For those who want proof of the exodus

[athrock]

again you are describing a commentary dressed as a documentary.
An inconvenant truth is a great example of a commentary dressed as a documentry. where very little actual evidence is provided and it almost completely relys on expert testimony.
In contrast to say a true documentry on the american revolution that cites, dates times, historical records and news papers.

And yet Inconvenient Truth is able to fool a lot of viewers into thinking they're seeing and hearing vast quantities of "proof" for the documentary's conclusion. Particularly the stupid who are ignorant of the scientific method and lack critical-thinking skills. Understand?

I absolutly can, because the matter being discussed is based on opinion. We have absolutle no hard evidence that states egypt is a fixed age. why? because of three intermediate periods/egyptian darkages where history was lost.
All anyone can do is guess on how long these time spans lasted, based on guess of what was known to be going on in the world at the time.

It's guess work all of it. It would be one thing if the majority of egyptologists had a solid timeline from the old to new kingdom and 2000 years of solid history, but the oppsite is true. we at best can only guess at 1/2 of what is known because we have little more than tatters and rags to tell us what is going on in what some estimate could be 1000 years of historical silence.

That's just not true at all. They can use radiocarbon dating, Palaeolithic dating, and a range of other academic study to determine an ancient culture's age (such as its progression along the bronze age for example). You are clearly ignorant of this. It's not a "guessing game".

Yeah, that's call sarcasm. I can honestly say I see absolutely no wisdom in how the academic structureof main stream Egyptology works.

That's because you're struggling to understand something that's simply beyond your comprehension. You seem to have no clue as to how academic standards of evidence work.

Are you actually stupid, or is it an act? Post middle Kingdom means after the middle kingdom has fallen. The events of the exodus (The death of Pharaoh's son, the destruction of the Army and the loss of Egypt's wealth spun them into a dark age. a depression it took over 100 years for them to recover from.)
Their were no cities occupied by a central egyptian goverment because their was no centralized goverment any more (40 after the loss/exodus)

Well Drich there were in fact Egyptian strongholds that existed in Egypt up until the mid 12th century, which prove that Egypt was still powerful up to that time. This has been confirmed by several archaeological digs in Canaan that located the cities. As I mentioned before, most cities in the region were not strongholds. From the ~15th century to the mid 12th century Egypt controlled most of Canaan, from a network of heavily fortified cities in Canaan that they occupied and used to hold sway over the whole region.

May I assume from your pointed questions above that you have, in fact, watched the documentary?

If so, with what, specifically, would you take issue from the filmmaker's arguments?

Minimalist mentioned the Ipuwer Papyrus (did he watch the film?), and I wasn't overly impressed by that, either, but the producer does not rely overly much on that single artifact, IMO.

If scientists like Einstein can make errors in their formulas, is it inconceivable that Egyptologists can be off by a few centuries in theirs?

[Brian37]

Drich,

I know you truly want that book to be true, we get that. But it really is nothing but a book of myth. Humans wrote that book because they didn't know any better. In the same way the Ancient Romans created their gods and the same way Mayans created theirs and the same way Native Americans made up their spirit gods.

Humans gap fill based on false perceptions.

[Minimalist]

The Ipuwer papyrus is standard fare for jesus freaks seeking some evidence to prop up their fairy tale.  It tells of an invasion not an "exodus."

Indeed, the desert is throughout the land, the nomes are laid waste, and barbarians from abroad have come to Egypt.
Indeed, men arrive [. . .] and indeed, there are no Egyptians anywhere.

Pt. III of the Ipuwer papyrus

But when you are desperate people will latch on to anything which gives them vindication for their nonsense.

Once again, put down your silly bibles and read some actual history:

Of prior concern here should be the date of the sources in Exodus 1- 14 judged empirically on the basis of datable details. The latter, it must be admitted, are few and most are of a toponymic nature. Research on these place-names, however, has proceeded far beyond the stage of Cazelle's classic article of thirty-five years ago; and we can now genuinely speak of a unanimity of the evidence. Whoever supplied the geographical information that now adorns the story had no information earlier than the Saite period (seventh to sixth centuries B.C.). The eastern Delta and Sinai he describes are those of the 26th Dynasty kings and the early Persian overlords: his toponyms reflect the renewed interest in the eastern frontier evidenced for this period by fort building and canalization. He knows of "Goshen" of the Qedarite Arabs, and a legendary "Land of Ramesses." He cannot locate the Egyptian court to anything but the largest and most famous city in his own day in the northeastern Delta, namely Tanis, the royal residence from about 1070 to 725 B.C. (cf. Psalm 78:12, 43), which survives as a metropolis into Roman times; and he mistakenly presses into service the adjacent marshy tract "the reed-(lake)" as the "Reed-sea," the scene of Israel's miraculous passage to safety. The route he is familiar with is that which traverses the same tract as the canal of Necho II (610-594 B.C.) from Bubastis to the Bitter Lakes; then he moves north in his mind's eye past the famous fort at Migdol to Lake Sirbonis (Ba'al Saphon) where Horus had already in the mythical past thrown Seth out of Egypt. In short, with respect to the geography of the Exodus, the post-Exilic compiler of the present Biblical version had no genuinely ancient details. He felt constrained to supply them from the Egypt of his own day and, significantly perhaps, cited several places where Asiatic elements and especially Judaean mercenaries resided in the sixth and fifth centuries.

Egypt, Canaan and Israel in Ancient Times by Donald Redford  (begins pg 409)

[Wyrd of Gawd]

http://m.imdb.com/title/tt3464018/

This one can be found on Netflix.
I know it's a tall ask to ask anyone to watch hour and half two hour movie for the sake of debate. That's not what I'm doing here I am providing a resource for those who want an honest look at what evidence their is for the exodus. In this film every major point before and after the exodus is examined and what they have found out there in the sand.

I say an honest look because this the evidence and theory that binds the evidence has holes. Those holes are identified and discussed. ultimatly it is up to you to look at all the evidence and decide for yourself.

The exodus from Egypt is a parable about the Israelites living in sin before Moses hit them upside the head with his 613 laws.  

The biblical stories use Egypt as a metaphor for sin.  The Israelites were jealous because the Egyptians were more advanced than they were.  

Remember, if you believe in the exodus fairy tale then you also have to believe that a million man army from Sudan invaded Judea.  And that army had a better leader than the stumble bum Moses because it didn't take him forty years to get there.

[Aractus]

May I assume from your pointed questions above that you have, in fact, watched the documentary?

No not yet, but I will respond to this:

If scientists like Einstein can make errors in their formulas, is it inconceivable that Egyptologists can be off by a few centuries in theirs?

We're talking about two completely different regions. Egypt and Canaan. Egyptian timeline is, I believe, well established and accounted for with some, but little uncertainty over dating. As far as I'm aware, c.1300 BC we're only talking a single century of leeway. Not enough to shift the Exodus into the Middle Kingdom (which ended around 1700 BC).

On the other hand we have Canaan cities. And 4 of 5 of them, pretty much the only fortified cities at the time, were Egyptian up until the mid 12th century - when they were abandoned without conflict, thought to coincide with the fall/dwindling power of the New Kingdom. From these cities we find hundreds of cuneiform tablets detailing messages (telegraphs, if you will) between Egypt and their Canaanite territories. But not one single letter of Hebrew - in fact the earliest known Hebrew writing accepted by scholars as Hebrew is 2 centuries later in the 10th century BC (the Zayit Stone). And there's only one Hebrew inscription from that period that has ever been found and proved to be Hebrew.

If the Exodus happened the way the Bible explains then the conquest of Canaan has happened sometime between 1400-1200 BC. If that's the case then there should be lots of Hebrew writing to be found in the Cananite cities from at least the 11th century on (or the 13th century on if you favour the earlier date). But there isn't any. None at all.

But centuries aside or not, not one letter of Hebrew has ever been recovered from ancient Egypt. Despite their supposed enslavement. If there were really 1,200,000 Jews enslaved in Egypt - and they'd been living there for centuries - then we'd be able to dig up millions of their graves. They'd be everywhere.

There were no Jews in Egypt because there were no Jews anywhere until the rise of the kingdom of Judah in the 8th(/possibly 9th) cent. BC. Judah rose on its own. There was never a pre-existing Kingdom that was later split in two, which is what the Bible claims. No, there were always two different kingdoms. The kingdom of Israel rose in the 10th cent. BC. Where did it come from? See if there was an Exodus in 1250 BC then it should have been established in the late 13th century BC - but it wasn't. It wasn't there for another 300 years.  And if you instead take the early Exodus date then it takes 500 years between when the Bible says that Joshua conquered Canaan and when the ancient kingdom of Israel actually rose in Canaan. Of course Israel had to exist somewhere in the Canaan region so they could rise to power, but they were nothing more than a pathetically small tribe of herders (or tribe of some description) that didn't even have a city to their name.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

---

May I assume from your pointed questions above that you have, in fact, watched the documentary?

