Was the Exodus fictional?

[polonius]

Is the Old testament fictional regarding the Exodus story?

1. The story begins with Joseph, his faather and his brothers.

2. The Hebrews were supposedly in Egypt for about 400 years.

3. At the time of the Exodus they numbered about 2.4 million, computed from the number of 600 Hebrew soldiers, their wives, children, and men too old or to young to fight.

So evidently Joesph and his brothers were overwhelmed with procreating!

4. And in spite of the number of Hebrews and all the time spent in Egypt, as one archeologisgt put it, they didn't even leave any broken pottery. In short, nothing that showed that 2.4 million had been there.

5. And to make matters worse, Moses l
led them into Canann, a Egyptian terrirtory at that time.

Don't we just love bible stories

[polonius]

I wonder exactly where Finkelstein believes that archaeologists have examined the landscape to find evidence of the Exodus.

Sites all over the Sinai Peninsula have been excavated. Even if you're right and the wilderness wanderings were to the east, the Israelites still had to travel from Egypt to Canaan. Terrain and sites of known Egyptian military occupation limit the area through which they must have travelled. There is no sign of at least a half-million people having crossed the two to three hundred miles of desert.

The Israelites are also described as having made camps in specific places. Most of these are unknown references, but Kadesh-Barnea and Ezion-Geber can be identified with some certainty based on biblical descriptions of their locations and boundarieds of the region in Numbers 33 and 34. The sites weren't occupied by a group of any size during the correct time period.

Does he mean where Constantine's mother said Mt. Sinai was?

I don't feel like I should even have to say this, but modern archaeologists aren't tourists. Finkelstein in particular added an appendix to his book to explain that, while there are likely candidates, nobody is sure which mountain peak was Mount Sinai or Horeb. The conclusions he and other archaeologists have drawn don't rely on Sinai being a specific site, let alone one based simply on the traditions of Byzantine monks.

I know there is no evidence there because that is not the actual Mt. Sinai. Did his archaeologists go to JABAL AL LAWZ in Midian? There is much room to wiggle regarding this issue. The locations of the cities mentioned in the Bible account are not exactly known today. Scholars have them in various places. If you follow the Bible account from the Gulf of Aqaba, everything lines up. No one seems to want to do that.

So, do you mean that there is evidence of this? Or are you saying that there isn't any actual evidence because archaeologists haven't excavated the right spot? The Israelites still had to traverse the same terrain. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that they actually traveled farther. There should still be evidence in the places archaeologists have looked, even if they haven't looked where you think the actual Mount Sinai is.

I say---not necessarily. The excavating work they have already done could very well have been in the wrong places, and their time frames could be wrong.

I said already that there is compelling evidence connected to searches made by a number of people, and there are pictures of chariot pieces at the bottom of Yam Suf in the Gulf of Aqaba. There are studies done on these inferences, and the latest book that I have obtained is called "The TRUE Red Sea Crossing to the TRUE Mt. Sinai," by Ron Tottingham, PhD, LitD. It sums up everything I have researched up to now. Perhaps you would find it interesting.

RESPONSE: Have any of these "pieces" been raised and dated? What were the results? Please cite your references.

[onewithhim]

I wonder exactly where Finkelstein believes that archaeologists have examined the landscape to find evidence of the Exodus.

Sites all over the Sinai Peninsula have been excavated. Even if you're right and the wilderness wanderings were to the east, the Israelites still had to travel from Egypt to Canaan. Terrain and sites of known Egyptian military occupation limit the area through which they must have travelled. There is no sign of at least a half-million people having crossed the two to three hundred miles of desert.

The Israelites are also described as having made camps in specific places. Most of these are unknown references, but Kadesh-Barnea and Ezion-Geber can be identified with some certainty based on biblical descriptions of their locations and boundarieds of the region in Numbers 33 and 34. The sites weren't occupied by a group of any size during the correct time period.

Does he mean where Constantine's mother said Mt. Sinai was?

I don't feel like I should even have to say this, but modern archaeologists aren't tourists. Finkelstein in particular added an appendix to his book to explain that, while there are likely candidates, nobody is sure which mountain peak was Mount Sinai or Horeb. The conclusions he and other archaeologists have drawn don't rely on Sinai being a specific site, let alone one based simply on the traditions of Byzantine monks.

