Archaeological evidence for the Exodus?

[yxboom]

Essentially, the idea is that evidence exists, but because a couple unwarranted assumptions are made in coming up the standard chronology the evidence is missed because not where (when) it's being looked for. The evidence is pretty much all at each end of the Exodus (Rohl claims to have found the pyramid where Joseph was temporarily interred, with his proposed chronological realignment the destruction patterns of Canaanite cities match the Conquest, etc.)

Are you familiar enough to know if there others who corroborate his conclusions?

[One Bad Pig]

Are you familiar enough to know if there others who corroborate his conclusions?

I can't recall. It's been too long, sorry.

[technomage]

Are you familiar enough to know if there others who corroborate his conclusions?

There has been some sympathy for the critique of the mainstream chronology, but little or no support for Rohl's proposals, even amongst advocates of Biblical historicism. Indeed, Kenneth Kitchen, himself an ardent supporter of a proposed historical Exodus, is ... well, "scathing" is the best term I can come up with.

[Scruffyzach]

James K. Hoffmeier makes a convincing case that the Exodus is historical in his book Israel In Egypt

http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Egypt-E.../dp/019513088X

[technomage]

James K. Hoffmeier makes a convincing case that the Exodus is historical in his book Israel In Egypt

You may have found his case convincing ... he has yet to persuade the scholarly community. (It should also be noted that the book is somewhat, but not fatally, dated, as it was published in 1999).

[yxboom]

You may have found his case convincing ... he has yet to persuade the scholarly community. (It should also be noted that the book is somewhat, but not fatally, dated, as it was published in 1999).

You've spent some time in this area, apparently. Thanks for all the input.

[lee_merrill]

Interesting discussion! In "Cities of the Biblical World" it was mentioned that they found a destruction layer (there may have been more, I can't recall) at about the expected time, in others, they did not. With regard to eleph, TWOT has this comment:

Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament

It is occasionally alleged that since ʾelep means a company of a thousand men it could mean any military unit, even of reduced strength. From there it came to mean a family unit or clan, even a small one. But this means that the 1000’s of the mustering of the soldiers in Num 1 and 26 is reduced to a small figure in accord with the desire of the commentator. The wilderness wandering and its miraculous supply is also reduced to naturalistic proportions. But it should be remembered that the conquest of Transjordan and of Palestine was not accomplished by a handful of men. Also such juggling must alter the text of the Numbers passages which by the addition of their totals clearly speak of 1000’s of soldiers.

© source where applicable

Blessings,
Lee

[lee_merrill]

I normally treat the OT as a series of theological commentaries and theological statements. Even as a skeptic on the historicity of the OT, this is a concept I can get behind.

As a Wiccan, Justin, you would believe in the supernatural. But here you almost sound like a liberal scholar, who doesn't believe anything really out of the ordinary happened in the Biblical accounts. It's an odd contrast, I must say.

Blessings,
Lee

[fm93]

Interesting discussion! In "Cities of the Biblical World" it was mentioned that they found a destruction layer (there may have been more, I can't recall) at about the expected time, in others, they did not. With regard to eleph, TWOT has this comment:

Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament

It is occasionally alleged that since ʾelep means a company of a thousand men it could mean any military unit, even of reduced strength. From there it came to mean a family unit or clan, even a small one. But this means that the 1000’s of the mustering of the soldiers in Num 1 and 26 is reduced to a small figure in accord with the desire of the commentator. The wilderness wandering and its miraculous supply is also reduced to naturalistic proportions. But it should be remembered that the conquest of Transjordan and of Palestine was not accomplished by a handful of men. Also such juggling must alter the text of the Numbers passages which by the addition of their totals clearly speak of 1000’s of soldiers.

© source where applicable

Blessings,
Lee

The eleph solution still requires that there were thousands of people, but a number in the thousands is much more plausible than two million. Also, Exodus 23:30 implies that the number was somewhere in the thousands. It says "Little by little I will drive [the Canaanites] out before you, until you have increased enough to take possession of the land." If there were millions of people in the exodus, that certainly would've been enough to possess the land.

[lee_merrill]

[Ex. 23:30] says "Little by little I will drive [the Canaanites] out before you, until you have increased enough to take possession of the land." If there were millions of people in the exodus, that certainly would've been enough to possess the land.

Well, the current population of Israel is about 7 million, in a much reduced area (no land east of the Jordan). But let's stick with around 600,000, the menfolks would be mainly the ones working the land and building and keeping watch then.

Blessings,
Lee

[technomage]

As a Wiccan, you would believe in the supernatural. But here you almost sound like a liberal scholar, who doesn't believe anything really out of the ordinary happened in the Biblical accounts. It's an odd contrast, I must say.

