Moses/Resistance toward Anti-God Regimes: Was Exodus About Religious War/Mercenaries?

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Concerning why I was writing this, there was another discussion elsewhere on how literal one was meant to take the Exodus account when they left Egypt in Exodus 13-14 - and the following was shared:


Instead of 186,400 fighting men in one camp, you have 185 chiefs and 1400 men. The total would be 598 chiefs and 5550 men. The author seems to have made the mistake that this was all the people instead of just the fighting men, so the total would be probably closer to 20-30 thousand with women and children plus the mixed multitude.

Another site translates eleph as families, which would lower the total to 598 family groups with a total of 5550 fighting men.
The Population of the Israelite Exodus

Why I find the larger numbers hard to believe: not because I don't think YHWH could care for that many. We may see for ourselves in the next exodus, which is prophesied to be much larger than the first. He didn't save Israel by their might, but by his. See Deut 7:1,7 and Deut 11:23 about their small size as a nation. The tiny nations holding only small parts of the promised land were larger than the whole tribe of Israel.

What kind of miracle would it be if an army of over six hundred thousand took over the promised land where most towns held no more than a few thousand people and a few hundred soldiers? When you have only about 5550-7000 total fighters, that is another matter.
[/QUOTE]

I felt what was shared had good considerations on the issue..

Some scholars, interestingly enough, have advocated the dynamic that the Hebrews may have been smaller in number - and yet known to be warriors/mercenaries and that being the reason the Egyptians were afraid of them in time when they began to grow....


Again, the argument some scholars believe is that they are also in this area fighting as mercenary soldiers in the Egyptian army. Their job would be to serve as a first line of defense against invaders from the north. These ‘habiru’ were mercenaries, they were soldiers of fortune and would fight for who ever it was in their best interest at that time to fight for. And to others, it seems like they had a good thing going in Egypt for a few hundred years. But eventually,when a new pharaoh rises to power, some scholars believe he is Seti I, and he does not seem to care much for the Israelites.
Exodus 1:9-10, “And he said to his people, ‘Look the Israelite people are much too numerous for us. Let us deal shrewdly with them, so that they may not increase. Otherwise in the event of war they may join our enemies in fighting against us and rise from the ground.’ ” 11 Therefore they set taskmasters over them to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh supply cities, Pithom and Raamses. 12 But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were in dread of the children of Israel. 13 So the Egyptians made the children of Israel serve with rigor. 14 And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage—in mortar, in brick, and in all manner of service in the field. All their service in which they made them serve was with rigor.
Richard A Gabriel, PhD and author of Military History of Ancient Israel said the following:

“The sheer location of where the habiru are in the land of Goshen, sitting astride the key route of invasion or defense of Egypt, probably convinced Seti himself, a professional warrior that something had to be done either to remove them, or weaken their influence, or at least remove them from their geographical area. Thus it is that Seti becomes, most historians think, the pharaoh in the Bible who first sets the Israelites to physical labor.....There was no slavery in Egypt right from the beginning until the end of the empire. Well, if in fact they were not slaves set to labor, what were they? The answer is corvee labor. That is the term used to describe, essentially conscripted civilian workers to work on public works projects. These people were not slaves, they were paid and they were well treated, and we know that from the military medical texts which stations military doctors with the workmen in order to make sure they are well-treated and well fed.””

I really do find it intruiging to consider that they were Mercenaries out of Egypt...


I do think that it makes A LOT of sense when seeing the history of Abraham himself (like rescuing Lot in Exodus 14/routing multiple armies with a force of 318 TRAINED men) or Jacob's sons destroying an entire city (as with the case of Dinah in Genesis 34 when they put the entire city to the sword) or even Jacob's brother Esau in his ability for fight/the warriors with him in Genesis 33 - the ability to fight and the fight well was not something that suddenly developed AFTER the Exodus from Egypt.

And as Moses was a prince of Egypt who was able to fight off others raiding Midianite herds (due to his background/training), it's hard not to see a military perspective present in the text.

For some excellent reads on the issue I've been thankful for:


There are many others besides that - but those are among some of the best reads/references I've seen on the issue...good food for thought in how we actually choose to read the Exodus Account and the ways that it is (as another scholar noted) a study in resistance toward anti-God regimes. Of course, it gets even more fascinating when considering the ways that the Hebrews as mercenaries in Egypt takes on an entirely different light if remembering how Joseph in Egypt helped to bring monotheism to the Egyptian Empire for a good time and that led to a power struggle dynamic when the new Pharaoh arose...


Outside of that, the mercernary mindset makes a lot of sense and I do think others should consider it more..

Whether slaves or not, the demotion from soldier to common physical worker probably signaled to the Israelites that it was time to leave Egypt....

And this goes with the number dynamic in Exodus when considering how a para-military force such as the Hebrews in Egypt didn't need to be in big numbers in general. The Bible says that 600,000 men left Egypt. …

Recently, Jim Hoffmeier discussed a mistranslation of the word “elith.” ...specifically, archaeologist Jim Hoffmeier of the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School says the number is probably far fewer, due to a mistranslation dating thousands of years. For the original Hebrew says there were 600 elith.

Hoffmeier notes “The word elith can be translated 3 different ways: it can be translated thousand. Elith can also be translated to the clan. The third option is that it’s a military unit, which I think is a more plausible scenario.” According to Hoffmeier’s interpretation, instead of 600,000 men and their families, there were as few as 5000.

