Tuesday, July 7, 2015

9 Reasons to Believe That the Biblical Exodus Actually Happened



In 2013 Rabbi David Wolpe asserted in print and at the pulpit that the historical Exodus was a fiction. He based this conclusion on what he believed was (lack of) archaeological evidence. A common mistake.  This lead biblical historian Richard Elliot Friedman (someone who's conclusions I generally have significant issues with) to respond in the following way:


After reading those articles, your readers may have concluded that scholarship shows that the Exodus is fictional, when, in fact, that is not so. There is archaeological evidence and especially textual evidence for the Exodus.

I respect Professor Sperling and Rabbi Wolpe. They were understandably following the claims of some of our archaeologists. Those archaeologists’ claims that the Exodus never happened are not based on evidence, but largely on its absence. They assert that we’ve combed the Sinai and not found any evidence of the mass of millions of people whom the Bible says were there for 40 years. That assertion is just not true. There have not been many major excavations in the Sinai, and we most certainly have not combed it. Moreover, uncovering objects buried 3,200 years ago is a daunting endeavor. An Israeli colleague laughingly told me that a vehicle that had been lost in the 1973 Yom Kippur War was recently uncovered under 16 meters—that’s 52 feet—of sand. Fifty-two feet in 40 years!


Ok, so that helps us to understand that our inability to locate the "Moses was here" plaque is not as conclusive a matter as some would have us believe.  But what about positive evidence?  What "archaeological and textual evidence" is professor Friedman referring to?


Rabbi Dr. Joshua Berman, professor of Bible at Bar Ilan University, recently wrote a piece for Mosaic Magazine entitled "Was There an Exodus?" in which he claimed to be revealing evidence "for the first time" for the historicity of the Exodus account.  What follows is a summation of some of that evidence:


  1. There is rich evidence that West-Semitic populations lived in the eastern Nile delta—what the Bible calls Goshen—for most of the second millennium. Some were slaves, some were raised in Pharaoh’s court, and some, like Moses, bore Egyptian names.            
  2. We know today that the great pharaoh Ramesses II, who reigned from 1279 to 1213 BCE, built a huge administrative center out of mudbrick in an area where large Semitic populations had lived for centuries. It was called Pi-Ramesses. Exodus (1:11) specifies that the Hebrew slaves built the cities of Pithom and Ramesses, a possible reference to Pi-Ramesses. The site was abandoned by the pharaohs two centuries later.
  3. In the exodus account, pharaohs are simply called “Pharaoh,” whereas in later biblical passages, Egyptian monarchs are referred to by their proper name, as in “Pharaoh Necho” (2 Kings 23:29). This, too, echoes usage in Egypt itself, where, from the middle of the second millennium until the tenth century BCE, the title “Pharaoh” was used alone.
  4. The names of various national entities mentioned in the Song at the Sea (Exodus 15:1-18)—Philistines, Moabites, Edomites, et al.—are all found in Egyptian sources shortly before 1200 BCE; about this, the book of Exodus is again correct for the period.
  5. The stories of the exodus and the Israelites’ subsequent wanderings in the wilderness reflect sound acquaintance with the geography and natural conditions of the eastern Nile delta, the Sinai peninsula, the Negev, and Transjordan.
  6. The book of Exodus (13:17) notes that the Israelites chose not to traverse the Sinai peninsula along the northern, coastal route toward modern-day Gaza because that would have entailed military engagement. The discovery of extensive Egyptian fortifications all along that route from the period in question confirms the accuracy of this observation.
  7. Archaeologists have documented hundreds of new settlements in the land of Israel from the late-13th and 12th centuries BCE, congruent with the biblically attested arrival there of the liberated slaves; strikingly, these settlements feature an absence of the pig bones normally found in such places. Major destruction is found at Bethel, Yokne’am, and Hatzor—cities taken by Israel according to the book of Joshua. At Hatzor, archaeologists found mutilated cultic statues, suggesting that they were repugnant to the invaders.
  8. The earliest written mention of an entity called “Israel” is found in the victory inscription of the pharaoh Merneptah from 1206 BCE. In it the pharaoh lists the nations defeated by him in the course of a campaign to the southern Levant; among them, “Israel is laid waste and his seed is no more.” “Israel” is written in such a way as to connote a group of people, not an established city or region, the implication being that it was not yet a fully settled entity with contiguous control over an entire region. This jibes with the Bible’s description in Joshua and Judges of a gradual conquest of the land.
  9. Professor Berman gives a good deal of background for the remainder of his piece on the similarities between the structures of the Tabernacle and the battle compound of Ramesses II as well as the Book of Exodus's "Song of the Sea" and an Egyptian battle hymn known as the "Kadesh Poem."  He explains that Maimonides held that the Torah makes liberal use of the material of other nations as a kind of "cultural appropriation."  But in this case, how could the Torah's author have known about the details of these highly specific Egyptian references had they not been privy to them - as part of that culture?  As Rabbi Berman explains:
The evidence suggests that the Exodus text preserves the memory of a moment when the earliest Israelites reached for language with which to extol the mighty virtues of God, and found the raw material in the terms and tropes of an Egyptian text well-known to them. In appropriating and “transvaluing” that material, they put forward the claim that the God of Israel had far outdone the greatest achievement of the greatest earthly potentate.


