Tammuz

There seems to be almost a consensus that the Exodus is a myth, and that the Israelites came from the Canaanites. But from where comes the Exodus myth then? It seems strange that it would just appear out in the air, and it makes much more sense that it would be a legendarization of a real event, such as the expulsion of Hyksos. Does the story have some parallel in Mesopotamian myths (then there would be a connection and a source) or is it unique to the Israelites?

Sven

Well, the book recommended most often here on this topic is The Bible Unearthed (or via: amazon.co.uk)

If I remember correctly, they indeed discuss the Hyksos as a possible root for the myth.

yalla

I reckon the political circumstances of the writers and their times provided the inspiration for the story.
Having just returned from Babylon a priestly class attempts to justify displacing the native inhabitants of Judea and thus creates a story in which god mandates exactly that.
It would have been a little obvious whose interests the story was serving if the "exodus" was alleged to have been from Babylon to the west so Egypt was substituted, after all Egypt was in political decline and could be safely cast as the villains as could the "people of the land" of Judea be transformed into evil Canaanites and Philistines et al.
Simple political and religious propaganda wapped up as legend and myth to further the interests of a small group of usurpers.

Aspirin99

I was reading this book when I opened this post. It's an excellent read.

Wads4

This is what I have always thought, and I believe the clincher is that the Israelites allegedly were lead out of Egypt by a "pillar of fire by night and a column of smoke by day";--obviously an erupting volcano. The biggest eruption was around 1628 BC, of the island of Santorini(Thera). This should have been visible from afar, and it produced fallout and tsunami effects,ie the plagues of Egypt and the so-called parting of the Red Sea. The thing is that 1628 BC corresponds with the start of Egypt's New Kingdom and the expulsion of the Hyksos by the Egyptians.

Tammuz

Thank you for your answers.

But who lived in Judea when the Israelites returned? After all, the "exile" was only for several decades. Was the area populated by enough other peoples so quickly that assimilation of them by the Israelites was not possible?

Anat

Most of the Judeans were not exiled. There was some population decline in the immediate environs of Jerusalem, but some increased activity in the area of Mitzpa (previously in Benjamin territory and a border town between Judah and Israel) which became the administrative center. There was some incursion of Edomites and other neighboring peoples, some of which intermarried with the remaining Judahites (hence the campaigns for divorcing foreign women in Ezra and Nehemia). Also there formed a Samaritan identity from a mix of cross-exiles brought into Samaria by the Assyrians and remaining Israelites who did not move into Judah in the days of Hezekiah.

Kosh

C'mon Wads, you've been around here long enough to have seen all that refuted ad nauseum. It's just mythology, no naturalistic explanations needed.

Wads4

I'm sure you are correct, but I don't recall the actual refutations that don't involve my "explanation"; I will search around for them unless you can give me a quick summary.

Malachi151

My biggest problem with this whole theory (and the whole Exodus Decoded show) is that we then have to explain how this event in 1628 BCE is faithfully recorded "on paper" for the first time around 700 BCE, almost 1,000 years later...

Not only that, but the whole Red Sea thing is such a "red" herring. The Red Sea" is a mistranslation, and the whole Christian understanding of this story is a misinterpretation that doesn't even match the oritional texts, so coming up with a "naturalistic explanation" for the "parting of the Red Sea" is just fool's play, since the "parting of the Red Sea" was a later Christian mistranslation of a story about Jews crossing a swamp.