Evidence for an Israelite Exodus (?)

[knor (Kai)]

@paleomalacologist

Conversely, there are passages forbidding wanton destruction of trees in warfare.

The prohibit to ‘war against trees’ mainly focuses on trees that have edible fruit. These were seen as beneficial. There is less concern for other species.

As an ecologist, I would have hoped some wise advice about how to treat forests. Unfortunately, it seems that the OT texts reflect the understanding of the ancient Near East people, not what modern biologists know. The texts of the Torah tell more about dominance and rule over the wildlife and trees than about a need to take care of the nature. During the ancient times, there were so many areas where the impact of humans was small or neglible that the need to care for nature around the settlements was smaller than it is now.

[St.Roymond]

@knor

As an ecologist, I would have hoped some wise advice about how to treat forests.

I’ve thought about that when reading the prophets who use shade as a metaphor for a peaceful life, wondering why God didn’t go a bit farther than tell them to value trees if only for the shade they gave. It’s made me think of North Africa, where there is evidence that in the first century and a bit there were farms a hundred kilometers into what is now desert, farms that were made by clearing forest; the Romans didn’t know any better, either, and so over a half millennium some of the empire’s richest provinces turned to desert. And that flips me back to the prophets and wondering whether if the people of Israel had been faithful then perhaps God would have given instructions about forests – but then “what if” tends to be a pointless game.

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@Bill_II

@adamjedgar

oh come on Bill read the following and tell me the authors of these statements DO NOT BELIEVE they are of a a real event

Look back a few verses to Genesis 9:2 “The fear of you and the terror of you will be on every animal of the earth and on every bird of the sky; on everything that crawls on the ground, and on all the fish of the sea.” Does every animal fear humans? Pretty sure if you went face to face with a lion, or tiger, or bear, Oh my, they would rip your face off. This is theology and not history, or God got the history wrong.

@adamjedgar

The fact is the ONLY reason you do no agree here is because Evolution says you cannot…period!

Sorry no.

@adamjedgar

So you refuse to accept normal comprehension of language, and when that doesnt work, the bible writer must be illiterate, confused, got his facts wrong, or made a scribal error!

Never said that so please stop putting words in other people’s mouth.

@adamjedgar

(which i believe the bible says was a global flood)

Well you are wrong about that. Like so many other things.

@adamjedgar

I think the above cleansing by fire and brimstone is quite significant given that science tells us that there is no evidence Sodom and Gomorah ever existed (that this account is a fairytale).

Boy have you got this wrong.

Tell me something Bill…

an Australian inland Taipan (the most venomous land snake in the world), is a predator. Do you have any evidence where said snake bit a human by hunting one down and biting said person? That snake, when approached will first attempt to move away. Most venomous snakes bite people when they are left with little option.

A lion or tiger usually does not attack humans, however, lets face it, these animals are both territorial and protecting of their young. A human venturing into habitat that belongs to these animals is almost always going to envoke the defense response and that isnt necessarily from all of the lions in the pride. Most likely the lead male will be the attacker.

If animals did not fear us, then they would not defensively attack (if i may phrase it that way) in the first place! Horses are another example. Horses who are not domesticated, will run as do most prey animals when humans turn up nearby.

The point is, if you are attacked by an animal, its likely you have either cornered them or, they want to eat you because they are hungry. The fear the bible talks about does not for a moment mean no animal will naturally attack a human.

Biblical examples debuncting the theology, that fear means animals wont attack humans in the bible;

1 Samuel 17:34-36 - David
Judges 14:5-6 - Sampson
1 Kings 13:24 - Old prophet and the man of God

[Bill_II]

@adamjedgar

Biblical examples debuncting the theology, that fear means animals wont attack humans in the bible;

You are ignoring the “on every animal” which on a literal reading using the normal sense of every means any and all animals. Not just the lead male, not some one protecting their young, but all animals. But you can chose to selectively apply this if you want. The problem is what else are you selectively picking and choosing?

[ivar]

@knor

The texts of the Torah tell more about dominance and rule over the wildlife and trees than about a need to take care of the nature. During the ancient times, there were so many areas where the impact of humans was small or neglible that the need to care for nature around the settlements was smaller than it is now.

I don’t know whether it has already been mentioned or not, but today I came across this passage:

“If you come across a bird’s nest beside the road, either in a tree or on the ground, and the mother is sitting on the young or on the eggs, do not take the mother with the young. You may take the young, but be sure to let the mother go, so that it may go well with you and you may have a long life.”

(Deuteronomy 22:6-7)

I think it is interesting that the Israelites (who were accustomed with the ways of the Egyptian empire) were ordered to not fully exploit a bird’s nest. Let alone other humans.

Empire turned upside down, the message of Exodus.