No not yet, but I will respond to this:

If scientists like Einstein can make errors in their formulas, is it inconceivable that Egyptologists can be off by a few centuries in theirs?

We're talking about two completely different regions. Egypt and Canaan. Egyptian timeline is, I believe, well established and accounted for with some, but little uncertainty over dating. As far as I'm aware, c.1300 BC we're only talking a single century of leeway. Not enough to shift the Exodus into the Middle Kingdom (which ended around 1700 BC).

On the other hand we have Canaan cities. And 4 of 5 of them, pretty much the only fortified cities at the time, were Egyptian up until the mid 12th century - when they were abandoned without conflict, thought to coincide with the fall/dwindling power of the New Kingdom. From these cities we find hundreds of cuneiform tablets detailing messages (telegraphs, if you will) between Egypt and their Canaanite territories. But not one single letter of Hebrew - in fact the earliest known Hebrew writing accepted by scholars as Hebrew is 2 centuries later in the 10th century BC (the Zayit Stone). And there's only one Hebrew inscription from that period that has ever been found and proved to be Hebrew.

If the Exodus happened the way the Bible explains then the conquest of Canaan has happened sometime between 1400-1200 BC. If that's the case then there should be lots of Hebrew writing to be found in the Cananite cities from at least the 11th century on (or the 13th century on if you favour the earlier date). But there isn't any. None at all.

But centuries aside or not, not one letter of Hebrew has ever been recovered from ancient Egypt. Despite their supposed enslavement. If there were really 1,200,000 Jews enslaved in Egypt - and they'd been living there for centuries - then we'd be able to dig up millions of their graves. They'd be everywhere.

There were no Jews in Egypt because there were no Jews anywhere until the rise of the kingdom of Judah in the 8th(/possibly 9th) cent. BC. Judah rose on its own. There was never a pre-existing Kingdom that was later split in two, which is what the Bible claims. No, there were always two different kingdoms. The kingdom of Israel rose in the 10th cent. BC. Where did it come from? See if there was an Exodus in 1250 BC then it should have been established in the late 13th century BC - but it wasn't. It wasn't there for another 300 years.  And if you instead take the early Exodus date then it takes 500 years between when the Bible says that Joshua conquered Canaan and when the ancient kingdom of Israel actually rose in Canaan.

---

Of course Israel had to exist somewhere in the Canaan region so they could rise to power, but they were nothing more than a pathetically small tribe of herders (or tribe of some description) that didn't even have a city to their name.

Didn't they steal Jerusalem from the Jebusites?

[The Grand Nudger]

There were no Jews in Egypt because there were no Jews anywhere until the rise of the kingdom of Judah in the 8th(/possibly 9th) cent. BC. Judah rose on its own. There was never a pre-existing Kingdom that was later split in two, which is what the Bible claims. No, there were always two different kingdoms. The kingdom of Israel rose in the 10th cent. BC. Where did it come from? See if there was an Exodus in 1250 BC then it should have been established in the late 13th century BC - but it wasn't. It wasn't there for another 300 years.  And if you instead take the early Exodus date then it takes 500 years between when the Bible says that Joshua conquered Canaan and when the ancient kingdom of Israel actually rose in Canaan. Of course Israel had to exist somewhere in the Canaan region so they could rise to power, but they were nothing more than a pathetically small tribe of herders (or tribe of some description) that didn't even have a city to their name.

A point which is quite adequately contained -within- the OT, if a person doesn't commit to reading it as a book of miracles.  Nearly the entire body of the text is a running dialogue between two distinct ideological forces and their criticisms of each other, their predictions for the outcomes of the competing ideologies policies.  The OT -very- briskly rolls through it's establishment myth, the real meat and potatoes is the social commentary and legendary history of and between the northern and southern kingdoms.

[Drich]

BTW, did this piece of shit try to pass of the Ipuwer papyrus as "evidence" of the plagues?

That's a pretty standard jesus-freak claim.

Then you should have some "standard defense" rather than you weak attempt at a general dismissal.

