jonathan and David. David had one wife- Bethseba and one son- Solomon by her. When David got the ark- this was the first time the ark was mentioned. God wanted David to kill Uriah so he (David) could have Bethseba.

The original story ends when Solomon is made king. The first verse is Genesis 2:4.

This is not the real great discovery, although it may seem radically different. I accidentally came upon all this stuff when I researched the Bible for a book I was writing. I had some exact data to narrow the date of authorship. I kept attempting to place the book 800-1100 BCE as standard dating dictates. I could not do this. It had to have been written prior to 1841 BCE as an absolute drop dead date. Upon further research it was written most likely between 2218 BCE (after the death of the first historical David- last major event of the story) and 2141 BCE. The story is fairly primitive. It is very Babylonian in flavor. It is not 100% historical. Some of the texts, such as the partring of the Red Sea is meant to be a history of heaven and not of earth (Gen 2:4a first line of text).

[Mentuhotep]

Hello all,

I have seen quite often on the forums arguments against the exodus and wish to interject ainteresting point if I may. Has anyone heard of a book intitled, "Centuries of Darkness: A Challenge to the Conventional Chronology of the Old World Archaeology" ? I first came across the name of the book in an article on AIG. Here is the link of anyone wishes to read the article.http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/tj_v15n1_moses.asp

The author of the article, Mr. David Down, argues based on a few other sources that a revision of Egyptian chronology is needed and when this is taken into account there is substantial evidence for an exodus, bringing the 12th dynasty to the time of moses. Any thoughts?

[mikeledo]

Hello all,

I have seen quite often on the forums arguments against the exodus and wish to interject ainteresting point if I may. Has anyone heard of a book intitled, "Centuries of Darkness: A Challenge to the Conventional Chronology of the Old World Archaeology" ? I first came across the name of the book in an article on AIG. Here is the link of anyone wishes to read the article.http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazines/tj/docs/tj_v15n1_moses.asp

The author of the article, Mr. David Down, argues based on a few other sources that a revision of Egyptian chronology is needed and when this is taken into account there is substantial evidence for an exodus, bringing the 12th dynasty to the time of moses. Any thoughts?
Many attempts have been made to revise Egyptian history to fit neatly into the Biblical accounts. Rohl and Velikovsky are the most recent failures. There are several problems to this. First of which is C-14 supports the status quo. So in order to change history one must refute the findings of C-14 data. The second problem is that Egypt did not evolve in a vacuum. Any attempt to alternate Egyptian history means one must change Assyrian history etc. Now you have opened up a bag of worms that was no match for any revisonists of Egyptian history. The third problem is that at least one date for the pharaoh is support by a mention of the Sothis year. Pepi II was clearly the ruler during the great famine. It would be impossible to place him outside of that time period.

The article is correct to make the Exodus an EB III period as stated due to the fall of Jericho is far too established in this period. I have no idea why he feels he must change Egyptian history to do this. He is incorrect in his assumption of the time of David and Solomon. A universal flood 2307 BCE? He must be kidding. I have shoes older than that. His assumption that everything in the Bible is true as written is his major downfall. He is looking at multiple Exodus stories combined into one and has no clue about separating them.

There is no problem with Egyptian chronology. There is however a call to revise Biblical chronology beacuse none of the aforementioned data supports the current Biblical history. There was no Iron Age David and Solomon. Jericho was destroyed in the Early Bronze Age while Heshbon didn't exist until a 1000 years later. It is Biblical history that is written circular- not the one written in stone.

[Mentuhotep]