[jpm (Phil McCurdy)]

@ivar

I think it is interesting that the Israelites (who were accustomed with the ways of the Egyptian empire) were ordered to not fully exploit a bird’s nest

and along comes Chik Fil A and the chicken egg and cheese biscuit.

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@Bill_II

You are ignoring the “on every animal” which on a literal reading using the normal sense of every means any and all animals. Not just the lead male, not some one protecting their young, but all animals. But you can chose to selectively apply this if you want. The problem is what else are you selectively picking and choosing?

Can we include the context of my comment you are responding to so it makes sense please.

So lets go back to my actual statement again

I said…

Tell me something Bill…

an Australian inland Taipan (the most venomous land snake in the world), is a predator. Do you have any evidence where said snake bit a human by hunting one down and biting said person? That snake, when approached will first attempt to move away. Most venomous snakes bite people when they are left with little option.

A lion or tiger usually does not attack humans, however, lets face it, these animals are both territorial and protecting of their young. A human venturing into habitat that belongs to these animals is almost always going to envoke the defense response and that isnt necessarily from all of the lions in the pride. Most likely the lead male will be the attacker.

If animals did not fear us, then they would not defensively attack (if i may phrase it that way) in the first place! Horses are another example. Horses who are not domesticated, will run as do most prey animals when humans turn up nearby.

The point is, if you are attacked by an animal, its likely you have either cornered them or, they want to eat you because they are hungry. The fear the bible talks about does not for a moment mean no animal will naturally attack a human.

Biblical examples debuncting the theology, that fear means animals wont attack humans in the bible;

1 Samuel 17:34-36 - David
Judges 14:5-6 - Sampson
1 Kings 13:24 - Old prophet and the man of God

Now do you have a problem with the texts quoted in reference to my statement debuncting the theology that fear means animals wont attack humans in the bible?

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

I havent read all of the responses above…so if i repeat anything, my apologies.

the reason why i have such a strong interest in the historicity of the bible narrative is because despite the apparent scientific evidence presented on these forums supporting evolutionary THEORY, we also have a wealth of physical evidence for the authenticity of the Bible narrative concerning as a whole.

Archeological evidence is far superior to any theory because we know for a fact that its real history we are looking at and touching. These artifacts cannot be ignored.

It is not necessary for me to pretend to know what may have happened a million years ago by working backwards. I am able to research known archeological history and use that to help authenticate the bible narrative. When both line up, i can be sure i have the correct understanding of the history of this world according to God’s own word.

I see a lot of irony in the fact that despite the referenced claims of so called Christian scientists here on these forums, archeology largely supports the biblical narrative and its known timelines and not the evolutionary ones.

Because of this, I can confidently claim that i have the right theology because it is also supported by real historical archeological evidence that proves names, places, times, even years. If the bible is right about these things, then its a no brainer that its also right about everything else!

Some examples below

1. The Tale of Sinuhe (1800 B.C). This is the story of a runaway Egyptian official who hides from Egyptian soldiers stationed at a military defense station called Deir El-Balah in Philistia. It was an extensive Egyptian fortification that existed along the route to the North protecting Egypt from Philistine attack (which is referenced in Exodus 13:17)

17When Pharaoh let the people go, God did not lead them along the road through the land of the Philistines, though it was shorter. For God said, “If the people face war, they might change their minds and return to Egypt.” 18So God led the people around by the way of the wilderness toward the Red Sea.

2. Excavations at Tel Miqne. The archeologists found here the Biblical site of Ekron (a Philistine city mentioned in the O/T). This discovery is particularly important because it lists some of the rulers of Ekron. One such ruler was the seventh century B.C Philistine King Achish (named in the biblical books of 1 Samuel 27 and 1 Kings 2)

3. King Unas pyramid has inscribed on its walls text that show that Proto-Canaanite language already existed in the 3rd Millennium (Moabite, Ammonite and Hebrew)

4. The Bullae of the Son of לחוא from the City of David. Jerusalem Journal of Archaeology 2: 120–129. These Bullae contain a list of over 50 individuals’ names and quite a number of these individuals are found in the Old Testament. This confirms the historical accuracy of ancient Biblical writings and provide very strong evidence for the historicity of other biblical narratives for which we haven’t yet found direct archeological evidence (ie the Exodus from Egypt)

Some familiar biblical names found on the Bullae:

ל ̇ חוא ןב ̇ םקילאל “(belonging) to ’Elyāqīm son of ’wḥl” In the Bible, ם י ִקָי ְל ֶ א is the original name of Jehoiakim, king of Judah (2 Kgs 23:34; 2 Chr 36:4), of a minister contemporary with the prophet Isaiah (2 Kgs 18–19; Isa 22, 36–37), and of a priest of the Persian period (Neh 12:41)