[dyresand]

BTW, did this piece of shit try to pass of the Ipuwer papyrus as "evidence" of the plagues?

That's a pretty standard jesus-freak claim.

Then you should have some "standard defense" rather than you weak attempt at a general dismissal.

The greatest defense and dismissal is and forever will be geology. Even Min gave you evidence against your
claims. No amount of faith or wanting the bible to be true won't make it true. That's pretty much it
you don't have evidence for your claim that's pretty much it. All you have is a baseless claim with no 
evidence to support it.

[Drich]

at the end of this you feel that 'mainstream egyptologists' have been out right ignorant or lying to you. Makes you wonder how many other fields of 'advanced study/learning' is also flat out lying.

So in the space of two sentences we go from "ignorant or lying" to "flat out lying. That's cute. I doubt you spend much time wondering which other fields of advanced study/learning are also conspiracies of lies to gull the faithless and mislead God's warriors, so let's have it. Please inform me which other fields of academic human endeavor you see fit to pronounce upon without a minute's training in the relevant disciplines.

Again if you want to have this debate watch the movie, take notes and address the monuments, papyrus and the archaeological evidence documented by the movie, acknowledged by Egyptology, and suppressed in the "Absolutely no evidence for egyptian enslavement of the descendants of Abraham." argument.

Sometimes I have trouble deciding which is more breath-taking: your arrogance or the degree of your anti-intellectualism.

says the person who has burried his head in the sand, and is ignoring a simple documentry that has documented undeniable proof that is truly being suppressed by word games (No Jews/israelites were ever slaves to egypt. That is because The Jews were not known as jews till after the exodus) Durning the time they spent in egypt they were egyptians/egyptian slaves

The other 1/2 of the word game is a time line forced on to the exodus by people who says it did not happen, but if it did it would have to happen in a time period in which their is no evidence, rather than a time period where their is absolutly evidence for every single major event recorded in exodus.

The reason I say it is undeniable is because the professors archaeologists and egyptologists who oppose this evidence do not deny the viablity of the evidence, they simply ascribe it to a similar situation that happened to a different semetic people that egypt did enslave because of the supposed time line discrepency or because Israel was not mentioned by name. (which again was not a name the people had yet) They were simply the semetic family of Joseph who saved Egypt from a great famine and consolidated all gubernatorial power under pharaoh during the famine. (which again is recorded in Egyptian history in the middle kingdom)

It is absolutely ridiculous! to watched these supposed "intellectuals" stammer and stutter their way through trying to reconcile their area of expertise with the rest of the evidence, while trying to maintain the greater idea that their is not evidence for the exodus.

Serious question: if the case made in this film is so compelling, why is it buried in a documentary that was shown in a relative handful of church basements rather than hashed out in the appropriate peer-reviewed journals?

Dude. it's on net flix.. what about streaming a movie from net flix is "a showing in a church basement, to you?" Or haven't you even bothered to read the OP, and you are just persuming to know...
How ironically typical.

Your question should be why isn't the evidence accepted?
Two reasons. the time line issue is the greatest 'excuse.' which again is a non issue because the bible does not place the exodus in a specific time. The Egyptologists assume a late dynasy exodus because of jewish tradition, which again is not confirmed scripturaly. So the going explaination by the dozen or so anti exodus experts for the evidence is literly: "these things happened to a different semetic people that egypt enslaved." Not the Jews.
Why? Because for the second most popular reason the Jews were not mentioned by name until after the middle dynasty was over (which again is the movie's time line for the exodus/the reason for the fall of the middle dynasty.) or according to hacks like Hawass they are not mentioned at all in any egyptian document. Which is an out and out lie.
(people who try and float that out right lie tend to be of the Muslim faith, or are simply ignorant parrots who are just repeating what they heard from people like hawass)

And don't give me any of the standard-issue fundie crap about how believers' ideas are shut out of the academy. If there is a real case to be made within the relevant academic disciplines, there is a way to go about it, and pandering to groups of people who are desperate to have their approach to Biblical historicity confirmed is not that way.