. First of which is C-14 supports the status quo. So in order to change history one must refute the findings of C-14 data.I concede that C14 is accurate within the time frame of our discussion (though one can always cry contamination, but we will leave that for another time), however in what way(s) exactly does c14 establish the idea that Egyptian chronolgy is completely accurate? What archealogical finds are you speaking of exactly?
The third problem is that at least one date for the pharaoh is support by a mention of the Sothis year. Pepi II was clearly the ruler during the great famine
What date is that? I have read, from the same author, that the bringing down of the exodus into the 12th dynasty would make Sesostris I the pharoah during the time of Joseph and the famine, incadentatly there is a canal named after joseph present in this time period. Sesostris III would then be the one who did not know Joseph and Amenemes III the Pharaoh during the time of Moses. Amenemes III daughter, Sobeknefru had no son correct? Perhaps she went down to the river Nile to ask the gods for one, pop, here comes Moses. Was it not also shortly after the next pharaoh in line of succession that the Hyksos invaded Egypt, only to find no army to fight against them? So Mr. Downs’s arguments for revision are quite important, if my names and dates are not mistaken, very important.
. His assumption that everything in the Bible is true as written is his major downfall.
Assumptions, yes but they are not blind or unfounded I think. We all have assumptions intertwined into our arguments and beliefs. I for one will take God at his word before any one man, but then again you may interpret that as my downfall as well…hehehe.(OT textual relaibility is as I understand it quite good when compared with other ancient sources)




</P>

</P>

[ChrisChillin]

Your information must be at least 30 years out of date, since the only "archaeologists" or "biblical scholars" today who subscribe to an exodus are completely rejected by mainstream scholarship.

Kenneth Kitchen?
Nahum Sarna?
Alan Millard?
Abraham Malamat?
Manfred Bietak?
Baruch Halpern?
James Hoffmeier?

These are archaeologists and biblical scholars and orientalists (period), not "archaeologists" and "biblical scholars" (questionable/fringe).

...yet completely oblivious to 2 million Israelites leaving their country--

First, our lack of Egyptian documents wouldn't mean they were oblivious, just that we don't have the documents. Second, as I've stated in the threads on the subject in Apologetics 301, "2 million Israelites" should be dropped in favor of, say, 20,000 (and this can be done from the biblical text).

There is absolutely no positive evidence for, and plenty of circumstancial evidence against, the exodus.

There is absolutely no positive direct evidence for the exodus, but plenty of indirect circumstantial evidence that favors it.

..but in fact, left nothing at all.

Again, emphatically not 2 million people, and then - why should we expect or demand to have uncovered evidence in the Sinai so far?

[TheOneAndOnly]

There is absolutely no positive direct evidence for the exodus, but plenty of indirect circumstantial evidence that favors it.

Such as? Isn't it more likely to be a legend based partly on the Hyksos expulsion?

[Mentuhotep]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/history.asp

there is a good audio file on that page talking about all the evidences for the exodus, given a change in chronolgy. the audio clip also talks about that as well.

[mikeledo]

I concede that C14 is accurate within the time frame of our discussion (though one can always cry contamination, but we will leave that for another time), however in what way(s) exactly does c14 establish the idea that Egyptian chronolgy is completely accurate?

C-14 does make it completely accurate. However when you attempt to displace people by 500 years in this era, you best have the facts to match. You could easily go plus or minus 100 years or so, but then that doesn't get the revisionist much of anything.


What archealogical finds are you speaking of exactly?

I don't know to which statement you refer to. Please specify.


What date is that? I have read, from the same author, that the bringing down of the exodus into the 12th dynasty would make Sesostris I the pharoah during the time of Joseph and the famine, incadentatly there is a canal named after joseph present in this time period. Sesostris III would then be the one who did not know Joseph and Amenemes III the Pharaoh during the time of Moses. Amenemes III daughter, Sobeknefru had no son correct? Perhaps she went down to the river Nile to ask the gods for one, pop, here comes Moses. Was it not also shortly after the next pharaoh in line of succession that the Hyksos invaded Egypt, only to find no army to fight against them? So Mr. Downs’s arguments for revision are quite important, if my names and dates are not mistaken, very important.

As stated before- there were multiple Exodus of Asians out of Egypt. The Bible includes at least two, most likely three. The Great Famine was in the Early Bronze Age during the reign of Pepi II. The Midrash states the pharaoh lived to be 100 years old ruling from age 6 to 100, followed by a short reigned monarch. This Midrash accurately describes Pepi II and he is unique in those year ranges. The pharoah who welcomed Joseph is the same one which ruled when Moses was a child.



