Pharaohs Can't Celebrate Passover

[ProgressiveMuslim]

Rabbi Michael Lerner

Observing Passover, the holiday celebrating the liberation of Jewish slaves from Egypt roughly 3200 years ago, has become a problem for many Jews this year.

(snip)

The story itself is so compelling that it has become a metaphor for many other struggles. Black African American slaves sang songs about Moses and the children of Israel as a way of identifying with the possibility that someday they too would be free, and the civil rights movement often used the story as a challenge to the way American society had not yet fulfilled its promise of becoming a land of the free.

No wonder then that through the ages even Jews who questioned the existence of God turned up in large numbers at a Seder.

This year I've been hearing a very different story from my rabbinic colleagues and from many Jews who are not part of any religious community.

Millions of Jews have been watching Israel's role in Gaza and the West Bank with particular horror this year. Most share an anger at the ongoing terrorism that has made life in the Israeli town of Sderot so difficult. Few sympathize with Hamas. They are aware that over the course of the past few years dozens of Israelis have been killed by the missiles sent from Gaza.

Yet the wildly disproportionate response of the Israeli army that led to the killing of over 1,200 Gazans, hundreds of them children and women civilians, has shocked and dismayed many Jews whose identification with their Jewishness came primarily through their commitment to its ethical teachings. Moreover, growing numbers of Jews in Israel and the rest of the world have become aware that the core of the problem lies in the way that Israel's creation in 1948 led to the expulsion from their homes of some 800,000 Palestinians. Some fled in anticipation of a quick destruction by invading armies of the newly formed Israeli state. But Israeli historians in the past two decades have documented that hundreds of thousands of those refugees left their homes because of a fear generated by Israeli terrorists that Arab civilians would be targeted during the war, or to escape a war zone as civilian have traditionally done during active hostilities, or, in the case of over 80,000 of them, because the Israeli army itself forcibly evicted them from their homes and marched them off to Gaza or the West Bank.

(snip)

As several congregants put it to me, "We Jews have become Pharaoh to the Palestinian people -- so we would be hypocrites to sit around our Passover table celebrating our own freedom, rejoicing at the way the Egyptians were stricken with plague and their first born killed, while ignoring what Israel is doing today in the name of the Jewish people."

read the whole piece...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-michael-lerner/pharoahs-cant-celebrate-p_b_185411.html

[stopbush]

1. But the Jews were never slaves in Egypt and the Exodus never happened.

A compelling story based on a lie.

Religion's stock in trade.

[oberliner]

2. Wow - right out of the gate with a "Judaism is based on lies" post

Amazing.

[stopbush]

3. I didn't say Judaism is based on lies, but the Exodus is

an a-historic event. Every competent Biblical scholar acknowledges this to be a fact, just as they admit that the person who supposedly led the exodus - Moses - is a fictional archetype.

Judaism, like all other religions, is based on fantasy - belief in the supernatural, for one thing.

I object to the author of the article asserting that it is a historic fact that the Jews were slaves in Egypt. That is anti-Egyptian bigotry at its worse, bigotry that isn't mitigated by the passage of time. There is absolutely no physical proof, archaeological proof, historic proof or geological proof to claim that the Jews were slaves in Egypt or that the Exodus ever happened. In fact, if you wish to believe the Biblical account of Exodus, you must believe that the number of Jews who left Egypt during the Exodus outnumbered the entire population of Egypt at the time.

All religions need to be called on the lies they tell, especially lies that they assert are historic facts. In fact, historians need to be called on their lies as well.

There is no reason to continue to tell the a-historic lie of the Exodus as reported in the Bible as if it were a fact. This is religion. You could say the Exodus was a metaphor for a people struggling against oppression, not a real event, and nothing would change in the religion. So why keep the lie going?

[oberliner]

7. Observant Jews believe that the Torah is the word of God

I am not sure how saying that the Exodus story is a lie is different from saying that Judaism in based on lies. That you have now followed this up with a claim that Moses was a fantasy and not a real person seems in keeping with the notion that Judaism is based on lies.

I am not evaluating the accuracy or inaccuracy of your statements; however, I do not see how, given what you have stated, you can argue that you are not saying that Judaism is based on lies.

There are several million Jewish people (and presumably many Christians and Muslims) who would be very offended by such statements.

[Howardx]

10. too bad

let them be offended, the sooner we move to a post religion world the better.

[stopbush]

16. Then let them be offended by such statements.

If the truth is that the Jews were never slaves in Egypt and the Exodus never occurred, then why should I worry about whether or not they get offended? Am I to go along quietly and treat an a-historic lie as if it is an historic truth, just because some one's religious beliefs are in the mix?

Should I worry about offending the descendants of Gen George A Custer (as well as many "patriotic" Americans) if I report that archeological evidence and the oral and written testimonies of the Indians who fought at Little Big Horn tell an opposite story of the romanticized "they died with their boots on" myth that attached to Custer and the 7th Cavalry immediately after the battle and for more than a century after the fact? Should I worry about offending Christians when I state that there's no historical evidence for Jesus existing, that there's no record of his crucifixion or resurrection, and that people never come back form the dead after being buried for two days?

I'd say my worrying about offending adherents of the religions that are popular today should be taken just as seriously as my worrying if I offend believers in Zeus, Anubis or Thor, wouldn't you say?

Why are the religious so afraid of the historic truth that their only defense against fact is to feign offense and outrage? Grow up, people. You might even learn something. Who knows, your faith might even deepen.

