Understanding Judaism and its impact on the Modern World.

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

First I want to say that I apologize for any ignorance that I show (and I will show), in my knowledge of Judaism. My view is through the lense of what I've read in the Bible and what I've read of in history. So feel free to correct me and I hope that we can keep this as nice as possible and I apologize if anything I say comes of as anti-semitic.

Judaism has had a huge impact on the world and it's roots are tied to the roots of 4 other religions that form the Abrahamic religions.

So I had a few questions and it is here that I was hoping to get some answers.

The first question I have is dealing with the historicity of The Jewish time in Egypt. The book of Exodus mentions that at one point they were slaves in Egypt, but there are no archelogical (historical) evidence of this. Does that not impact the story of Exodus and also influence the story of who Moses was?

 

[Zanuku]

I'm not too well versed on Judaism, I just know that history hasn't played fair to Judaism. (Probably for killing Jesus)
But then again Jesus came back to life so I don't know what the universe has been so anti-Judaism about the past few thousand years.

 

[Riverwolf]

I'm not too well versed on Judaism, I just know that history hasn't played fair to Judaism. (Probably for killing Jesus)
But then again Jesus came back to life so I don't know what the universe has been so anti-Judaism about the past few thousand years.

It's even stranger when you realize that Jews didn't kill Jesus; the Romans did.

Best I can think of is that they somehow got lumped together with gypsies in the collective mind of Dark Age/Middle Age Europe.

 

[ignition]

The book of Exodus mentions that at one point they were slaves in Egypt, but there are no archelogical (historical) evidence of this.

How would there be evidence of this if all the Jews left Egypt and the entire Egyptian leadership and their works were drowned and destroyed as the story goes?

 

[Zanuku]

It's even stranger when you realize that Jews didn't kill Jesus; the Romans did.

Best I can think of is that they somehow got lumped together with gypsies in the collective mind of Dark Age/Middle Age Europe.

The Romans did the deed, a Jewish...Branch I guess I could call it, almost persuaded them to.

Could be wrong, that's what I've heard.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

How would there be evidence of this if all the Jews left Egypt and the entire Egyptian leadership and their works were drowned and destroyed as the story goes?

625,000 people left (That's a pretty big population size), they were the source of their slave labor (look at what happened to the South after being trashed by a war (Egypt was pretty much in a war with God) and the Slaves were freed.

Egypts Army was wiped out...at that time, the Assyrians were the next big dogs around. A collapse in Egypt (leadership dying, army destroyed), would have left a huge power vacuum which would immediately have been sought to be filled by neighboring countries.

Most importantly, signs of their work. They had their own culture, but none of it is remarked anywhere historically.

The argument about that I think is that the Egyptians were notorious (allegedly), of not recording when engative things happen to them. It's odd however that no one else did besides the Jews.

So I want to see what are the opinions of those on the site who are Jewish.

 

[LuisDantas]

Judaism has had a huge impact on the world and it's roots are tied to the roots of 4 other religions that form the Abrahamic religions.

I take it that you are including the Bahai Faith and... Sikhism, perhaps?

 

[Sha'irullah]

The Romans did the deed, a Jewish...Branch I guess I could call it, almost persuaded them to.

Could be wrong, that's what I've heard.

You are aware that Jews like any other people had no ability to influence the Roman empire right? There is not enough wealth they could even give them to compensate for the amount they receive in expansion of conquering.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

I take it that you are including the Bahai Faith and... Sikhism, perhaps?

Well I was talking Christianity, Islam, Bahai and Rastarfarism (sp), I guess you can include Sikhism...not sure they would agree lol.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I take it that you are including the Bahai Faith and... Sikhism, perhaps?

Sikhism is not considering Abrahamic, it is still Dharmic.

It is Christianity, Islam, Baha'i and Druze

 

[Riverwolf]

The Romans did the deed, a Jewish...Branch I guess I could call it, almost persuaded them to.

Could be wrong, that's what I've heard.

We're talking about ROME, here. If you weren't Roman, you were just a dirty barbarian.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

We're talking about ROME, here. If you weren't Roman, you were just a dirty barbarian.

That's just society at it's best smh.

But I'm very curious to what those who are Jewish have to say.

I especially want to know from them because despite being in the same family and the oldest of the other Abrahamic Religions, Judaism seems to be the one most in sync with societal progress and scientific reasoning.

 

[LuisDantas]

Sikhism is not considering Abrahamic, it is still Dharmic.

It is Christianity, Islam, Baha'i and Druze

Sometimes I wonder how unified Druze doctrine is.

Not that I am likely to ever learn... :no:

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The book of Exodus mentions that at one point they were slaves in Egypt, but there are no archelogical (historical) evidence of this.

How would you know? Are you saying that there were no semitic slaves/laborers?

