Interesting discussion about religion and evolution

[Kenny]

I responded to this post. I never said something did not happen during the time of Exodus. Did it happen in the 13th or 15th century? I said the problem is 'as described in Exodus.' Yes, the narrative describes some place names, but that only justifies that when compiled they knew the place names. Place names does not justify that the events took place as described as the reference of Mount Ariate does not justify Noah's flood.

Problems are difficult to resolve: No evidence for the numbers involved and the invasion of Canaan by an army led by Joshua.

Not in the article: "The similarities between the two have caused some to speculate that the builders of the Theban house were either proto-Israelites or a group closely related to the Israelites. The evidence indicates the 'slaves in Egypt' were a mix of Semites from the region called Canaan likely from the Egyptian conquest of Canaan.

I still stand by my original argument that the invasion by an army led by Joshua never happened, because there is no evidence for this army, and the region was conquered, occupied, and colonized by Egyptians for over 300 years from before 1500 to 1200 BCE.

Is this the only evidence you have posted?

Obviously we think differently and certainly you have every right to hold onto your views.

Your position is simply that because there is no archaeological evidence for this army, it never happened is basically an opinion (as I have stated how archaeology is painstakingly slow and has proven that certain stances have been in error after more discoveries have been found). You are right that at this time we don’t have evidence of the army. (not sure how you would corroborate this army archaeologically speaking).

I approach it differently...

Certainly we all can agree that the Israelites believe that the land was portioned out to each tribe and also believe the land is theirs by inheritance. One can wonder when they started believing that.

We can also find that there is evidence of the domain of King David which means that at some time it did belong to the Israelites. Additionally, we find more and more corroboration to the stories in the Bible as more discoveries are found. Each discovery is another validation that what was written was true.

We also know that again and again the geography, cities et al mentioned in the Bible are correct.

Obviously the proximity of Egypt has an influence. The battle of Qadesh iin 1275 between Ramses II and the Hittites (which lines up with the Bible) is proof. That Egypt had control over the complete area is an interpretation.

The continued corroborating archaeological finds simply add value to the TaNaKh. Each find says “Look, here is evidence of what was written”. I simply haven’t been convinced that it is a made up story.

And there is still no evidence that Joshua didn’t exist or that the Israelites were the figment of imaginations. But the cities mentioned in the battles exists and support the narrative!

What I do find is that people see the same evidence and come with different conclusions. At this point nothing convinces me that the TaNaKh has been wrong.

Biblical Sites: Three Discoveries at Jericho

If the Bible is historically accurate when it describes the Israelite conquest of Canaan, we should expect to find some archaeological evidence to support this significant event. The question is, …

biblearchaeologyreport.com

What Archaeologists Have Learned About the City of Jericho

Jericho (also called Tell es-Sultan) is ancient city mentioned in the Judeo-Christian and its ruins near the Dead Sea in the West Bank of Palestine.

www.thoughtco.com

 

[shunyadragon]

Well yes, and Israel (the people) snuck in while Egypt was busy with other things, and replaced many of the people in Canaan with themselves and Egypt still thought of and called Canaan part of their Empire and eventually backed away from the area.

Not until after 1200 BCE