[oberliner]

18. I just don't understand the need to go there in this thread

Obviously one is free to post whatever one wants (within reason) but I was just somewhat amazed that the first post in response to the OP was one undercutting the foundations of Judaism, especially with it being Passover and everything.

[Howardx]

19. the truth should be on hold

because its "passover"? forget it.

[oberliner]

22. Seems like a bit of a thread hijack to me

The OP is about the Gazan situation, not whether or not the Biblical story of Exodus is true.

[Howardx]

23. nice try

maybe if you had not said "Wow - right out of the gate with a "Judaism is based on lies" post" we wouldnt be discussing it. you opened this subthread not me.

[oberliner]

26. It was a response to another post

Which made a comment about Judaism rather than about the actual point of the OP.

I was surprised that was the first place anyone went with the thread.

[stopbush]

39. The "need to go there" is a logical response to your being the scold-in-chief

and telling those of us who are aware of history that our history is not welcome in a forum if the facts of history offend somebody's religious beliefs.

Let me ask you a question: do you consider the Exodus to be a foundation of Judaism? If so, is that foundation shattered if the Exodus never happened?

[oberliner]

40. Yours was the first response to the OP

Before any "scolding" took place, you chose to respond to this post that is about Israel and Gaza by calling the event that Jews are currently commemorating around the world a lie.

That Moses is one of if not the most significant figures in Judaism is not something that is a matter of opinion.

The fact that one of the most significant Jewish holidays is one that is centered around the re-telling of the story of Exodus indicates the centrality of that story to the religion.

You have every right to believe that those events never happened and that Moses was a fictional character; however, the majority of observant Jews would disagree with you and many would be offended by such claims.

All that aside, I just found it amazing that the first response (which happened to be your post) to this article made a statement not about the point of the article itself but calling the Passover story a lie.

[stopbush]

46. Hey, the Easter story is a lie as well. So is the Christmas story.

So are the ancient tales of Zeus and Isis. If you prefer the word fiction to the word lie, I'm fine with that. Perhaps I use the word lie to describe the Exodus because that particular fiction has been so debunked at this point that to continue to hold that it was an historic event appears to me to be mendacious.

And why hold it against me that I was the first to post a response? I read the article linked. Had I been the second or tenth or fortieth post I would have said the same thing.

[GoesTo11]

60. Link?

[stopbush]

63. You'll need to do your own research. It shouldn't take long.

[GoesTo11]

67. Need help. It takes longer if you're not intellectually arrogant.

[stopbush]

69. Who is being arrogant? You're already on the internet, just a search and a few

clicks away from numerous articles on both sides of the argument, as well as links to books on the subject you might purchase if you're really interested.

Type the words "exodus myth" into a Google search to get started.

There's also this article from last year's NYT concerning the Red Sea: Did the Red Sea Part? No Evidence, Archaeologists Say. Here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/world/africa/03exodus.html?ex=1333252800&en=6f654bfd6c4fbcd8&ei=5088&partner=rssny

BTW - Egyptian archaeologist Dr. Zahi Hawass, for one, asserts that the Exodus story is a myth. From the above-cited article: “Really, it’s a myth,” Dr. Hawass said of the story of the Exodus, as he stood at the foot of a wall built during what is called the New Kingdom.

“If they get upset, I don’t care,” Dr. Hawass said. “This is my career as an archaeologist. I should tell them the truth. If the people are upset, that is not my problem.”

[GoesTo11]

72. Assertion is not evidendce

I googled "exodus myth" and got basically a bunch of viagra ads worth of credible sources. Google exodus archaeology and you find more detailed but not very convincing discussion about evidence that the Exodus did happen. With ancient history mixing mythology, written records, archaeological records and who knows what else, we can expect some things to be wrong, some to be ambiguous, some inconsistent, some biased recounting, etc. That's why people with a lifetime of training in these areas disagree. But it is arrogant for a lay person to make absolute pronouncements about exactly what did and didn't happen almost 4000 years ago, based on "research" of looking up some articles in favor of one argument.

[stopbush]

75. Boy, you're lazy, aren't you?

I suggested that you Google "exodus myth," you did so, didn't like what you found, and...that's it? End of your research?

Now, to be honest, I didn't Google "exodus myth" myself. I just tossed that out as a starting point because you called me arrogant for not providing you with links. Ergo, I spent just a little more time coming up with a research strategy for you than you did for yourself. I really had no idea what you'd find when you Googled "exodus myth" (BTW - I may need a link to those viagra ads you found), and I certainly didn't mean for that starting point to be a stopping point.

The fact that your response is time-stamped a whole FIVE MINUTES after my post was last modified indicates that maybe you didn't do a whole bunch of reading or research. Yet, here you are, back with a response accusing me of "looking up articles in favor of one argument," when my post #69 stated, "you're already on the internet, just a search and a few clicks away from numerous articles on both sides of the argument (emphasis added)."

I don't think you're being very fair here. Do you?

[GoesTo11]

77. You're the one claiming to know everything

I found out that you didn't in just a few minutes. If you were just claiming that the story of Exodus isn't completely accurate, then the burden of proof is on Exodus rather than you, since a single inaccuracy invalidates the claim of accuracy. But if you are claiming to know what absolutely did not happen, the burden of proof is on you. I am not lazy, just don't have time to chase down every flake who has their own certainty about what must have happened.