For more, one can go here:


With the History Network's presentation on the issue, although I don't agree with all aspects of the program the presentation came on (from the History Network entitled "Bible Battles") - specifically when it comes to doubting the crossing of the Red Sea - I must admit that the argument for the Hebrews being warriors was noteworthy....especially when seeing how getting out of Egypt and facing the Amalekites in Exodus 19 happened and they were prepared to fight/do battle effectively.

Dr. Richard Gabriel's take on the Exodus account is something that seems noteworthy when it comes to military history
. The theory of Israel being military trained seems to make sense (as it concerns them being small yet efficient) because it was the Israelites who actually enslaved themselves in a manner of speaking. They was told to go back to Canaan but were living happy in the Land of Goshen after Joseph's day when they were told to stay for awhile during the famine.. So, when they wanted to leave, the Pharoah did not want them to, whether they were slaves, workers or soldiers.

Does anyone here feel that there is merit in the Exodus account being reconsidered as a military text - and that the numbers may be smaller than others wish to acknowledge? What do you feel the Exodus account represents when it comes to the themes present within it?

moses.jpg
 
Last edited:

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Gxg (G²);65093072 said:
...the mercernary mindset makes a lot of sense and I do think others should consider it more..

Whether slaves or not, the demotion from soldier to common physical worker probably signaled to the Israelites that it was time to leave Egypt....

And this goes with the number dynamic in Exodus when considering how a para-military force such as the Hebrews in Egypt didn't need to be in big numbers in general. The Bible says that 600,000 men left Egypt. …

Recently, Jim Hoffmeier discussed a mistranslation of the word “elith.” ...specifically, archaeologist Jim Hoffmeier of the Trinity Evangelical Divinity School says the number is probably far fewer, due to a mistranslation dating thousands of years. For the original Hebrew says there were 600 elith.

Hoffmeier notes “The word elith can be translated 3 different ways: it can be translated thousand. Elith can also be translated to the clan. The third option is that it’s a military unit, which I think is a more plausible scenario.” According to Hoffmeier’s interpretation, instead of 600,000 men and their families, there were as few as 5000.

For more, one can go here:


For anyone wondering on why I feel the numbers are smaller than we think with the Exodus Account....and on why I wonder on how one would be able to honestly say Israel was excessively massive and yet not tackle certain scriptures.

Exodus 1:7-9 states the Israelites had multiplied so steadily that the Pharaoh complained that "the Israelites have become much too numerous for us." But the pharaoh may have been describing how he perceived the Israelites, based on his fear and hatred of the foreigners. In contrast, Deuteronomy 7:7 states Israel was "the fewest of all peoples" (Exodus 23:29-30). Moreover, it is difficult to visualize any army over 600,000 being panic-stricken at the prospect of being pursued by only 600 chariots (Exodus 14:5-12).

Taking it further, Numbers 3:43 reports 22, 273 firstborn males in Israel - and this would suggest that only 22, 273 mothers had borne sons. Taking into account the many sons under age twenty, there would have to have been at least one million males in total. The implication, absurd as it may be, is that each mother had at least 44 sons...

But when looking at the data another way, if there were 22,273 firstborn sons, each of whom had an average of five brothers, the total number of men would have been around 122, 638, a figure still far too low to reconcile with the census results in Numbers 1. If there were 603, 550 men-at-arms, the majority of whom would likely have been married, how is it that there were only 22, 273 firstborn sons?

One could attempt to adjust the estimated total number of births per mother by assuming that many households were polygamous, resulting in more mothers than firstborn sons. But polygamy was not widely practiced among commoners, and few slaves could afford more than one wife.

More could be said....but ultimately, whatever we make of all the difficulties described, it is clear that the ancient Israelites had ways of dealing with numbers that are perplexing to us - the Bible is an ancient book from an ancient culture, and we cannot assume that it handles data in the same way a modern census-taker would. And in seeing that, it is important that we always realize the Biblical account is neither erroneous nor deliberately misleading - we simply don't understand how the Israelites conducted and reported either a military or a Levitical census....or an Exodus.

There are good points that both sides of the debate do have going for them.

On the side of those saying the Exodus account was within the millions, I thought one of the best resources was The Exodus Route: The population of the Exodus Jews - The Number of the Exodus - How many Hebrews were in the Exodus - Biblical Archeology

And on the side of smaller numbers, from the article entitled "The Number of Israelites in the Exodus" ( ) - as seen in Biblearchaeology.org:

At the heart of the issue is the meaning of the Hebrew word eleph. It is usually translated “thousand,” but has a complex semantic history. The word is etymologically connected with “head of cattle,” like the letter aleph, implying that the term was originally applied to the village or population unit in a pastoral-agricultural society. From that it came to mean the quota supplied by one village or “clan” (Hebrew Mišpāḥā ) for the military muster (Malamat 1967: 135). Originally the contingent was quite small, five to fourteen men in the quota lists of Numbers 1 and 26, as shown by Mendenhall (1958). Finally the word became a technical term for a military unit of considerable size, which together with the use of the same word for the number 1,000 has tended to obscure its broader semantic range.

....I agree that 2 to 3 million Israelites are too many. Additional support for the smaller number leaving Egypt comes from Deut 4:38, 7:1, and 11:23 which God basically says that "the seven nations you will encounter in Canaan will be greater than you." Archaeologically there is no evidence of a large populace ever having existed in the land. If there had been 2 million Israelites, there would have to have been 14 to 15 million in residence before the arrival of Israel to have exceeded their numbers. And that was never possible. The land could not support that many.​

For other places that seemed to do some excellent studies on the subject:

  • How many came out of the exodus of Egypt - Ancient Hebrew Research Center ..


As said there (for excerpt):

RSV Exodus 12:37 And the people of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children.

According to this passage 600,000 men descended from Yaacov left Egypt. If each man is married with the average of 5 children, this brings the entire population of Israel to 6,000,000. This is not including the mixed multitude that came out with them (Exodus 12:38) or the flocks and herds that they also brought out. This large number of people creates a few problems. The first is the size of this "army" (Exodus 12:41 - hosts meaning army. Also Exodus 12:37 where the men are called "gevoriym" or warriors) compared to the size of Pharaohs army of 600 chariots (Exodus 14:7) which brought fear to the Israelites. How could 600 chariots be considered a threat to 600,000 warriors of Israel? Equally puzzling is the fear the Israelites felt at entering the promised land where each city probably contained no more than 5,000 warriors compared to their 600,000.

Another problem is the simple logistics to supply, feed, water and move such a large number. According to the Quartermaster General in the army, it would take 1,500 tons of food, 4,000 tons of wood as fuel and 11,000,000 gallons of water each day to supply the basic needs of this group. Another problem is the location of the Latrine.

RSV Deuteronomy 23:12,13 "You shall have a place outside the camp and you shall go out to it; and you shall have a stick with your weapons; and when you sit down outside, you shall dig a hole with it, and turn back and cover up your excrement.

A camp of this size would be approximately five miles by five miles square assuming only 1,000 square feet per family. One located in the center of the camp would require a hike of 2.5 miles to use the restroom.

Another problem is the estimated population of the nation of Israel compared to the estimated population of Egypt at this time. It is estimated that the whole population of Egypt at the time of the exodus was between 2 and 5 million. According to the above estimates of the population of Israel, the people of Israel would be the population of Egypt.

Another problem is the large number of people is not possible with the number of generations available from Levi to the exodus. The average number of children born to the descendents of Yaacov is three to five. If we assume that the twelve children of Yaacov had 5 children, and the generation of Kohath, Amram and Moses each had 5 children, the maximum number of people (men, women and children) descended from Yaacov at the time of the exodus would be approximately 7500.

The Hebrew text of Exodus 12:41; "about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children" reads "c'shesh me'ot eleph rag'liy hagebariym l'vad mitaph". This could also be translated as "about six hundred chiefs (eleph) on foot are the warriors apart from the children". We now have a group of warriors that would find the 600 chariots of Pharoah a formidable army. If we also assume that each chief (head of the family) included a wife and 5 children we have 6,000 people correlating the previous calculation of descendents from Levi to the exodus.

By changing the translation of the word "eleph" to chiefs will also fit the census records of numbers.

RSV Numbers 1:21 the number of the tribe of Reuben was forty-six thousand five hundred.

The Hebrew of this passage could also be translated as; "The number for the tribe of Rueben is six and 40 (46) chiefs and 5 hundred". With this alternate translation we have 46 chiefs and 500 family members. When we apply this method to the remainder of the tribes we come to a total number of 598 chiefs and 5,550 others (The standard translation of the complete census is 603,550, if the 3 is changed to a five, a possible error we have 605,550 very close to the 598 (2 short of 600) chiefs and 5550 people. Note, the Septuagint (LXX) does have a change of 5 to a 4 so the error is not out of the realm of possibilities).

Other good places for study would be Logistics of the Exodus - Tekton Apologetics Ministries

Numbers 1:19 says “As the LORD commanded Moses, so he numbered them in the wilderness of Sinai” and Numbers 2: 32 says “These are those which were numbered of the children of Israel by the house of their fathers: all those that were numbered of the camps throughout their hosts were six hundred thousand and three thousand and five hundred and fifty.” Furthermore, Numbers 1:20-46 says that the number of men from each tribe who were 20
years old or older was as follows:

46, 500 men from Reuben.
59, 300 men from Simeon
45, 650 men from Gad
74, 600 men from Judah
54, 400 men from Issachar
57, 400 men from Zebulun
40, 500 men from Ephraim
32, 200 men from Manasseh
35, 400 men from Benjamin
62, 700 men from Dan
41, 500 men from Asher
53, 400 men from Naphtali

It is the case that Numbers 2:32 includes all of the Children of Israel, whereas Numbers 1:20-46 is stated in terms of men over 20 years of age. Of course, since the sums are identical, the figure 603,550 must be referring in both instances to the entire number Israelites, i.e., the men and those in their household, not just the men by themselves. The figure for each tribe
as recorded in Numbers 1 ends in a zero, which seems to be a first hint that the term “number” is not a simple census (head count). Rather, it is something else, since it is unlikely that each of the twelve tribes would all have a total number of people divisible by ten.

It would seem wise to note that the term “number” must have a broader meaning in addition to “taking a census,” and it does since it is the redemption value of the Children of Israel, as revealed by Exodus 30:11-15, which says “And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel after their number, then shall they give every man a ransom for his soul unto the LORD, when thou numberest them; that there be no plague among them, when thou numberest them. This they shall give, every one that passeth among them that are numbered, half a shekel after the shekel of the sanctuary: (a shekel is twenty gerahs:) an half shekel shall be the offering of the LORD. Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and above, shall give an offering unto the LORD. The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel, when they give an offering unto the LORD, to make an atonement for
your souls.”

