Exodus Part One: Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt

I had been thinking about a new Exodus topic and, I had said elsewhere, I would have preferred to have a discussion that focussed on one area of the debate at a time before moving on to the next area, but I have reconsidered and decided that I would have an individual thread about a few different aspects of the Exodus event. I think having a few subtopics in the one thread would be too difficult to keep focussed.I don’t think it would be possible to cover every single aspect of the subject, but I think that there are a few aspects that really need to be supported if we are to take the exodus seriously as an historical event.The first area that I would like to discuss is a pretty obvious one. If the Exodus narratives in the Hebrew Bible are true, then there would have to have been a time when the Israelites were actually in Egypt.I would like to make what may look like a fairly bold statement to open this thread and that is: There is no direct evidence whatsoever for Hebrews/Israelites living in Egypt at the time the Bible claims the Israelites were in bondage there. (This is true whether we take the 15th or 13th century dates)Remember that the Bible suggests that there was about 2-3 million in the group that left Egypt, and Modern scholars cautiously estimate a population (of Egypt)of between four and five million in the ancient period. The point is that the Israelites would have constituted an extraordinarily high percentage of the population of Egypt. (Nahum Sarna, 1986 Exploring Exodus: the heritage of biblical Israel, New York, Schocken Books.)So, Exodus supporters, can you prove me wrong and provide any direct evidence of Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt?I would imagine that such a high percentage of the population would have left some direct evidence. If not, then how do we proceed?Brian

The number involved is based soley on the Bible, and we don't want to go reinterpreting the text do we? Brian.

There is the possibility of several different translations. Flinders Petrie was one of the first to suggest that the word for 'thousand' (eleph) can be translated as family. George Mendenhall suggested something similar in the 1950's claiming that tribal stats supported his hypothesis that the figures were family units plus total number of people. Hence the tribe of Asher whose figures are given in Numbers 1:41 as 41,500, should be read as 41 families with a total number for the tribe of 500 people. The hypothesis has some real problems attached to it, especially when you consider the Levites whose number is given in Numbers 3:39 as 22,000, or 22 families with no people in them.Numbers 1:45-46 also gives a slightly different number to Exodus 12:37, it says45 All the Israelites twenty years old or more who were able to serve in Israel's army were counted according to their families. 46 The total number was 603,550.Personally, I wouldn't take the number of Israelites as being 2-3 million, but this figure is the generally accepted amount in the literature.To propose that 70 people became 2-3 million in 430 years is in itself an absurd suggestion, and utterly impossible for the time and place we are talking about. But, IMO, all attempts to rationalise this number by decreasing it have all failed. I did try to arrive at a smaller population myself about a year ago, but all suggestions have huge problems. Although, I will admit that the 2-3 million is the most difficult to support.Brian.

Well, to be fair all round, we have already had claims on other threads that there is evidence of Hebrews in Egypt.Archaic guy says there are references to Hebrews in Egyptian documents and WT claims that there are Hebrew artifacts that havebeen found in Egypt. Any of these would be acceptable to me. There are other possible indications, but I'll let the pro crowd produce them.Brian.

The thread is about whether or not there is any direct evidence of Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt, do you have anything to contribute to that question?Brian.

The only evidence being the Hebrew Bible Ray! I am not against reinterpretation at all, in fact, I don't even think that the Bible supports a 2-3 million population of Israelites. I was simply posting the generally accepted number of Israelites that the fundies always tout. Keep in mind that most Christian scholars involved in the debate do not subscribe to this huge figure.So we don't drift too far off-topic, because I know that the popualtion issue will develop, I will open another thread to discuss the population growth, and whether the Bible does support 2-3 million people in the Exodus group.Brian.

There does seem to be a bit of a problem with understanding what the OP is suggesting.I am NOT suggesting that there were no Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt during the 2nd millenium BCE, I don't know where that suggestion came from.The question is:Do you have any DIRECT evidence of Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt?I am NOT saying that they weren't there, I am just asking for DIRECT evidence.If there is no direct evidence, then how do we proceed?Brian.

You probably didn’t read my statement properly, if you had you would notice the qualifier that I had in it. Here it is once again:To propose that 70 people became 2-3 million in 430 years is in itself an absurd suggestion, and utterly impossible for the time and place we are talking about. You cannot assume zero mortality for any period in history, you cannot even assume it for today’s most advanced societies.We are talking about a time when medical care was at a minimum. It is a ridiculous idea, and so is this: Why would you halve the 70 when the Bible says there was 70 males, your scenario only has 35 males.Why on earth are you multiplying by 5?This is not how population figures are worked out. You need to work out an annual percentage increase in population, and there are many factors to take into consideration. Infant mortality, which you casually dismiss, accidental death of others in the population, disease, poor sanitation, lack of natural resources, etc.A. Lucas’ article ‘The Number of Israelites at the Exodus’ (PEQ 1944-45, pp164-68) is a frequently referenced source in this debate.Working with figures from the Annuaire Statistique, 1937-8, which gave an annual rate of increase per 1,000 as follows (p. 167).1907-17 12.271917-27 10.951927-37 11.86Lucas took the average rate (11.69 per thousand) and applied that to the Israelite group and came up with a total of 10,363. A much more realistic figure.70*1.01169^430 = 10,363This rate is far too high for the time period that we are talking about, which according to the biblical dating would be about 19-15th cenuries BCE.Lucas also touches on the likelihood that a group this size could live off the land in an area as small as the Sinai Peninsula. He states the population of the whole of the Administrative Division, or Province, of Sinai, from the Mediterranean Sea on the north to the apex of the peninsula on the south, was only 15,058 in 1927 (Annuaire Statistique 1937-8, p.14) and only 29,951 in 1937 (ibid: 10), and there could not possibly have been water or food sufficient for the number of Israelites given. Klutzy is too kind a word for it, and it is beyond the realm of possibility for the time and place under discussion.I am going to propose another topic for the population, as this one is specifically for direct evidence and I don’t want yet another Exodus topic dragged all over the place. So, hope to see you contribute on the other thread.Thanks for the reply.Brian.

This thread is for discussing the DIRECT evidence.Please wait until I open a new thread to discuss the population issues.Thank you for observing this request!!!!!!

Hi Faith,There are two replies over at the new Exodus thread.Brian.

Hi Ray, Direct evidence would be something that is identifiable as 'Israelite/Hebrew'. Any artefact would do, something such as pottery, tools, house types, weapons, clothing, religous buidings, shrines (anything cultic in fact).I'll get to David over the weekend, we have relatives stayiing for a few days. I'll post earlier if I can, if not, normal service will be resumed from Monday.Cheers.Brian.

Okay, we are well into the topic and we have no direct evidence of Hebrews/Israelites in Egypt during the 'exodus period'.Do we proceed by introducing circumstantial evidence, or are there any other suggestions about how we continue?Brian.

Yes, as described in the biblical accounts.But, what I am proposing is that perhaps the biblical accounts are based on some historical events and that they have been subjected to some rigorous reworking by various groups over the centuries.Perhaps we could try and peel away the obvious unhistorical claims and see what is left, then find out if there is some plausible scenario that the texts as we have them now is based on.I certainly think that wa good case can be made based on circumstantial evidence for Israelites in Egypt.Brian.

The Israelite authors sure liked their puns! Brian.

There's a sight for sore eyes!How's it going?Where you been?Brian.