Assumptions, yes but they are not blind or unfounded I think. We all have assumptions intertwined into our arguments and beliefs. I for one will take God at his word before any one man, but then again you may interpret that as my downfall as well…hehehe.(OT textual relaibility is as I understand it quite good when compared with other ancient sources)

I too will take the word of God over man. I have yet to find a text not written or polluted by man. Everything God has given to man he has polluted. The Bible is no exception. While some texts are historical others are hysterical.




</P>

</P></P>

</P>

</P></P>

[mikeledo]

Such as? Isn't it more likely to be a legend based partly on the Hyksos expulsion?
I would agree with that statement. The Exodus story is more complex than just a simple legend. While there were several expulsions of Asians out of Egypt. The miracles associated with the expulsion would be considered fictional to any credible essay on the topic. The miracles were however necessary to explain the history of the heavens aspect of the tale.

The heavenly aspect of the story is demonstrated in the Egyptian Tale of AAH-EN-RU. In Babylon it was Merodach against the 7 plagues sent by Anu. The historical setting is the Great Famine of the Early Bronze Age. The historic text would be the Admonitions of Ipuwer http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/texts/ipuwer.htm

although the web site disagrees with my view point.



The celebrations associated with the Exodus were practiced by the Canaanites prior to the 15th century BC.

[TheOneAndOnly]

In Babylon it was Merodach against the 7 plagues sent by Anu.

Do you have any links to this? It seems a lot of the pentateuch is similar to Mesopotamian mythology: Gilgamesh/Noah Moses in the bullrushes/ Sargon of Akkad(?), and the plagues. Suspicious.


The historic text would be the Admonitions of Ipuwer http://nefertiti.iwebland.com/texts/ipuwer.htm

although the web site disagrees with my view point.

I'm not really sure what the "Admonition of Ipuwr" is. It's hard to follow.

The celebrations associated with the Exodus were practiced by the Canaanites prior to the 15th century BC.

Really? Do you have any links for this.

[mikeledo]

Do you have any links to this? It seems a lot of the pentateuch is similar to Mesopotamian mythology: Gilgamesh/Noah Moses in the bullrushes/ Sargon of Akkad(?), and the plagues. Suspicious.

It is not suspicious. The reason why the OT is so similar to Babylonian myths is because it was based upon them and Babylonian history from the Garden through Solomon. I have no web page for this story at the moment, although I believe a serach engine would turn something up.

The similarity between all the ancient religions becomes extremely remarkable once one figures out their common bond, i.e. what the myths/stories/legends/ blends of fact and fiction were really about- the topic of my next book.




I'm not really sure what the "Admonition of Ipuwr" is. It's hard to follow.

It is a poem about a famine where anarchy reigns in Egypt. I claim it is the Great Famine of the Early Bronze Age- the same one that drove Joseph's family in Egypt and caused the Nile to turn Red etc.



Really? Do you have any links for this.
No links per se. The information is from a book "Old Testament Religion" by Elmer Leslie.

The Feast of Un­leavened Bread is described in Exodus 34:18. “The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, as I command thee, in the time of the month of Abib: for in the month of Abib thou camest out of Egypt.” Coincidentally the Canaanites celebrated their Feast of Unleavened Bread on the same day, before Moses appeared. It was celebrated at the beginning of grain harvest (Deuteronomy 16:9) at the vernal equinox. It appears to have been an ancient sun-god rite. The Canaanites’ feast lasted seven days, during which no bread made with leaven could be eaten.



Likewise the Canaanites would wave the first fruits at Baal (Leviticus 23:10f.) as did the children of Israel. The feast originates in an ancient myth. Our hero, Al Eyin, is killed in battle against his evil twin brother Mot. Anath (Al’s sister, bride­groom, and virgin mother—you figure) goes out to find her brother-husband-son. She espies at her feet the last sheaf of grain (barley or corn). As it turns out, Mot (god of the ripe harvest) is hiding there.



Anath performs seven acts (the seven days?):

1. Anath seizes the sheaf (Mot)

2. She cuts the ears.

3. She threshes the grain.

4. She roasts the grain.

5. She grinds the grain by hand in a mill.

6. She scatters the ground grain over the field.

7. Then she eats the leaven bread, for the taboo on the harvest has been lifted. The destruction of Mot made way for the resur­rection of Al Eyin, the god of the spring rains.