I know there is no evidence there because that is not the actual Mt. Sinai. Did his archaeologists go to JABAL AL LAWZ in Midian? There is much room to wiggle regarding this issue. The locations of the cities mentioned in the Bible account are not exactly known today. Scholars have them in various places. If you follow the Bible account from the Gulf of Aqaba, everything lines up. No one seems to want to do that.

So, do you mean that there is evidence of this? Or are you saying that there isn't any actual evidence because archaeologists haven't excavated the right spot? The Israelites still had to traverse the same terrain. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that they actually traveled farther. There should still be evidence in the places archaeologists have looked, even if they haven't looked where you think the actual Mount Sinai is.

I say---not necessarily. The excavating work they have already done could very well have been in the wrong places, and their time frames could be wrong.

I said already that there is compelling evidence connected to searches made by a number of people, and there are pictures of chariot pieces at the bottom of Yam Suf in the Gulf of Aqaba. There are studies done on these inferences, and the latest book that I have obtained is called "The TRUE Red Sea Crossing to the TRUE Mt. Sinai," by Ron Tottingham, PhD, LitD. It sums up everything I have researched up to now. Perhaps you would find it interesting.

RESPONSE: Have any of these "pieces" been raised and dated? What were the results? Please cite your references.

No, the local government won't allow it. The same is true if someone wants to go and see Jabal al Lawz for themselves. Check out that book and let me know what you think.

[Tart]

Is the Old testament fictional regarding the Exodus story?

1. The story begins with Joseph, his faather and his brothers.

2. The Hebrews were supposedly in Egypt for about 400 years.

3. At the time of the Exodus they numbered about 2.4 million, computed from the number of 600 Hebrew soldiers, their wives, children, and men too old or to young to fight.

So evidently Joesph and his brothers were overwhelmed with procreating!

4. And in spite of the number of Hebrews and all the time spent in Egypt, as one archeologisgt put it, they didn't even leave any broken pottery. In short, nothing that showed that 2.4 million had been there.

5. And to make matters worse, Moses l
led them into Canann, a Egyptian terrirtory at that time.

Don't we just love bible stories

Ok so if we were to do the math, say we start with the 12 brothers (sons of Jacob), and 400 years later we end up with 2.4 million decedents from those 12 brothers.

Now say that the average age of conception is 22 years old. That means every 22 years a new generation is born.

If we take 400 years, and divide that by 22, we get about 18. That means there would be 18 generations in 400 years.

now (for example), lets say the 12 brothers had an average of 2 children apiece, the equation would be 12*2=24, meaning there would be 24 children. Now say those 24 decedents also had 2 children apiece, the equation would be 12*2*2=48, meaning in the second generation there would be 48 decedents... Note ill simplify the equation using exponents, so 12*2^2, where the exponent is the number of generations.

From this equation we can build the main equation.

2,400,000(decedent)=12(sons of Jacob)*x^18
now we can solve for x and get the number of average children that would have to be born to a family to end up with 2.4 million.

Doing the math, x=1.97

So this is a completely reasonable number to get in 400 years, when assuming the age of conception is 22 years old. And if we do a variation of that year of conception, if it was 25 years old, we would get x=2.14.. If we did 20 years old we would get x=1.84...

So this tells us that the Israelites would have to had an average of about 2 children per family to end up with 2.4 million decedents 400 years later...

This is completely reasonable to be true


Also, saying there were no pottery is bizarre.. Are you really saying we havent found pottery in Egypt? Of course we found pottery in Egypt. We have found all kinds of archeological treasures in Egypt, we just dont have much actually naming the Israelites on the pottery, or some how indicating Israel was there (this is my assumption of what you mean when you say we didnt find pottery showing the exodus of the Israelites... Is my assumption wrong? what do you mean when you say we didnt find any pottery pieces? becuase i can guarantee you we have found tons of pottery pieces in Egypt)...

Like for example, how much pottery do we have that names any tribes? Ill let you come with your evidence that shows we have pottery naming any tribes.. How many tribes do we have on pottery being named?