[stopbush]

80. You have a strange view of things.

Accusing me of believing that I "know everything" is a silly school yard taunt.

Here's the skinny: there is no evidence that the Exodus occurred. It is not just the single event of the Exodus "trip" that is under consideration. it is whether Jews lived in Egypt in significant numbers when the Exodus supposedly occurred. There's no evidence for that. There's no evidence Jews were ever enslaved in Egypt. There's no evidence that the Biblical plagues ever afflicted Egypt. There's no evidence that Moses was a real person. There's no evidence to support the idea that Israel numbered in the millions when they supposedly fled Egypt. There's no wreckage on the bed of the Red Sea to support the idea that Pharoah's chariots ended up there.

It's not a matter of a "single inaccuracy" invalidating the Exodus story, it's a matter that there isn't a single "accuracy" to support it. Why give any story the benefit of the doubt under such circumstances?

Now, if you wish to label the Bible as being historically accurate, well, be my guest. There's no need for evidence of any kind if you wish to go down that road.

BTW - Dr. Zahi Hawass is one of the many "flakes" who is certain about what DIDN'T happen - he states flat out that the Exodus story is a myth that never happened. His writings may be worth chasing down...though I somehow doubt you'll bother.

[GoesTo11]

82. Dr. Hawass does seem to be quite the expert on Jewish history, but possibly biased

Ok, I googled your source. He seems to have some readings of history that are not consensus. Just from a superficial analysis, I suspect he has political motivations given his powerful position in Egypt, and the conclusions of his "research" are not compelling.


http://jwest.wordpress.com/2009/04/06/more-from-the-lips-of-hawass/

Zahi Hawass, head of the Egyptian Antiquities Council, wrote in Al-Sharq Al-Awsat that the “Jews of Palestine” are murderous by nature: “The concept of killing women, children and elderly people… seems to run in the blood of the Jews of Palestine. it seems to have become part of the false faith of this people, who is tormenting us in our homeland.

“When I speak of the Jewish faith, I do not mean their faith, but the faith that they forged and contaminated with their poison, which is aimed against all of mankind… The only thing that the Jews have learned from history is methods of tyranny and torment - so much so that they have become artists in this field. They have done to the Palestinians what Pharaoh and Sargon did to the Jews…” Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), January 22, 2009 (translated by MEMRI.org).



http://jwest.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/is-zahi-hawass-an-anti-semite/

Following is an excerpt from an interview with Zahi Hawass, secretary-general of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Egypt, which aired on Egyptian TV on February 11, 2009.

Interviewer: So the Jews were dispersed in 133 C.E.?

Zahi Hawass: That’s right.

Interviewer: And they didn’t reunite until 1900?

Zahi Hawass: Exactly.

Interviewer: So they were dispersed for 18 centuries?

Zahi Hawass: For 18 centuries they were dispersed throughout the world. They went to America and took control of its economy. They have a plan. Although they are few in number, they control the entire world.

Interviewer: Dr. Hawass, you are a great historian and archaeologist. I would like to figure out the mystery of how 15 million people, 5 or 6 million of whom do not share this vile Jewish logic… With regard to Israel and Zionism – we are talking about 7 or 8 millions. How is it possible that these 7 or 8 millions have taken control of the entire world, and have convinced the world of their cause, while we, over one billion Muslims, cannot convince the world of our cause? How would you explain this from a historical perspective?

Zahi Hawass: The reason is that they are always united over a single view. They always move together, even if in the wrong direction. We, on the other hand, are divided. If even two Arab countries could be in agreement, our voice would be stronger. Look at the control they have over America and the media.

Interviewer: So in your opinion, the secret lies in unity?

Zahi Hawass: Yes. It was unity that gave them this power…

Interviewer: You mean from a historical perspective?

Zahi Hawass: Of course.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

83. Zahi Hawass is an Egyptologist. He is not an expert on biblical history or the history of ancient

Israel.

[stopbush]

84. And that makes him not an expert on those parts of Jewish history that took place in Egypt

how?

You're both trying to make this a discussion based on the views of a single person, ie: Dr Hawass. In fact, you're trying to make it a discussion ABOUT Dr Hawass. Of course, the first step is to try to discredit him as an anti-Semite. The next step is to aver that he's not an expert on Biblical history - as if Biblical history is history in anything but name only - and the history of ancient Israel - as if said history is a separate issue from the fiction of the OT for most people.

Do you not think that as the leading archaeologist in Egypt that Dr Hawass might know what he's talking about? Is it even possible for an archaeologist centered in Egypt to not have an intimate knowledge of what the archaeology says in reference to what was going on in Egypt during the period in question?

I would ask you and our friend from Spinal Tap to cite the archaeological evidence that supports the Biblical story of the Exodus. Leave Dr Hawass out of the picture. Leave all of the archaeologists who concur with Dr Hawass out of the picture. Where is the archaeological evidence to support the Exodus story?

BTW, Goto11: is there some reason that you couldn't be bothered to post Dr Hawass' response to this story you reported in post #82? I found it at the link you provided:

Hawass has responded, yesterday, to these reports. He says, in part

"I am concerned that a statement that I made recently about Jewish history is being widely misrepresented in the media. In a February interview with Mahmoud Saad of the television show El-Beit Beitek,I discussed the Arab-Israeli conflict in its historical context. I contrasted the relative unity of the international Jewish community with the political fragmentation that we see among the Arabs. Unfortunately, many people seem to have taken this comment to mean that I believe in a sinister Jewish conspiracy to control the world. This is simply not true. I do not believe at all in such a conspiracy."

[ProgressiveMuslim]

87. I'm saying your insistence on calling Judaism a lie is juvenile. Are you being forced to

endure confirmation or something?

This conversation belongs in the religion forum, not in I/P.

Thanks for hijacking the thread.

[stopbush]

88. I'm 54. Confirmation took place years ago.

And so what if I hijacked your thread? At least if generated a few responses.

[Meshuga]

93. Stopbush, you are telling us WWE fans that wrestling is fake during our favorite event

And you wonder why we're saying WTF? :-)

[GoesTo11]

91. Your main source is just not credible.

His explanation above is a joke, given his original words about Jews controlling the world (which he doesn't deny saying, only denies believing?). The guy is not logical enough to be a reliable scholar. I was really surprised when I searched the one person you suggested and found that he is essentially a clown. From his bio, he seems to be a very successful bureaucrat who has arrived at his position through political conniving. Sort of the equivalent of a Dean of Creation Science at the University of Texas.
I do NOT think he knows what he is talking about, or at least, I don't trust that he is saying things because he thinks they're true, rather, he's saying them to discredit the Jewish people, which probably plays well with some of his political patrons.

As for the overall argument, none of us were there. I am sure there is reasonable debate about how exactly to interpret what evidence there is and is not, but reasonable debate requires that you not know your conclusion ahead of time.

[stopbush]

95. Here's some info on that source you say is not credible:

Dr Zahi Hawass:

EDUCATION

1987 Ph.D. - EGYPTOLOGY
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA
1983 M.A. - EGYPTOLOGY & SYRO-PALESTINIAN ARCHAEOLOGY
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA
1979 DIPLOMA - EGYPTOLOGY
Cairo Universtity, Alexandria, Egypt
1967 B.A. - GREEK & ROMAN ARCHAEOLOGY

HONORS

October 2006 Featured as an archaeologist in an exhibition at the Children’s Museum in Indianapolis
May 2006 Named top “100 most influential” people in the world by Time Magazine
August 2005 Lectured with top 30 famous writers, scientists and Nobel prize winners to the Adventures of the Mind Society, comprised of 150 accomplished high school students in the United States, at Stanford University, U.S.A.
Feb. 2005 Honorary Doctorate, American University in Cairo
Nov. 2002 Name inscribed on C.D. for the Mars Exploration Rover 2003 mission
2002 Received an honor from the Egyptological Society in Spain as one of the five pioneers of Egypt, including Naguib Mahfouz, Omar Sharif, Ahmed Suweil, and Om Kolthoum.
2001 -Honored by Mansoura University for his many achievements and
contributions to Egyptian society and the archaeological community worldwide; this honor was previously awarded to Om Kolthoum, Omar Sharif, Ahmed Suweil, and Naguib Mahfouz
-Selected by National Geographic as one of its Explorers-in-Residence

-Awarded the Silver Medal and membership in the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences

2000 -Named Distinguished Scholar of the Year by the Association of Egyptian-American Scholars

-Received Golden Plate Award from the American Academy of Achievement: one of thirty honorees of international prominence to receive this award. This honor was previously awarded to people who have won the Noble prize, actors, kings and queens, and prime ministers

-Appointed Adjunct Professor at the University of California, Los Angeles

-Mellon Fellowship from the University of Pennsylvania
1998 -Received First Class award for Arts and Sciences from President
Mubarak; this award is in honor of Dr. Hawass’ restoration of the Sphinx

-Received “Pride of Egypt” award from the members of the foreign press in Egypt for achievements in archaeology
1980 Fulbright Scholar

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

2002 - present Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities
1998 - 2002 Undersecretary of the State for the Giza Monuments
1987 - 1997 General Director of the Giza Pyramids & Saqqara & Bahria Oasis
1980 Chief Inspector, Giza Pyramids, Cairo
1974 - 1979 First Inspector of Antiquities, Giza Pyramids, Embaba, and Bahria Oasis
1974 - 1975 Inspector of Antiquities for Boston Museum of Fine Arts at Giza Pyramids
1974 Inspector of Antiquities, Pennsylvania Expedition at Malkata, Luxor
1973 - 1974 Inspector of Antiquities, Abu Simbel
1972 - 1974 Inspector of Antiquities, Embaba, Giza, Cairo
1970 Inspector of Antiquities, the Western Delta at Alexandria
1969 Inspector of Antiquities, The Pennsylvania Yale Expedition at Abydos
1969 Inspector of Antiquities, Edfu-Esna, Egypt
1969 Inspector of Antiquities, Italian Expedition at Sikh Abada, Minia
1969 Inspector of Antiquities of Middle Egypt at Tuna El-Gebel and Mallawi

FIELD WORK

2006 - PRESENT
Excavation in the Workmen’s Village at Giza
-Excavation in the area between the back of the Sphinx and the second pyramid

