Israel and the Exodus fictitious?

[PuritanCovenanter]

Recently I was challenged to examine if the Exodus can be supported by extra-biblical support. This is the situation I am faced with answering.

The Exodus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
No archeological evidence has been found to support the Exodus,[3] and most archaeologists have abandoned the investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit".[4] The consensus among biblical scholars today that the story is best seen as theology, a story illustrating how the God of Israel acted to save and strengthen his chosen people, and not as history.[5]

This is being used by many to discount the scriptures Inspiration and Authority as I understand it. I have never run across this.

I am finding these claims rather amazing. Have any of you guys ever dealt with this before?

 

[RamistThomist]

It all depends on what counts as "evidence." They already begin with the a priori assumption that the Bible doesn't count--they offer no argument for that presupposition. A different line of thought would be the Ha-bi-rus. Supposedly they were in Egypt around the same time and if you take the vowels out of Hebrew, or revocalize it, you get Habiru.

 

[Zach]

I have heard of this and I also don't know the best way to respond were I asked about this. One of my Professors in Jewish Studies Department at Penn State said this in class. Thanks for posting, Randy. I'm looking forward to some of the answers.

 

[RamistThomist]

I'm no longer a van Tillian, but this is one of the few places where van tillians have a point: if we accept the covenant-breaker's starting point, then he wins. When people say "there is no archeological evidence," what they really mean is "there is no archeological evidence which Iw ill recognize as valid." There are studies on this topic from a moderately conservative basis which do defend the historical thesis. I can't remember what they are, though.

 

[Quatchu]

I have a friend who likes to throw out such claims, as the main reason he became a atheist. I found this and other articles on the Associates for Biblical Research site helpful.

Also, although i have not gotten around to reading it, I have heard good things about "On the Reliability of the Old Testament" by K.A. Kitchen.

 

[ClayPot]

I know of two resources that may be helpful to those interested in this topic:

Israel in Egypt: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Exodus Tradition: James K. Hoffmeier: 9780195130881: Amazon.com: Books

Ancient Israel in Sinai: The Evidence for the Authenticity of the Wilderness Tradition: James Hoffmeier: 9780199731695: Amazon.com: Books

Thy are both by James Hoffmeir, professor at TEDS. Hope this helps.

 

[Peairtach]

There are also some interesting recent articles at Mark Rushdoony's Chacedon that can be accessed for free, which show that the claim that there is no evidence is erroneous.

Of course a study of the history of biblical archaelogy and how it has often proved the critics wrong is in hand here. There must be so many historical treasures under the ground that we just haven't discovered, ......yet.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Zach]

Let God (as revealed by His Word, the Bible) be true, and every man (trust in sense, empiricism, bare rationalism, irrationalism) a liar. The Bible, God's Word, which may not be put in the dock, says they were real. Ergo, it is true, no matter what anything else might assert.

That reminds me of something R.C. Jr. said at the Ligonier Conference a few years ago. On a question about the age of the earth, he noted that so much of the debate between Old Earth v. New Earth involved what the Science said about the age of the earth. He noted that the problem was, it's equally bad on both ends if we're letting Science (or archaeology) inform us over Scripture. Thus far, that's been how I've handled this objection. Nevertheless, I am interesting in seeing what sort of physical evidence is out there in answer to the original post.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

The Bible is self-attesting and self-authenticating. This is not some fabrication of C. Van Til. It is the conviction of historic Christianity, found beautifully in Augustine, Anselm, Calvin, et al. If it's the Word of God, as it claims to be, and is, nothing can properly demonstrate it to be so (because nothing is higher than it or is its judge), though everything evidences that it is so (rightly interpreted).

As for evidences, then, taken within this framework of faith, all good evangelical works on the OT, defend its historicity across the board. This canard--denying the Exodus--along with a host of other impieties, has been around for some time. Kenneth Kitchens, mentioned above, as a first-rate Egyptologist, addresses this. Unless one is involved in the world of biblical criticism and unbelieving biblical scholarship, how wicked this all is escapes most Christians. The enemy rages against the Truth, more openly and blatantly than ever. Attacks on the Bible are encouraged and celebrated in the West as never before. And it looks to get worse.

Just remember in dealing with any attacks: These are not well meaning questions but an attack on the Truth in its integrity, meaning ultimately an attack on Him who is the Truth. How thankful we can be that ultimately all such shall fail and be brought to nothing. How we long for that day!

Peace,
Alan

 

[Jerusalem Blade]

Richard Hess is a great defender in this area.

By Richard S. Hess at Denver Seminary, a review of The Bible Unearthed

Another review article by Dr. Hess of The Quest for the Historical Israel, by the same authors of The Bible Unearthed.

A great article from Christianity Today, Did the Exodus Never Happen? How two Egyptologists are countering scholars who want to turn the Old Testament into myth.

 

[presbyterian ninja]

There is some interesting stuff by Steve Rudd at Interactive Bible Home Page www.bible.ca. I don't agree with him on everything, but he has done a ton of research on this issue. He contends that we're looking in the wrong place and the wrong time period for evidence for the Exodus. I think he's right about that. Hoffmeier and Kitchen are both super smart, but they both espouse a 13th century exodus, and a somewhat lame Reed Sea crossing, which in my humble (and mildly ignorant) opinion leads to difficulties. I recommemd John Bimson's book Redating the Exodus and Conquest for a good defense of a 15th century exodus (which I can lend to you if you want). Rudd's geography of the Exodus is a little unorthodox and controversial, but I think it's very interesting and fairly well researched. It's definitely worth checking out.

 

[RamistThomist]

THese are the books I was thinking of. Too moderately critical for my taste, but they do intelligently dealw ith the issues, from what I gather.
What Did the Biblical Writers Know and When Did They Know It?: What archaeology Can Tell Us About the Reality of Ancient Israel: William G. Dever: 9780802821263: Amazon.com: Books

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

I asked a few people for help here and I am finding the accusation that people have given up on this pursuit (as wiki records) is so out of accord it is pathetic.

Dr. Talbot gave me a few references.

The Exodus Controversy

Egyptian history and the biblical record: a perfect match?

Dr. Byron Curtis from Geneva College did a lot of work in this area and he has helped me out also.

I also found this to be good. [video]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m2vhrK6Wczs&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dm2v hrK6Wczs[/video]

I am grateful for good men who love our God. While I do not lean heavily upon modern man for answers I am grateful that God has given us helps to confirm our heritage. As Joshua noted above, "Let God be true and every man a liar."

I agree with Dr. Hoffmeier that these men have an agenda. He does also. I just fear that men who are trying to tear down other's faith in God's word will only realize it too late.