Like many events that occurred in the past and are explored through sciences such as forensics, evolutionary biology and archaeology, researchers are working with only limited and fragmentary information as R Berman says, "Proofs exist in geometry, and sometimes in law, but rarely within the fields of biblical studies and archaeology. As is so often the case, the record at our disposal is highly incomplete, and speculation about cultural transmission must remain contingent." Ultimately, the "mesorah" - the Judaic chain of transmission from one generation to the next - speaks to me more than whatever biblical scholarship and archaeology "dig up," but for those who need an official scientific stamp of approval before taking something seriously, this is real grist for the mill.


For further reference, please check out http://www.patternsofevidence.com/en/ and read Professor Ken Kitchen's "On the Reliability of the Old Testament."  

19 comments:

  1. Even Bible Maximalists like Hoffman, Kitchen etc: argue an Exodus of Biblical proportions (you know 600,000 people plus) DID NOT TAKE PLACE !. So the Torah's story as understood by Orthodox Judaism is almost certainly non historical and a false nation building mythology. It is possible there is a kernal of truth in jumbled up in the mythology of the Torah Exodus story - but a much smaller size of slaves....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Even if it were 10% of what has been commonly understood I would argue that it's still a massive event. The exact number is actually not that important. That the event took place (the "kernel of truth") is and this basic fact was, and still is, denied in many circles. As such, your (and others) begrudging acknowledgment of it is a step in the right direction.

      Delete
  2. No begrudging at all. Many cultures have foundation myths - these may also have a kernel of truth - the problem is the stories get passed down over many generations and get embellished, misunderstood and separating fact from fiction becomes hard. Many atheists accept an Israelite Exodus or even several may have occurred. Even one involving thousands escaping during plagues may have occurred. Ancient people would ascribe these sort of things to supernatural. ANYWAY - the exact number is important because it means the mesorah and the Torah got it wrong ! How could a divine book get facts and figures wrong ?

    ReplyDelete
  3. It does not mean that and there are many areas of contention in the Mesorah - not over principles but rather of details and application of principle. It is noteworthy that the Torah doesn't give an actual figure of the whole populace but rather just the size of the army. In that light consider what Rabbi Berman said on the topic:

    In biblical Hebrew, as in other Semitic languages, the word for thousand—eleph—can also mean “clan,” or “troop,” and it is clear from individual occurrences of the word that such groups do not comprise anywhere near a thousand individuals. In the military context, the term may simply function as a hyperbolic figure of speech—as in “Saul has killed his thousands, but David his tens of thousands” (1 Samuel 18:8)—or serve some typological or symbolic purpose, as do the numerals 7, 12, 40, and so on.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, I am aware of the eleph issue - the problem is Rabbinic Judaism has always interpreted it as a number = thousand. That is how my Yeshiva(s) interpreted it. I am pretty sure I have come across Gemorah where 600 thousand individual people are meant. Another problem is the census in the Torah with numbers adding up to 600,000, which discredits I Samuel analogy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are several parts to this and it is probably worthy of a separate post but in response I'll suggest the following:

      1. When materialists are confronted with irreconcilable difficulties in the world of science such as the problem of explaining consciousness, the origin of matter or of abiogenesis they generally say that science will eventually find the answer. They start with facts of existence who's origins are in the past and try to piece together how it actually unfolded. The Torah is the same way. We were given numbers and in a sense we "research" what they refer to. That's how we can have disagreements about how the numbers in the various Torah censuses came about - such as the one that Rashi, Ramban and Gershonides have over it. It very well may be that 600,000 is the real number of army age men that left Egypt and like the materialists hold regarding unsolved scientific conundrums, we don't yet know how to explain this phenomenon. But what's good for the goose is good for the gander and you can't have it both ways.

