|
It's very late so I'm going to have to be quick, but suffice to say that this claim (that the exodus never occurred) is not new and - if we examine the evidence impartially - also seems to be quite accurate.
I'll quickly run through the points, which I'll elaborate upon when I have the time / if I'm pressed:
- There is no archaeological evidence that would suggest that any significant number of people of Jewish ancestory ever lived in Egypt in any capacity (i.e. we can find absolutely no traces of Jewish culture in the country from that time period).
- No surviving Egyptian historical record mentions the enslavement of Jewish people or the subsequent Exodus.
- By the time the Jewish people first appear in Egyptian historical records, they are already situated in modern-day Isreal.
- The books of the Bible describing the exodus and early Jewish history were written by Jewish refugees in Assyria in about 600 BC, several hundred years after the after all these events were supposed to have taken place (it would be like us commenting on, say, 16th century Europe with only legends passed down orally to go by).
- Virtually every historical event that was supposed to have occurred before this time either demonstrably didn't happen or at least left absolutely no evidence of its occurrance (strange given that the scale of some of the events should have left us with some evidence of them occurring - i.e. the crazy, Gaza strip ramsackings that Joshua inspired) .
- Virtually every historical firgure that was supposed to have lived before this time either demonstrably didn't exist or at least left no absolutely evidence of their existence (strange given the large power or influence some were supposed to have wielded - i.e. Solomon and David).
- The formation of the monotheistic Jewish faith is far more mundane and it's origins (based on archaeological evidence) can be traced back to the mountainous areas of modern day Isreal, where refugees of several distinct tribes (each displaced from their fertile, Gaza strip villages by those marauding Philistines) united, despite their theological differences, under a single God (creating, I believe, the oldest surviving monotheistic religion in the world).
I'm not sure about all the dates or the facts (I can't be fucked looking up sources atm), but I'm pretty sure this is how it is.
Yeopus:
| quote: | | There are other archaeological indicators (such as the fact that the drought stated in the bible as the cause for the Jews to move to Egypt (which was flourishing with food) actually did happen) that can lead us to believe good reason for something to happen. |
Are there such indicators though? I seriously doubt it, again, given the archaeological and historical evidence that Judaism began (much later than the Bible would indicate) in Isreal and remained there until the Assyrians sacked Jeruslelum in 600 BC or so.
| quote: | | Anyway, there can't really be any archaelogical evidence for the Jews. What are you going to do? DNA test a mummy to try and find some mythic Jew gene? Theres proof that people lived in Sinia some 3000 odd years ago. There is proof that people were enslaved in Egypt during the time that they build the pyrmaids. Aside from that it really all and always will ever be speculation with some degree of certainty. |
Why weren't the Jewish people mentioned at all though? The Egyptians left large amounts of historical records - and even begain mentioning the Jewish people after a certain point (the exact date I will be able to find for you tomorrow) - but they never mentioned enslaving an entire race of people, nor did they mention letting them go after a series of plagues. Similarly, there is no archaeological evidence (in terms of artifcats found etc.) that would indicate that the Jews were ever in Egypt. The fact is, in this case, where the question framed is ontological in nature (about the nature of being and existence), absense of evidence is generally pretty good evidence of absense.
___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/
Last edited by Renegade on Dec-28-2004 at 20:11
|
... perhaps Opus might be willing to give ya some insights into the topic. However, as a regular trend of "religious discussions", it tends get long and tedious for both sides, at the end we'll either agree on nothing or agree on little. At the same time if one is not aware of the tone of language he/she speaks in, it'll easy piss the other person off 
.
. But i think where you're getting, and you're sorta right in that. 