-Supervisor of excavation at the temple Ramses II at Heliopolis

-Supervisor of excavation at Taposiris Magna in Alexandria

-Supervisor of excavation of the temple of Ramses II at Akhmim


1999 - PRESENT Excavations at the Valley of the Golden Mummies and the 26th Dynasty site at Bahriya Oasis
1999 Director of the Excavation of the Western Field of Khufu's Pyramid
1999 Director of the Excavation of the Water Shaft under Khafre's Causeway
1999 Director of the Excavation of the Valley of the Mummies, Bahriya Oasis
1996 - PRESENT Director of Excavation of the Third Pyramid at Giza
1995 - PRESENT Director of Excavation in front of the Valley Temple of Khafre
1992 - PRESENT Director of Excavation of the Pyramid Complex of Teti at Saqqara
1991 - PRESENT Co-director of the Excavation to the southeast of the Sphinx (Workmen's Village)
1991 - PRESENT Director of Nazlet-el-Batran Excavation
1991 - PRESENT Director of the Excavation of Beni Youssef
1991 - 1995 Director of Excavation of the Old Kingdom Settlement at Giza (Nazlet- E1-Samman)
1991 - 1995 Director of Excavation east of the Great Pyramid
1990 - PRESENT Director of Excavation of the Tombs of the Overseers of the
Pyramid Builders, southeast of the Sphinx
1990 - 1991 Director of Excavation of the Causeway and the Valley Temple of Khufu
1988 - 1995 Director of Excavations of the Western Field of Khufu's Pyramid
1987 - 1988 Director of Excavation of the site of Kafr-El-Gebel, east of the Sphinx
1980 Director of Excavations in front of the Sphinx Temple and northeast corner of the Sphinx of Giza (Old Kingdom)
1979 - 1980 Director of Excavations at Abou-Rawash (Archaic Cemetery)
1978 Director of Excavation at northeast corner of Sphinx and
Nazlet-El-Samman, Giza (Old Kingdom)
1976 - 1977 Archaeological Survey at South Yemen on behalf of the Egyptian Antiquities Organization and UNESCO of the Arab League
1976 Director of Preliminary Excavations, Merimdeh Beni Salama (prehistoric)
1975 Director of Excavations at Kom Abou Bellou, Delta
(Pharaonic, Greek, Roman site)
1975 Director of Excavations at Khus Abou Zied, Embaba Province
(Late Period)
1970 - 1974 Associate Director of Excavations at Kom Abou Bellou
(Pharaonic, Greek, Roman)
1968 Associate Director of Excavations at Ashmuneim, Middle Egypt (Greek, Roman)
BACK to TOP

CONSERVATION PROJECTS

2002-present -Major important conservation projects of Islamic monuments in Old
Cairo and also the Jewish and Coptic monuments

-Major important conservation work of the temple of Hibis in Kharga Oasis, the Serapeum at Saqqara

-Important conservation of the churches and mosques in cities outside of Cairo and Islamic houses in Rashied
Prior to 2002 Conservation and site management of the Giza Plateau and Sphinx
1999 Conservation of three tombs south and east of Khufu's pyramid
1999 Conservation of the Second Pyramid (which was closed in July 1999 and will be reopened shortly)
1999 The conservation plan of the tomb of Khent-Kawes, the tombs south of Khafre's causeway, and the funerary temple of Khafre
1998-1999 The conservation plan for the site of Abu Sir
1998-1999 Conservation of the Great Pyramid of Khufu (which had been closed on April 1, 1998 and reopened in June 1999)
1998-1999 Restoration of the Sphinx Temple
1998 Completion of the restoration of the Sphinx (Celebration in May)
1998 Conservation of the three Queen's Pyramids near the Great Pyramid of Khufu
1998 Restoration of the tombs at the Snedjem-Ib tomb complex and the tombs of Debhen and Iwnu-Min
1997 Director of Conservation of the Third Pyramid (Menkaure)
1996 Director of Conservation of the Second Pyramid (Khafre)
1991 - 1994 Conservation project of the restoration of the interior of the Pyramid of Unas
1990 - 1992 Conservation project of the Alabaster Sphinx statue at Memphis and the Ramses II statue
1990 Conservation projects of Old Kingdom tombs at Saqqara, such as the Two Brothers, and others
1990 Director of Conservation of the Third Pyramid
1990 Director of Conservation of the Tombs of Nobles and Officials (20 tombs were opened.)
1989 - PRESENT Director of the Sphinx Restoration Project
1989 - 1992 Conservation projects of the tombs of the Late Period at Bahria Oasis
1989 Director of Restoration of the Great Pyramid
1987 - 1993 Director of Conservation of the Step Pyramid at Saqqara
1987 - 1988 Director of Conservation of the Second Pyramid at Giza (Khafre)

SITE MANAGEMENT

*Plan of site management:

1. Discussed in the papers of the 2000 Congress of the International Association
of Egyptologists in Cairo, Egypt

2. Application of proposed measures:
-stopping excavation at Upper Egyptian sites (Giza to Aswan)
-GIS
-conservation
-excavation in the Delta
-conservation of the Unfinished Obelisk in the Aswan Quarries, Kalabsha,
Kom Ombo, Dendara, Edfu, Valley of the Kings, Giza, and Saqqara

*These ideas were presented at the congress in 2000 and were implemented in 2002 when I became the Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities.
1991 - PRESENT Archaeological site management of Memphis
1987 - PRESENT The management of the site of the Giza Plateau.
It was divided into three phases. Two phases were finished.
The third phase, which began in December 1996, is expected to be finished soon and will complete the conservation of the plateau.
Alexandria, Egypt

Zahi Hawass (Arabic: زاهي حواس‎) (born 28 May 1947 in Damietta, Egypt) is an Egyptian archaeologist and Egyptologist and the current Secretary General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities.<1> He has also worked at archaeological sites in the Nile Delta, the Western Desert, and the Upper Nile Valley.

