Gullwind

Separate from a God-induced plague? The bible quite clearly states that ALL Egyptian livestock - cattle, horses, camels, donkeys, sheep and goats - died. It does not say "all except the war horses that would be needed later."

And the likelihood of ALL these records having been destroyed everywhere is pretty small. We have a lot of information about the ancient world, and we are talking about events that would have had massive social, economic, religious and political ramifications, not just for Egypt, but for the whole region.

If all the Egyptian animals died, starvation would have been a very real possibility. Why no mention of such a massive famine? Those animals would have to be replaced somehow. Why no mention from other countries about the sudden Egyptian demand for large numbers of livestock? Why is there no economic indication of this event? It would be comparable to every semi-truck in the United States suddenly disappearing, and no one even mentioning in passing that it happened.

Here's an example. Let's say a man claims to have walked into a bank and deposited $1000 in his account. However, the tellers don't recognize him, he does not appear on the security video, there is no record of the transaction, and he doesn't even have an account there. Would you still believe that he deposited the money?

Absence of evidence IS evidence of absence if the evidence is not where it should be if the event happened. If the 10 plagues happened anywhere close to the way they are described in the bible, there would be ample evidence, even today. We are not talking about small events with no lasting effects. The death of the livestock alone would have affected Egypt for years, not to mention the rest of the region who suddenly had to resupply a major nation with animals.

Gullwind

The point is that there is currently no corroborating evidence for them at this time. Sure, it's possible that somehow every single record of the plagues has either been destroyed, or somehow missed by scholars, but the same could be said for the alien invasion that took place a year later. You can't prove it happened without supporting evidence, and as I said above, if the evidence does not exist where it should, then taking the position that it didn't happen at all is justified.

As for evidence from the plagues? How about large numbers of animal skeletons all shoved into mass graves? How about large numbers of human remains all having been buried at the same time from all the first-born children that died? How about large numbers of bodies from the starvation that would have resulted from having all their livestock killed, then their crops wiped out by hail, and what was left eaten by locusts? The plagues as described would have destroyed Egypt. That didn't happen. The massive evidence we have showing that Egypt existed all through this period is evidence that the plagues didn't happen.

QRUEL

spoken like a true believer and apologist of the christian bible.

I fail to understand why you continue to cling to this line of reasoning. maybe you should go back and re-read the pages of this thread where your outlandish claims and faulty thought process has been continually rebuted.

in case you don't feel motivated to do that here are some of my favorites...

FatherMithras

In light of the fact we have evidence contrary to the Jews being in Egypt, the fact that plagues and a loss of slaves would have caused a downturn in the Egyptian economy (when it in fact was thriving) make the stories unlikely. Once again, an absence of evidence does NOT support your claim. You seem to not understand the idea that the burden of proof is on you and that you have not countered any of the archaelogical evidence about the whereabouts and doings of the jews at that point.

QRUEL

FatherM

can you please provide links with information that provides proof that jews were not a part of egyptian society, as slaves or indentured servants.

I'd like to use that info when talking about this subject...

FatherMithras

http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/otarch2.html

The site in and of itself is biased towards atheism. But if you go through the references on it you'll see that their bias simply reflects the truth of the matter. The data is there, and it's a very good amateur analysis. The best evidence they weren't there however, is the total lack of Egyptian influence on the jewish culture and art, the complete lack of any evidence they were slaves, etc. There simply is nothing to verify the BS bible account.

Helo

Well that would be a problem if I took the bible litterally which I do not.

Again, most of that hinges on taking the whole story litterally which I do not. I believe that certain events happened but not to the severity that the bible states.

Theres no need to resort to insults. Im actually not a Christian, Im defending my own theories, I couldnt care less about the bible.

Which is?

Im also curious as to your opinion of what the Armana Letters refer to as the Apiru (Translated to the Habiru) who were recorded as a group of rebels wreaking havok across Egypt and which some scholars take as the first mentioning of the tribes of the Hebrews.

Economic impact may have been limited by Egypt's treasury and food stores which would have been quite high at the time of Ramses II. Tutankhamun had three top advisors when he was a boy king. Ay, Horemheb, and Maya. Ay was an ex-priest of Amun, Horemheb was chief of the armies, and Maya was his treasurer. During the reign of Akhenaten, Egypt was nearly bankrupt because of his spending. Maya was the one who managed to pull Egypt up and build up grain and financial stores to a high level.

Egypt has often been the richest country in the ancient world. When Egypt fell completely to Rome (After the death of Cleopatra) the Egyptian treasury was so large that it caused Roman interest rates to fall by over two thirds.

It could be argued that the Egyptians had the biggest influence of any culture on the Jews, it was the Egyptians who developed the idea of monotheism (Albeit for a short time).

Which, if Moses was a rebellious Egyptian prince (considering he was rescued out of the Nile by a daughter of Pharoah), makes sense. He would have grown up around Atenism his whole life. He would have been influenced by it and felt its pull from the time he was a young child. Maybe this left an impression on him and spawned Judiasm.

Now we dont know much about Atenism because any record of it was intentionally destroyed by the Egyptians (Think of Russia after Stalin). We do know that it was the first monotheistic religion. But the specifics have been erased from history.

xaxxat

If there was an Exodus, shouldn't the Sinai be littered with artifacts left by a large population spending 40 years there? Wouldn't such artifacts point towards an Egyptian origin?

sismofyt

helo, search for "exodus, crap & shit" here. i think someone calculated just how much mess they would have made during that long walk. there's no trace of anything btw..

the only thing there is, is a book

Helo

The only THING thats claiming the Jews were in the desert for 40 years is the bible. And for the 50th time, Im not saying the bible is 100% accurate or reliable.