Exodus
In a word, none that I've ever seen.
Another case in point is the biblical record of the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt and their subsequent 40-year wandering in the Sinai wilderness. According to census figures in the book of Numbers, the Israelite population would have been between 2.5 to 3 million people, all of whom died in the wilderness for their disobedience, yet extensive archaeological work by Israeli archaeologist Eliezer Oren over a period of 10 years "failed to provide a single shred of evidence that the biblical account of the Exodus from Egypt ever happened" (Barry Brown, "Israeli Archaeologist Reports No Evidence to Back Exodus Story," News Toronto Bureau, Feb. 27, 1988). Oren reported that although he found papyrus notes that reported the sighting of two runaway slaves, no records were found that mentioned a horde of millions: "They were spotted and the biblical account of 2.5 million people with 600,000 of military age weren't?" Oren asked in a speech at the Royal Ontario Museum. That is certainly a legitimate question. Up to 3 million Israelites camped in a wilderness for 40 years, but no traces of their camps, burials, and millions of animal sacrifices could be found in ten years of excavations
RE:
There have been ruins found beneath the Red Sea:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=33168
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=33168
"And I shall slay them who partake of futurism, for in the preterist light there will be everlasting salvation, truth, and peace." ~ Faust
Firstly, the census figures in Numbers are notoriously prone to broad interpretation (there is no firm agreement on the total census number).
Secondly, the census figure was not a figure of the total population. Whoever said that hasn't bothered to read the text. The census was of all those twenty years old and up.
A total population number is extrapolated from the census figure, but the census figure is not the total population. These errors occur as a result of sloppy research.
This is of great importance, because it leads to the third point, which is that only those included in the census died. The critic you quote claims that the entire Israelite population is said to have died in the wilderness, which is completely false.
To give a figure of the total Israelite population, and then say 'all of whom died in the wilderness for their disobedience' betrays the fact that someone hasn't even read the text they are supposed to be criticising - a fault typical of 'Higher Criticism'.
Secondly, the census figure was not a figure of the total population. Whoever said that hasn't bothered to read the text. The census was of all those twenty years old and up.
A total population number is extrapolated from the census figure, but the census figure is not the total population. These errors occur as a result of sloppy research.
This is of great importance, because it leads to the third point, which is that only those included in the census died. The critic you quote claims that the entire Israelite population is said to have died in the wilderness, which is completely false.
To give a figure of the total Israelite population, and then say 'all of whom died in the wilderness for their disobedience' betrays the fact that someone hasn't even read the text they are supposed to be criticising - a fault typical of 'Higher Criticism'.
Yes, that's a good question which still remains. But determining exactly what we're looking for should help.mick wrote:Gotcha; I've seen anywhere from a couple hundred thousand to, as above, a couple million.
I guess the point of his question, though, is whether there is any arcaheological evidence for the Exodus and the 40 years.