Hawass originally intended to become a lawyer, but then studied Greek and Roman archaeology at Alexandria University, where he obtained a Bachelor's degree. He obtained a diploma in Egyptology at the University of Cairo, then continuing his studies at the University of Pennsylvania, where he received his Doctoral Degree (Ph.D) in 1987.

After 1988, he taught Egyptian archaeology, history and culture, mostly at the American University in Cairo and the University of California, Los Angeles. In 1998, he was appointed secretary of state and director of the Giza Plateau. In 2002 he was appointed Secretary General of the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities.

Hawass has appeared on television specials on channels such as the National Geographic Channel, The History Channel and Discovery Channel. Hawass has also appeared in several episodes of the U.S. television show Digging for the Truth, discussing mummies, the pyramids, Tutankhamun, Cleopatra, and Ramesses II.
Hawass also worked alongside Egyptologist Otto Schaden during the opening of Tomb KV63 in February 2006 — the first intact tomb to be found in the Valley of the Kings since 1922.
In June 2007, Hawass announced that he and a team of experts may have identified<4> the mummy of Hatshepsut in KV60, a small tomb in the Valley of the Kings.<1> The opening of the sealed tomb was described in 2006 as "one of the most important events in the Valley of the Kings for almost a hundred years."
With the assistance of some of the world's leading Egyptologists, Hawass created and hosted the documentary Egypt's Ten Greatest Discoveries.

Hawass is currently spearheading a movement to return many prominent unique and/or irregularly taken Ancient Egyptian artifacts, such as the Rosetta Stone, the bust of Nefertiti, the zodiac ceiling painting from the Dendera Temple, the bust of Ankhhaf (the architect of the Khafra Pyramid), the faces of Amenhotep III's tomb at the Louvre Museum, the Luxor Temple's obelisk at the Place de la Concorde and the statue of Hemiunu, nephew of the Pharaoh Khufu, builder of the largest pyramid, to Egypt from collections in various other countries. In July 2003, the Egyptians demanded the return of the Rosetta Stone. Hawass, as secretary general of the Supreme Council of Antiquities in Cairo, told the press, "If the British want to be remembered, if they want to restore their reputation, they should volunteer to return the Rosetta Stone because it is the icon of our Egyptian identity."

Hawass is also a vocal opponent of ancient astronauts' theories about a previous highly technologically advanced, worldwide civilization. He appeared on a History Channel show to dispel the theories, and provided evidence to show that the Egyptians built the pyramids of Egypt.

List of works by Zahi Hawass
Hawass has written and co-written many books relating to Egyptology. Many of his books coincide with his positions of Ancient Egypt. He is the author of many books including King Tutankhamun: The Treasures from the Tomb, published to coincide with a major exhibition in the UK.] He has also written an article on Tutankhamun in Ancient Egypt magazine, and has written several articles for this bi-monthly UK-based magazine in the past.

Hawass is now a regular columnist for Egypt Today magazine.
References

^ a b Zahi Hawass's home page
^ http://www.history.com/minisites/lostpyramid
^ http://www.kv-63.com/
^ The Quest for Hatshepsut - Discovering the Mummy of Egypt's Greatest Female Pharaoh
^ "King Tut's Mystery Tomb Opened", video documentary, Discovery Channel, first aired 9 July 2006
^ Charlotte Edwardes and Catherine Milner (2003-07-20). "Egypt demands return of the Rosetta Stone". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved on 2006-10-05.
^ Henry Huttinger (2005-07-28). "Stolen Treasures: Zahi Hawass wants the Rosetta Stone back, among other things". Cairo Magazine. Retrieved on 2006-10-06.
^ a b Egyptology News» Blog Archive » Hawass says that Tutankhamun was not black
^ a b The Show-Biz Pharaoh of Egypt's Antiquities. Sharon Waxman. New York Times. 13 June 2005.
^ Hawass, Zahi (May 2005). "A New Era for Museums in Egypt". Museum International (Oxford: Blackwell Synergy) 57 (1-2): 7–23. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0033.2005.00505.x.
^ "Unravelling the Mummy Mystery - Using DNA (citing Interview with al-Ahram issue 512.)". Egyptology Online. Retrieved on 2009-04-10.
^ "Unravelling the Mummy Mystery - Using DNA (citing Interview with "Travel Egypt" magazine, 2004.)". Egyptology Online. Retrieved on 2009-04-10.
^ King Tutankamun: The Treasures of the Tomb : Books : Thames & Hudson
^ King Tut and the Golden Age of the Pharaohs Exhibition
^ Egypt Today - The Magazine Of Egypt

Yep. Just not credible.

BTW, there are more credentials if you're interested: http://www.guardians.net/hawass/background.htm

[GoesTo11]

96. Everyone kisses his butt to get access to Egyptian sites

Then he just makes stuff up. It's an old story. Watch Indiana Jones, you'll see this character as one of the guys he has to bribe.

[stopbush]

97. Now, you're just being arrogant and childish.

Comparing a man of Hawass' credentials and accomplishments with a fictional character in a movie. Wow. That takes smarts!

Do you really believe that the man who has been Egypt's Secretary General of the Supreme Council of Antiquities since 2002 "just makes stuff up?"

I'm sure your credentials in archaeology and Egyptology put his to shame. Which archaeologists are kissing your ass these days?

Speaking of asses, you're coming off as a complete ass in this exchange, and all because you feel the need to defend some religious fantasy. Talk about "an old story."

