Originally Posted by Adam

Even the Holman Bible Dictionary admits that excavations at Kadesh have failed to confirm the Exodus accounts, but does not give up hope. However, the more rabid Fundamentalist Christian websites are sure the older (pre-1881) locations for Kadesh are correct, usually meaning Petra (as with Josephus).
Kadesh Barnea

Originally Posted by Cheerful Charlie

But there is direct evidence. The claims of the OT are that 75 people came to Egypt and 430 years later left 2 1/2 million strong to Palestine. So you would expect they would have been heavily Egyptianized in culture, language, clothing, pottery styles and so on. The Iron age Israelites were not. Their pottery was basically same as their Canaanite forbearers. Their language was a typical West Semitic- Canaanite dialect. They were in fact little different from Canaanites in anything, and lacked all of the Egyptianisms you would expect to have been part of their culture starting as 75 illiterate tribesmen shepherds who were in Egypt for centuries.

Joshua 10 lists the 33 kings Joshua and Moses allegedly defeated. Archaeology demonstrates all the large cities supposedly destroyed by the Israelites were in fact abandoned at the times of Moses/Joshua. Direct evidence all of the Torah is faux history.

All available archaeological evidence shows there is no truth to any of this. Hard evidence, not just theory. The mere theory there is an historical truth in the Torah has been falsified.

Note that later prophets from Jesus to Mohammed have taken these faux histories as true, demonstrating they did know the facts and apparently God didn't tell them any truths in regards to these issues worth paying attention to.

Cheerful Charlie

Originally Posted by semiopen

The current thinking is that the builders of the pyramids weren't slaves.

I've pointed out in the past that there was little economic advantage in enslaving someone especially when you have people who would work pretty much for free. It's not like you had to pay unemployment insurance, etc.

Egypt tombs suggest free men built pyramids, not slaves

Also

Slaves and Slavery in Ancient Egypt

Even the actual descriptions in the bible are not very clear about the depths of servitude of the Hebrews. They seem to own a lot of shit and get plenty of days off. The Levites weren't enslaved at all.

Originally Posted by Duvduv

For all the swipes about "haredi Jews" you have to ask yourself whether the many numbers of Biblical commentators from all over the place didn't wonder about the same things you wonder about, and yet they were not even afraid to offer different explanations that would some cast "aspersions" on the image of a monolithic narrative of all events in Jewish history.

They could be expected to hide their true opinions from all literate Jews when it came to these matters. In any case there are differing views that go in this direction. Rashi states that they stayed at (in the area of) Kadesh Barnea for 19 years. R. Avraham Ibn Ezra believes it was for only a couple of months.

The Daat Zekenim in Numbers 34 explains that they were NOT even in Kadesh Barnea itself (was he anticipating those archaeologists of some 800 hundred years later?). And some sources would deny that the location of the excavations is at the correct location anyway.

My goodness, why did all the rabbis not simply hide these various views to protect the integrity of the Jewish narrative?!

Originally Posted by Sarpedon

Moot. Egypt undertook no major conquests outside the valley in the Old Kingdom, when the pyramids were built. We know that the workers on the Pyramids were Egyptians, because they carved their names in the vaults over the burial chamber, and other out-of-the-way places.

Racists like to claim the achievements of other cultures as their own. Examples of this are so common as to not need to be mentioned.

I know the biblical tale of the Hebrews coming to Egypt as refugees, a small band, but that is clearly incompatible with the later assertion that before the Exodus, the Hebrews were so numerous the Egyptians were afraid that they would take over.

Then there is the inability of the biblical supporters to give a coherent timetable of events. Which Pharaoh was it who died in the Red Sea? When did the Hebrews first come to Egypt? Which Pharaoh did Abraham meet and speak to? Which Pharaoh did Joseph serve as minister? Biblical supporters cannot answer any of these questions, which would establish the chronology.

The various 'Pharaohs' in the bible are clearly generic characters. They no more refer to a real person than 'the King' in the story of Jack the Giant Killer refers to a real king of a real country.

Originally Posted by Sarpedon

I don't view the Midrash as a credible source. I'm having a hard enough time with the Bible as it is.

Does the Midrash identify the Pharaohs? If it doesn't, why should I view it as credible? Since they can't even say how long the Hebrews were in Egypt, they can't even say how much fecundity would be necessary.