      2. The word, and thus the actual number was misunderstood by the sages. No one ever said that they were infallible.

      3. There are several valid ways of interpreting the text (pshat, remez, drash, sod) and the number may well be referring to a spiritual aspect of the people (number of souls) that is unrelated to their actual number. Consider that this 600,000 figure makes appearances in various places and is described by Kabbalah as the number of root souls. Same with 613. Do we really have 613 parts of our bodies or does that refer to something else?

      4. Again, whatever the exact number, it is not an issue for the Kuzari Argument which simply requires a large number of people to witness something to be convincing.

      5. The census itself could be hyperbolic.

      6. There is a legitimate answer (albeit unconventional) in Rabbi Berman's "eleph" approach. It answers the apparent question. Perhaps the questions that some pose are simply helping us to understand the text better - much as Talmudic "kashas" do and is not just an exercise in goalpost moving. Maimonides famously held that there is no contradiction between science and Torah and that if there were then there was a misapprehension of the one or the other (obviously implying that a Toraitic interpretation can in fact be mistaken).

      Delete
    2. Sorry this is a bit long response. I am hoping we can continue our dialogue. Thank You.

      1. “We were given numbers and in a sense we "research" what they refer to.”

      That is not at all what is taking place. We have a census, mesorah and Torah telling us 600000 people. There is nothing to research and we now know it is an impossible figure. Apologetics is not research and not analogous to the scientific method.

      And you are making a poor analogy. 1)Science lets the evidence speak, while Orthodoxy assumes the Torah is true, and then proceeds by hook or crook to make it fit the facts. You can assume any ancient text is true and then engage in contortions to make it fit facts. 2) The Torah 600000 is questioned by some in Orthodoxy because we now known from academic scholarship it is almost certainly wrong. The cause for YOUR “research” is not because the Torah or our Mesorah ever questioned 600000 ! However in science the cause for the research is new scientific empirical information that conflicts with a current model or to explain phenomena that do not yet have a good model.

      And this hurts the Kuzari argument - if we don’t know what the 600 aleph means. Basing the Kuzari on extremely uncertain story weakens the argument.

      2. “The word, and thus the actual number was misunderstood by the sages. No one ever said that they were infallible. “

      So accordingly this would mean for at least 2000 years Rabbinic Jews and sages have misunderstood the Torah, did not know what it meant and had it wrong. If so, maybe there is so much more they ‘misunderstood”. And this hurts the Kuzari argument - basing the Kuzari on an extremely uncertain story weakens the argument. One important Kuzari assumption is an unbroken chain of transmission of facts. But now it seems Rabbinic Jews and sages may not have facts or correct interpretations. What was there to transmit ?

      Delete
    3. 3. “There are several valid ways of interpreting the text (pshat, remez, drash, sod) and the number may well be referring to a spiritual aspect of the people (number of souls) that is unrelated to their actual number.”

      The Torah is talking about actual people and their belongings in an Exodus. Were the animals really souls, and the food virtual food, mixed multitude also souls... You can only deviate so far from pshat before you reach absurdity. Plus you cant just make up interpretations. Provide me with a Gemorah, holy sage or even a midrush for support.

      And so maybe there were no people at a revelation or maybe there was no MT Sinai - it was all a sort of just spiritual.

      All this also ruins the Kuzari argument, since then there were no 600000 plus people there, just souls. And the souls passed down the tradition to whom ?

      4. “Again, whatever the exact number, it is not an issue for the Kuzari Argument which simply requires a large number of people to witness something to be convincing.”

      The Kuzari also argues tradition is passing down accurate history. But if the Torah and mesorah has inaccurate history the whole Kuzari collapses. If we are uncertain of 600000, on what basis do you say a large number of people witness something at Mt Sinai ? Maybe it was only 600 family heads and there family.