Another reference to the names found on the Bullae:

Some of the seals bear biblical names, several of which are still used today, such as Pinchas. One particularly interesting seal mentions a man by the name of “Achiav ben Menachem.” These two names are known in the context of the Kingdom of Israel; Menachem was a king of Israel, while Achiav does not appear in the Bible, but his name resembles that of Achav (Ahab)–the infamous king of Israel from the tales of the prophet Elijah. Though the spelling of the name differs somewhat, it appears to be the same name. The version of the name which appears on the seal discovered–Achav–appears as well in the Book of Jeremiah in the Septuagint, as well as in Flavius Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews 15: 7-8). Bullae from the First Temple period found in the City of David excavations

Seal of Azariah Son of Hilkiah. Hilkiah was King Josiah’s right-hand man in restoring a brief religious renaissance to Judah

Seal of Nathan Nathan-Melech, the officer who was in the court; and he burned the chariots of the sun with fire” (2 Kings 23:11

[Bill_II]

@adamjedgar

Now do you have a problem with the texts quoted in reference to my statement debuncting the theology that fear means animals wont attack humans in the bible?

Actually what I find interesting is you use natural history to inform your interpretation of a verse in Genesis but refuse to use natural history to inform your interpretation of other portions of Genesis. The portions for which natural history (AKA as God’s natural revelation) says you can’t take them literally.

@adamjedgar

Archeological evidence is far superior to any theory because we know for a fact that its real history we are looking at and touching. These artifacts cannot be ignored.

The archeological evidence you like only goes back a few thousand years so there is none for the first 11 chapters of Genesis. You also ignore the archeological evidence that shows humans existed long before 6,000 years ago.

@adamjedgar

I see a lot of irony in the fact that despite the referenced claims of so called Christian scientists here on these forums, archeology largely supports the biblical narrative and its known timelines and not the evolutionary ones.

Archeology doesn’t support the history in Joshua so what do you mean by “largely”? What percentage is supported and how accurate is it? If archeology and the Bible don’t agree on a date, which wins?

[Paraleptopecten (Timothy Campbell)]

@Bill_II

Archeology doesn’t support the history in Joshua so what do you mean by “largely”?

It supports (or cannot comment upon in the case of Jericho) the destruction of the cities which are actually recorded as having been destroyed and have known locations. The problem with Jericho is that there simply are no remains from that date at all (except for a few tombs): any remains from c. 1280 - c. 1200 got eroded away during its abandonment from c. 1200 to c. 850 BC. Hazor is recorded as having been burned, and there is an extensive destruction and burn layer c. 1220 BC. Lachish also has a small destruction layer c. 1220, as does Joqneam. Libnah, Eglon, and Debir are recorded as having been attacked, but not stated to have been destroyed. The other sites stated as having been attacked either haven’t been confidently located (e.g., Ai), or haven’t been excavated deeply enough to find anything from that date. So long as ANE-style hyperbole is understood as such (i.e. “all that breathed”), Joshua and Judges fits pretty well with the evidence that has actually survived.

[Bill_II]

@Paraleptopecten

It supports (or cannot comment upon in the case of Jericho) the destruction of the cities which are actually recorded as having been destroyed and have known locations.

If you squint and hold your head just right it might appear that way.

@Paraleptopecten

The problem with Jericho is that there simply are no remains from that date at all

There have been some recent findings that date to the 13th century BC but the archeologists aren’t in agreement as to what they mean (as usual).

My problem is if you want to claim historical accuracy for Joshua you have to explain why it gets some of the history close to right and some completely wrong. What would the original readers of Joshua expect, actual “history” or theology?

@Paraleptopecten

The other sites stated as having been attacked either haven’t been confidently located (e.g., Ai)

A site for Ai has been known since the 1930s but the dating is wrong so people try to find alternatives that fit the biblical dates but the archeologists don’t generally accept these. This always seems to me like trying to trim the puzzle pieces to make them fit.

[St.Roymond]

The only fear that animals have of humans is learned behavior. We had a problem near where I live a couple of years ago: coyotes were attacking dogs while those dogs were with people because they’d lost their fear of humans. It took several people shooting coyotes to remind them that humans are to be feared. Rangers advised people to wear a sidearm and shoot not to kill but to injure as the injury would be a better lesson for the rest of the pack.