Let's review what was found/is confirmed by historians:
The found a semetic city, around that city, 25 to 30 towns and villages All Semetic/nomadic in orgin/sheep herders. Different culture, different God, different race of people than the standard egypt born egyptian. In the beginning and for some time they were very prosperous. Excavation of grave sites confirm strong skeletal/well nourished and graves with gold, daggers and semetic pottery found. They found Joseph's house. later was replaced by Egyptian palace with semetic over tones. in the back A grave/Mini pyramid containing a statue of a semite ruler holding a semetic version of a boomerang. donning pale skin, red hair and a semetic robe of many colors. (which is absolute un heard of period in the rest of egyptian history as outsiders were never honored with a pyramid burial) along side this pyramid were twelve semetic tombs of high honor. One for each one of Joseph's brothers/The 12 tribes of Israel. Also found in the excavation a mass infant young male grave from about the time moses would have been born. (pharaoh's decree that all the young boys and male infants be killed)
Also at that time these people went from well nourished and living long lives to being poorly nourished and living to maybe 30. while egyptian graves of that time show that they were well nourished and still living long lives.

What was the guy who is doing the actual exavation have to say about all of this?
"Wrong time period, must be a different semetic people who's story just so happen l mirrors the jews." Literally this is what the guy who is incharge of the dig said!

Then we have the brooklyn papryus. This is a recognized document that contains a list from around the 12th century BC (just before the exodus/same period as the dig) that contain 100 Jewish only names all of which were identified as slaves. Jewish only Meaning names unique to what we know to be the jewish people.
Curator of the museum said "wrong time period"

Then we have papryus named "The admonisions of an egyptian sage" which records the state of egyptian affairs at the end of the middle kingdom. (which is a direct result of the pharaoh being killed along with his army/at the bottom of the red sea, the jews walking away with all of egypt's riches, and the death of all the first born sons of eygpt, along with the total destruction of Egypt's crops and live stock brough on by the plague.)
In this papyrus the nile turning to blood, hail and fire from the sky is mentioned, which destroys all of the crops and the blood water kills off the live stock, plague, flies and the death of egyptians on a mass scale is also recorded.
http://raseneb.tripod.com/Ipuwer.htm

What does this museum curator who was interviewed have to say?
This was all made up, this court appointed historian (the egyptian sage) made all of this up from scarry stories of long past kingdoms. plus he said "the hand writting style firmly places the document at the end of the middle kingdom which is far to early for the exodus."
Plus he add: "why would the affluent be so devestated while the slaves made off with all their prized possessions?" (why wouldn't the plagues also have devestated the slave population/why wouldn't the army of egypt have stopped them?)

Again, We have our answer in the bible.

So, You tell me sport. this is just three points of just three major events in the documentry mentions It catalogs a whole lot more, but the answer given by the anti exodus expert is always the same. Also know the movie does not only provide the bible perspective. The film make goes out of his way to bring the top experts in to represent their little piece of egytpian history. so you can make up your own mind.

You tell me how they all can just dissmiss the bible because of the 'wrong time period' excuse when clearly the bible does not book end the entrance and exodus of the jews in egypt.
You tell me why all of them want to attribute all of these documented events and archaeological evidence to 'some other semetic people who just so happen to mirror the jews right down to the exodus.' Why not simply adjust the time line for events that they say could not happen for lack of evidence, To a time period that completely supports the exodus?!?

Oh, and when you realize that people like that/people like you desperately don't want the bible to be true are indeed burying their heads in the sand is indeed the reason and only reason, they will not acknoweledge the exodus then you can appreciate what and why/how my godwin statement is completely valid.

If you like take hitler out of the equasion. You still have propaganda. you have an orgnazition pumping out miss information that completely contradicts the evidence.

That is why I title this thread what I did.. This discussion is for those who only want proof of the exodus, not for those who want thier ears tickled with reassuring anti-God propaganda. Other wise ask yourself this sport: what does it matter to you if the exodus is true or not if the reality is their is no God?

What you are all seem equal blind to is the fact that their should/would not be an argument over time lines or what did or did not happen to the jews is it not for God being up held as the author of this egyptian destruction.

It kinda makes you guys look like the Germans who bought Hitler's propaganda hook line and sinker. Kinda gives some incite as to how easy it was for basically a 'good' person to get swallowed up into a propaganda machine.

Leaving aside from your demonstrated love of Godwin, even when it is entirely irrelevant (as here), I can only shake my head in amazement that someone could hoist so much unintended irony into two sentences without a crane.

Now your failure is complete..

The irony was indended sport, now just keep digging and you might find just one more level of irony if you are indeed at all concerned with the truth.