Logically, since the redemption value for each individual was half a shekel, and a shekel was defined as 20 gerahs, every person would have had a redemption value of 10 gerahs. And the redemption value (or “number”) of the Children of Israel was 603,550 gerahs, which would indicate that there were 60,355 Israelites who came out of Egypt in the Exodus.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Gxg (G²);65093072 said:
There are many others besides that - but those are among some of the best reads/references I've seen on the issue...good food for thought in how we actually choose to read the Exodus Account and the ways that it is (as another scholar noted) a study in resistance toward anti-God regimes. Of course, it gets even more fascinating when considering the ways that the Hebrews as mercenaries in Egypt takes on an entirely different light if remembering how Joseph in Egypt helped to bring monotheism to the Egyptian Empire for a good time and that led to a power struggle dynamic when the new Pharaoh arose...


Outside of that, the mercernary mindset makes a lot of sense and I do think others should consider it more..
For more info on the ways that establishing monotheism in Egypt was a big reason for the Egyptian suppression of the Hebrews....

One of the OT stories that I've always enjoyed (and possibly, seen as the best one altogether) is the story of Joseph (Genesis 39-50 , Exodus 1:7-9 , Psalm 105:16-18 , Acts 7:9-11 / Acts 7) . Already noted by many throughout church history as being a type of Christ, everytime I read of his journey and how the Lord took him for provision...to the pit..and to the palace, I must stop/pause and see how I need to change my life.

Does anyone know of the Films they'd often have on TNT back in the mid 90's? e When I was younger, I remeber growing up seeing movies on the man ...as seen here:​


JOSEPH - HOLY BIBLE - YouTube

When I would sit/watch the films with my mother (as she was a single mom), I used to think back/consider "What was life life for the man?" while he was in Egypt...as it concerns the details that the pages of scripture may not go into fully due to the focus being upon what Joseph did of greater importance.​


That said, I was going through the bookstore years ago and noticed a book I had considered buying after investigating some of the background involved in it---entitled The Hebrew Pharaohs of Egypt: The Secret Lineage of the Patriarch Joseph . To read the online version of it (although it may not be complete) one can go here to GoogleBooks and see it for themselves.


864305-L.jpg


Essentially, the book is a reinterpretation of Egyptian and biblical history that shows the Patriarch Joseph and Yuya, a vizier of the eighteenth dynasty king Tuthmosis IV, to be the same person...in light of the king's mixed background and the rise of monotheism during that king's dynasty.



Some of my interest in the history of Egyptian culture and the Jews has been around for awhile, especially in light of my own views on the subject of cultural diffusion and witnessing the ways in which the Hebrews themselves were taken care of by Gentiles---with specific Hebrews leading the way in becoming adapted to many aspects of Gentile culture.

I've been very thankful for having some very special experiences with Egyptian Christians after studying alongside my brethren at Messianic fellowship on what the scriptures often said about Egypts' culture/heritage in the Lord (as shared here in #1 , #37 , #25/ and here in #228 ). It has been wild to see the ways in which the Lord was truly using others from all parts of the world to glorify the Messiah. In light of the ways that Joseph came into power in Egypt and the Hebrews lived in peace with the Egyptians for an extensive amount of time, I thought that many of the things the author noted seemed to be spot on with showing how Joseph was really an historical figure---even though I may disagree sharply with his conclusions/assumptions on a host of other things.

As Joseph was used by the Lord to save both the Egyptians and the Hebrews for perishing physically, I would not be surprised to see the dynamic occur historically if Joseph had possibly used his influence to try to reform Egypt in other ways...specifically in regards to turning others toward Monotheism/faith in the God he served. He was already acknowledged as having the Spirit of the Lord within him when Pharoah saw his wisdom:
Genesis 41:38
So Pharaoh asked them, “Can we find anyone like this man, one in whom is the spirit of God39 Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, “Since God has made all this known to you, there is no one so discerning and wise as you.
Genesis 41:37-39
If Joseph used his influence to later influence the rest of his culture to come into obediance to the One who saved them all, it would not be surprising..and indeed, it'd make sense as to why other pharoah's may've disliked him.

As one reviewer said of the book:
While the theories of his other books of this genre (namely that Jesus and Moses were Pharoahs) are far-fetched in my opinion, this theory of Joseph and Yuya being the same person appears spot-on. The details fit together almost as perfectly as one could expect considering the language and culture barrier between Hebrew and Egyptian. I am convinced.
Drawing on the Bible, the Koran and various ancient Egyptian sources, the author places the events of Exodus in the time of Ramses I. This new interpretation of history may be compared with the work of Velikovsky although their conclusions are not the same; Velikovsky identifies Ramses I with Necho I of the end of the 7th century B.C.


I don't know who is correct, but Osman certainly provides a great read in this book as he identifies the biblical Joseph with Yuya, grand vizier of the 18th dynasty pharaoh Tuthmose IV. From this follows the introduction of monotheism by queen Tiye and her son Akhenaten. This explains the animosity shown towards Akhenaten and his religion by the later pharaoh Horemheb, whom Osman identifies as the oppressor king of the book of Exodus.
This book consists of two parts: A Father To Pharaoh which details the aforementioned history, and Notes And Sources, which contains the evidence and an interesting
Followers of faith who read this book and want to appreciate the depth the Osman's hypothesis must be willing to open their mind to think beyond traditional words heard in synagogue, mosques, temples and churches.