Al Eyin exclaimed, “I am Al Eyin, son of Baal. Make ready, then, the sacrifice. I am the lamb which is made ready with pure wheat to be sacrificed in expiation” (Jesus = lamb = communion wafer). Anath informed Mot that he was forsaken by his heavenly father El. Mark 15:34 uses these Passover ritual words, “My El, my El, why hast thou forsaken me?” Anath breaks Mot’s reed scepter, signifying his castration and a break with the old. This symbolism is repeated in Mark 15:38 when the veil in the Temple is rent.



A similar tradition existed regarding the Tammuz Festival at Harran (Assyrian empire). The women would lament Tammuz, who was cruelly put to death. His bones were ground in a mill and strewn into the wind. During the festival the women would eat nothing that was ground in a mill. (Tammuz = Mot/Al Eyin = Adonis = Osiris = Jesus.)



The Canaanite Feast of Weeks or Feast of Harvest is men­tioned in Exodus 23:16, 34:22, and Leviticus 23:16-17. This festival is called Passover or Pentecost (the Greek word for Passover). This rite came seven weeks later after the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The first fruits of the harvest were offered in the form of a meal by baking two loaves of bread with fine flour and leaven. This would help Baal renew vege­tation. The practice dates back to ancient Egypt, where two cakes were baked to represent the eyes of Horus, con­taining the essence of life.



The Feast of Ingathering (Exodus 34:22) marked the end of the olive and vintage harvest (Deuteronomy 16:13). Judges 9:27 de­scribes this tribute to Baal: “And they went out into the fields, and gathered their vineyards, and trode the grapes, and made merry, and went into the house of their god, and did eat and drink….” It was a fun celebration, like New Year’s Eve. There was dancing (Judges 21:19-23, Exodus 32:19).



The feast lasted for seven days. The Canaanites would dwell in huts made out of olive and myrtle branches (a tree sacred to Astarte), or palm branches and branches from thick trees. The Hebrews copied the pagans (Leviticus 23:39-43, Nehemiah 8:14-17). This vegetation temple was called a “booth” or “tabernacle.” The Feast of Ingathering was also called the Feast of Booths or Tabernacles (Deuteronomy 16:13).

[mikeledo]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/history.asp

there is a good audio file on that page talking about all the evidences for the exodus, given a change in chronolgy. the audio clip also talks about that as well.
I couldn't get past the first belly laugh "The problem with Egyptian chronology." There is no problem with Egyptian chronology which is supported by archaeology. It only become a problem when ones supposes the Biblical chronology, not supported by archaeology and compares it to one that is supported by archaeology.

[mikeledo]

According to the last archeological information I have read (which may be out-dated, I haven't really kept up with it) the Jews left Egypt in the chaos of the mid to late 13th century after the invasions of the Sea-People and the fall of the Hittites. This places the Exodus at (very) roughly between 1250 and 1200 BCE.

If accurate, this means that in 1308 BCE the Jews were a conquered people.
The invasion of the Peoples of the Sea not only proves bothersome for classical Exodus and Joshua dating, but also is a problem for the dating of the United Monarchy. Israel was thrown into a dark age during this period. From my own previous work:

"One of the major events that took place in ancient times is known as the invasion of the Peoples of the Sea. Every professional historian is aware of this event. However this major devastation of the Holy Land was not worth mentioning in the Biblical texts. During 1208 B.C.E. Egypt was attacked by Libya and five other groups of people identified as Shardana, Shekelesh, Akawasha, Lukka, and Tursha. These were known as the “Peoples of the Sea.” The pharaoh Merneptah defeated the invaders. A generation later they attacked again, supported by Peleset and Tjeker. Peleset is believed to be Philistines from Crete. Lukka is possibly the Lycians. Akawasha are thought to be Greeks. Tursha has been equated to the Etruscans, likewise Shardana is Sardinia and Shekelesh is Sicily. A combination of drought and migrations is believed to have caused the mass invasion by the Sea Peoples. This was not just an attacking force, but a vast migration of entire nations com­plete with women and children being pulled on ox carts.



