Yoseph and The Departure from Egypt

[bluethread]

I pretty much stay away from this thread, because I believe that scientifically proving the details of historical events is a fools errand. However, examining claims that certain things are scientifically impossible can have value. A case in point is a recent examination of previous discoveries discarded due to archeological orthodoxy.

Most archeologists and even many rabbis, reject the idea that Yoseph ever existed and Israel originated from a population of Semitic people who were delivered from slavery in Egypt and effected a conquest of the land of Canaan. However, upon closer examination it has been proposed that, like the location of Mt. Sinai, the reason why no evidence of such things have not been found was because archeologists were looking in the wrong place, based on orthodoxy and not scientific skepticism.

patternsofevidence.com (also available on Netflix)

The thesis is that, based on the references to the region and city of Rameses, archeologists erroneously presumed that Israel was delivered in the time of Ramesses the Great. However, those references might have been inserted in the text for the sake of the reader at a later date. Though there is no significant population of Semites in Egypt at the time of Ramesses the Great, there is evidence of a significant number of Semites and a swift departure of same in the middle kingdom, some 500 years earlier. Now, there is more to the thesis than that and I am not addressing the grandeur of the miracles on this thread. The only question is does this put to rest the assertion that there is no historical basis for Yoseph, the deliverance from Egypt and the conquest of Canaan?

[Willum]

[Replying to post 1 by bluethread]

Well, sure the reason we can't find evidence of Hebrew wanderings is that God transported them to the deserts of Mars, which, though difficult terrain, was survivable, with God's help, 5000 years ago.

Shortly we will find their wanderings and match the description of Mt. Sinai, et&al., to the topography of our Red Planet.

Though there is no significant population of Semites in Egypt at the time of Ramesses the Great

This is because he decimated the semitic population in region. I know, history can't prove that, but, as you pointed out, it is supported.

Final point of order, invoking a history Jews and Christians seemed to go out of their way to destroy - the Canaanite were a very powerful empire up until about 250BC, where its bulk in Jerusalem was crippled, and elsewhere in the Second Peloponnesian War, where they declined until they were absorbed by Pompey the Great.

So, up until about 65BC, Ba'al and Moloch and so on, were very powerful forces in the Holy Land. With Yahwey, who at the time was a war god, taking second fiddle.

So, no, there is no serious evidence for Egypt, none for the slaughter of the Canaanites. The Canaanites became the pagan Sadducee, relatively peacefully, under the guidance of foreign conquerors. The genocide of the Canaanite is just a fiction to secure the legitimacy of the claims modern residence of that scrap of land.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 2 by Willum]

None of that addressed anything presented in the video or what I mentioned in the OP. What you post speaks to what you believe to have happened when Israel came from Babylon. However, it does not speak to the information about a large Semite population that quickly emerged on the Nile delta in the middle kingdom of Egypt and disappeared suddenly? Also, what of the redheaded Semite statue in a small pyramid tomb with no body, from the same time period?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 2 by Willum]

None of that addressed anything presented in the video or what I mentioned in the OP. What you post speaks to what you believe to have happened when Israel came from Babylon. However, it does not speak to the information about a large Semite population that quickly emerged on the Nile delta in the middle kingdom of Egypt and disappeared suddenly? Also, what of the redheaded Semite statue in a small pyramid tomb with no body, from the same time period?

I think the problem your running into here and why everyone seems to be looking in the wrong place and time is that the story might not be entirely accurate. Certainly if you break the story into individual elements you might be able to find bits and pieces throughout history that fit. The problem arises when you try putting them together.

Case in point the story of Troy. The ancient city thought to have been myth has been more or less put together just not in the way we thought. Several archeological sites throughout the region had been proposed as possible spots for Troy. Each site had something missing that would make it a match. However when the sites were combined they hit nearly all the markers. One particular set of sites existed on top of each other a city that had been rebuilt many times over a long period of time. At one point it had walls, at one point a battle had been fought, and other tid bits of the story were found at the site. The problem none of these existed at the same time.

So to goes the story of exodus. At one point there were semantic slaves, just not during a time period with a pharoah that meets the conditions of the story, there are pharoahs that meet some conditions but not all. It's only when you compress these figures together does it fit the story.

[Willum]

[Replying to bluethread]

There is no mystery, the people the Jews claim to be in-continuity, have been exterminated and decimated a few times in history. The first time they are mentioned in history, they were removed from it. How did they survive that?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah

The Canaanite they claim to have exterminated are themselves. Perhaps you didn't investigate the end of the Canaan Empire.

As to me not considering your evidence, consider this you walking a bit our moccasins, you ignore plain obvious reality, for a book of stories copied from other cultures, and expect people to take it seriously.

It turns out I'd seen a program like it on Discover, or some-such, and it is inconclusive.
My theory is better.

If gives Christians and Jews centuries for the Jews wandering around Mars to be disproved, as opposed to just a few more years until archaeologists fail to find wandering Jews elsewhere.

I'll give you a hint: Since they weren't slaves to Egypt, none of it happened. So if there was no escape from Egypt, there was no wandering.