And through it all, you somehow avoid presenting even a single piece of archaeological evidence to support your fantasy about Exodus. Not surprising. It's typical of the religionists and their diversionary tactics. Why answer questions when you can change the subject? Much easier to launch an ad hominem attack on the world expert in the field as an anti-Semite, a fake and a liar than to present a reasoned and fact-based defense of your position. That wouldn't be due to the fact that your position is indefensible, would it?

Enjoy the fantasy swirling around your casaba. You may be selling it, but no one's buying.

[GoesTo11]

98. Evidence with links

http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/08/New-Evidence-from-Egypt-on-the-Location-of-the-Exodus-Sea-Crossing-Part-II.aspx

By the way, your great expert who believes a few Jews control the entire world has a motivation to deny the Exodus. The Exodus story is used as a basis for legitimacy of Jewish claims to the land of Israel, and it also shows Egypt in an unfavorable light. Unethical historians always try to distort history to make their points. Hawass is the ancient history version of a Holocaust denier. I'll look forward to your posts on that too.

[stopbush]

99. Thanks for the links. There's good information there.

You do realize that the two sites are in conflict as to the possibilities they advance, don't you?

For instance, your first link avers:
"Professor Hans Goedicke believes that the Biblical city of Ra'amezez is incorrectly equated with Pi-Ramesses. Hershel Shanks writing about Goedicke's view states, "But the fact is that the store city of Ra'amezez cannot be identified with Pi-Ramesses, the Residence of the Ramessides. This identification is impossible phonetically, as has been demonstrated conclusively more than 15 years ago (D.B.Redford, "Exodus I, II", Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 13, pp. 408-413, 19"

while your second link avers:

"Rameses (Ex 12:37; Nm 33:3) was the starting point of the Exodus. There is no reason to doubt that Biblical Rameses is the same as Pi-Rameses in Egyptian texts. The city, whose full hieroglyphic name was “House of Ramesses, Beloved of Amun, Great of Victories,” was originally built on the eastern bank of the Pelusiac, the easternmost of the Nile’s five ancient branches. (Kitchen 2003: 255; Wood 2004; Hoffmeier 2005: 53, 55"

But thanks for the objectivity.

Those links were fun to read. But I must say that it's strange that the articles are titled "Biblical Archaeology: Evidence of the Exodus from Egypt" and "New Evidence from Egypt on the Location of the Exodus Sea Crossing" when the articles themselves don't support the ideas of their headlines. For instance, your first link avers that there was only one mass migration out of Egypt, and that was the expulsion of the Hyksos. The Hyksos were a ruling dynasty of Egypt, specifically, the 15th Dynasty. The article states, "This exit from Egypt by the Hyksos probably included the Israelites as well. The story of the Exodus is most likely based on the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt, for there is no other record of any mass exit from Egypt (Robertson 1990, 36; Halpern 1994, 89-96; Redford 1897, 150). Here we see the Biblical apologist in action: there's only one mass exit from Egypt on record, ergo, there were probably Jews among the Hyksos, and the Biblical story of Exodus - which has no mention at all of the Hyksos - is most likely based on this event. Both sites take the leap of faith that non-Biblical histories "might, could, probably, seem to, suggest" align with the Biblical account, even though the details they provide push the non-Biblical accounts further and further away from the Bible (though I do appreciate the fact that neither site claims that the evidence they advance make a conclusive case for the Exodus).

And - importantly - neither link you provided addresses the issues that any archaeologist would raise - the lack of garbage, the fact that Jews didn't live in large numbers in Egypt, the fact that there's no evidence that the Jews were slaves. Instead, they try to make a case based on non-Biblical histories possibly aligned with the Bible. This even extends to the geographical "evidence" for the Bible story, which is inconclusive and speculative at best (at least your second link has the honesty to say, "admittedly, our present archaeological, geological and textual knowledge is not sufficient to understand each name or pinpoint its location precisely on the ground.")

It's another case of Biblical apologists asserting how the Bible could be true, not whether the Bible is true. They start with the given that the Bible is accurate, then interpret the non-Biblical evidence to align with the Bible. Fun times! Still, I would encourage others on this board to read the content at the links you provided.

As to your continued and distasteful assault on Dr Hawass - your summary dismissal of Dr Hawass as a racist and worse is beyond the pale. Your assertion that he is my "great expert" is also an interesting framing on your part, for I put his name out there simply as AN expert, and a very well-known expert at that (someone I'm surprised you didn't know - he's on the TV all the time). There are other experts who agree with Dr Hawass whole-heartedly. In fact, the field of archaeology is literally littered with experts who concur with Hawass' views that there is no archaeological evidence to support the Exodus story. I could give you a few more names to explore, but why should I bother when I know that it would only set you off on another round of character assassination, assassination that - in your mind - allows you to discount their expertise in archeology?

Let me throw a thought out to you: Dr Hawass could be every evil thing you imagine he is, and he could still be right on the conclusions he draws from the evidence. Hitler was possibly the most-evil man who ever lived, but I'd see no reason to doubt the fact that the sun rises in the east if I read a quote from Hitler that stated the sun rises in the east, just because Hitler was an evil man. You believe that your ad hominen smearing of Dr Hawass invalidates the conclusions he draws from the archaeology. It doesn't. It simply shows one and all what disgusting lengths you'll go to convince yourself that you've won an argument. Nobody's fooled, my friend.

