Talk:Exodus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

However, the counts given for each tribe in Numbers 1-2 cannot be interpretted in this fashion. They are given in units of "thousands", "hundreds" and "tens" and in addition the total is given. No interprettation of eleph except "thousand" makes sense in that case, so the difficulty remains.

True, but the Hebrew Bible doesn't always use the same word in the same way, as it was redacted together from a number of different sources. So the previous reading does remain a possibility. RK 01:04, 13 Sep 2003 (UTC)
What I'm saying is that whoever wrote the tables of count in Numbers 1-2 obviously meant "thousands", so the large total of 603,550 remains a problem for those who can't accept that the Bible account might be wrong. Of course it remains possible that the author of Exodus meant "clans" rather than "thousands", but that would just create a contradiction between Exodus and Numbers which is even more of a problem for the literalist. I didn't try to write this opinion in the article, but it seems to me that the close similarity between the total in Exodus and the total in Numbers makes it most unlikely that anything except "thousands" is meant in Exodus either. --zero 01:49, 13 Sep 2003 (UTC)
Understood. Of course, I think that when you read it carefully, and with an open mind, the entire book presents problems for the literalist! Which is why some of my co-religions have tounge-in-cheek accused me of worshipping the God of J, E, P and D, instead of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. :) RK 13:26, 13 Sep 2003 (UTC)
The article, as now written, is obviously POV - as of a non-literalist who feels triumphant in believing that disputed figures prove that Exodus is a story. And, as usual, the term Fundamentalist (whether ignorantly or pejoratively) is used as a broad brush in separating Christians into just two groups. Fundamentalism is one of many movements within Christianity. The article has a ways to go to meet Wikipedia NPOV standards. Pollinator 14:26, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Why not just exchange Literalist for the term Fundamentalist? 13 July 04
My $0.02 answer: The terms Literalist and Fundamentalist are extremely weak. I suggest reference to methods of interpretation. For example: historical-critical or historical-grammatical.
An article already argues this 603,550 number to death The Exodus as opposed to Exodus.
The term contradiction seems to be used too carelessly. Why doesn't anybody use the term paradox? If the generation of Hezron makes it to Egypt with just 70 men, just three generations before an exodus of 603,550 begins, an explanation is for each man to have 20 kids per generation...unbelievable...but possible especially when Mosaic Laws aren't yet in place that prohibit more than one wife...not that the Mosaic Laws prevented multiple-wives from happening later on!...the next problem is Exodus 12:40 which describes 430 years for the three generations...--Ep9206 20:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Duh! What is the definition of an Israelite? When there is a count of 603,550, it counts people like Caleb, whose father was not an Israelite but a Kenezzite.Ep9206 05:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Why the {} sign/s?

Why were one or more of these sign/s: {{NPOV}}{{expansion}}{{Cleanup}} signs placed on this page without any discussion, explanation or reasoning? (And why create a redundant category Category:Bible stories that is now up for a vote for deletion at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion#Category:Bible stories?) IZAK 07:25, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] What are we doing with this: Mass Exodus. Redirect, merge or seperate article?

The instance in which a large group of people, animals, or objects attempt to leave, evacutate or move to a different location.

  • Some famous exodus include the jewish exodus from Egypt to the promised lands.
  • Refugees ussally partake in exodus from troubled lands.


It’s not an exodus unless it’s a mass exodus.

Redirect, merdge or seperate article?

[edit] Book of Exodus

Is there a reason why the name of this article does not start with "Book of"? All the other articles in the Old Testament category start that way, except for four of the five books of the Torah. If there are no objections, I'll have it changed.

[edit] Authorship

I am not Jewish (I am Roman Catholic though) so I am not well versed on the issue of who is claimed to be the actual author of the Torah or even specifically of the Book of Exodus. In parochial school religion class mainly dealt with the issue of the stories in the Bible, rather than the archeological or historical authenticity of the Bible.

The "authorship" section concisely talks about the issues of "who" the author of the Exodus book is. However, there is no talk at all about "when" the Book of Exodus was written. Is there any answer to this that anyone could provide or point me to. I think it is an important point for those who are more interested in the historical aspects of the Torah and the Exodus text, rather than the religious aspects or teachings therein.

