The Passover Story - Myth?

[Channing]

I grew up a pretty observant Jew, and just took a lot of the biblical stories for granted. Once I went to Duke and took some religion courses, I really questioned the historical accuracy of a lot of what I had taken for granted (i.e. the Massada myth). I don't think that weakened my faith, as religion and reality are two very separate things.

However, the other night I was watching a show on the history channel (called Bible Battled, if anyone is interested in watching it ever) that was pretty interesting. The entire premise was that the Jews were not actually slaves in Egypt. Rather, they had been allowed to come and settle in a key strategic access point to Egypt (roughly the Northeastern corned of Egypt), and serve as mercenaries. They were to protect Egypt from invaders. This is not too implausible, and ancient Jews were pretty well known warriors (and the bible reads like a slasher film script). The program went on to say that the Jews ultimately became the equivalent of day laborers, and when they did not like that - they left.

The reason Pharoah chased them into the desert was not because he wanted his slaves back, but rather because the Jews ransacked an Egyptian town. This interpretation comes from Exodus 12:35/36 which says the Egyptians "gave" the Jews gold and silver for their journey - a highly unlikely scenario.

Anyway, I found the idea interesting, and was wondering if we have any Duke Div graduates who can comment on that theory one way or the other, or anyone else who has an idea.

Happy Passover!

[snowdenscold]

I can't comment on this particular episode - but in the past when I've watched a couple History channel programs that dealt with what the Bible said - I was fairly unimpressed. Some of them seemed to just be sensational conspiracy theories passed off as legitimate. As much as I love the History Channel (for WWII, Modern Marvels, etc.) I take any content dealing with religion with a grain of salt.

[duke74]

I grew up a pretty observant Jew, and just took a lot of the biblical stories for granted. Once I went to Duke and took some religion courses, I really questioned the historical accuracy of a lot of what I had taken for granted (i.e. the Massada myth). I don't think that weakened my faith, as religion and reality are two very separate things.

However, the other night I was watching a show on the history channel (called Bible Battled, if anyone is interested in watching it ever) that was pretty interesting. The entire premise was that the Jews were not actually slaves in Egypt. Rather, they had been allowed to come and settle in a key strategic access point to Egypt (roughly the Northeastern corned of Egypt), and serve as mercenaries. They were to protect Egypt from invaders. This is not too implausible, and ancient Jews were pretty well known warriors (and the bible reads like a slasher film script). The program went on to say that the Jews ultimately became the equivalent of day laborers, and when they did not like that - they left.

The reason Pharoah chased them into the desert was not because he wanted his slaves back, but rather because the Jews ransacked an Egyptian town. This interpretation comes from Exodus 12:35/36 which says the Egyptians "gave" the Jews gold and silver for their journey - a highly unlikely scenario.

Anyway, I found the idea interesting, and was wondering if we have any Duke Div graduates who can comment on that theory one way or the other, or anyone else who has an idea.

Happy Passover!


Saw that one too. There's also one out there with "the story" of natural events such as the 10 plagues - locusts, death of the first born, etc - and the "parting" of the Red Sea (which might not have been the Red Sea after all).

Interesting, but speculation.

And...A Zissen Pesach to all out there.

[rthomas]

Interesting, but speculation.


That's the whole basis of all religions.

[duke74]

That's the whole basis of all religions.

I'm not overly religious, but I assume a little sprinkling of faith (or "checking reason at the door") is a part of it as well?

[rthomas]

I'm not overly religious, but I assume a little sprinkling of faith (or "checking reason at the door") is a part of it as well?

speculation, faith...road to the same thing?

[snowdenscold]

Saw that one too. There's also one out there with "the story" of natural events such as the 10 plagues - locusts, death of the first born, etc - and the "parting" of the Red Sea (which might not have been the Red Sea after all).

Interesting, but speculation.

And...A Zissen Pesach to all out there.

I mean, look, people will always try to come up with some supernatural explanation for 'miracles' depicted by religion. Some are more legitimate than others. Whether or not you believe 'super'-natural events can even occur in the first place also plays an important role.

But for example, people try to explain away the Red Sea crossing by stating they weren't actual in the Red Sea and that the water was only a foot or two deep - that it was really more marshy than anything. OK, that's a great theory and all, but then you have to explain how the Eygptian army drowned in it. You might as well just accept it as a miracle or reject the written account outright. Trying to find some middle ground often just ends up not making sense.

[billybreen]

I mean, look, people will always try to come up with some supernatural explanation for 'miracles' depicted by religion. Some are more legitimate than others. Whether or not you believe 'super'-natural events can even occur in the first place also plays an important role.

But for example, people try to explain away the Red Sea crossing by stating they weren't actual in the Red Sea and that the water was only a foot or two deep - that it was really more marshy than anything. OK, that's a great theory and all, but then you have to explain how the Eygptian army drowned in it. You might as well just accept it as a miracle or reject the written account outright. Trying to find some middle ground often just ends up not making sense.

In my Old Testament class in high school, we were taught that it was actually the Reed Sea, which is closer to the path taken out of Egypt. I rejected the written account outright anyway.

[snowdenscold]

In my Old Testament class in high school, we were taught that it was actually the Reed Sea, which is closer to the path taken out of Egypt. I rejected the written account outright anyway.

And there are debates as to the actual locations, and whether or not coral formations shaped like chariot wheels found in some places are legitimate or not. The point is, supernatural miracles have no need to be explained naturally. If you believe God really drowned the pursuing Egyptian army, then there's no need to worry about whether the water was 2 or 20 or 200 feet deep.

[duke74]

And there are debates as to the actual locations, and whether or not coral formations shaped like chariot wheels found in some places are legitimate or not. The point is, supernatural miracles have no need to be explained naturally. If you believe God really drowned the pursuing Egyptian army, then there's no need to worry about whether the water was 2 or 20 or 200 feet deep.

Hence my "faith" point above.