History is rapidly destroying religion I am afraid, despite the best attempts of Christan and Jews to burn the books and slander other cultures.

All that was accomplished in the end was the destruction of irreplaceable, maybe even honest, cultures.

[H.sapiens]

I pretty much stay away from this thread, because I believe that scientifically proving the details of historical events is a fools errand. However, examining claims that certain things are scientifically impossible can have value. A case in point is a recent examination of previous discoveries discarded due to archeological orthodoxy.

Most archeologists and even many rabbis, reject the idea that Yoseph ever existed and Israel originated from a population of Semitic people who were delivered from slavery in Egypt and effected a conquest of the land of Canaan. However, upon closer examination it has been proposed that, like the location of Mt. Sinai, the reason why no evidence of such things have not been found was because archeologists were looking in the wrong place, based on orthodoxy and not scientific skepticism.

patternsofevidence.com (also available on Netflix)

The thesis is that, based on the references to the region and city of Rameses, archeologists erroneously presumed that Israel was delivered in the time of Ramesses the Great. However, those references might have been inserted in the text for the sake of the reader at a later date. Though there is no significant population of Semites in Egypt at the time of Ramesses the Great, there is evidence of a significant number of Semites and a swift departure of same in the middle kingdom, some 500 years earlier. Now, there is more to the thesis than that and I am not addressing the grandeur of the miracles on this thread. The only question is does this put to rest the assertion that there is no historical basis for Yoseph, the deliverance from Egypt and the conquest of Canaan?

The problem is that there is no evidence left behind, anywhere. Had there be a migration of 2,000,000 people for 40 years Sinai would have been left pockmarked with at least on fire pit for every 200 square meters of terrain ... but they are nowhere to be found, not to mention the kitchen middens, burials, etc.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 2 by Willum]

None of that addressed anything presented in the video or what I mentioned in the OP. What you post speaks to what you believe to have happened when Israel came from Babylon. However, it does not speak to the information about a large Semite population that quickly emerged on the Nile delta in the middle kingdom of Egypt and disappeared suddenly? Also, what of the redheaded Semite statue in a small pyramid tomb with no body, from the same time period?

I think the problem your running into here and why everyone seems to be looking in the wrong place and time is that the story might not be entirely accurate. Certainly if you break the story into individual elements you might be able to find bits and pieces throughout history that fit. The problem arises when you try putting them together.

Case in point the story of Troy. The ancient city thought to have been myth has been more or less put together just not in the way we thought. Several archeological sites throughout the region had been proposed as possible spots for Troy. Each site had something missing that would make it a match. However when the sites were combined they hit nearly all the markers. One particular set of sites existed on top of each other a city that had been rebuilt many times over a long period of time. At one point it had walls, at one point a battle had been fought, and other tid bits of the story were found at the site. The problem none of these existed at the same time.

So to goes the story of exodus. At one point there were semantic slaves, just not during a time period with a pharoah that meets the conditions of the story, there are pharoahs that meet some conditions but not all. It's only when you compress these figures together does it fit the story.

That is the point of the thread. Why dismiss the theory out of hand? What specifically does not fit with regard to the artifacts found in the Middle Kingdom? The thesis acknowledges that the name of the city found in the extant Scriptural manuscripts is not the one used in that time period. However, apart from that there do not appear to be any reasons, other than archeological orthodoxy, for not entertaining the idea that these artifacts might be seminal to the Scriptural narrative.

[Willum]

[Replying to bluethread]

Several reasons for dismissing it out of hand have been presented...
The latest, the city being the wrong name - is a typical literary device for fiction...

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 7 by bluethread]

There are reasons to dismiss it. As has been pointed out certain elements of the story should leave certain archeological evidence behind. The 40 years wandering in a desert should have produced massive amounts of archaeological evidence but didn't. There is no pharoah that matches the description in the bible. There has been no army of artifacts recovered in the Red Sea.

While there is some evidence pointing to semantic slaves at one point never to the number described and they were not builders. The pyramids and other monuments required skilled labor.

There is no mention of God or any plagues in Egyptian artifacts during the time period(s) in question, which directly contradicts the will of God to be know. Throughout Egypt.

If there is any grain of truth to the story it is most likely an exaggeration. A myth, a morality tale, a warning not to turn your back on God tale, or a foundational tale. We can't find the evidence because the story has been so exaggerated and mythologized that it simply is no where near close to what actually happened.

[bluethread]

[Replying to bluethread]

Several reasons for dismissing it out of hand have been presented...
The latest, the city being the wrong name - is a typical literary device for fiction...

That is the only one presented and the person proposing the theory is the one who presented it. It is also common to use names that current people are familiar with rather than the names of the places at the time of the event. I seem to recall someone on this site repeatedly making the argument that the Scriptures should have been written using terms and language that modern people can easily understand. Place names are transient, so the name used is not necessarily the most useful piece of evidence.

So, apart from that, is there any reason why what has been discovered in the Nile delta could not have contributed to the Scriptural account of the departure from Egypt?