The Historical Accuracy of the Biblical Exodus

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheTrueCentrist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TheTrueCentrist

Guest
Does the Catholic Church have a position on the historical accuracy of the biblical exodus? It seems that historians and archaeologists have found no reason to believe it occurred, and that the search for evidence has mostly been abandoned in scholarly literature.
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
Does the Catholic Church have a position on the historical accuracy of the biblical exodus? It seems that historians and archaeologists have found no reason to believe it occurred, and that the search for evidence has mostly been abandoned in scholarly literature.
Click to expand...
It is not historical. But the revelation is what it matters. It seems that there were migrations of Jews but not that way
the history of salvation is done on the incredible acts tht God is able to do for his people. The interpretation is what matters.
 
Just curious. What does the Turkish government have to do with the Sinai peninsula? Last I heard Israel gave it back to Egypt. 🤷
 
C_Elizabeth said:
Just curious. What does the Turkish government have to do with the Sinai peninsula? Last I heard Israel gave it back to Egypt. 🤷
Click to expand...
It is not located there. It is on the Arabian Peninsula . The reason why the traditional site diesn’t have any remains is that is it is not the correct site. Constantine’s mother Helena, declared the traditional site.

(corrected post)
 
edwest2 said:
There is evidence:

bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

And a few words from our Jewish neighbors:

jewishworldreview.com/0401/prager.exodus.html

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Both of those sources have terrible scholarship. The first claims
A look at all the archaeological evidence shows that the best fit of the data is to identify the Exodus with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt around 1570-50 BC The most important discovery is the Merneptah stele that mentions Israel which forced the revision of a number of liberal theories. Before the discovery of this stele scholars placed the date of the exodus and entry into Canaan much later. They were now forced to admit that Israel was already in Canaan at the time of Merneptah. This puts a terminus ante quem date of 1210 BC for the exodus.
Click to expand...
The problem is that the account of this expulsion comes from the late 4th century BC, a few thousand years later. Moreover, the account is based on the expulsion of a bunch of undesirable militants, and their association with Moses was a later addition not present in the original chronicles.
 
You said:
There appear to be lots of mountains there, it could have been anyone of them. How do you make a leap from; I don’t know which of all these mountains was Mt. Sinai to The Exodus did not Happen?
Click to expand...
How do we get from “we know which mountain was Mt. Sinai” to “the Exodus did happen?” I did not bring up Mt. Sinai, another poster suggested that it would somehow be informative.

The evidence against the Exodus is that archaeology has found that early Israelite settlements were basically identical to Canaanite settlements. Their pottery, alphabet, and even gods initially match indigenous Canaanite settlements. This strongly suggests that there was no sudden arrival of migrants who had lived in Egypt for a few hundred years, but that the Israelite people were actually locals. Moreover, it is essentially impossible to match archaeological evidence from Egypt to archaeological evidence from Canaan. Basically, there is no evidence that a large group of people was expelled from Egypt around the same time that a bunch of Canaanite cities were destroyed.
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
How do we get from “we know which mountain was Mt. Sinai” to “the Exodus did happen?” I did not bring up Mt. Sinai, another poster suggested that it would somehow be informative.

The evidence against the Exodus is that archaeology has found that early Israelite settlements were basically identical to Canaanite settlements. Their pottery, alphabet, and even gods initially match indigenous Canaanite settlements. This strongly suggests that there was no sudden arrival of migrants who had lived in Egypt for a few hundred years, but that the Israelite people were actually locals. Moreover, it is essentially impossible to match archaeological evidence from Egypt to archaeological evidence from Canaan. Basically, there is no evidence that a large group of people was expelled from Egypt around the same time that a bunch of Canaanite cities were destroyed.
Click to expand...
Forgive me for asking but why are you suggesting that evidence against the Exodus should be solely based on archaeological scientific scrutiny? Why should the science of archaeology always be the litmus paper to prove Biblical events?
 
centurionguard said:
Forgive me for asking but why are you suggesting that evidence against the Exodus should be solely based on archaeological scientific scrutiny? Why should the science of archaeology always be the litmus paper to prove Biblical events?
Click to expand...
Because human life is inherently physical, and so the life of a large society can be expected to have left recognizable physical traces?

TTC: some sources, please?🙂

ICXC NIKA
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
How do we get from “we know which mountain was Mt. Sinai” to “the Exodus did happen?” I did not bring up Mt. Sinai, another poster suggested that it would somehow be informative.

The evidence against the Exodus is that archaeology has found that early Israelite settlements were basically identical to Canaanite settlements. Their pottery, alphabet, and even gods initially match indigenous Canaanite settlements. This strongly suggests that there was no sudden arrival of migrants who had lived in Egypt for a few hundred years, but that the Israelite people were actually locals. Moreover, it is essentially impossible to match archaeological evidence from Egypt to archaeological evidence from Canaan. Basically, there is no evidence that a large group of people was expelled from Egypt around the same time that a bunch of Canaanite cities were destroyed.
Click to expand...
Have you asked yourself what evidence you would expect to find if the Exodus happened. I ask this because I walked halfway across a continent and I left no archeological trace of my journey apart from some rollup cigarette buts, but they won’t last for 3,000 years. I carried nothing but 1 shirt and 1 trousers + 1 small towel. In other words I used the pottery, accommodation (such as it was), etc. that I found in settlements all along the way, so I left no trace of my journey but I was there.
 
centurionguard said:
Forgive me for asking but why are you suggesting that evidence against the Exodus should be solely based on archaeological scientific scrutiny? Why should the science of archaeology always be the litmus paper to prove Biblical events?
Click to expand...
That’s a pretty good point because archeology alone cannot prove most historically accepted events.
 
You said:
Have you asked yourself what evidence you would expect to find if the Exodus happened. I ask this because I walked halfway across a continent and I left no archeological trace of my journey apart from some rollup cigarette buts, but they won’t last for 3,000 years. I carried nothing but 1 shirt and 1 trousers + 1 small towel. In other words I used the pottery, accommodation (such as it was), etc. that I found in settlements all along the way, so I left no trace of my journey but I was there.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, you were one person. A single person or small group may well leave little or no archeological evidence. A group of half a million? There would be some evidence.

It may be that we haven’t looked in the right place, or (more likely) that the numbers in Exodus and Numbers are exaggerated or misinterpreted. For example, a “thousand” may be a part of a tribe, and could easily be only a hundred or so people. Or another idea is that only the Joseph tribes actually went to Egypt and returned–the other tribes were recruited in the land.

And then there’s the recent (well, in the last 20 years) archeological position that David and Solomon didn’t ever exist, since there was no hard evidence–until they found some. Now the position is that they were not “great kings” of a large kingdom. Until more evidence is found, perhaps.

The problem is that the oral tradition, and ancient cultures in general, were not so tied to the literal and exactitude as we are. Did Washington chop down an actual cherry tree? Or does the story illustrate what sort of character he had, and we should aspire to?
 
And, to get back to the original question, I’m not sure that there’s an official position on the historicity of Exodus. I think we would like it to be historical, but we can live with the evidence. And, at the least, the oddness of the story of Israel being a slave people rescued by God–that points to something happening.
 
There are Egyptian inscriptions on some pillars I believe that support the Exodus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top