The Exodus never happened.

Hyksos - I remember reading some article some time ago mentioning they came probably from Libya. Any other suggestions?

Egyptian records are notorious for not reflecting things which caused state embarrassment. 

errr..... POST!?

I definitely have problems with that article. While it makes bold claims of no evidence to support the exodus and that its falsehood is 'beyond doubt' it produces no evidence to support its claims.

It does, of course, make good points about tradition... but that has little to do with the event itself.

By not prohibiting it, it condones it - this is evidenced by slave ownership in Islamic countries right up to the 20th century and to this day in places like Mauritania. So it doesn't do a very good job of discouraging it.

I am going to have to look more into it before I can add anything more for debate.   I read about 1/3 of the way into the Qur'an (I gave up when it condoned slavery) and up to the point that I did read there was ample reference to Moses.  If I get more time I will investigate and revert.

Edited by Zagros - 23-Apr-2008 at 12:44

Originally posted by Zagros You don't necessarily need archaeological evidence - a process of deduction can also be used. The Qur'an mentions the Israelites and Moses, so it can be correlated with the Bible.  From the sacrificial cow and all.   Besides, the people of the Levant at that time (900BC) are as the article describes - polytheists.  Monotheism really took grip on the return of the Judaic people from Babylon (550BC) - this is a historically veritable fact.  And since the word of Moses was of monotheism it means that the story was written after the return from Babylon.  I agree that it serves only as an allegory.

Only if you assume that monotheism only cropped up once in history.
550BC is the time of the Prophet Ezikial right? So according to tradition he was there to re-establish monotheism after the religion had changed since the previous prophet.

What is wrong with this story:
1) Moses establishes monothesim,
2) Later, polytheism becomes more popular
3) Ezikial reestablishes monotheism

Besides, when was exodus written? Retelling an old tale in a modern light is common too. I don't see any reason why Moses must be after 550BC. By that logic, shouldn't Ibrahim, Noah and all prophets also be after 550BC?

The Qur'an mentions the Israelites and Moses, so it can be correlated with the Bible

But the bible has a lot of information that the Quran doesn't, and its that information we are arguing over. As far as I can remember the Quran only says that Moses preached monotheism and led a group of followers out of Egypt. It doesn't say how many, it doesn't say they invaded Palestine, it doesn't say anything you can prove or disprove.

I  once saw Yul Brynner and Charlton Heston in "The Ten Commandments". I must say: Every word is true..and if not, well invented...

[

Originally posted by Zagros Just because I post an article, it doesn't necessarily mean I am reflecting my own point of view. You don't necessarily need archaeological evidence - a process of deduction can also be used. The Qur'an mentions the Israelites and Moses, so it can be correlated with the Bible.  From the sacrificial cow and all.   Besides, the people of the Levant at that time (900BC) are as the article describes - polytheists.

Just because I post an article, it doesn't necessarily mean I am reflecting my own point of view.

You don't necessarily need archaeological evidence - a process of deduction can also be used. The Qur'an mentions the Israelites and Moses, so it can be correlated with the Bible.  From the sacrificial cow and all.   Besides, the people of the Levant at that time (900BC) are as the article describes - polytheists.  Monotheism really took grip on the return of the Judaic people from Babylon (550BC) - this is a historically veritable fact.  And since the word of Moses was of monotheism it means that the story was written after the return from Babylon.  I agree that it serves only as an allegory.

Basically I think the article is too dismissive, too much speculation and little fact.

Well how much fact do you have to play with given the supposed date of the exodus, we can only reach conclusions through a process of deduction.


Edited by Zagros - 22-Apr-2008 at 13:25

Originally posted by Theodore Felix The exodus could have been a historical reality albeit in a far smaller scale then we are told in the Bible and under different circumstances. At one point Egypt was taken over by a people they called the 'Hyksos', a generalized name for what seems to have been a conglomeration of Semetic invaders, among them possibly even Hebrews. The Hyksos Pharaoh's ruled for some time and here we can possibly see how Joseph attained the position he attained in Egypt. The subsequent exodus could have very well come about when the Hyksos were finally expelled by a nativist movement. Modrzejewski in his "Jews of Egypt" says states that the exodus on a smaller scale(to the level of a minor skirmish which was played up by later Jewish tradition)

That's what I have deduced, too. Exagarration is an evolution of the tale.