• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can someone show me evidence outside the Bible that the Exodus actually happened?

DNB

Christian
It would be cool if you could convince me.
Outside of watching a rather compelling documentary on the facticity of the event, I have not done much study in this regard in order to offer a comprehensive and balance argument on the matter.
I believe that it was true, exactly as described in the Bible. For, this was the over-arching principle that God continuously used against the Israelites during their apostasies, defiant and irreverent behaviour. That is, right up to the southern Kingdom's expulsion from the land that God promised them during the time of the Exodus, He constantly reminded them of how evident both His power and love was displayed in this historical fact. And, that it was for this reason, what they witnessed with their eyes, that their sins were even more egregious than they would've been had not such an event occurred. Plus, before the Exodus happened, it was prophesied by Joseph (Genesis 50:24-25, Hebrews 11:22).

In other words, had the Exodus not taken place, and all the events immediately leading up to it and shortly afterwards, then the entirety of the TaNaKh's veracity is put into question. And, not only the TaNaKh, but also the New Testament makes reference to the event: Stephen during his martyrdom, and Matthew prophesying in Matthew 2:15 how the Exodus event relates to Jesus' temporary sojourn in Egypt.
 

BilliardsBall

Veteran Member
Okay... so if that date and the Exodus story were both correct, what we would see is:

- Israel is solidly monotheistic well before 2000 BC
- From 2000 to 1500 BC, a new dynasty reverts everything back to polytheism
- in 1500 BC, a new, solidly monotheistic dynasty pushes out the polytheistic one

Does the evidence agree with this timeline?

Why would Israel be monotheist when about 10 Jews were there (Abraham's group) before the Exodus?
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The 'exodus' did not happen as the story depicts. In fact, the Israelites were never enslaved by or in Egypt. But myths are not intended to be taken as factual. They are intended to be taken as story-lessons. So claiming a myth is not factual is as irrelevant as claiming they are.
Apart from Exodus, there is no other archaeological evidence that Israel was ever enslaved by Egypt. But why wouldn't Exodus itself be considered evidence?
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Apart from Exodus, there is no other archaeological evidence that Israel was ever enslaved by Egypt. But why wouldn't Exodus itself be considered evidence?
Because none of the other events depicted in the Exodus myth are evidenced, either.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Apart from Exodus, there is no other archaeological evidence that Israel was ever enslaved by Egypt. But why wouldn't Exodus itself be considered evidence?

Because none of the other events depicted in the Exodus myth are evidenced, either.

Also because Exodus is the claim. It cannot be the evidence. It is like my claim that I bought a mint Harley Davidson motorcycle (you can name the year and model) for $20.00. My claim cannot be the evidence for my claim. It would be pure circular reasoning.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Because none of the other events depicted in the Exodus myth are evidenced, either.
I have found that most legends are based on fact. You have to look for the history encased by the fiction. Saying Troy didn't exist simply becaues teh Iliad is a myth was one of the stupidest things that modern scholars ever did.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Also because Exodus is the claim. It cannot be the evidence. It is like my claim that I bought a mint Harley Davidson motorcycle (you can name the year and model) for $20.00. My claim cannot be the evidence for my claim. It would be pure circular reasoning.
I disagree with your analysis. Exodus is supposed to be a documentation of history. It is no different than any other ancient historical source.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
I have found that most legends are based on fact. You have to look for the history encased by the fiction. Saying Troy didn't exist simply becaues teh Iliad is a myth was one of the stupidest things that modern scholars ever did.
It is true that most myths have factual components, but only to the degree that they serve the meaning of the myth. What matters to the purpose of the myth is the ideal it represents, not the factual validity of it's details. The truth of a myth is NOT RELATED to the factual validity of it's presentation.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I disagree with your analysis. Exodus is supposed to be a documentation of history. It is no different than any other ancient historical source.
What makes you think that it qualifies as "documentation of history"? And even so, one never takes one document alone. If one so called document is refuted by archaeology, history, and other documents it will be rightfully rejected. Exodus appears to have been written during the Babylonian exile. I do not see how that qualifies it as a historical document.

And of course if you are going to claim that Moses wrote it then the fact that there was no Flood of Noah, no Garden of Eden, no Tower of Babel, pretty much rule him out as a reliable source.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I have found that most legends are based on fact. You have to look for the history encased by the fiction. Saying Troy didn't exist simply becaues teh Iliad is a myth was one of the stupidest things that modern scholars ever did.
That is true to an extent. But legend may have greatly altered the past. Some of the stories of the Old Testament are as accurate as Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
It is true that most myths have factual components, but only to the degree that they serve the meaning of the myth. What matters to the purpose of the myth is the ideal it represents, not the factual validity of it's details. The truth of a myth is NOT RELATED to the factual validity of it's presentation.
I agree
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
What makes you think that it qualifies as "documentation of history"? And even so, one never takes one document alone. If one so called document is refuted by archaeology, history, and other documents it will be rightfully rejected. Exodus appears to have been written during the Babylonian exile. I do not see how that qualifies it as a historical document.

And of course if you are going to claim that Moses wrote it then the fact that there was no Flood of Noah, no Garden of Eden, no Tower of Babel, pretty much rule him out as a reliable source.
Exodus is simply orally transmitted history that was written down. As is usual with oral transmission, legend creeps in. But it is STILL primarily a historical document.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Exodus is simply orally transmitted history that was written down. As is usual with oral transmission, legend creeps in. But it is STILL primarily a historical document.

I do not think Moses wrote the Torah, nor am I a literalist. You are bringing these points up with the wrong person.
 
Top