"Exodus" film beats out "Hunger Games: Mockingjay"

[abaris]

I hate to admit I saw it last week, but the film sucked sacrificial lamb balls.

No thanks, I'm good. I'm not wasting hard earned money on something I know I wouldn't like. I didn't watch the Noah movie either. I still have strong and not very fond memories of sitting through all the old 50ies flicks like the ten Commandments and the different tale of the Christ movies that cropped up like ripe asparagus.

[CapnAwesome]

It's about as based on reality as the hunger games. Exodus never happened. It's probably not even based on anything real.

[abaris]

It's about as based on reality as the hunger games. Exodus never happened. It's probably not even based on anything real.

Well, it obviously has people in it. So they're real, but that's pretty much all the bible offers too with regards to reality. Yeah, and the title Pharao obviously.

[CapnAwesome]

It's about as based on reality as the hunger games. Exodus never happened. It's probably not even based on anything real.

Well, it obviously has people in it. So they're real, but that's pretty much all the bible offers too with regards to reality. Yeah, and the title Pharao obviously.

The whole basis that mass amounts of Jews were held as slaves by the Egyptians isn't even based on anything historical. Much less that these Jews escaped, much less that some 600,000 of them left Egypt and survived crossing the desert. It's an entirely fictional story. I'm surprised actually that people aren't making threads about it, like they make constant threads about Jesus not existing, even though I'd say the historical chances of that are infinitely more likely than Exodus being true.

[abaris]

Much less that these Jews escaped, much less that some 600,000 of them left Egypt and survived crossing the desert.

I even heard the number of two million at some point. Not sure about the number of people actually living at the time this supposedly happened, but I would be highly surprised if it was that high. So under the best circumstances, every Egyptian toddler would have had their own jewish slave.

[Tonus]

Exodus 12:37,38 "Now the sons of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men on foot, aside from children. A mixed multitude also went up with them, along with flocks and herds, a very large number of livestock."

The story claims 600,000 men on foot. Assuming at least one woman and child per man, the group increases to 1.8 million. And we can only guess as to the size of the "mixed multitude." The number could be astronomical, not counting the "very large" number of livestock. Or, from this site:

According to this passage 600,000 men descended from Yaacov left Egypt. If each man is married with the average of 5 children, this brings the entire population of Israel to 6,000,000. This is not including the mixed multitude that came out with them (Exodus 12:38) or the flocks and herds that they also brought out. This large number of people creates a few problems. The first is the size of this "army" (Exodus 12:41 - hosts meaning army. Also Exodus 12:37 where the men are called "gevoriym" or warriors) compared to the size of Pharaohs army of 600 chariots (Exodus 14:7) which brought fear to the Israelites. How could 600 chariots be considered a threat to 600,000 warriors of Israel? Equally puzzling is the fear the Israelites felt at entering the promised land where each city probably contained no more than 5,000 warriors compared to their 600,000.

Another problem is the large number of people is not possible with the number of generations available from Levi to the exodus. The average number of children born to the descendents of Yaacov is three to five. If we assume that the twelve children of Yaacov had 5 children, and the generation of Kohath, Amram and Moses each had 5 children, the maximum number of people (men, women and children) descended from Yaacov at the time of the exodus would be approximately 7500.

[CapnAwesome]

Even if the numbers were 6000 or 600 there isn't any evidence for that either. There isn't any evidence for any large number of jews being held in slavery at any point in the history of Egypt. It's excusable that a lone prophet wandering insignificant parts of the Roman empire wouldn't have primary sources that survived to this day, but totally unrealistic that no sources or even archeological evidence exists for thousands of people supposedly held in captivity.

[Jackalope]

Obviously they were *magic* Israelites, Cap'n.

[thesummerqueen]

The whole basis that mass amounts of Jews were held as slaves by the Egyptians isn't even based on anything historical. Much less that these Jews escaped, much less that some 600,000 of them left Egypt and survived crossing the desert. It's an entirely fictional story. I'm surprised actually that people aren't making threads about it, like they make constant threads about Jesus not existing, even though I'd say the historical chances of that are infinitely more likely than Exodus being true.

I think we have made threads about it, in the distant internet past of this website.

[professor]

I told my kids not to go see it, just like I told them not to bother seeing the Noah flick.
I suggested to my daughter to buy the house next door several years ago. Now she wishes she did.
Maybe later, they will say- yeah those movies were garbage- why didn't you tell me?