Early on Ahmed Osman clearly states his position as a person of faith and his cultural context and scholarly bias. Then he plunges into the Joseph narrative, literally word by word according to the Koran and the Hebrew Bible. I read the majority of the book while traveling in Egypt, which of course brought rich meaning and life to the pages. Not everyone can do that, but the book is still worth the read. Furthermore, in today's information virtual world, much of the artifacts used to build Osman's case are visible on the Internet from museum and university web sites.

Osman traces the lineage of a royal birthright from Abraham and Sarah's brief stay in Egypt. He follows it as Esau surrenders the birthright to Jacob for a meal, and eventually links it to Joseph and the rise of monotheism in the 17th Dynasty of Ancient Egypt. Along this largely unheralded tale Osman makes many nice and very neat ties that have possibility. Some theologians, including myself, recognize the probability of Osman's theory.
It clearly explains the deliberate obliteration of references to the “heretic” king and his successors by the last eighteenth dynasty pharaoh, Horemheb, who was the oppressor king in the Book of Exodus.

The wealth of detailed evidence from Egyptian, biblical, and Koranic sources place the time of the departure of the Hebrews from Egypt during the short reign of Ramses I, the first king of the nineteenth dynasty.

I am certain that many who see the work will be quick to focus on what the man believes personally and may dismiss anything of what he has said simply because he had other conclusions that were not Biblical---though I think it's a negative thing whenever that occurs since all truth is God's Truth, IMHO....and whether or not someone agrees fully with my theological perspective has no real bearing on simple facts. It doesn't take one being a believer, in order to acknowledge where a historical individual was referenced in scripture...nor does it take one believing in the Lord in order to acknowledge where certain biblical events did indeed occur.

For those involved in the fields of archeology, both Christian and Non-Christian, I'm thankful for the ways they seek to confirm what the scriptures note--such as what has often gone down with giving evidence for the Exodus of Egypt (as seen here , here , here, here and here). For other examples, I'm reminded of what has been discussed on differing areas, such as the History network, when it comes to interesting theories to consider with the background of Biblical events. ....
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Gxg (G²);65093363 said:
As Joseph was used by the Lord to save both the Egyptians and the Hebrews for perishing physically, I would not be surprised to see the dynamic occur historically if Joseph had possibly used his influence to try to reform Egypt in other ways...specifically in regards to turning others toward Monotheism/faith in the God he served. H.
Continuing from before..

To give more info that may help clarify some things,

There've been many discussions by scholars that've noted how Joseph was actually around during the era of the Hyskos control of Egypt (as discussed here). As one group of scholars said best:


FAMILY IN EGYPT (GEN. 46–50).

The brothers returned to Palestine and brought their father to Egypt.His meeting with the Pharaoh involved some verbal sparring to determine who was the elder of the two. Because Jacob was the elder, he had to pronounce a blessing on the Pharaoh (47:7–12). Some see this as evidence that the Egyptian ruler was a Semite, as was Jacob, because a native Egyptian would not seek blessing from a Semite—he would have instead held him in contempt. This would have taken place, then, during the Hyksos rule (1720–1570 B.C.E.), because they were Semites.

Genesis ends with the blessing of Jacob’s sons (Gen. 49), the story of Jacob’s death and burial, and, finally, Joseph’s death, preceded by his request not to be buried in Egypt (Gen. 50).
Of course, there's alot of debate as it concerns the chronology of events and whether the Hyskos were truly the ones ruling Egypt when Joseph entered the scene/possibly began cultural exchanges in the name of the Lord. And for other places for reference:

Others have had differing thoughts on Joseph's identity - some claiming him to be Imhotep...


Due to debates on when Joseph lived (as well as where he would best fit historically---and for the unsaved, debating if he even existed), it has been hard to find consensus across the wall on the person of Joseph...and if anyone has any possible theories or information that they feel would help to connect the dots, I'd greatly appreciate it:)

But I truly do feel that what He did as a person in establishing monotheism - if taking the text of Exodus and Genesis seriously - is something that makes a world of difference when seeing the ways that new Egyptian politics came into being. And why God, when delivering the people from Egypt, had to establish His dominance by demolishing ALL of the Egyptian gods (polytheism) in their powers and abilities.....it was essentially a showdown on who the REAL God of the world was - and the God of the Hebrews avenging himself on the Egyptians who suppressed them.

The plagues reveal many things, but their most impressive theme is "God’s Glory."

  • The First Plague: Water turned to blood (Exodus 7:14-24) - and Major gods insulted were Osiris and Hapi, spirit of the Nile....as well as Khnum, guardian of the Nile.
  • The Second Plague: Frog infestation (Exodus 8:1-15) and the god insulted was Heqet (who had a frog head)
  • The Third Plague: Lice (Exodus 8:16-32)...and the god insulted was Geb, who was "god" of the earth or vegetation, father of Osiris and husband of Nut...and the other god was Aker, god of the earth.
  • The Fourth Plague: Large Insects (Exodus 8:20-32).
  • The Fifth Plague: Death to Animals Outdoors (Exodus 9:1-7) - The Apis bull was considered the sacred animal of the God Ptah. Only one sacred Apis bull; twenty-eight distinctive marks that identified him...and Hathor, goddess of love & beauty represented by a cow.
  • The Sixth Plague: Boils on Man and Beast (Exodus 9:8-12) - This insulted Sekmet, a healing goddess (also goddess of war).
  • The Seventh Plague: Hail (9:13-35) - The plague devastates except in Goshen (Genesis 9: 22-26) and it insults Seth, Patron of: winds, storms, chaos, evil, darkness, strength, war, conflict, Upper Egypt...and it also insulted Nut, the sky goddess.
There were many other gods besides those listed who were harmed in the plagues - more here, for a basic review:




g.jpg






plagues1.jpg

"A man can no more diminish God’s glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling 'darkness' on the wall of his cell." - C. S. Lewis.

When considering all of those factors as have been mentioned, it is an issue for me to consider how the entire text of Exodus was truly a military text that showed the God of the Hebrews (trained in war) rising up to demolish the Egyptian gods/goddesses in order to prove who the real God is - going as far back as what occurred with Joseph in Egypt and continuing into the era of the Exodus when Moses was made into a military commander to deliver His people from a system that was opposed to Theism/Monotheism itself...

And with why there was a fight that occurred with the rise of monotheism in Egypt and the Hebrews leaving, the concept of ethnical momotheism has to be considered when it comes the reality that many cultures believed in monotheism - except they felt that the being they worshipped was the sole one whom all should worship - and if not doing things on their terms, there'd be issue. For them, it was never about having many deities (even though things could easily be placed within the realm of monolatry and henotheism - #36 #86 /#89 - when seeing how one being was Supreme even as other beings existed)....and each camp holding to ethnical monotheism would inevitably have battles centered around showing whose monotheism was truly the "right" way - by defaulting making all other forms of monotheism "wrong" - leading to many battles for dominance so as to ensure others were interacting on the right basis even if others differed while having the same principle (i.e. believing in monotheism/all needing to interact by the same rules and yet not thinking that monotheism practiced by one group would lead to playing the same as other monotheists in whom they worshipped).

AS said elsewhere:
If anyone disagrees, that's fine - and If anyone has any thoughts, I'd love to hear sometime....:)
 

Attachments

  • blog10plagues.jpg
    blog10plagues.jpg
    327 KB · Views: 1,706
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Gxg (G²);65093072 said:
Does anyone here feel that there is merit in the Exodus account being reconsidered as a military text - and that the numbers may be smaller than others wish to acknowledge? What do you feel the Exodus account represents when it comes to the themes present within it?

moses.jpg

For other good reviews on the issue, one can go here:

  • Battles B. C. (history) - Serious Christian


For different religions that value the story of Moses and the Exodus, from Christianity to Judaism or Islam, it is something that I think needs to be discussed and understood if trying to make sense of the Biblical text and the ways that it seems the characters in the account all seemed to have a fighting background. For those in Islam, already seen as being very militant, it is interesting to see how they connect with Judaism in its hatred for idolatry and the ways that both did not take kindly to being oppressed by other groups - and the same goes for Christianity to good degrees.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I don't have much to add, this is a lot to take in.
Not having much to add, of course, is still a matter of having something to add - not everything was covered or meant to be covered (even though the goal was to be comprehensive). But I am curious as to what was a lot to take in - the concept/main question of "Does anyone here feel that there is merit in the Exodus account being reconsidered as a military text - and that the numbers may be smaller than others wish to acknowledge? What do you feel the Exodus account represents when it comes to the themes present within it?"
 
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟55,644.00
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
Gxg (G²);65093400 said:
One of the OT stories that I've always enjoyed (and possibly, seen as the best one altogether) is the story of Joseph (Genesis 39-50 , Exodus 1:7-9 , Psalm 105:16-18 , Acts 7:9-11 / Acts 7) . Already noted by many throughout church history as being a type of Christ, everytime I read of his journey and how the Lord took him for provision...to the pit..and to the palace, I must stop/pause and see how I need to change my life.

It might interest you to know that Baha'i history begins with the story of Joseph which appears in the Qur'an as well. Mullah Husayn had been promised by his teacher that when he found the Promised One He would teach him the meaning of the Surah of Joseph. When Mullah Husayn met the Bab, the latter unasked began to reveal the Qayyumu'l-Asma, His commentary on the Surah of Joseph. There Joseph is presented as the paradigmatic Manifestation of God, and the story of Joseph is the story of all true religion.

Essentially, the book is a reinterpretation of Egyptian and biblical history that shows the Patriarch Joseph and Yuya, a vizier of the eighteenth dynasty king Tuthmosis IV, to be the same person...in light of the king's mixed background and the rise of monotheism during that king's dynasty.

Are you aware that this same author argues that Jesus was actually King Tut?

He's trying to reconcile the Biblical narrative with the Qur'anic one, an exercise I don't find terrifically helpful because I don't think either text can relied on for historical evidence. Mind you, I think there was an exodus but I think it involved a relatively small number of people. If there was indeed a historical Joseph, I think it likely he became a the Prime Minister during the reign of the Hyksos since the Hyksos themselves appear to have been originally Palestinians. It would also explain why the Hebrew people would have been badly treated once the Hyksos are kicked out.
 
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
It might interest you to know that Baha'i history begins with the story of Joseph which appears in the Qur'an as well.