The same phenomenon has been observed on the Pacific Crest Trail: two species of bears and one of wild cats lost their fear of humans to the point that there were instances of bears and cats tearing off the side of a tent to get to food they smelled inside, even when humans were there. I don’t know what action was taken, but one ranger talked about hiking the trail in ordinary clothes (because bears at least are smart enough to figure out that it’s just the people in uniforms who are the danger) and shooting to warn. I talked with a guy on a trail section in California who’d done all the things that will supposedly scare a bear away and the bear kept walking towards him; he drew his .45 and put a bullet in the ground between the bear’s front paws, which in that rocky terrain sent a flurry of bits of stone against the bear, causing it to stop, and then a shot in the ground which sent a flurry of rock fragments into the bear’s face. The bear definitely didn’t like that and headed elsewhere.

@Bill_II

But you can chose to selectively apply this if you want. The problem is what else are you selectively picking and choosing?

Start with the opening of Genesis . . . .

@adamjedgar

I see a lot of irony in the fact that despite the referenced claims of so called Christian scientists here on these forums, archeology largely supports the biblical narrative and its known timelines and not the evolutionary ones.

Do you believe that Tom Clancy wrote history? how about John Grisham? You can go through their books and find that the things they present as facts repeatedly throughout the books match what we know of history, along with what we know of the world we live in.
Your reasoning fails because it is perfectly possible to tell a fictional story and get every fact that can be checked absolutely correct.

Archaeology isn’t actually helpful for showing that anything in the Bible but those few facts is correct; all it does is help shut up critics who have made claims they couldn’t sustain anyway.

[St.Roymond]

@Bill_II

people try to find alternatives that fit the biblical dates but the archeologists don’t generally accept these.

In grad school I knew three ANE archaeologists. They all made one point clear: when dealing with Old Testament archaeology, there are no “biblical dates”, in fact there are at least three very different ways to read the chronology from Moses to Samuel. I listened to a lecture recently where the professor put forth three different dates for the Exodus and provided an argument for each one from scripture!

[knor (Kai)]

@St.Roymond

The only fear that animals have of humans is learned behavior. We had a problem near where I live a couple of years ago: coyotes were attacking dogs while those dogs were with people because they’d lost their fear of humans. It took several people shooting coyotes to remind them that humans are to be feared.

We have similar kind of problems, minor or not so minor.
The minor one is that foxes living in suburbia and towns are not anymore afraid of humans as there is no shooting in these areas. We have a small dog (4 kg) that is eager to chase foxes out of its’ territory. Worked well as long as the foxes were afraid of humans but now we have to be careful that the foxes don’t eat the smaller dog. We often wake about five am when our dog announces that a fox has entered to watch it through the door class - not nice to wake up so early.

The not so minor problem is with wolves that live in fairly populated areas and hunt deer that seek safety from backyards. Some young wolves are already loosing their fear for humans and have followed walking people, even children. There is an attempt to return the fear to wolves, when necessary by shooting the most tame ones. The main problem is that there are not many uninhabited areas in the region and poachers shoot wolves even in these uninhabited areas. If the wolves are harassed in all areas, they do not retreat far from humans but rather stay where the food is, close to houses. It has been difficult to get all hunters to understand that we need to leave the most distant areas in peace while we harass wolves close to humans - it has been easier to teach the wolves than the hunters.

Another problematic group is the fanatic wildlife lovers who try to utilize all legal ways to overturn any permit to kill any large predator. Currently there is a situation where the hunting of bear, lynx and wolves has practically stopped because of the fights in courts. The populations of these big predators are increasing with a rapid rate because hunting has almost stopped and the predators fear less because they are not hunted. Just waiting when this turns to predator attacks against humans…

Sorry, this sidestepped from the original topic of the thread but it was too tempting to comment what was written. There is a thin connection to the topic of Exodus as God did not give the whole promised land rapidly to Israelites so that the beasts would not multiply too much - at least according to Torah (Exodus 23:29, Deuteronomium 7:22).

[ivar]

@St.Roymond

@paleomalacologist

Pharoah Merenptah records defeating Israel in 1209; a people group thus identified must have existed in Canaan by then

Not necessarily. It’s been discovered that campaigns against troublesome foreigners in the Nile delta area, which is where the Hebrews were, were recorded the same as those against foreigners outside of (what we think of as) Egypt’s borders. Some have argued that this indicates that Mereneptah was the “king who did not know Joseph”.

@paleomalacologist

Technically possible but unlikely, given that Israel is listed among specific Canaanite towns and groups. But at any rate, it indicates the existence of “Israel” at that date.

It depens on whether Pa-Canaan is a reference to the land of Canaan, or Gaza, Canaan’s principal city at the time.

If the latter, it is possible that the text is structured like this:

---

For the whole article, see

@ivar

It is said that there is no literary evidence for an Israelite sojourn in Egypt outside of the Bible. But if the Exodus occurred in the 12th century, the Merneptah stele can be interpreted as talking about Israel in Egypt: The Merenptah Stele and the Biblical Origins of Israel .