Egyptian exodus proof or slavery?

[IndigoChild5559]

How many Israelites does scholarship think were in Egypt at that time?

I truly do appreciate your questions.

When you say "scholars," there is more than one type of scholar. For example, a Christian theologian and an archeologist are both scholars, but obviously their areas of specialization are different, and the theologian reasons from a text while the archeologist uses scientific method.

A conservative Christian scholar BEGINS with the faith based belief that the Bible is a divine inerrant text. Since Exodus mentions 600,000 men, they extrapolate to 2-3 million Israelites.

Liberal Christian scholars generally view the number as symbolic or exaggerated. They argue that ancient texts, including the Bible, often used large numbers symbolically to emphasize the significance of events rather than provide precise figures.

Archeologists and other scientists point out that there really is no evidence that millions of Israelites were enslaved, left, and then wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, or violently conquered Canaan. Some of these scientists say that a significantly smaller group was in Egypt, perhaps only what is known as the Levites or perhaps others. Other scientists say the entire story is fictitious. In general, scientists and historians have much more complicated ideas on the origin of the Israelites, although that really gets into a different topic.

I am a religious Jew, but as I commonly say, my approach to these sorts of things is really quite liberal. I completely agree that in the Torah, numbers are not assigned for accuracy, but for symbolic value. I am highly informed by science, and am inclined to believe that something happened that is the historical foundation for the Exodus story, but did it happen the way it is written? I don't think so. Like you, I also keep my eyes open for natural phenomena that might explain the potential events of the story.

 

[Audie]

Bye bye Audie.

Heat / Kitchen .

 

[oldbadger]

I truly do appreciate your questions.

When you say "scholars," there is more than one type of scholar. For example, a Christian theologian and an archeologist are both scholars, but obviously their areas of specialization are different, and the theologian reasons from a text while the archeologist uses scientific method.

A conservative Christian scholar BEGINS with the faith based belief that the Bible is a divine inerrant text. Since Exodus mentions 600,000 men, they extrapolate to 2-3 million Israelites.

Liberal Christian scholars generally view the number as symbolic or exaggerated. They argue that ancient texts, including the Bible, often used large numbers symbolically to emphasize the significance of events rather than provide precise figures.

Archeologists and other scientists point out that there really is no evidence that millions of Israelites were enslaved, left, and then wandered in the wilderness for 40 years, or violently conquered Canaan. Some of these scientists say that a significantly smaller group was in Egypt, perhaps only what is known as the Levites or perhaps others. Other scientists say the entire story is fictitious. In general, scientists and historians have much more complicated ideas on the origin of the Israelites, although that really gets into a different topic.

I am a religious Jew, but as I commonly say, my approach to these sorts of things is really quite liberal. I completely agree that in the Torah, numbers are not assigned for accuracy, but for symbolic value. I am highly informed by science, and am inclined to believe that something happened that is the historical foundation for the Exodus story, but did it happen the way it is written? I don't think so. Like you, I also keep my eyes open for natural phenomena that might explain the potential events of the story.

Thank you very much for your post, IndigoChild.
Yes, I have seen the number of 600,000, and have also read that this huge number of men is considered to be unlikely by some historians.
Given all natural possibilities beyond the actions of a God I don't think that a very high number of persons could have got through in the short window offered by nature alone, maybe 7 hours at the very best time possible.

But like you I do believe that something amazing happened which grew with the telling.

You mentioned theologians, scholars, archaeologists, scientists and we can include historians in that list and I do tend to ignore their titles whilst just focusing upon what they report about findings, investigations, etc.
A few debaters do seem to think that they can win through because their favoured ideas have been voiced by 'peer reviewed scholars' rather than the substance behind any claims.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

How many Israelites does scholarship think were in Egypt at that time?

I suspect that they don't. Egypt was a major player throughout the Ancient Near East, and semitic peoples pressed into labor didn't where tribal designators or name tags.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Yes, I have seen the number of 600,000, and have also read that this huge number of men is considered to be unlikely by some historians.

Some? The more interesting question might be which historians consider it likely?

Furthermore, if one assumes 600,000 men capable of being mustered, we are likely talking about roughly 2 million people. To this we should presumably add pack animals and, perhaps, livestock.

Which historians consider this likely?

 

[Audie]

Darn those folks who submit their work to criticism by experts for
peer review. Such spoil sports

Much more satisfying to be able to just say things.

Like Ron Wyatt.

He proved exodus a thousand times over.

 

[Eli G]

Some? The more interesting question might be which historians consider it likely?

Furthermore, if one assumes 600,000 men capable of being mustered, we are likely talking about roughly 2 million people. To this we should presumably add pack animals and, perhaps, livestock.

Which historians consider this likely?

... the same ones that consider likely that thousands went back from the exile in Babylon to their land in Israel.

 

[oldbadger]

I suspect that they don't. Egypt was a major player throughout the Ancient Near East, and semitic peoples pressed into labor didn't where tribal designators or name tags.

Fair enough. Whatever time limit would be guesstimated for an Exodus event, and however many wades or wide the path of it, I can't imagine more than a few thousand getting through.
Despite all that I think that there must have been some escape event which became magnified over time.

 

[oldbadger]

Some? The more interesting question might be which historians consider it likely?

Furthermore, if one assumes 600,000 men capable of being mustered, we are likely talking about roughly 2 million people. To this we should presumably add pack animals and, perhaps, livestock.

Which historians consider this likely?

Indigo Child already mentioned the number including women/children on the parallel conversation which you have replied to, so your whole post is just a parroting of his.
He mentioned that theist apologist theologians have taken that number from the bible, but that is where the number commences for discussion.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

... the same ones that consider likely that thousands went back from the exile in Babylon to their land in Israel.

Flag me if and when you wish to share an honest response.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

A few debaters do seem to think that they can win through because their favoured ideas have been voiced by 'peer reviewed scholars' rather than the substance behind any claims.

One peer reviewed piece of scientific research doesn't do the trick. On of the necessary steps of scientific method is to repeat. However, when you have a series of studies that do all come to the same result, I would say that yes, this wins any argument.

 

[oldbadger]

One peer reviewed piece of scientific research doesn't do the trick. On of the necessary steps of scientific method is to repeat. However, when you have a series of studies that do all come to the same result, I would say that yes, this wins any argument.

Absolutely!
But only where the same-result is explained. Where debaters just tell me that a bunch of scholars all agree on a finding, then that if itself doesn't excite me...... I want to know what their workings were.