Let me ask you a question: What are your three favorite books on Eyptian and/or Syro-Palestinian archaeology?

 

[Flankerl]

But I'm very curious to what those who are Jewish have to say.

About what?

 

[Sha'irullah]

Sometimes I wonder how unified Druze doctrine is.

Not that I am likely to ever learn... :no:

I question the same as well considering that Druze have this habit of somehow keeping their holy book under wraps.

It seems to be avoided and never discussed. Apparently their small size allows this to occur still.

 

[Sha'irullah]

First I want to say that I apologize for any ignorance that I show (and I will show), in my knowledge of Judaism. My view is through the lense of what I've read in the Bible and what I've read of in history. So feel free to correct me and I hope that we can keep this as nice as possible and I apologize if anything I say comes of as anti-semitic.

Judaism has had a huge impact on the world and it's roots are tied to the roots of 4 other religions that form the Abrahamic religions.

So I had a few questions and it is here that I was hoping to get some answers.

The first question I have is dealing with the historicity of The Jewish time in Egypt. The book of Exodus mentions that at one point they were slaves in Egypt, but there are no archelogical (historical) evidence of this. Does that not impact the story of Exodus and also influence the story of who Moses was?

Egypt is not to far off from Israel and considering that Jews have never had a true established kingdom along with the fact that Egypt was a super power the slaves of Israel would not be surprising.
Keep in mind that no society throughout history has actually always given reference to Jews by name. Greeks were calling them all Palestinians along with Egypt at one point.
Jews are just a meshing of Semitic tribes abiding by a racial and religious union.
Certain events like Egypt taking slaves from Israel would not be something well documented most likely despite Egyptians and their reputation.

I myself am unsure of the conquest of Egyptians

 

[Levite]

The first question I have is dealing with the historicity of The Jewish time in Egypt. The book of Exodus mentions that at one point they were slaves in Egypt, but there are no archelogical (historical) evidence of this. Does that not impact the story of Exodus and also influence the story of who Moses was?

There is neither sufficient archaeological evidence to support the Biblical account in all its aspects, nor to dismiss it entirely.

Much also depends on whether one insists on taking the Exodus account literally in every detail, or whether one is willing to consider that Exodus is an embellished, compressed, and redacted account with perhaps some grains of truth at the center.

In the end, I think the precise details are less important than the general concept of the People Israel, in their earliest days, were somehow touched with revelation of the Creator, and established an eternal covenant with Him.

 

[Moishe3rd]

Neither the Torah (first five books of the bible) nor Tanach (the entire "old testament") are history books.
According to Judaism, the Torah is G-d's Blueprint for Mankind and, it is His Instruction Manual on how the Jews are to relate to G-d and to This World.
I am a rather hard core "ultra" Orthodox Jew who believes in the entire Torah and all of its attendant explanations.
And - I haven't a clue if the Exodus is historically true.
I am quite certain that it is spiritually; psychologically; esoterically; and fundamentally True to the degree that it is the Archetype for a Jewish relationship to G-d.
Which, for me, makes it the G-d's honest Truth.
However, I could care less whether it is provable. G-d is not provable...

And just fyi - The Druze are an offshoot of the Ismailis which is a Shia offshoot, which is the original offshoot of Islam way back when Sunni Islam proved predominant over Shia Islam. There are many, many more Islamic offshoots beside Baha'i and Allawites, mostly from Shia, but a few from the Sunni side.
Plus, I have a whole religious theory that Hinduism (and therefore all Eastern religion) descended from Avraham Avinu (Abraham).

And - the Jews didn't kill Jesus. As noted, the Romans did.
However, Christianity had two problems in the beginning. In order to claim to have fulfilled the Jewish bible - Torah and Tanach - the Christians had to claim that they were right and the Jews were wrong. Otherwise, if the Jews were right, then Jesus could not have been the messiah.
Secondly, in order for Christianity to be THE religion of the Roman Empire, it had to be separated from Judaism and - they couldn't very well have the Romans killing the new Roman god. So - they had to blame it on the Jews.
This became embedded in Christian theology to the point where Jews became an accursed race of Deicides who murdered the Christian god.
And, for 1500 years or more, this was the official policy of Christianity, causing untold hardship and death for Jews throughout the centuries.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

How would you know? Are you saying that there were no semitic slaves/laborers?

Let me ask you a question: What are your three favorite books on Eyptian and/or Syro-Palestinian archaeology?

Going by the book of Exodus it makes it seem that the group that considered itself the Israelites was well defined. So I would think that they had their own culture that would be shown in archaelogical excavations.

So yes there would be slaves/laborers but would they be the start of who we would considered Israelites (A mix group of individuals), or were they already being defined as Israelites?

Again this is through a biblical lens I ask this question (that is what I know, I just recently found out about the lack of evidence), So I want to see what the thoughts are from a Jewish perspective.