You managed to date the Exodus? That's quite the trick.
-
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!
The Ten Plagues of Egypt- allegorical or historical?
- Thread starter Dawnofhope
- Start date
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
This is what I was taught as part of the Documentary Hypothesis -- that the Torah was written by four different authors (today that number has grown) and that their respective documents were edited together into the five books in Babylon. Of course, not everyone accepts this; some people hold to the older though unprovable idea that Moses wrote the Torah.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Those who gravitate towards scientific explanations would entertain an explanation such as the darkness being caused by the ash in the air due to a volcanic explosion being a hypothesis, not a fact or belief. But yes, anyone who actually believed such a thing were a fact would be exhibiting faith since we really don't have enough empirical evidence to make this basic knowledge. On the other hand, believing that locusts were a natural phenomenon doesn't stretch the imagination in the slightest -- locust plagues happen all the time.
And again, one of the important points that I made that I don't want to get lost is that God designed nature. Whatever nature does is therefore of his will.
[quote[I don't see why accepting the written accounts in the Bible needs to be essentially faith based, since it is presented as a historical account, by eyewitnesses[/quote]I think it is more complicated than this. I think things got passed along orally before they were put into print. That leaves room for changes being made, augmented, legend creeping in, etc. For myself, I choose to live my life as history happened the way it is recorded. But if it turns out it didn't, it wouldn't upend my faith. The number one reason the story of the Exodus is in the Torah is to tell us, the Jews, who we are as a People. That would be true whether the story is historical or legend.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
The Santorini eruption, frequently cited as causing the plagues, has recently been dated using tree rings to the year 1560 BCE.
Ancient Volcanic Eruption Dated Through Rings of Dead Trees | Smart News | Smithsonian Magazine
Ancient Volcanic Eruption Dated Through Rings of Dead Trees | Smart News | Smithsonian Magazine
Not quite. If you're interested, two really good books on the subject are:
- R. E. Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible
- Joseph Blenkinsopp's The Pentateuch
Friedman's work is particularly readable.
Muffled
Jesus in me
It helped when I looked it up on Wikipedia. That puts it completely out of the time period of the Exodus.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe there can be parallel sources. So another source can exist alongside God as the source.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe that is all any historical account is.
nPeace
Veteran Member
faith based claim?
Do you mean like accepting the Nabonidus Chronicle and the Mesha Stele ?
You consider things of that nature as faith based claims?
I am learning some new things all the time, on these forums. I'll like to hear more from you on this.
So please tell me, where do you draw the line between faith and evidence?
How do you view the claims of scientists where history (e.g. man's origins) is concerned?
Do you believe faith is based on evidence, and rational processes of investigation, or do you view faith as blind acceptance, without rational thought?
nPeace
Veteran Member
I think if one includes God in anything, and then limits his hand, that is a clear indication of a lack of faith. (2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Timothy 3:16, 17)
Faith aside, there is enough evidence for me to believe those scriptures to be true, so that God's demonstrating, or rather, God's making his name known to Abraham's offspring (Exodus 6:3-9), and spreading his fame among the nations. (Joshua 2:10, 11), is what really happened.
These accounts are all linked to God's "plan" of salvation, starting at Genesis 3:15. So, I am not able to separate them.
I think those who scoff at miracles (not referring to you), will very soon get to see their reality.
There are any number of documents that attest to the fact
that there are tornados in Kansas,
that there are farms in Kansas,
that there are aunts in Kansas,
that there are uncles in Kansas,
that there are dogs in Kansas,
but none of that -- NONE OF THAT -- constitutes evidence for Munchkins or the Wizard of OZ.
To offer the Menshe Stele of the Nabonidus Chronicle as evidence of the historical accuracy of the Exodus account is simply ludicrous. It's about as intelligent as is offering the dollar bill as evidence for the historicity of the George Washington cherry tree myth.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
God limits God's hand. He most often works through people, and allows nature to simply take its course. I'm not discounting that miracles may happen. True life is stranger than fiction.
nPeace
Veteran Member
No one is offering the Menshe Stele of the Nabonidus Chronicle as evidence of the historical accuracy of the Exodus account, so what is your point?
You didn't answer the questions though.
nPeace
Veteran Member
Sorry to hear that about your God. That would explain why persons lack faith in such a god. I would too.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
It would have to be allegorical.
Plagues tend to be indiscriminate, not selective based on a person's belief.
What was your point? What do you think can be can be inferred from the stele?
I view your questions as a distraction. But, if you wish, ...
- Evidence is relevant and intersubjectively verifiable.
- I view the claims of scientists with caution. I view the claims of science with respect.
- Faith is belief in the unevidenced and is rational only to the extent that it is informed by evidence.
Messianic Israelite
Active Member
This is taken from bbc.co.uk:
Were the Hebrews in Egypt?
The story goes that Moses led two million Hebrews out of Egypt and they lived for 40 years in the Sinai desert - but a century of archaeology in the Sinai has turned up no evidence of it. If the Hebrews were never in Egypt then perhaps the whole issue was fiction, made up to give their people an exotic history and destiny.
Some archeologists decided to search instead in the Nile Delta: the part of Egypt where the Bible says the Hebrews settled.
They combed the area for evidence of a remarkably precise claim - that the Hebrews were press-ganged into making mud-bricks to build two great cities - Pithom and Ramses. Ramses II was the greatest Pharaoh in all of ancient Egypt - his statues are everywhere. Surely his city could be traced? But no sign could be found. There were suggestions it all been made up by a scribe.
Until a local farmer found a clue: the remains of the feet of a giant statue. An inscription on a nearby pedestal confirmed that the statue belonged to Ramses II. Eventually, archeologists unearthed traces of houses, temples, even palaces. Using new technology, the archaeologists were able to detect the foundations and they mapped out the whole city in a few months. The city they had discovered was one of the biggest cities in ancient Egypt, built around 1250BCE. 20,000 Egyptians had lived there.
But was this city actually built by Hebrew slaves? There is a reference in ancient Egyptian documents to a Semitic tribe captured by Pharaoh and forced to work on the city of Ramses. A clay tablet lists groups of people who were captured by the Pharaoh and one of the groups was called Habiru. Could these be the Hebrews?
Last edited:
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Nothing to be sorry about. And if I were you, I wouldn't go about telling God how best to do things.
nPeace
Veteran Member
My point is made by your response to my questions.
The Mesha Stele, also known as the Moabite Stone, is a stele (inscribed stone) set up around 840 BCE by King Mesha of Moab (a kingdom located in modern Jordan). Mesha tells how Chemosh, the god of Moab, had been angry with his people and had allowed them to be subjugated to Israel, but at length, Chemosh returned and assisted Mesha to throw off the yoke of Israel and restore the lands of Moab. Mesha describes his many building projects. Some say it is written in the Phoenician alphabet, but others say it is written in the Old Hebrew script, which is closely related.
On what basis do you accept this, and others like it... a) faith b) evidence?
I am not convinced this is a genuine statement. I don't do distraction. I have no need for them. My questions are always designed to establish the point I am making. When people try to sidestep, or avoid them, it is often an indication they get the point, but act like these guys.
Thank you for answering.
If that were true, we would not have different opinions about the origin of life, man, the cosmos, and a whole heap of other theories, would we. Not all evidence is verifiable. If we have evidence, but there is not enough, do you think that is where we step into faith?
That's interesting. What's the difference, and how can you tell?
Maybe it's my lack of understanding, but this seems contradictory.
Could you please explain, or clarify. How is faith "belief in the unevidenced", and yet can be "informed by evidence"?