The second strike was in 1175 B.C.E. during the reign of Ramses III. The invaders set up camp in Syria-Palestine and desolated its people. They attacked by both land and sea. Ramses destroyed their fleet in the mouth of the Nile by shooting arrows from the riverbank. The land force was de­feated somewhere in Lebanon or northern Palestine. This ended the Hittite empire. Egypt could not maintain control over the Near East. Palestine fell into what is known as a “dark age” which lasted up until the time of Omri. This invasion took place during the time Joshua was supposedly leading his army eastward, yet the Bible makes no mention of it. Joshua somehow missed the whole war.



The destruction of the Hittite Empire, supported both by Egyptian text and archaeological digs, dates to circa 1150 B.C.E., though a few Hittite cities survived until absorbed by the Assyrians.



The problem is that there is no evidence of any great empire, Hebrew, Hittite, Assyrian, Babylonian, or Egyptian, existing between 1000-900 B.C.E. While the cities in Israel were occupied during this time period, there is no evidence of a great magical golden age kingdom as proclaimed by the Bible. Like Camelot, the story is not real. Israel was in a dark age during this period. There is no archaeological or non-Biblical historical evidence to support the Bible’s story."

Since the time I wrote this I might amend my statement to say, "There is no evidence in this age to support the story."

Please don't cry about the David stone. One disputed stone does not make an empire.

[ChrisChillin]

Such as?

Moses' clearly Egyptian name.
The placement of the Hebrews in the East Delta where Asiatics are known to have lived and worked.
The portrayal of the Hebrews making mudbricks mixed with straw is accurate to Egyptian construction, while a concocted fairytale in 7th century Jerusalem probably should have imagined them working with stone.
The necessary dating of Deuteronomy as a format belonging to the time period around the 13th century, not the 7th.
The wilderness wandering accounts reflect knowledge of conditions in the Sinai, including migrating quail.
Same goes for a basis for 9 out of the 10 plagues in the ecology of Egypt.
Moses encounters worshipers of YHWH among the people of Midian, which parallels Egyptian texts that speak of "Yhwh of the Shasu."
The command by God to turn south when leaving Egypt and not go by the northern coastal route reflects the situation in the 13th century when the road was heavily militarized.
And so on...

Isn't it more likely to be a legend based partly on the Hyksos expulsion?

Depends on your point of view.

[ChrisChillin]

Palestine fell into what is known as a “dark age” which lasted up until the time of Omri.

Ahh, revisionism - so self-certain of its claims yet so debatable...

[shunyadragon]

Ahh, revisionism - so self-certain of its claims yet so debatable...Do you have any evidence to support this claim? It can be demonstrated that much of the histroy in the Pentateuch is historical revisionism of Babylonian writings mixed with Hebrew and Egyptian legend with a sprinkling of hostory thrown in.

The best history is what is found in archeology. The Bible fits sometimes, sometimes it does not, therefore it can be assumed by the evidence that the Bible is partially historic, and part legend and myth.

[shunyadragon]

Moses' clearly Egyptian name.
The placement of the Hebrews in the East Delta where Asiatics are known to have lived and worked.
The portrayal of the Hebrews making mudbricks mixed with straw is accurate to Egyptian construction, while a concocted fairytale in 7th century Jerusalem probably should have imagined them working with stone.
The necessary dating of Deuteronomy as a format belonging to the time period around the 13th century, not the 7th.
The wilderness wandering accounts reflect knowledge of conditions in the Sinai, including migrating quail.
Same goes for a basis for 9 out of the 10 plagues in the ecology of Egypt.
Moses encounters worshipers of YHWH among the people of Midian, which parallels Egyptian texts that speak of "Yhwh of the Shasu."
The command by God to turn south when leaving Egypt and not go by the northern coastal route reflects the situation in the 13th century when the road was heavily militarized.
And so on...
These points are weak and hypothetical. There is always some truth in legends. For example the Illiad and the Odessy, and Gilgamesh both contain some truth, but it does not demonstrate or support the legenday aspects of the stories. Gilgamesh and other Babylonian works are far better documented than the Bible.

[mikeledo]

Ahh, revisionism - so self-certain of its claims yet so debatable...
This is what archaeology conclusively shows. I do not debate what God has written in stone- just what man has put on paper.

[mikeledo]

Moses' clearly Egyptian name.
The placement of the Hebrews in the East Delta where Asiatics are known to have lived and worked.
The portrayal of the Hebrews making mudbricks mixed with straw is accurate to Egyptian construction, while a concocted fairytale in 7th century Jerusalem probably should have imagined them working with stone.
The necessary dating of Deuteronomy as a format belonging to the time period around the 13th century, not the 7th.
The wilderness wandering accounts reflect knowledge of conditions in the Sinai, including migrating quail.
Same goes for a basis for 9 out of the 10 plagues in the ecology of Egypt.
Moses encounters worshipers of YHWH among the people of Midian, which parallels Egyptian texts that speak of "Yhwh of the Shasu."
The command by God to turn south when leaving Egypt and not go by the northern coastal route reflects the situation in the 13th century when the road was heavily militarized.
And so on...



Depends on your point of view.The birth of Moses, who led the exodus, is similar to that of the legendary King Sargon I of this same period:

“My lowly mother conceived and bore me in secrecy; placed me in a basket of rushes; sealed with bitumen, and set me in a river, which how­ever did not engulf me. The river bore me up. And it carried me to Akku, the irrigator, who took me from the river, raised me as his son, and made me a gardener: and while I was a gardener, the goddess Ishtar loved me. Then I ruled the kingdom…”

What is really interesting is the use of bitumen to seal up the basket- just as Moses which used pitch or "zepheth". Bitumen was used in Babylon and especially around the Dead Sea. The Egyptians however used wax up until about the Ptolemiaic times-never bitumen or tar. Herodotus even noted the Egyptian were using wax and papyrus to seal their ships.

Like Moses, Sargon conquered the Amorites during this same time period.

The name Moses is normally given as Egyptian in origin. I will claim that is incorrect. Moses derives from the Assyrian word masuwhich means “hero.” This title was given to Merodach (Marduk) who defended against the dragon and chaos. (Moses vs. the pharaoh) This title was also given to Nergal who was “the sun of night” whose job was to illuminate the after world. This was the light which would lead Moses at night. Aries, the sign of Moses was called lu-masi or “sheep of the hero.” Moses dies on Mt.Nebo in sight of the moon city of Jericho.



Merodach struggle against the dragon was viewed as an eclipse. He suffered or endured 7 hardships or plagues. These were sent by the god Anu.

The problem with your assumption is you have no acknowledgement of Wellhausen. The Bible was not written all at one time but over a period of time. It was a living document to which things were added. Jeremiah lamented over these additions as "the lying pen of the scribes." I contend that the original was written 2218- 2141 BCE. Most of Deut. would not have been in the original text but a later propagandist addition.

[ChrisChillin]

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

The fact that people debate the value of revisionism.

It can be demonstrated that much of the histroy in the Pentateuch is historical revisionism of Babylonian writings mixed with Hebrew and Egyptian legend with a sprinkling of hostory thrown in.

Mere assertions won't get either of us anywhere.

The best history is what is found in archeology.

Archaeology is mute without ancient documents.

There is always some truth in legends.

Very well. What aspects of the Exodus account reflect a late date or poor knowledge of conditions in Egypt and/or the Sinai?

Gilgamesh and other Babylonian works are far better documented than the Bible.

And that is the case, I contend, because of the widespread use of cuneiform tablets in Mesopotamia, while in Israel/Judah papyrus was likely the medium of choice for lengthy documents. And as of 1987, only one fragment of Hebrew papyrus has been found! Much like the case in the Delta region of Egypt, ecological conditions precipitate quick and easy disintegration of papyrus.

[All info in that paragraph taken from A.R. Millard, "The Question of Israelite Literacy", Bible Review, 3:03, Summer 1987.]

Moses derives from the Assyrian word masu which means “hero.”

Interestingly enough, Mose was pronounced "Masu" in fourteenth/thirteenth century Egypt. [K.A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament, p. 297]

[mikeledo]

Very well. What aspects of the Exodus account reflect a late date or poor knowledge of conditions in Egypt and/or the Sinai?

