zuker12 Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 So this is an argument I heard a long time ago. It posits that the Israelite excursion from Egypt happened, but it wasn't recorded in any egyptian histories, since the Pharaohs had a concept of royal shame - they wouldn't record anything that was "bad" or "shameful" to the Egyptian kingdom. This sounds like a perfect apologetic device - since the Israelite fleeing from egypt and wandering in the desert simply isn't anywhere in either historical or archeological record. I dont know if "pharaonic shame" is an actual element of ancient egyptian culture, but if it was so that would mean that there'd be outside proof so that this conclusion about royal shame could be made (which is AFAIK not the case with the Israelite excursion). At best, we end up at "we don't know". What are your thoughts on this, and did the ancient Egyptians actually have a concept of Pharaonic shame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Actually archeologist have uncovered a great deal of evidence on this matter. The Hebrews were Canaanites. They always had been but for some time the Hebrew and Canaanite region was a colony of Egypt. They didn't go down to Egypt. Egypt had expanded it's border and conquered the "Promised Land". However that ended when the Sea People invaded. The Sea People kicked both Egypt and the Hebrews out of the area. The Sea People settled in their newly conquered land known as Philista. The Sea people became known as Philistines. Egypt withdrew to defend their lands in the south. The Hebrews moved inland to build brand new cities in the hills and mountains. The Hebrews didn't conquer these cities. They moved into areas that had never been occupied before; areas that would eventually became Israel. The early books of the Bible are a myth. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zuker12 Posted May 31, 2015 Author Share Posted May 31, 2015 Is there even evidence of a concept of royal shame in Egypt? While that wont take us anywhere at least itd narrow down the possibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ Fuego ♦ Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 The concept of pharonic shame also ignores the enemies of Egypt, and that even if the Egyptian party line was that something huge like Exodus was to be hushed-up (like in the old 10 Commandments movie with Charlton Heston), their enemies would have noticed and written about Egypt getting their asses kicked by a god. Then there were all of the nations they allegedly walked through. None of it ever happened. The writers had no concept of archeology being able to figure out the truth, so they invented as they pleased. Embellishment is extremely common in cults. I also have a hunch that if the writers had made it seem too easy on the Israelites (like an almighty god simply wiping out a path for them to go through nations without having to fight, or beaming them over to the Promised Land) then they'd expect the same and not learn to fight. They had to keep a certain semblance of normal life in it. And maybe the many laws they have to follow are there to keep them preoccupied and not thinking about if any of it is true (and given the brilliance of many Jews, you'd think it would be a common thing to see them dumping the religion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Do we know what is considered shameful to an Egyptian king? Perhaps the Exodus tale would be a source of pride not shame to an Egyptian ruler? mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VacuumFlux Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 We do know that Egyptians had quite the history of erasing names on monuments, sometimes replacing them with the current ruler's. You'd leave the names of people you're related to and that you like alone, but when power changes hands, the things carved in stone get edited. This has caused problems for archeologists trying to write up a kings list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 The question still stands. Would this particular turn of events be shameful? Assuming it happened then why not just report it as the removal/destruction of some enemy force and count the loss of your own army as casualties of this war? This isn't shameful at all. This is basically what is said of the Hyksos as I recall. They were a problem that finally had to be dealt with. Why assume the Egyptians are making a cover-up? The Jews could be spinning their tales to make themselves look better (a "chosen" people may do such a thing) if not making things up entirely for whatever reasons. It's already known that the Exodus story makes little sense since, taken literally, the Jews are leaving Egypt to go to Egyptian held territory but they don't seem to realize this is the case. The Egyptians should have little trouble getting a second shot at these trouble makers after embarrassing them so badly but they quickly lose interest forever and allow them to take their occupied lands away from them without a peep. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts