Postcard73

The techniques that have been developed in history and archaeology are vastly more complex now than in the period the Bible was written. Ancient writers based their texts on oral tradition and not on proper methods.

Consider the excavations of Heshbon and Dibon I brought up yesterday. Both were of towns that are mentioned as part of the Conquest in Numbers, but archaeology has shown that the sites were not inhabited until well after the Conquest should have occurred. From this we can determine that ancient scribes were applying the Exodus story to the world they inhabited as opposed to the world of the late Bronze Age. They were not recording a history of actual events but a tradition that developed and adapted over time. If Numbers were an accurate history text, then we would either find evidence of older habitation at these sites, or they would not be mentioned at all.

Doctor X

It could happen. . . .

Welcome to the Forums!

Postcard well describes the problems of anachronism in the OT texts. It reminds me of expecting the "real" King Arthur to have plate armour and an employee from Conneticut. . . .

--J.D.

rlogan

Back to the strawmen who supposedly said these Biblical cities never existed - I don't really know of any cases where historians put forth an argument that some city never existed. If they did, that surely was not the basis upon which they challenged the Bible.

The skepticism is not over mundane things like whether there are cities or not. Rather, it is over things like bringing dead people back to life, parting seas, global floods, and such.

The snorkel chariot was used for about three centuries until it was made obsolete by unleavened depth chargers.

sismofyt

Well, thank you for the welcome, Herr Doktor! Very long time lurker here.. time to get out of the closet.

Yes, okay maybe the chariot (or car) at the bottom of the Red Sea is a result of a mad pharao chasing the israelies outta Egypt. But where's the evidence for that?

Anyway, I think it's clear that most of the OT is based on stories made up to fit the cause. It's quite a pathetic history book. The israelies didn't have the knowledge about the egyptians as we do now even though they lived in the same age. If they did, they would have written an entirely different book. Or no book.

Oh, just got "Who Wrote the Bible" in the mail today! Thanx for the recommendation..

EGGO

Not that I'm against this or anything, but what would be considered evidence that a bunch of egyptians would be chasing 600,000+ Jews. I know the bodycount is the big thing, but it sounds like you have evidence that shows the pharoh had no intentions of even doing this (well...considering that it did happen )

Postcard73

Probably the most likely piece of evidence that might possibly make the Exodus story seem even remotely based on fact would be an ancient Egyptian text dated to the right period indicating that a huge group of slaves had headed out into the Sinai. This would represent a massive migration, yet to my knowledge no such reference has been found. I guess you could also find an entire army at the bottom of the Red Sea (or perhaps the Reed Sea).

I believe I heard a fundy claim once that the event was stricken from Egyptian records because it made Pharoah look bad...

RED DAVE

From EGGO:600,000+ cardboard tubes from empty toilet paper rolls.

RED DAVE

Doctor X

rlogan:

Sodom
Gomorrah
Compton [Stop that!--Ed.]

Your point is taken regarding more obvious problems with the stories. However, an apologist can play the "how do you know a donkey did not talk?" game until the bovines return to their domiciles regarding the supernatural events. Finding a specific problem also helps date the texts.

sismofyt:

You are welcome. Regarding the book, scholars argue about Friedman's dating of the texts--he makes a good argument, but he does not address how the Bablyonian myths and religious ideas entered the texts. He may do this in his newer book; I do not know. Anyways, the basic idea of the Documentary Hypothesis is well represented.

EGGO:

I am not an archaeologist, and I do not play one on public access television; however, it seems that people leave garbage. Like the "how did they feed the animals on the Ark" calculations, the size of the migration is untenable. However, even a much smaller migration leaves evidence. The book Archeaology and the Bible gives a good summary of what would be "expected."

--J.D.

sismofyt

Finished the book. Liked it. I too have wondered a lot about how the mesopotamian myths have entered the OT as well.

For the exodus to be true, I'd say a sudden settlement of 2-3 million people in Canaan would leave clear traces. It would have shocked the entire (biblical) 'world', yet no-one seems to remember anything. Closest 'exodus' was the Hyksos being kicked out. Mayby that chariot was used for that. We'll probably never know...

Sarpedon

I think the best evidence for the events of exodus would be finding all the mass graves for the Hundreds of Thousands of Egyptian men and boys who died in the "I'll kill all the firstborn" plague. The egyptions had a thing for burying their dead...they are well known for it. If such a thing had happened, you would find tombs that had been built for a father would have been hastily refitted to house his son. The poorer people would probably have just piled mummies in a big hole. The mummies would not have been embalmed with the usual care, as the sudden glut would have overwhelmed the embalmers. Old tombs may have been reopened, and filled with fresh mummies. Instead, there is...nothing!