Is there any evidence for the Exodus?

There is evidence for the exodus, in the Bible.The Bible is evidence of the Exodus, we just need to test the information contained in it.I would say to the Bible supporters that the best place to start in the search for quest to support the biblical Exodus would be to present a date for this event.We all know what was supposed to have happend, so we need to know where in time to look.Discovering the name of the pharaoh of the Exodus would be a huge help in determining the historicity of the event. BTW, leaving out the name of the pharaoh, such a key figure in the story, smacks of mythology.So, Bible believers, when does the Bible say the Exodus happened?Brian.

But some of these ”very specific’ details contradict each other, and some very specific details are reinterpreted by some people to fit the evidence. For example, the chronological reference in 1 Kings 6:1 is pretty specific. In the four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites had come out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, the second month, he began to build the temple of the LORD. I am sure you will agree that this is very specific, to the very year in fact, but this date (which would be around 1446 bce) is rejected by most scholars because given what we know about Thutmosis’ reign and extent of his empire it looks impossible for the Exodus to have happened during this time. So, this specific date is rejected because it doesn’t fit the evidence, so we have to look for another date for the Exodus. But why should we look for another date? Which again conflicts with 1 Kings 6:1.This verse contains at least one anachronism as well, and has to have been written during or after the 7th century bce as Pithom was never used as the name for a city until the Saite period. That’s IF Pithom is Tel el maskhuta (I suspect it is).But Redford also rejects the biblical Exodus, he believes that the Egyptian topographical information in the Book of Exodus relates to the Saite and Persian periods rather than the new kingdom.But, if Exodus 1:11 was written at the end of the 7th c bce or into the 6th c bce, this could explain the anachronism. I don’t see the need to quote Finkelstein here, in this part of the book he is just relating what the Bible tells us. Certainly not at Pithom there isn’t . Except that, as I am sure you are aware, Joshua/Judges contradict greatly over the way in which Canaan was ”conquered’. It must have been huge to scare 2-3 million Israelites, or do we ignore this ”specific detail’ as well? So we will go with Avaris, tel el dab’a?I wonder why the Israelites never gave us very specific information.You know if there was an exodus and the whole nation of Israel came out of Egypt you would expect at least the name of the pharaoh to be known, and even the names of the cities that the Israelites allegedly helped to build to be at least accurate. Why the amnesia? This really has no bearing on the historicity of the Exodus though. You have asked when Raameses was built and then went on to look at Avaris ( I know it’s the same location). Why are you rejecting this specific detail in the Bible? But, in the very same book, Weinstein does declare that there is no evidence to support the Exodus.I think what we need to do on this thread is decide what ”Exodus’ we are going to examine, because no one appears to think that the biblical Exodus can be accepted at face value.So, it can be stated, IMO, quite categorically that the biblical Exodus did not happen.Thus we appear to be starting with a conclusion and then setting out to find evidence.Why cant the Bible simply be wrong?Why cant the Exodus be a foundation myth?

Going by biblical chronology, this would be the date of the Exodus, 1 Kings 6:1 is the relevant text. However, with the mention of the City of Rameses at Ex. 1:11, some scholars thought if this was an accurate claim then the Exodus had to be after 1309 BCE, and more specifically after 1295 when Rameses II came to power. So the new date preferred by most scholars for the Exodus is mid 13th c BCE. Most myths have historical kernels within them. The exodus myth however, has hidden these gems very well. There's no evidence of Canaan/Palestine ever being conquered by the Israelites, certianly no evidence to support Joshua's alleged rout. Ai was uninhabited during from ca. 2400-1200 BCE, so doesn't fit any of the two main dates for the Exodus.

It may or may not be made up.Perhaps there was a mini Exodus of a few dozen families or more, but certainly nothing on the scale that the Bible suggests (2-3 million).It is not impossible that it is complete fiction, many nations have what is known as 'origin myths'. It may be made up to display the power of Yahweh, and how He is so powerful even the great Egyptian gods cannot stop Him, there's lots of reasons. The thing is there's nothing appraoching the scale of the rout that Joshua's book claims. Now for Josh's account to be accurate we need to find evidence of complete destruction at all locations in Palestine within either a 5 or 7 year period, this depends on certain biblical interpretations. We do not have that. I am happy that you wish to do your own research, too many people just accept what they are told.The main archaeologists that you should look up are Judith Marquet-Krause and Joseph Calloway.Calloway led 9 seasons at Ai from 1964-72.I rarely use websites for research, I prefer sitting in the library.The only real online-resources I use are accessible through my ATHENS password, which I get through my uni.Any other pointers you want just ask.

Hi Art,A few different sites have been proposed for Ai, but Ai really is the only plausible location for the biblical narrative, and if we leave the biblical narrative and assign any evidence of destruction at any other site to Joshua then we MAY be stealing someone else's history and giving it to Israel.Calloway had a nice response to people who tried to place Ai elsewhere, he simply asked them, " so, tell me, where have I been excavating for the last 9 years!"Calloway was a southern baptist minister who went to Ai to try and prove the Joshua narratives, he admitted that he had to change his view of the Bible in light of the evidence.One thought I have about Ai could be that it is an aetiological tale, thnk about it, why were people living in a city called 'the ruin'? Is it not more plausible that people living long after the city had became a ruin just claimed its destruction for Joshua's armies?There's actually 2 exodus myths woven into one, and there's also a different 'conquest' given in the Book of Judges.The one in Judges is far more plausible, but the real problem is identifying remains that we can definitely call 'Israelite'.Archaeologists have suggested various material culture that they thought we unique to Israel, the four pillar house and the rim collared jar were the two main ones, but evidence of these have been found all over the near east now so these are rejected.It is a massive subject, and I don't think Joe Public realise the intensity of the debate that is going on in academia about this. I got into this subject whilst studying under Keith Whitelam, at Stirling Uni, if you do a Google you will see he is a big player in this debate.I also had the pleasure of spending a few hours chatting (and drinking!) with Philip Davies, another major player, whilst studying at Glasgow Uni.It is a massive area of research, and probably the only thing that is agreed upon by both sides is that we need to reinterpret the biblical texts, they really cannot be taken at face value, which is fine, all ancient peoples exaggerated their history, so why should we expect Israel to be any different?Nice to have you here.