Mullah Husayn had been promised by his teacher that when he found the Promised One He would teach him the meaning of the Surah of Joseph. When Mullah Husayn met the Bab, the latter unasked began to reveal the Qayyumu'l-Asma, His commentary on the Surah of Joseph. There Joseph is presented as the paradigmatic Manifestation of God, and the story of Joseph is the story of all true religion.
Thanks for the reminder - although as said before, I already know about Baha'i extensively. Got the books, saw the people in action, know the stories. And as said before, I have noted that to you directly in A Baha'i's view of atonement ( #208 / #210 ). Either it was missed - or it was assumed that others did not already know the ins/out of Baha'i because they did not agree with the conclusions.

Regarldess, disagreeing with it doesn't mean one forgets the roots thereof - and after that has been made clear, talking to others as if they do not understand basics can come off talking down to people or trying to school them in basics (which is never cool) - so as said before, please stop speaking to others on Baha'i as if they don't understand it.
Are you aware that this same author argues that Jesus was actually King Tut?
Indeed - for the man has many of his views based in Egyptology and the religious culture of Christianity evolving from that. But as said in the rest of what was noted, I did not agree with every conclusion the author made, but I can see some valid points n what he was trying to say....in the same way I've seen several things in Baha'i that are historically off-base yet I still feel they have valid points on others.

And with his points, what he argued I think has merit on the identity of Joseph - as said here:

Gxg (G²);65093400 said:
If Joseph used his influence to later influence the rest of his culture to come into obediance to the One who saved them all, it would not be surprising..and indeed, it'd make sense as to why other pharoah's may've disliked him.

As one reviewer said of the book:
While the theories of his other books of this genre (namely that Jesus and Moses were Pharoahs) are far-fetched in my opinion, this theory of Joseph and Yuya being the same person appears spot-on. The details fit together almost as perfectly as one could expect considering the language and culture barrier between Hebrew and Egyptian. I am convinced.
Drawing on the Bible, the Koran and various ancient Egyptian sources, the author places the events of Exodus in the time of Ramses I. This new interpretation of history may be compared with the work of Velikovsky although their conclusions are not the same; Velikovsky identifies Ramses I with Necho I of the end of the 7th century B.C.


I don't know who is correct, but Osman certainly provides a great read in this book as he identifies the biblical Joseph with Yuya, grand vizier of the 18th dynasty pharaoh Tuthmose IV. From this follows the introduction of monotheism by queen Tiye and her son Akhenaten. This explains the animosity shown towards Akhenaten and his religion by the later pharaoh Horemheb, whom Osman identifies as the oppressor king of the book of Exodus.
This book consists of two parts: A Father To Pharaoh which details the aforementioned history, and Notes And Sources, which contains the evidence and an interesting
Followers of faith who read this book and want to appreciate the depth the Osman's hypothesis must be willing to open their mind to think beyond traditional words heard in synagogue, mosques, temples and churches.

Early on Ahmed Osman clearly states his position as a person of faith and his cultural context and scholarly bias. Then he plunges into the Joseph narrative, literally word by word according to the Koran and the Hebrew Bible. I read the majority of the book while traveling in Egypt, which of course brought rich meaning and life to the pages. Not everyone can do that, but the book is still worth the read. Furthermore, in today's information virtual world, much of the artifacts used to build Osman's case are visible on the Internet from museum and university web sites.

Osman traces the lineage of a royal birthright from Abraham and Sarah's brief stay in Egypt. He follows it as Esau surrenders the birthright to Jacob for a meal, and eventually links it to Joseph and the rise of monotheism in the 17th Dynasty of Ancient Egypt. Along this largely unheralded tale Osman makes many nice and very neat ties that have possibility. Some theologians, including myself, recognize the probability of Osman's theory.
It clearly explains the deliberate obliteration of references to the “heretic” king and his successors by the last eighteenth dynasty pharaoh, Horemheb, who was the oppressor king in the Book of Exodus.

The wealth of detailed evidence from Egyptian, biblical, and Koranic sources place the time of the departure of the Hebrews from Egypt during the short reign of Ramses I, the first king of the nineteenth dynasty.

I am certain that many who see the work will be quick to focus on what the man believes personally and may dismiss anything of what he has said simply because he had other conclusions that were not Biblical---though I think it's a negative thing whenever that occurs since all truth is God's Truth, IMHO....and whether or not someone agrees fully with my theological perspective has no real bearing on simple facts. It doesn't take one being a believer, in order to acknowledge where a historical individual was referenced in scripture...nor does it take one believing in the Lord in order to acknowledge where certain biblical events did indeed occur.
G
He's trying to reconcile the Biblical narrative with the Qur'anic one, an exercise I don't find terrifically helpful because I don't think either text can relied on for historical evidence
Generally, going for historical evidence in reliability will also be either good or bad depending on the actual text you have in front of you and what story in mind. There are many things in both narratives that are historical and some things not so much...so the exercise he had I didn't see as problematic in any way. Of course, there's still speculation as well one has to keep in mind.
. Mind you, I think there was an exodus but I think it involved a relatively small number of people. If there was indeed a historical Joseph, I think it likely he became a the Prime Minister during the reign of the Hyksos since the Hyksos themselves appear to have been originally Palestinians. It would also explain why the Hebrew people would have been badly treated once the Hyksos are kicked out
Indeed - this was noted later in the thread as it concerns potentials for Joseph to have reigned in the Hysko era, as seen here:


Gxg (G²);65093513 said:
Continuing from before..

To give more info that may help clarify some things,

There've been many discussions by scholars that've noted how Joseph was actually around during the era of the Hyskos control of Egypt (as discussed here). As one group of scholars said best:


FAMILY IN EGYPT (GEN. 46–50).