      Delete
    4. 5. “The census itself could be hyperbolic.”

      The census balances to the 600000, so if the census is not factual then the 600000 is not factual. If the census is hyperbole, then again the Kuzari collapses. Uncertain story, uncertain tradition, uncertain meanings don’t make for a strong argument. Is there anything in Gemorah, Midrash etc: claiming census as hyperbole ?

      6. “There is a legitimate answer (albeit unconventional) in Rabbi Berman's "eleph" approach.”

      It has always been understood as 600000 actual people. Now that we know that figure is almost certainly wrong, there are many Apologetic attempts to revise traditional understanding.

      Rambam per your comment may have held that there is no contradiction between science and Torah. But would he go so far as to say the same for historical events - especially Exodus ? Every time academia discovers that science, history, archaeology conflicts with the Torah this is the Orthodox response. Denial until evidence is overwhelming. Then reinterpreting Torah pasukim so they now conform. Repeat as often as needed. Yet this means our ancestors have been duped and been duping. It also means every pasuk in the Torah can have just about any interpretation - making it a useless guide. Do you consider this intellectual honesty ? I do not.

      I have been trying to explain to you why your responses are unconvincing. Do you h think you have provided intellectually honest and satisfying answers to my questions ? Think about it. Maybe you are wrong - maybe the Torah is a man made book. Such an Hypothesis explains everything and I mean everything and has overwhelming evidence for it. Why don’t you accept such a conclusion ?

      Delete
    5. I disagree with your thinking on this. The Talmud is replete with discussions on how we should source and understand a given law or concept - it's a kind of investigation. It does not employ the scientific method but the scientific method has proven rather fallible over time - requiring constant revision and leading often to wholly mistaken notions of reality, but in any event, what exactly is the scientific consensus on the impossibility of the numbers regarding the Exodus? Says who? You do realize that for every scientific opinion there are competing opinions, yes?

      I'm reminded of an article I read in the 80's about a German engineer (not a hater) who disbelieved the Holocaust because he couldn't see how it would be mathematically possible to dispose of all of the bodies. Later a discovery was made of the original blueprints of the crematoria and he fully retracted his earlier belief. As such, it is still well within the realm of possibility that the simple meaning of the Torah's Exodus number is correct. I bring Rabbi Berman's explanation as an alternative to those who are bothered by it. I do not believe that it compromises the Mesorah or the Kuzari argument.

      And I'll ask again if you believe in Intelligent Design and the existence of the human soul given that science currently is unable to explain the origin of matter, life or consciousness? If you say that science will eventually explain it then we're making similar arguments. Otherwise, you should believe it and then perhaps we're having a different discussion.

      Delete
    6. “..., what exactly is the scientific consensus on the impossibility of the numbers regarding the Exodus? Says who? “

      EVERY academic scholar alive who has studied the issue disparages the 600,000 figure, including Kitchen and other Bible maximalists.

      “I do not believe that it compromises the Mesorah or the Kuzari argument.”

      But I have provided you with numerous reasons why it does. Please read them again, and respond if you can or care to.

      “And I'll ask again if you believe in Intelligent Design and the existence of the human soul given that science currently is unable to explain the origin of matter, life or consciousness? If you say that science will eventually explain it then we're making similar arguments”

      I explained to why you analogy was a poor one. Please read it again. If I have not already said so somebody saying science will eventually explain an unknown is nothing like finding a historical statement in the Torah wrong, and then reinterpreting the Torah to fit facts.

      Maybe we should just agree to disagree.

      But please explain to me why you don’t think the Torah is a man made book. Such an Hypothesis explains everything and I mean everything and has overwhelming evidence for it. Why don’t you accept such a conclusion ?