         Forget this question.  My answer was found in the informative article "Dating the Bible."  Excellent read.

[edit] Ramesses III/Ramesses IV and "non campus mentis"

I suspect that the Pharaoh mentioned in the Exodus is probably Ramesses III or IV, based on the following:

  • Egypt dominated Canaan around this time period, up until around the end of Ramesses III's reign and the entirety of Ramesses IV's reign (such a hegemony has archaelogical evidence, at least in Egypt itself, concerning Tel Megiddo and other places)
  • There was a massive famine in Egypt towards the tail end of Ramesses III's reign, apparently due to an eruption of Hekla in 1159 BCE
  • Family politics during the reign of Ramesses III were rough (there was an assassination plot involving the harem of Ramesses III), which could give reason why a prince would want to get away from the royal house and Egypt altogether
  • there was work going on at Pi-Ramesses (Exodus mentions "Pithom and Ramesses" during this time period
  • There was an incursion of Sea Peoples during Ramesses the III's reign, which may have something to do with the legend of Moses parting waters of the sea
  • Alternatively, Hekla, which likely generated a tsunami (but probably not one touching Egypt or the Levant), or some disaster much more ancient, could've given rise to the legend (such as Thera in the 1600s or 1400s BCE and/or reported meteorites hitting Arabia as far back as 2200-2400 BCE), along with reports of "pillars of cloud by day and towers of fire by night"
  • Accounts of such disasters may have been embellished, stylized, and/or garbled up in a "non campus mentis" manner (people forgetting exactly how history happened and in exactly what order, but remembering the basics - it happens to high-school and undergrad students all the time and might also happen in oral traditions), thus explaining the misplacement of the fall of Jericho and other misplacements
  • The journeys of the Sea Peoples themselves may have worked their way in during the retelling

In summation, the scholars involved in dating the events in the Book of Exodus (or the events that inspired the Book of Exodus) may have been looking a tad too early by suggesting Ramesses I and II. Furthermore, Ramesses the IV was a fourth or a fifth-born (I think), not a first-born, and the lack of a first-born in the royal house might've worked its way into the story of the 10 Plagues, along with the (obvious) Hekla-related "darkness" and possibly some biological problems related to that "darkness". 204.52.215.107 20:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Krakatoa, when it made its caldera-forming eruption, caused darkness and/or added a yellow-tinged sky to its immediate vicinity for a few days, extending over the isle of Java. Other parts of the world reported green and blue suns and brilliant sunsets; an earlier eruption, Tambora, is said to have caused the Year without a summer by adding particulates to the atmosphere. The 20-year event apparently related to Hekla was a time of stunted tree-ring growth, suggestive of even greater tampering with the atmosphere and/or climate. I suspect what the Egyptians likely experienced was something like a green (or yellow, or some other color) haze, or a slightly to somewhat darkened sky, along with cooler than usual temperatures. This period coincided with the end of Ramesses III's reign and all of Ramesses IV's reign. 204.52.215.107 20:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alternative Theories

In one of the latest revisions, someone has put an additional section called alternative theories. I was wondering if the person who provided this new section provide links to source material and evidence. Also I want to ask for clearification about the first line of this paragraph where it says that the Exodus is only described in the Old Testament. What exactly was the author's intent with this sentence: does he mean that the Torah does not support the Great Exodus of Hebrews? And if so, could he again provide evidence because I was under the impression from some of the links to Jewish translations (at the bottom) that the Torah also gave evidence of this.

[edit] Red Sea

The article says 'who have by this point reached what is referred to as the 'Reed Sea' (often mistranslated as the Red Sea). Fortunately for the Israelites, they are divinely guarded, and are able to passage of Red Sea,'.

If it was really mistranslated as 'Red Sea' why is 'Red Sea' used in the next sentence? Also, where exactly is the 'Reed Sea'.--Jcvamp 11:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

The article on Pharaoh of the Exodus is short and is duplicated in this article. Merge Zargulon 15:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/x/o/Talk%7EExodus_4010.html"