Further more, we even have this archaeological find in Egypt, the Merneptah Stele, that mentions Israel in 1200 BC (the same time they were believed to be living in Egypt).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele

[Tart]

12th Dec, 2017
Kathleen D Toohey
International Arthurian Society (North American Branch)

According to "Prof. Israel Finkelstein, a senior researcher at the Department of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University and one of the most prominent scholars in the field of biblical archeology today. "The question of historical accuracy in the story of Exodus has occupied scholars since the beginning of modern research," says Prof. Finkelstein. "Most have searched for the historical and archaeological evidence in the Late Bronze Age, the 13th century BCE, partly because the story mentions the city of Ramses, and because at the end of that century an Egyptian document referred to a group called ’Israel‘ in Canaan. However, there is no archaeological evidence of the story itself, in either Egypt or Sinai, and what has been perceived as historical evidence from Egyptian sources can be interpreted differently. Moreover, the Biblical story does not demonstrate awareness of the political situation in Canaan during the Late Bronze Age – a powerful Egyptian administration that could have handled an invasion of groups from the desert. Additionally, many of the details in the Biblical story fit better with a later period in the history of Egypt, around the 7-6th centuries BCE – roughly the time when the Biblical story as we know it today was put into writing.

It is interesting you bring up a quote with the City of Rameses... We actually discovered this city not even 100 years ago... Supposedly it was founded in 1300BC, and it was abandoned in 1060BC. That is about 400 years before, as you pointed out, the Biblical story was put into writing. The first mention of it is in Genesis 47:11, which means it was mentioned in a similar time frame, according to biblical dating, when it was still occupied.

Now say the Israelites wrote about it in the "7-6th centuries BCE", about 400 years after it was abandoned... It would be likely there would be documentation of it from before it was abandoned, and not first mentioned 400 years later after it was abandoned... Or maybe they just have a really good memory!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi-Ramesses

[brianbbs67]

I believe Sequanero Tao was the pharaoh killed when Isreal left Egypt. His sons were Tamose(Tammuz), Ahmoses, Kahmoses and Maybe Moses(adopted). The Israelites were helped out of Egypt by some other group, Hyksos. Hyksos are originally the sons of Yaphaet(Japhet), son of Noah. Their were the palace guard and special forces of the Pharaoh. They actually took over Egypt for a short time, the Hyksos period. Tamoses died as an infant. Kahmose eventually took power and sent the Hyksos to Scythia and crete just to get them out of Egypt(they complied) after he won a major battle. This would be the last of the 7th dynasty and fit the timeline of the Exodus much better.

[JehovahsWitness]

Ok so if we were to do the math, say we start with the 12 brothers (sons of Jacob), and 400 years later we end up with 2.4 million decedents from those 12 brothers.

Now say that the average age of conception is 22 years old. That means every 22 years a new generation is born.

If we take 400 years, and divide that by 22, we get about 18. That means there would be 18 generations in 400 years.

now (for example), lets say the 12 brothers had an average of 2 children apiece, the equation would be 12*2=24, meaning there would be 24 children. Now say those 24 decedents also had 2 children apiece, the equation would be 12*2*2=48, meaning in the second generation there would be 48 decedents... Note ill simplify the equation using exponents, so 12*2^2, where the exponent is the number of generations.

From this equation we can build the main equation.

2,400,000(decedent)=12(sons of Jacob)*x^18
now we can solve for x and get the number of average children that would have to be born to a family to end up with 2.4 million.

Doing the math, x=1.97

So this is a completely reasonable number to get in 400 years, when assuming the age of conception is 22 years old. And if we do a variation of that year of conception, if it was 25 years old, we would get x=2.14.. If we did 20 years old we would get x=1.84...

So this tells us that the Israelites would have to had an average of about 2 children per family to end up with 2.4 million decedents 400 years later...

This is completely reasonable to be true

Thank you for doing the math, I'm a complete ignoramus when it comes to numbers, I'll read the counter argument (if there is one) to try and get the whole picture.

Just a small note not sure we should estimate 2,4m from 600,000 men in the Exodus. We mustn't forget the Egyptians that joined them. Thus when examining the question of whether the reported numbers could be accurate regarding projected birth rate, the final figure doesn't need to be 2,4 million at all. (Also it was 430 years and I'm pretty sure the writer counted "Israelites" all the descendents of those that went into Egypt as part of Jacobs household which was a total of 70 individuals. Don't know if that changes much).

JW

[Tcg]

Thank you for doing the math, I'm a complete ignoramus when it comes to numbers, I'll read the counter argument (if there is one) to try and get the whole picture.