The brothers returned to Palestine and brought their father to Egypt.His meeting with the Pharaoh involved some verbal sparring to determine who was the elder of the two. Because Jacob was the elder, he had to pronounce a blessing on the Pharaoh (47:7–12). Some see this as evidence that the Egyptian ruler was a Semite, as was Jacob, because a native Egyptian would not seek blessing from a Semite—he would have instead held him in contempt. This would have taken place, then, during the Hyksos rule (1720–1570 B.C.E.), because they were Semites.

Genesis ends with the blessing of Jacob’s sons (Gen. 49), the story of Jacob’s death and burial, and, finally, Joseph’s death, preceded by his request not to be buried in Egypt (Gen. 50).
Of course, there's alot of debate as it concerns the chronology of events and whether the Hyskos were truly the ones ruling Egypt when Joseph entered the scene/possibly began cultural exchanges in the name of the Lord. And for other places for reference:

Others have had differing thoughts on Joseph's identity - some claiming him to be Imhotep...


Due to debates on when Joseph lived (as well as where he would best fit historically---and for the unsaved, debating if he even existed), it has been hard to find consensus across the wall on the person of Joseph...and if anyone has any possible theories or information that they feel would help to connect the dots, I'd greatly appreciate it:)

But I truly do feel that what He did as a person in establishing monotheism - if taking the text of Exodus and Genesis seriously - is something that makes a world of difference when seeing the ways that new Egyptian politics came into being. And why God, when delivering the people from Egypt, had to establish His dominance by demolishing ALL of the Egyptian gods (polytheism) in their powers and abilities.....it was essentially a showdown on who the REAL God of the world was - and the God of the Hebrews avenging himself on the Egyptians who suppressed them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟55,644.00
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
Gxg (G²);65121920 said:
Thanks for the reminder - although as said before, I already know about Baha'i extensively. Disagreeing with it doesn't mean one forgets the roots thereof - and after that has been made clear, talking to others as if they do not understand basics can come off talking down to people or trying to school them in basics (which is never cool) - so as said before, please stop speaking to others on Baha'i as if they don't understand it.

I'm sorry if I offended you. Most people on this list no next to nothing about the Baha'i Faith and even most Baha'is don't really understand what the Bab was saying about the Sura of Joseph. This Tablet has never been translated.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I'm sorry if I offended you..
It is not a problem - I simply felt I needed to reiterate the point since it seems people can be passionate many times for their stance (or their research) that it may be forgotten they are not the only ones with awareness on the issue - and on knowing Baha'i, I have noted that to you before directly in A Baha'i's view of atonement ( #208 / #210 ). Either it was missed - or it was assumed that others did not already know the ins/out of Baha'i because they did not agree with the conclusions.
Most people on this list no next to nothing about the Baha'i Faith
Not certain what list is even being discussed (OR where it is assumed people know next to nothing on it - that's the same dynamic that often comes up whenever they're disagreements within a camp) - although as it concerns the main OP issue, looking to a list given isn't the same as addressing what others say on the issue directly.

And on the OP, the main question (of which every other post after that was made to clarify) was "Does anyone here feel that there is merit in the Exodus account being reconsidered as a military text - and that the numbers may be smaller than others wish to acknowledge? What do you feel the Exodus account represents when it comes to the themes present within it?"
and even most Baha'is don't really understand what the Bab was saying about the Sura of Joseph. This Tablet has never been translated
The Sura of Joseph is indeed a difficult thing to handle and takes time - but again, this is basic/rudimentary - no need speaking on it as if it was not known.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Gxg (G²)

Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7)
Supporter
Jan 25, 2009
19,765
1,428
Good Ol' South...
Visit site
✟160,220.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟55,644.00
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
Gxg (G²);65121973 said:
The Sura of Joseph is indeed a difficult thing to handle and takes time - but again, this is basic/rudimentary - no need speaking on it as if it was not known.

I was referring more to the Qayyumu'l-Asma.

Sorry if I missed some of your references. You read all of your posts at once and it was a lot of material.
 
Upvote 0

BruceDLimber

Baha'i
Nov 14, 2005
2,820
63
Rockville, Maryland, USA
✟10,839.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
[to a third party] You might find this video by the Biblical Archaeologist where I did my graduate work:

And I have one for you, Susan:

There was a recent show on the History Channel (cable) titled Exodus Decoded that gave fascinating information about the book, including details of exactly how and why the plagues occurred as well as the fact that the traditional location of Mount Sinai is incorrect; and that the actual mountain is farther southeast, in or near Arabia.

(No idea when I might be down your way, but I do have this on DVD if you'd care to visit me in the DC area. . . .

And perhaps we can arrange for me to burn you a copy if you're unable to find the show.)

Cheers, :)

Bruce
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟55,644.00
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
Here is a review of that program:

Debunking "The Exodus Decoded"



And I have one for you, Susan:

There was a recent show on the History Channel (cable) titled Exodus Decoded that gave fascinating information about the book, including details of exactly how and why the plagues occurred as well as the fact that the traditional location of Mount Sinai is incorrect; and that the actual mountain is farther southeast, in or near Arabia.

(No idea when I might be down your way, but I do have this on DVD if you'd care to visit me in the DC area. . . .

And perhaps we can arrange for me to burn you a copy if you're unable to find the show.)

Cheers, :)

Bruce
 
Upvote 0