Exodus real?

[mark_a]

I’ve read that Genesis is possibly not a factual book and that the Church does not require us to believe it is factual.

How about Exodus? I’ve read that there is no archeological evidence of it, and that there are only a few references to Jews in all known Egyptian writings.

Would this lessen the importance of passover and successive beliefs?

Thanks in advance.

 

[AmandaPS]

I don’t know about archeological evidence for the Exodus, but one thing I do know about Egyptian history of the time, is that the pharoahs weren’t squimish about re-writing history that they didn’t like. If the pharoahs of the time found the exodus humiliating, I doubt they’d have the scribes preserve the knowledge for all it’s glory.

 

[TheQuestioner]

AmandaPS:

I don’t know about archeological evidence for the Exodus, but one thing I do know about Egyptian history of the time, is that the pharoahs weren’t squimish about re-writing history that they didn’t like. If the pharoahs of the time found the exodus humiliating, I doubt they’d have the scribes preserve the knowledge for all it’s glory.

True, true. I was also watching a program on T.V. that showed that the Exodus could have actually happend. Apart from an Egyptian tablet indicationg that at the time Ramses’ son was pharoah, the Isrealites were a nomadic people(40 years: hint-hint) there was also and Egyptian hiroglyph that saying that the “Hapiru” (hint-hint) escaped from slavery.

 

[Ghosty]

Correction: Genesis is not literal, it IS factual. The story describes facts in figurative language, meaning that one can’t take the words at their basic meaning to gather the facts of the story. Don’t let anyone tell you that the story of Genesis isn’t factual or doesn’t tell the truth; it simply does so in a different mode of language. The same is possible with many parts of Scripture, particularily the Old Testament.

 

[Jeffrey]

I don’t know where you read about Genesis not being real, but it most certainly is.
mark a:

I’ve read that Genesis is possibly not a factual book and that the Church does not require us to believe it is factual.

How about Exodus? I’ve read that there is no archeological evidence of it, and that there are only a few references to Jews in all known Egyptian writings.

Would this lessen the importance of passover and successive beliefs?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Hananiah]

In 1909 the Pontifical Biblical Commission, which at that time had the power to bind the conscience of Catholics, decreed that it could not be taught that the first three chapters of Genesis were not true in the literal historical sense. Moreover, the Commission emphasized especially that the literal historical sense could not be impugned regarding Adam’s transgression of the divine commandment “through the devil’s persuasion under the guise of a serpent.” Also, in 1950 Pope Pius XII issued an encyclical entitled Humani Generis which denounces the ideas that Adam and Eve were not real, individual people, that there has ever existed any true human who was not descended from them, and that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are not history in a literal sense.

When, however, there is question of another conjectural opinion, namely polygenism, the children of the Church by no means enjoy such liberty. For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is no no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own… [T]he first eleven chapters of Genesis, although properly speaking not conforming to the historical method used by the best Greek and Latin writers or by competent authors of our time, do nevertheless pertain to history in a true sense, which however must be further studied and determined by exegetes; the same chapters… in simple and metaphorical language adapted to the mentality of a people but little cultured, both state the principal truths which are fundamental for our salvation, and also give a popular description of the origin of the human race and the chosen people. If, however, the ancient sacred writers have taken anything from popular narrations (and this may be conceded), it must never be forgotten that they did so with the help of divine inspiration, through which they were rendered immune from any error in selecting and evaluating those documents.
(Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, no. 37f)

 

[knute]

Ghosty:

Correction: Genesis is not literal, it IS factual. The story describes facts in figurative language, meaning that one can’t take the words at their basic meaning to gather the facts of the story.

Ghosty, as many times as I’ve read that thought in commentaries, I have never, ever, ever understood what that means. I just don’t get it. The events either happened or they didn’t. What do we mean when we say a story isn’t to be taken literally (i.e. didn’t happen that way) yet it is true?

 

[twf]

Yes, I’ve also seen evidence for the Exodus…besides, we take Scripture above other secondary sources, not the other way around, don’t we? I think that the parts of Genesis that speak of the history of Israel are made to be taken literally…because they are written as historical narratives and the Jews sure believed they were true! Remember, the New Testament and the tradition of the Church make it pretty clear that Abraham really existed, and is the Father of the Jews (and us in a spiritual sense) and all his stories are from Genesis.

I’d like to point something out though…the Exodus is described in the Book of Exodus, not Genesis. (And there is no reason to deny that the Book of Exodus is a historical book…it’s written as such, to say that it’s not history is to undermine Judaism itself).

 

[Fergal]

I have seen many times on National Geographic that they have found remains of chariot wheels at the bottom of the sea that God parted for Moses and the Israelites.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Also

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Many claim aslo that satellite images have p(name removed by moderator)ointed the remains of Noah’s Ark. All this is available on the net at arkdiscovery.com/red_sea_crossing.htm
Quite incredible stuff, astounding all involved in the discovery.

Never doubt the inspired Word of God.
For those who doubt no miracle or discovery will be enough. For those who believe no miracle or discovery is necessary.

God Bless,
Fergal

 

[AmandaPS]

Cool pictures, Fergal. Thanks. That third one, is that a chariot axel?

 

[Peace-bwu]

mark a:

I’ve read that Genesis is possibly not a factual book and that the Church does not require us to believe it is factual.

How about Exodus? I’ve read that there is no archeological evidence of it, and that there are only a few references to Jews in all known Egyptian writings.

Would this lessen the importance of passover and successive beliefs?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Tom]

knute:

Ghosty, as many times as I’ve read that thought in commentaries, I have never, ever, ever understood what that means. I just don’t get it. The events either happened or they didn’t. What do we mean when we say a story isn’t to be taken literally (i.e. didn’t happen that way) yet it is true?