Just a small note not sure we should estimate 2,4m from 600,000 men in the Exodus. We mustn't forget the Egyptians that joined the.

Yes, let's not forget the Egyptians that joined the. How exactly does this help us determine the Exodus wasn't fictional?


Tcg

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 46 by JehovahsWitness]

Now that you have edited your "the" to "them", how does this recent modification change the fact that this numbers game fails to provide evidence that the Exodus isn't fictional?

Of course it could be that arguing numbers simply provides a distraction from the actual topic of this thread. Whether the Exodus involved two people or five billion is irrelevant to the topic of whether or not it happened at all.


Tcg

[Tart]

Ok so if we were to do the math, say we start with the 12 brothers (sons of Jacob), and 400 years later we end up with 2.4 million decedents from those 12 brothers.

Now say that the average age of conception is 22 years old. That means every 22 years a new generation is born.

If we take 400 years, and divide that by 22, we get about 18. That means there would be 18 generations in 400 years.

now (for example), lets say the 12 brothers had an average of 2 children apiece, the equation would be 12*2=24, meaning there would be 24 children. Now say those 24 decedents also had 2 children apiece, the equation would be 12*2*2=48, meaning in the second generation there would be 48 decedents... Note ill simplify the equation using exponents, so 12*2^2, where the exponent is the number of generations.

From this equation we can build the main equation.

2,400,000(decedent)=12(sons of Jacob)*x^18
now we can solve for x and get the number of average children that would have to be born to a family to end up with 2.4 million.

Doing the math, x=1.97

So this is a completely reasonable number to get in 400 years, when assuming the age of conception is 22 years old. And if we do a variation of that year of conception, if it was 25 years old, we would get x=2.14.. If we did 20 years old we would get x=1.84...

So this tells us that the Israelites would have to had an average of about 2 children per family to end up with 2.4 million decedents 400 years later...

This is completely reasonable to be true

Thank you for doing the math, I'm a complete ignoramus when it comes to numbers, I'll read the counter argument (if there is one) to try and get the whole picture.

Just a small note not sure we should estimate 2,4m from 600,000 men in the Exodus. We mustn't forget the Egyptians that joined them. Thus when examining the question of whether the reported numbers could be accurate regarding projected birth rate, the final figure doesn't need to be 2,4 million at all. (Also it was 430 years and I'm pretty sure the writer counted "Israelites" all the descendents of those that went into Egypt as part of Jacobs household which was a total of 70 individuals. Don't know if that changes much).

JW

Well it is interesting, i was thinking on a bus about this exact suspect, "what if there were Egyptians or others who married into the families of the Israelite?"... This would add much more complexities into the equation, however im pretty sure the equation i constructed would be a minimum number, which means the 2.4 million descents would have results from even less children per family then 2... It just adds complexities.

But the interesting thing to me when i was pondering this question was, it became evidence that the male lineage in the patriarch is totally needed to establish a family line... This is probably the reason they did it...

if we were to tract a family of both sons, and daughter, then whenever an outside man married into the family by means of marrying a daughter, if we counted that man and his children as part of the family, they would be leaving another family. The math goes crazy.. In essence, there would be no families. it would be pointless becuase everyone would become part of the main family and all other families would just windle away...

This probably became evidence early on, and they probably knew it, thus the patriarch of son began. It is absolutely needed to establish a family line, that came from the decedents of some couple, like Abraham and Sarah... In order to establish a family line (which was important for where property goes, who's the king, etc), the patriarch it needed, at least from son or daughter, and not both..

It is interesting to think about what kinds of numbers we would get from counting sons and daughters, say all decedent were sons and that none of them took wives from within the Israelite families, the number would sky rocket to way more then 2.4 million, and more so it would be impossible for the Israelites to track... Using 600,000 men would be easier to work with...

in any rate, the number of children born to a family, or of sons to a family, would certainly be reasonable... It would probably be even lower then 2 children per family, im just not going to do the math right now cuz the point has been proven.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 49 by Tart]

Absolutely, it was the male lineage that preserved the "purity" of the race, I wasnt suggesting that others not decendant of the 12 sons were considered of the 12 tribes but if we're thinking about the Exodus many "foreigners " would have been part of leaving crowd.

Again thanks for your work, bookmarked!


JW