      Delete
    7. I'll take one more crack at this and then perhaps we should "agree to disagree" as you suggested. There is confusion as to how the number could have been so large, fine, but like very many other matters that were once viewed by science and history as being impossible, times change. One good example is the first line of the Torah - Judaism asserted an ex nihilo creation and the scientific world opposed it - until they didn't. Here's another good example regarding the scientific consensus on the age of the universe (from Genes and Genesis):

      By the end of the 19th century, there was an entrenched, virtually indisputable scientific consensus that the Earth and the Sun (and thus the universe) were at most 100 million years old...the paradigm was pervasive and considered unassailable [much like today's views of evolution]. It was the consequence of fifty years of determined scientific effort, involving dozens of researchers in multiple disciplines. This result was repeated in countless books, monographs, journals, symposia, lectures and articles in popular magazines and newspapers. Virtually all scientists and educated members of the public were convinced of the veracity of the paradigm. It was almost inconceivable that results from such apparently-independent methodologies, drawn from such a wide array of disciplines and produced by the application of the most advanced tools of science could converge to such a narrow limit coincidentally.

      In short, their consensus on this matter (and others) doesn't move me much.

      Nonetheless, either way, since the Kuzari argument is built off of the CLAIM that a huge number of people witnessed the revelation that the fact that so many people (even today) accepted it, this discussion fails to touch it in any meaningful way. The claim is obviously intact.

      Delete
    8. "In short, their [academic - science] consensus on this matter (and others) doesn't move me much." And so you reject anything they may say regardless of the evidence and support they provide. Ok and this is your response to "The challenge posed by science to traditional religious narrative" reject academic findings because they may be wrong. Your position is very weak because academics have more support in their favor than the Orthodox narrative. Said another way they are more likely to be correct. Second, even if you dont accept academic findings, why then do you accept the the Torah is divine ? In other words you are skeptical when it comes to academic findings yet not Orthodoxy - why is that ? I explained to you several ways I think why reneging on the 600000 people hurts the Kuzari argument - no use repeating the reasons, (but please post them if you have not done so ) thus letting others see the full dialogue. Have a good Shabbas.

      Delete
    9. I'm not outright rejecting it. I am highly skeptical of it a) because archaeology is a "soft science" that by their own admission involves a great deal of guesswork based of a fragmentary evidence and b) there is plenty of historical precedent for scientific revision (I have cited several examples) and of scientific bias.

      My assumption is that you're an atheist. I maintain that if you were to hold yourself to the same scientific standard that you would like to hold me to (that unless I accept what the evidence suggests as we have it currently my position is weak) then you should accept that since the universe presents the appearance of design and there is currently no viable scientific explanation as to how life began, that there is a Designer. It seems to me that to not do so creates a contradiction in your logic.

      Additionally, do you agree that if the Kuzari Argument is built solely off of the claim of 600k witnesses (and the continued existence of a population who uphold the veracity of the event) that it is irrelevant what science has to say about the matter - that the argument, in and of itself, is sound?

      And a very good Shabbos to you.

      Delete
    10. I dont think the argument for design is a scientific argument, rather its a philosophical argument that can be refuted. I think the Kuzari argument is greatly weakened because the 600K people is most likely false. But lets assume the Torah was clear about a more reasonable figure. I still think the Kuzari argument would fail. Again, the Kuzari is not a scientific argument but more along the lines of philosophy that can be refuted for logic and philosophical reasons alone. I think what Science/Historians/Archaeology/Comparative Religion/Myth Formation has found is very relevant to Kuzari. To the extent those sources cast doubt on the Torah stories the Kuzari argument weakens. A Guten Shabbos.

      Delete
    11. Suppose a plaintiff is in court and tells the judge a story. Suppose the story turns out to almost certainly have at least some factual errors. Then the story becomes suspect, and because of that so does the plaintiff. And now suppose there are "facts" in the story that important to the plaintiffs case. And suppose those "facts" turn out to be very likely false. Then the plaintiff's case becomes questionable.

      Delete
  5. Every time academia discovers that science, history, archaelogy conflicts with the Torah this is the Orthodox response. Denial until evidence is overwhelming. Then reinterpreting Torah pasukim so they now conform. Repeat as often as needed. Yet this means our ancestors have been duped and been duping. It also means every pasuk in the Torah can have just about any interpretation - making it a useless guide. Do you consider this intellectual honesty ? I do not.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I Samuel is clearly hyperbole unlike the the exact figures in the Torah census. So what typological or symbolic purpose have you found in midrash, Gemorah... for the 600,000 people.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If 600 aleph is hyperbole/symbolic/typological , then maybe there was no mass witness at Mount Sinai or Mount Horeb. That would undermine a major claim of the Kuzari argument.

    ReplyDelete