The Egyptians never enslaved the Israelites?

[Richca]

I read some stuff that claims that the story of Exodus was a “White lie” perpetrated by white people to keep the “Black Man” down.

Many scholars claim that the Egyptians never enslaved Israelites.

This article goes into detail:

darkmoon.me/2015/the-first-jewish-lie-the-old-testament-fabrication-that-the-israelites-were-slaves-in-egypt-john-kaminski/

Here is a small sample from it.

*Tel Aviv University. Prof. Ze’ev Herzog, in a 1999 article in Ha’aretz, said:

“The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the 12 tribes of Israel.”*

*“The ancient Egyptians kept meticulous records of every event, and there is a great deal of documentation about the kingdom’s political and military life … . Yet there is not a single mention of any ‘Children of Israel’ who lived in Egypt, or rebelled against it, or emigrated from it at any time.”

Source: Shlomo Sand, The Invention of the Jewish People (2008); Arthur Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe: The Khazar Empire and Its Heritage (1976)*.

Is this true? Is this all just some lie made by white scholars and white religious leaders?

Or does our faith and the Bible have the historical accuracy it claims?

The going down of the family of Jacob or Israel to Egypt during the famine, their stay in Egypt for 400 years, the enslavement of the Israelites by the Egyptians, and their deliverance by God through the hands of Moses is all historical as well as concerning divine revelation. For the ancient Israelites, their theology about God was intimately connected with history and historical events, that is, what they knew and understood about God was intimately connected with divine intervention in human history and especially in their own history as the chosen people of God.

 

[Richca]

Because the Church does not teach a literal interpretation of Genesis.

This goes to the point you made about Bill Maher and talking snakes which is a rather naive interpretation. I said it was the devil talking through the snake. Two, the Church does not teach a literal interpretation of your statement here where ever you get it from.

 

[Tim_D]

Two, the Church does not teach a literal interpretation of your statement here where ever you get it from.

Huh?

“As Catholics, we must believe that every word of Scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit, a claim the Church will not make even for her infallible pronouncements. However, we must not imagine the biblical authors as going into a trance and taking automatic dictation in a “pure” language untouched by historical contingency. Rather, God made full use of the writers habits of mind and expression. It’s the old mystery of grace and free will…While they do not teach science, the early chapters of Genesis are history and not myth. But they are not history as it would be written by a modern historian. (It is not as though there was a camcorder in the Garden of Eden.) You might say that they are history written in mythic language a poetic compression of the truth, as it were. We are obliged to believe the fundamental truths expressed by the sacred author — for example, that our first parents, tempted by the devil, committed a primal act of disobedience whose effects we still suffer (cf. Catechism, no. 390). But the Catholic doctrine of original sin is entirely outside the realm of physical science.”

catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/answering-atheists/how-to-read-the-first-chapter-of-genesis.html

 

[Fiasco]

We probably should not be surprised to learn that the author is also a big holocaust denier.

And he confirms that himself in his vile diatribe.

 

[Tuxedo_Mark]

I read s theory once that the Egyptians finally got fed up enough with the Hyksos that they drove them out of Egypt. The Hyksos settled in Cannan and, with no pesky Egyptians around to bother them, rewrote history to turn the forced expulsion of oppressors into the liberation of slaves - at the hands of their god, of course.

Check out these links:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus

 

[meltzerboy]

I read s theory once that the Egyptians finally got fed up enough with the Hyksos that they drove them out of Egypt. The Hyksos settled in Cannan and, with no pesky Egyptians around to bother them, rewrote history to turn the forced expulsion of oppressors into the liberation of slaves - at the hands of their god, of course.

Check out these links:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus

By “their god,” do you mean the G-d of the Jews? If so, is this not also your G-d as a Catholic? (I am just linking the comment here to your other thread, which questions the Canon’s inclusion of the Old Testament.)

 

[Peebo]

While this may not be on topic…it’s interesting to note that the Book of Judith is acknowledged as a work of fiction…it nevertheless is accepted as deuterocanonical by the Catholic church but is not in the Hebrew bible… or the Protestant bible

 

[sudy]

By “their god,” do you mean the G-d of the Jews? If so, is this not also your G-d as a Catholic? (I am just linking the comment here to your other thread, which questions the Canon’s inclusion of the Old Testament.)

Yes, the same God. The only God.

Why should Catholics question the truth of the Exodus, as it has great meaning for the Catholic faith, also?

Our Paschal (Passover) Lamb (Jesus) is very much a fulfilment of the Old Testament regarding the Passover and Salvation of His people. It’s also mentioned in the New Testament multiple times, see Acts 7, 1 Corinthians 10, Hebrews 3 etc. There are probably more references but I’m too tired to look right now. Basically, you either believe in the truth as it has been passed down to you or you don’t. Some ‘professors’ can argue that neither Moses nor Jesus existed.

 

[ericc]

Yes, the same God. The only God.

