Haran

The Bible. And, just so you know, I ain't the only one iffing, maybeing, and who knowing about these events. This kind of thing can't be pinned only on those who believe in the veracity of the accounts.

Substantial parts?? No. Made up?? No, not necessarily. Accidentally corrupted, perhaps? (and no, minor things like this that are possibly found in the Bible do not cause problems for my theology) Symbolic perhaps?

This is too generic and simplifies the circumstances way too much. There are ancient tells with many, many layers. There are tells that have not been investigated. There are no inscriptions that say "This is where Kadesh-Barnea was located", so scholars are simply making their most educated guesses.

aa5874

Haran, based on your previous posts, it appears to me that you have a preconceived commitment to accept the Christian Bible as true, regardless of any evidence that shows otherwise. You seem to be satisfied with warding off 'attacks' rather putting your evidence of the 'Exodus' on the table.

The description of the 'Exodus', as recorded in the Bible, is being disputed, so just saying you believe the Bible is of little consequence. I am patiently waiting for you to give some tangible information outside of the disputed source to show that the 'Exodus' occurred.

Again, I ask you, how is it possible for magicians, without the help of the God of Moses, to create frogs or turn all the waters of Egypt into blood?

What you believe is of very little importance to me, all I need is to see the evidence that caused you to come to your conclusion that there was an 'Exodus'.

Haran

aa...I'm sorry, I just have very brief snippets of time for responses. I can't do justice to the topics like I'd like. I wanted to look something up before I responded to your questions about the Egyptians' magicians and then I promptly forgot with all the other attacks. However, I'll just quickly say that I believe the Bible account of Moses, the Magicians, and the plagues states that there came a point when the magicians could no longer perform the same feats and told Pharoah so, but he didn't listen.

If you want real history, then I am glad. The thread was started by someone who has an acknowledged agenda to decovert Christians, so my responses have mostly been aimed in that direction. I have already indirectly answered the core question for this thread...that is, I do not think that we can necessarily expect significant evidence of the Exodus 3500 years after the fact. That is the main point.

Within the framework that I am not defending against an attack on my religion, I am happy to speculate on what it means that little if any evidence of the Exodus has been found. I am also happy to speculate with you on where evidence might have been found or debate a little about whether certain things are actually evidence. Whether you are sincere about history, unlike Johnny, or not is up to you.

Sauron

Why wouldn't it be THE Kadesh-barnea? What reason exists to suspect otherwise?

Other than to prevent another biblical error, I mean?

Yes, you are incorrect. Finkelstein mentions that the area has been thoroughly examined.

Sauron

But the burden of proof is on the back of the affirmative claimant, to prove the positive case here. Your affirmative statement in favor of the Exodus isn't true by default. It doesn't depend on skeptics being able to disprove it.

It's the lack of any such proof that we're discussing here.

Please.

That's merely a slightly re-worked version of the creationist claim: "yeah, so what? Science may discover new evidence in the future, so why abandon creationism now?"

1. Or they may be Canaanite.
2. OR something else, and not Hebrew at all. "Could be" is not an argument.
3. Regardless of who they turn out to be, the fact that they appear on a relief doesn't prove that the depicted peoples actually lived in Egypt. Foreigners were also depicted on reliefs.

Depictions of unknown people on a relief that (you claim) are semitic (how did you decide that, BTW?) is a far cry from proving that Hebrews ever lived in Egypt.

After you're through with that, you can also address the contrary evidence that points to the Hebrews growing up indigenously in Palestine, alongside Edomites and Canaanites.

So for your argument to stand, you not only have to :

1. provide affirmative evidence of Hebrews in Egypt; AS WELL AS
2. explain away the evidence that they originated in Palestine instead.

What of it?

What details?

Sauron

In addition, I thought that part of this "Josiah revolution" explanation was that the priests took already existing documents and traditions from the two kingdoms and wove them together into a semi-coherent narrative.

If that's the case, then the core of the Torah could still pre-exist Josiah, but in two unreconciled volumes.

Sauron

So where is your physical evidence for the Exodus?

It's clearly the greater, more obvious, and central claim here. In addition, the Exodus, being:

* a 40 year event,
* involving (allegedly) hundreds of thousands of people,
* including the military, priesthood and pharaoh of the kingdom of Egypt;

would be far more likely to leave behind copious amounts of physical evidence, than the "Josiah revolution" would be. Far more people, far more time involved, and many more things going on. For example: personal items, military objects, written records, observations from neighboring political powers, evidence of human habitation. Yet we have none. Zero. Zip. Nada.

I don't agree with you that there isn't any physical evidence for the Josiah revolution. But for someone who suddenly wants physical evidence to support that theory before accepting it, you certainly didn't need any to accept the Exodus, now did you?

Sheesh. You complain that you can't find any footprints for the mouse, yet you see no problem in the lack of footprints for the elephant.

madmax2976

Unless Haran is demanding that everyone else believe it too, why would he need to provide evidence that the Exodus occured? Being an agnostic atheist I obviously don't believe the account to be true in all it's details, though the legend of the exodus could have been inspired by some real life events.

Haran on the other hand may believe it occured pretty much as the bible describes it. It's not an issue to me unless Haran (or other believers) insist I should believe it as well. I don't see him doing that here.

Haran

Thank you for that breath of fresh air. I'd like to respond to Sauron, but I've been around that block before...it goes nowhere.

Sauron

Oh, maybe because of his comments, such as:

In summary, Haran has gone beyond the point of merely expressing a personal belief. He has asserted that:

1. there is actual evidence to be examined;
2. evidence which he finds convincing;
3. he has incorrectly summarized the archaeological record;

And then to top it all off, he's decided that anyone skeptical of the orthodox view of the Exodus and the Conquest of Canaan is pushing an "absurd theory".

That is not the behavior of someone merely expressing a private point of view.

How true. I insist that you back your claims up, and you howl like a scalded pig. Not much else happens.