As a Wiccan, I acknowledge certain experiences that I have had that may or may not be supernatural ... I do not "believe" in the supernatural as you use the term "believe."

[lao tzu]

I normally treat the OT as a series of theological commentaries and theological statements. Even as a skeptic on the historicity of the OT, this is a concept I can get behind. Now, you will find Christians who argue that if the OT is not historical the entire Bible is up for grabs ... I have no authority to speak on those matters, of course. But you will find Christians who have absolutely no problem positing the OT as largely anhistorical, and who still place full faith and reliance on the saving blood of Jesus Christ.

As a skeptic, I can say the same, and more, that the OT indirectly reveals and provides insight on a number of more secular issues, including the sociology and cosmology of the contemporary region.

But even as a skeptic, I cannot dismiss the clear evidence in Exodus and elsewhere of a tradition of escape from Egyptian captivity. The easiest, most obvious reason for such a tradition would be a literal escape from Egyptian captivity. But the archaeology doesn't support it, indeed serves to debunk it, so we need to look for other explanations.

Well, we know what we mean by "Egypt," but what would "Egypt" have meant to late Bronze and Iron I Canaanites? What were the borders of the Egyptian empire at the time, and how did they change during the period of Israel's rise?

I once spent a couple of days with a gang of snipes pounding on a generator bearing on board ship, trying to free it from the axle with very little to show for it, until a chief warrant officer came by and noticed the struggle. Ten minutes later, having rearranged a veritable host of clamps and vices, half a dozen sharp blows drove the axle off the bearing instead.

I can't help suspecting it wasn't the Israelites in Canaan who left Egypt, but the other way around.

As ever, Jesse

[Cerebrum123]

As a skeptic, I can say the same, and more, that the OT indirectly reveals and provides insight on a number of more secular issues, including the sociology and cosmology of the contemporary region.

But even as a skeptic, I cannot dismiss the clear evidence in Exodus and elsewhere of a tradition of escape from Egyptian captivity. The easiest, most obvious reason for such a tradition would be a literal escape from Egyptian captivity. But the archaeology doesn't support it, indeed serves to debunk it, so we need to look for other explanations.

Well, we know what we mean by "Egypt," but what would "Egypt" have meant to late Bronze and Iron I Canaanites? What were the borders of the Egyptian empire at the time, and how did they change during the period of Israel's rise?

I once spent a couple of days with a gang of snipes pounding on a generator bearing on board ship, trying to free it from the axle with very little to show for it, until a chief warrant officer came by and noticed the struggle. Ten minutes later, having rearranged a veritable host of clamps and vices, half a dozen sharp blows drove the axle off the bearing instead.

I can't help suspecting it wasn't the Israelites in Canaan who left Egypt, but the other way around.

As ever, Jesse

I certainly wouldn't hold to that idea lao tzu, when it comes to archaeology the Bible has a tendency to be proven right. I believe it wasn't that long ago that they were claiming that the Bible had to be wrong, because there was no evidence of the Hittites, it wasn't long after that they found an entire Hittite city. Anyway, just wanted to point that out.

[technomage]

I can't help suspecting it wasn't the Israelites in Canaan who left Egypt, but the other way around.

You hit the nail on the head. The Hebrews were never in Egypt--but Egypt was frequently in Judah and Israel.

While they have been compiled into a single tradition following the Assyrian conquest of Israel, there are actually three broadly separate prophetic traditions among the Hebrews:
1. Northern (Kingdom of Israel)
2. Southern (Kingdom of Judah)
3. Trans-jordan (nominally attached to Israel, but far more independent)

It is from the Northern traditions that we actually receive the account of leaving Egypt, and of a journey from Egypt to the area of Bethel; from the Trans-Jordan, the focus is on a delivery from Egypt, but with no journey (suggesting one of the withdrawls of Egyptan control fro Canaan); from Judah, where we receive the Song of the Sea, we have the narrative of a military victory over Egyptian forces.

We know from history and archaeology that Egypt had a strong influence in Canaan during this time--at various times, they were the tributary overlords of one or both kingdoms, or had significant trade and economic influence. Indeed, Egyptian power in the region did not seem to end until the invasion by Nebuchadnezzar and the Neo-Babylonians. We have a considerable number of Egyptian artifacts discovered in the territory of Judah and Israel, and it is quite probable that Egyptian symbols and cultural motifs became "trans-cultural," as we have multiple finds related to Hebrew people with Egyptian artistic motifs.

[technomage]

I believe it wasn't that long ago that they were claiming that the Bible had to be wrong, because there was no evidence of the Hittites, it wasn't long after that they found an entire Hittite city.

Cerebrum, this is a common canard made by some apologists--it's not true. We have had considerable knowledge of the Hittites from before the change of the 19th century--the first identifiable finds are from digs dating before 1884.