Knute, what it means is some of the stories are parables. Remember in the NT Jesus teaches us in parables (stories to make a point), when asked why, He says that is the way His Father teaches us. If the Father teaches us in parables we can be sure at least some of the OT is also in parables. So, is the Gn story of creation “factual” or a parable? Does it really matter? If we’re spending our time trying to determine if it’s an accurate historical account or a parable, we’re missing the whole point. Does it matter if there really was a “prodigal son” or not? No, it’s not the point of the story.

 

[Fidelis]

Fergal-

Great photos. Do you have an on-line source we can reference those?

On a related note, on his Footprints of God video about Moses, Steve Ray shows the mummy of Ramses II, who is thought to be the Pharoah at the time of Exodus. He relates that Egyptian museum tour guides point out that the arms of this mummy are not positioned in the usual crossed over the breast position they were usually put in right after death. The condition of this mummy indicates that rigor mortis had set in before this was able to be done, indicating that the individual had been dead for sometime before it was prepared for burial. Like a body that had been recovered–perhaps from the bottom of the sea?

 

[SATEX]

**Knut

A man standing on a ledge overlooking the ocean wave hit the rock below slipped and fell toward the ocean. He grabbed a branch on the way down and was hanging there afraid of dieing. He called out to God for help, and God said, I am here. The man asked for God’s help again. God said, I will help you if you do what I ask. The man said, yes yes I will. God said, let go. The man though for a moment and called out to God, “God, is their anyone else up there?”

This is a story of Faith and Trust in God. If it is a factual story or not, does it take anything away from the message it intended to relay?

Richard

**

 

[Peace-bwu]

Ok, I just spent an hour on a long, well thought out,documented reply, but it didn’t post!!!:banghead: Bottom line is there are four senses of Scripture, Literal, allegorical, figurative and anagogical. Familiarize yourself with the correct way to apply them. Archaeology is fascinating and a worthwhile science but should not determine whether we believe Scripture is valid in that it the history of God’s relationship with His People with whom he chose to make a covenant. aww… maybe I will find what I wrote again. You are not required to read Scripture as if it were written by a scientist making detailed documentation of an experiment followed by an analysis. You are required to realize that it is the inspired Word of God, that there is something much deeper than unbiased historical accuracy, according to modern academic standards. Individual flawed people had experiences and recognized God in their lives, God chose to inspire them to tell a story or write it down. His Word is spoken to us through the writer’s personality with all of* their* individual strengths and weaknesse and perspective… There are some underlying themes such as God making covenants with those who follow His will faithfully, and the family dynamic, Much of the old Testament prefigures the sacraments to come, especially Baptism and the Eucharist. If we read Scripture without the benefit of Sacred Tradition it is easy to misinterpret passages and miss crucial elements.

BTW, Fergal, thanks for the great pictures!

 

[Peace-bwu]

I just spent some time reading info on the link from Fergal… The part about the Ark of the Covneant and the place where Jesus was crucified seems a little fishy to me. Is this the same guy who claims dinosaurs were around at the time of Noah’s ark? I am suspicious of this guy’s research.

 

[Peace-bwu]

ahhh… apparently this site is a 7th day adventist thing! I am wondering if any of this archaeology is real why there have not been more reliable studies done? The wheel at the bottom of the ocean looks like someone just put it there before the picture was taken. I think part of the story that shows where the sea was parted is intersting, but beyond that I simply don’t have confidence in what I read at this site.

 

[mark_a]

twf:

I’d like to point something out though…the Exodus is described in the Book of Exodus, not Genesis. (And there is no reason to deny that the Book of Exodus is a historical book…it’s written as such, to say that it’s not history is to undermine Judaism itself).

Thanks TWF,
Sorry my question read that way, I understand Genesis and Exodus are two different books. I was trying to ask if some view Genesis in perhaps a non-literal way, is Exodus viewed possibly similarly?

 

[mark_a]

Hananiah:

In 1909 the Pontifical Biblical Commission, which at that time had the power to bind the conscience of Catholics, decreed that it could not be taught that the first three chapters of Genesis were not true in the literal historical sense. Moreover, the Commission emphasized especially that the literal historical sense could not be impugned regarding Adam’s transgression of the divine commandment “through the devil’s persuasion under the guise of a serpent.” Also, in 1950 Pope Pius XII issued an encyclical entitled Humani Generis which denounces the ideas that Adam and Eve were not real, individual people, that there has ever existed any true human who was not descended from them, and that the first 11 chapters of Genesis are not history in a literal sense.

Forgive my ignorance, but is this saying the Church requires us to believe Genesis as written?

Thanks for your help.

 

[mark_a]

Fergal:

I have seen many times on National Geographic that they have found remains of chariot wheels at the bottom of the sea that God parted for Moses and the Israelites.

Also

Many claim aslo that satellite images have p(name removed by moderator)ointed the remains of Noah’s Ark. All this is available on the net at arkdiscovery.com/red_sea_crossing.htm
Quite incredible stuff, astounding all involved in the discovery.

Never doubt the inspired Word of God.
For those who doubt no miracle or discovery will be enough. For those who believe no miracle or discovery is necessary.

God Bless,
Fergal

I remember reading in a newspaper (USA Today?) that certain natural conditions (wind, moon phase, season, barametric pressure, etc.) could actually part the Red Sea. I guess God is the only one with the complete formula.

Also caught a documentary about the plagues that struck Egypt, and how plagues of this magnitude are very possible.

I personally wouldn’t use pictures from the internet as a foundation for my faith, though. God knows the trouble we’ve had with the pictures of the Pope’s hat and bent crucifix!!!