The problems with a MB Exodus are outlined in Stiebing's book: "Out of the Desert."

In looking at the traditional MB/LB age Exodus as endorsed by many Christians we find major archaelogical problems. Heshbon, Dibon, and Aroer did not exist until the Iron Age. Moses could not conquer those cities because they where not there.

[ChrisChillin]

The problems with a MB Exodus are outlined in Stiebing's book: "Out of the Desert."

Very well. Since I don't hold to an MB date, I'm not particularly concerned about that! Nonetheless, as I have stated in another thread, I will take a look at Stiebing's book one day.

Heshbon, Dibon, and Aroer did not exist until the Iron Age. Moses
could not conquer those cities because they where not there.

Did not exist according to what? According to archaeology done in isolation. But archaeology is very much mute without the help of ancient records. Remembering the various possible limiting factors (erosion, human depletion activity, site shift, etc), we should consider the possibility that a site did exist but that we may not find much or any of it left for us to study. As for Dibon, it is mentioned by Ramesses II (thirteenth century - LB!) in a topographical list, a reading that Kitchen describes as "beyond doubt." Heshbon could've undergone some site shift, and even the primary site of Tell Hesban has uncovered some Late Bronze sherds, so the possibility remains that there may have been something there.

Both Dever and Kitchen provide lists of towns mentioned in the Pentateuchal conquest narratives and summarize the archaeological data for each. Factoring out sites that are uknown or unexamined, both Dever's and Kitchen's lists show a correlation of somewhere over 80% between archaeological remains and the towns described as conquered. This is a high correlation, considering the limiting factors at play.

[Celsus]

Such as? Isn't it more likely to be a legend based partly on the Hyksos expulsion?
The Hyksos expulsion looks nothing like an "exodus". In fact, the main evidence we have for the Hyksos expulsion is Egyptian polemics and Manetho's third century historical fiction. It is not at all clear what is meant by "Asiatics" or "from the east" either--they may as well have been semites living on the east of the Nile for all we know--Egyptian use of the word "Asiatic" is vague.

Joel

[Celsus]

Kenneth Kitchen?
Nahum Sarna?
Alan Millard?
Abraham Malamat?
Manfred Bietak?
Baruch Halpern?
James Hoffmeier?
I haven't heard of all of these, but of those I have read, their Exodus is shorn of miracle, thoroughly naturalised, and nothing fantastic about it (any more than Mao's Great March might be). Have you seen Halpern's King David? He's a bloodthirsty tyrant engaged in deep-rooted political intrigue and annihilation of his enemies. Kitchen, Sarna, and Halpern's views differ radically from the biblical accounts in many, many places, though they still assume far too much of it to be really good.
First, our lack of Egyptian documents wouldn't mean they were oblivious, just that we don't have the documents. Second, as I've stated in the threads on the subject in Apologetics 301, "2 million Israelites" should be dropped in favor of, say, 20,000 (and this can be done from the biblical text).
20,000 is still half the population of Palestine. You'd think that with the population of Iron I Palestine leaving as much evidence as it did, that 20,000 people moving in a group should leave something at Kadesh Barnea for instance. Have you read the link I posted earlier? What do you make of it?
There is absolutely no positive direct evidence for the exodus, but plenty of indirect circumstantial evidence that favors it.
Please share.
Again, emphatically not 2 million people, and then - why should we expect or demand to have uncovered evidence in the Sinai so far?
50,000 people leaving behind hundreds of settlements gives us much reason to believe that 20,000 people in a single group should leave some trace. But there's absolutely nothing in the places the Bible says they travelled to.

Joel

[mikeledo]

Very well. Since I don't hold to an MB date, I'm not particularly concerned about that! Nonetheless, as I have stated in another thread, I will take a look at Stiebing's book one day.



Did not exist according to what? According to archaeology done in isolation. But archaeology is very much mute without the help of ancient records. Remembering the various possible limiting factors (erosion, human depletion activity, site shift, etc), we should consider the possibility that a site did exist but that we may not find much or any of it left for us to study. As for Dibon, it is mentioned by Ramesses II (thirteenth century - LB!) in a topographical list, a reading that Kitchen describes as "beyond doubt." Heshbon could've undergone some site shift, and even the primary site of Tell Hesban has uncovered some Late Bronze sherds, so the possibility remains that there may have been something there.

Both Dever and Kitchen provide lists of towns mentioned in the Pentateuchal conquest narratives and summarize the archaeological data for each. Factoring out sites that are uknown or unexamined, both Dever's and Kitchen's lists show a correlation of somewhere over 80% between archaeological remains and the towns described as conquered. This is a high correlation, considering the limiting factors at play.
LB age Iron age- in any case it is not the MB age which was my point. I will concede Dibon to an LB period, however that does not help a MB dating.

The fact that the cities exist and were conquered is not the issue- I am certain we will find that 100% of the cities exist. The problem is the dating of the conquests found in those cities in a chronological sequence support by archaeological facts.

It is most likely the texts are in error than the stones. My solution of a circular time line brings text and stones together- the first time this has ever been done in the history of the world.

[ChrisChillin]

I haven't heard of all of these, but of those I have read, their Exodus is shorn of miracle, thoroughly naturalised, and nothing fantastic about it.

For the most part, yes. I fail to see the point, because I'm not really stumping for people to accept the exodus account as completely in accord with what historically happened, but I am arguing at least that the idea that something like an exodus could have happened is being prematurely dismissed.

Kitchen, Sarna, and Halpern's views differ radically from the biblical accounts in many, many places

And I am aware of that.

though they still assume far too much of it to be really good.

Ehh, your opinion my friend.

You'd think that with the population of Iron I Palestine leaving as much evidence as it did, that 20,000 people moving in a group should leave something at Kadesh Barnea for instance.

Are you still assuming the text to mean that they spent 38 years there?

Have you read the link I posted earlier? What do you make of it?

"Cannot find server" - so I'm afraid I can't read it as of right now.

Please share.

Well, I have shared some indirect indicators previously in this thread.

50,000 people leaving behind hundreds of settlements gives us much reason to believe that 20,000 people in a single group should leave some trace. But there's absolutely nothing in the places the Bible says they travelled to.

Does it? Not everyone is so certain that we should be expecting evidence to appear in the Sinai. Kitchen isn't surprised by that at all. I don't want to discuss the matter of evidence in the Sinai for about another year until Hoffmeier's book on the subject comes out. Then I will order it and Stiebing's, and try to research some more sources on the matter, and then I will be ready and willing to talk more about it.

I need to go read more of your Intro to Archaeology series, it's been a while since I've looked at it. I'd love to be more involved over at Ebla, but I don't have much time as it is and plus with all those well-educated, well-read fellows over there I wonder if I shouldn't come back until I get my Ph.D.!

Take care for now.

Chris

[mikeledo]

For the most part, yes. I fail to see the point, because I'm not really stumping for people to accept the exodus account as completely in accord with what historically happened, but I am arguing at least that the idea that something like an exodus could have happened is being prematurely dismissed.



And I am aware of that.



Ehh, your opinion my friend.



Are you still assuming the text to mean that they spent 38 years there?



"Cannot find server" - so I'm afraid I can't read it as of right now.



Well, I have shared some indirect indicators previously in this thread.



Does it? Not everyone is so certain that we should be expecting evidence to appear in the Sinai. Kitchen isn't surprised by that at all. I don't want to discuss the matter of evidence in the Sinai for about another year until Hoffmeier's book on the subject comes out. Then I will order it and Stiebing's, and try to research some more sources on the matter, and then I will be ready and willing to talk more about it.

I need to go read more of your Intro to Archaeology series, it's been a while since I've looked at it. I'd love to be more involved over at Ebla, but I don't have much time as it is and plus with all those well-educated, well-read fellows over there I wonder if I shouldn't come back until I get my Ph.D.!

Take care for now.

Chris

My chronology of the OT is similar to Dr. Aardsma except I have no 1000 year gap between Joshua and David. His work might interest you. He likes to use archaelogy.

http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/conquest_jericho.php