Archaeologica.org

But archaeology dismisses both Moses and the exodus as fictions.

Almost every historical fact mentioned in Exodus has
at some time or other been called in question; but it is certain that all
investigation has hitherto only tended to establish the veracity of the
narrator. A comparison with other writers and an examination of the
monuments confirm, or at least do not contradict, the most material
statements of this book. Thus, for instance, Manetho's story of the Hyksos,
questionable as much of it is, and differently as it has been interpreted by
different writers, points at least to some early connection between the
Israelites and the Egyptians, and is corroborative of the fact implied in the
177
Pentateuch that, at the time of the Israelitish sojourn, Egypt was ruled by a
foreign dynasty. SEE EGYPT. Manetho speaks, too, of strangers from the
East who occupied the eastern part of Lower Egypt; and his account
shows that the Israelites had become a numerous and formidable people.

The ten plagues are physically, many of them, what might be expected in
Egypt, although in their intensity and in their rapid succession they are
clearly supernatural. Even the order in which they occur is an order in
which physical causes are allowed to operate. The corruption of the river is
followed by the plague of frogs. From the dead frogs are bred the gnats
and flies; from these came the murrain among the cattle land the bolls on
men; and so on. Most of the plagues, indeed, though of course in a much
less aggravated form, and without such succession, are actually
experienced at this day in Egypt. Of the plague of locusts it is expressly
remarked that "before them were no such locusts, neither after them shall
be such." And all travelers in Egypt have observed swarms of locusts,
brought generally by a southwest wind (Denon, however, mentions their
coming with an east wind), end in the winter or spring of the year. This last
fact agrees also with our narrative. Lepsius speaks of being in a "regular
snow-drift of locusts," which came from the desert in hundreds of
180
thousands to the valley. "At the edge of the fruitful plain," he says, "they
fell down in showers." This continued for six days, indeed in weaker flights
much uonger. He also saw hail in Egypt. In January, 1843, he and his party
were surprised by a storm. "Suddenly," he writes, "the storm grew to a
tremendous hurricane, such as I have never seen in Europe, and hail fell
upon us in such masses as almost to turn day into night." He notices, too,
an extraordinary cattle murrain "which carried off 40,000 head of cattle"

The arrangements of the tabernacle, described in the second part of
Exodus, likewise throw a favorable light on the historical authenticity of
the preceding events; and the least tenable of all the objections against it
are, that the architectural arrangements of the tabernacle were too artificial,
and the materialas and richness too costly and precious for the condition
and position of the Jews at that early period, etc. But the critics seem to
have overlooked the fact that the Israelites of that period were a people
who had come out from Egypt, a people possessing wealth, Egyptian
culture and arts, which we admire even nmow, in the works which have
descended to us from ancient Egypt; so that it cannot seem strange to see
the Hebrews in possession of the materials or artistic knowledge requisite
for the construction of the tabernacle.

The extremely simple and sober style and views throughout the whole
narrative afford a sure guarantee for its authenticity and originality. Not a
vestige of a poetical hand can b e discovered in Exodus 18; not even the
most sceptical critics can deny that we tread here on purely historical
ground. The same may fairly be maintained of chapter 20-23. How is it
then possible that one and the same book should contain so strange a
182
mixture of truth and fiction as its opponeemts assert to be found in it? The
most striking proofs against such an assumption are, in particular, the
accounts, such as in Exodus 32 sq., where the most vehement complaints
are made against the Israelites, where the high-priest of the covenantpeople
participates most shamefully in the idolatry of his people. All these
incidents are described in plaen and clear terms, without the least vestige of
later embellishmemets and false extolling of former ages. The
Pentatemmch, some critics assert, is written for the interest and in favor of
the hierarchy ; but can there be more anti-hierarchical details than are
founed in that book? The whole representation indicates the strictest
impartiality and truth.

another misleading statement as archaeology doesn't dismiss them, only the people who do not believe and use wrong interpretations dismiss them.

Manetho speaks, too, of strangers from the
East who occupied the eastern part of Lower Egypt; and his account
shows that the Israelites had become a numerous and formidable people.

you boy Kitchen was on National Geographic last night with a story about the plagues. Oddly enough the first nine were scientifically based but even he didn't try to pull Jacobovici's "gas leak from the river" routine!

You are incorrect.

As mainstream archaeology now credits Finkelstein's findings that the Israelites arose indigenously in the hill country of Canaan at the end of the Late Bronze Age

Far too many people forget about the investigation and thinking before exprsesing an opinion.

you mean the minimalist school credits finkelstein. i have shown him to be incorrect and to be using limited data for his conclusions which undermines anything he says now. you can devote yourself to him and quote him all you want but he is no longer a viable source.