Why should Catholics question the truth of the Exodus, as it has great meaning for the Catholic faith, also?

Our Paschal (Passover) Lamb (Jesus) is very much a fulfilment of the Old Testament regarding the Passover and Salvation of His people. It’s also mentioned in the New Testament multiple times, see Acts 7, 1 Corinthians 10, Hebrews 3 etc. There are probably more references but I’m too tired to look right now. Basically, you either believe in the truth as it has been passed down to you or you don’t. Some ‘professors’ can argue that neither Moses nor Jesus existed.

Some Christians may not have understood the ramifications by denying the Exodus. Jesus celebrated the Passover/Exodus, he acknowledged Moses. Denying any of these as true would mean Jesus have been deluded. Which means he wasn’t God if he was deluded.

 

[exnihilo]

I beg to differ. To Jews as well as Christians, it is most assuredly meant to be a literal history. If it is not so and the Jews did not wander through the desert, this means they also did not receive the Law at Mount Sinai–the Ten Commandments and the Torah–and so G-d did not inspire Moses. For Christians, it means that Jesus did not fulfill the Law nor its prophecies and the foundation of both Christianity and Judaism, as well as Islam, is one huge fabrication.

The thing about history is that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If one were to look for evidence of something in the “wrong” period, the supposedly supporting data will be either be missing or misleading and lead to wrong conclusions.

I agree. They said Pilate never existed because there was no evidence. Then they found a stone in the sixties, I believe, with his name on it. Of course the no evidence claim is never true since the Biblical documents themselves are evidence. The value and historicity of them can be discussed but they are evidence.

 

[dje14338]

BornInMarch stated above that the Hyskos were a Semitic group, included Israelites [who were also Semitic], and were in Egypt [around 1600 BC] and controlled the Nile Delta region. In 1555 BC, the Egyptians recapture the Nile Delta and probably enslaved the Hyskos. Thus, the Israelites were enslaved by the Egyptians.

 

[phil19034]

While this may not be on topic…it’s interesting to note that the Book of Judith is acknowledged as a work of fiction…it nevertheless is accepted as deuterocanonical by the Catholic church but is not in the Hebrew bible… or the Protestant bible

The Book of Judith is NOT fiction. You could say it’s a myth or written using mythological language, but “fiction” is the wrong choice of words.

The Book of Judith tells facts that God wants us to know though mythological language, symbolism, and colorful storytelling.

But I would NOT call it fiction, because that would imply it was simply made up, which is not true.

 

[ericc]

The Book of Judith is NOT fiction. You could say it’s a myth or written using mythological language, but “fiction” is the wrong choice of words.

The Book of Judith tells facts that God wants us to know though mythological language, symbolism, and colorful storytelling.

But I would NOT call it fiction, because that would imply it was simply made up, which is not true.

Jesus was a great story teller via parables. His parables have very strong educational points. Whether it is OT or NT, story telling serves to drive home important messages. The difference between normal story telling and this is that this is divine-sourced. Perhaps the stories are real or symbolic, (e.g. Prodigal Son), but when God tells a story, I’m all ears. I’m not going to criticize God for not citing sources. At the end of the story, we all get asked “what is the moral of the story?” What was that all about? There are those who sit back and jeered “that is not real”, “there is no such person”. The other camp would ponder and reflect on the message. Perhaps the story is made up of a composite of real persons, perhaps the location, time has been masked, but what is the take away from that lesson? When God teaches or tell a story, we’d better sit up and listen and wipe that smirk off our faces.

 

[phil19034]

Jesus was a great story teller via parables. His parables have very strong educational points. Whether it is OT or NT, story telling serves to drive home important messages. The difference between normal story telling and this is that this is divine-sourced. Perhaps the stories are real or symbolic, (e.g. Prodigal Son), but when God tells a story, I’m all ears. I’m not going to criticize God for not citing sources. At the end of the story, we all get asked “what is the moral of the story?” What was that all about? There are those who sit back and jeered “that is not real”, “there is no such person”. The other camp would ponder and reflect on the message. Perhaps the story is made up of a composite of real persons, perhaps the location, time has been masked, but what is the take away from that lesson? When God teaches or tell a story, we’d better sit up and listen and wipe that smirk off our faces.

agreed

 

[edwest2]

From the Jewish World Review:

jewishworldreview.com/0401/prager.exodus.html

Ed

 

[phil19034]

From the Jewish World Review:

jewishworldreview.com/0401/prager.exodus.html

Ed

 

[dje14338]

From approximately 1650 BC to 1550 BC, the Nile Delta region was under the control of the Hyksos, a Semtic group. The 7 year famine [story of Joseph] was probably caused by the eruption of Thera in 1627 BC. This eruption would have also caused a famine in Palestine. Thus the Hebrews/Israelites came to the Nile Delta region around 1620 BC. The Egyptians [under the Pharaoh Ahmose] reconquered the Nile Delta in 1550 BC. Thus any Hebrews/Israelites would have become slaves.