In closing, let me point this out about the group that runs the site associated with your second link. They call themselves The Associates for Biblical Research, and they state quite openly that they are "a non-profit ministry committed to demonstrating the historical reliability of Scripture through excavation and research in Biblical archaeology." That doesn't sound like science to me. That sounds like a group that has a pre-determined conclusion and is looking to cook evidence to fit their pre-determined conclusions. In fact, that sounds like a group that REJECTS the scientific method as the basis of their research. Note to Goesto11: take their pronouncements with a huge grain of salt.

The other site - which is run by Institute for Biblical & Scientific Studies - is also an admittedly religious site that believes the Bible, but they are far more objective, knocking down such idiocies as the Young Earth Theory. They also provide links to contrary voices like Michael Shermer on the skeptic side and Ken Ham on the loony creationist side. I'd probably explore their site further before I'd bother with the ABR.

Good chatting.

[stopbush]

101. One further comment. You wrote:

"The Exodus story is used as a basis for legitimacy of Jewish claims to the land of Israel, and it also shows Egypt in an unfavorable light. Unethical historians always try to distort history to make their points."

So, if the Exodus story is not true, it undermines the Jewish claims to the land. If the Exodus didn't happen, and if the Jews were never slaves in Egypt, then it is the Hebrew Bible which is acting as an unethical history, smearing the Egyptians as keeping Jews as slaves and treating them harshly, when the Egyptians did nothing of the kind. Yet, that's what position that all of the archaeological evidence supports.

You are - in effect - defeating your own argument. You are asserting that if we go by the evidence that is available today, the Hebrews and their Bible are illegitimate and unethical, that their claims for land are bogus and that THEY are nation shown in an unfavorable light, not ancient Egypt.

BTW - as an atheist, I don't believe god exists. Ergo, I have no reason to believe that the Jews or any other race/person on the planet has a god-given right to land anywhere. According to the Bible, Israel conquered and stole lands from other people. If you believe god exists, then I suppose that makes it OK, because the genocide and theft the Israelis committed was committed under the orders of god. But if you don't believe god exists, then the Israelis were nothing more than a bunch of what we would now call war criminals, and a people who only have a land because they stole it from somebody else. That being so, there's no case to be made against any other nation/people that tries to conquer/steal Israel's land today - except for the fact that we are a more-civilized people than we were 4,000 years ago, and because our secular laws have evolved beyond what was considered to be justice in the OT...and because most civilized people don't feel the need to deny the Jews a homeland as long as the rights of the Palestinians are also part of the mix.

History is rife with nations conquering other nations, slaughtering their populations and stealing their land. Most of the victorious nations assumed god was on their side. The fact is, god wasn't around to take sides. The conquering and theft was the work of men, done to and upon other men. And so it goes with Israel. What has been won by man can be lost by man, be they Israeli, British or American, for that matter.

[GoesTo11]

102. What I believe

I don't believe that God's will is a justification for much of anything, since we can't know whether there is a God and even if we did know that God exists, we can't know God's will. Whenever God's will is invoked it seems to be a way of saying "What I do is automatically right because I am doing God's will, and that is the definition of what is right".

Of course I don't know what happened 4000 years ago, but I believe that the story of Exodus isn't pure fiction, and it wasn't written with malice aforethought to appeal to 21st century readers and their political views. It seems reasonable to guess that it is a mix of stories that may have been distorted, embellished, or have lost facts over the centuries before they were written (and rewritten until they reached a more fixed form).

Those stories reflect some things that did happen, as perceived by those who lived them and passed the stories down, and as recorded and re-recorded by those who had multiple motivations, ranging from just keeping the knowledge alive to providing legitimacy for some king or political faction or nation.

Thus, I do not believe that the biblical story should be taken literally and all the miracles happened as described as pure divine intervention. But - and this isn't my original thought - I also believe that something impressive did happen in order to bring about the national identity of the Jewish people - this really is the formative event for the nation; we see this in history, but only rarely, and it is dramatic when it happens.

I believe any evidence we would see would be very sketchy and inconsistent and would be something we have to piece together along with written records and with historical analysis of other ancient stories and civilizations. I believe that anyone who wants to throw away all of that has to show more than that they couldn't find anything. They need to show persuasive evidence for some specific explanation. The model of gradual organic growth and movement of the Jewish people seems less likely given the lack of strong evidence for it, and the lack of any written record supporting it either.

Whether the Pharoahs did wrong by the ancient Hebrews or not, I don't really care. The statute of limitations is over and 4000 years would be a long time to hold a grudge. And this doesn't bear on what should happen in the middle east today. But in the Passover seder and story, there are some long-standing ideas that do provide a lot to reflect on, all this about nations trying to establish themselves and live without fear or oppression has quite a lot of relevance to the current concerns on all sides.

[stopbush]

103. Thanks for your post.

Too bad you didn't start out where you've ended up. The discussion would have probably born more fruit and you might have avoided the unseemly swipes at Dr Hawass.

C'est la vie.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

41. This historicity of the "myths" (in the broad sense) of our religious traditions are basically

irrelevant.

Believers of most religions based on scripture can be divided into different categories. There are some who believe that the sacred texts are literally true and historically factual. In Christianity these are fundamentalists. I would imagine that there are also Jewish groups which hold to the historical truth of written text.

Many denominations in Christianity are not so stuck on the texts being historically factual.

One could argue that it is irrelevant whether or not "Moses parted the red sea." The fact remains that the ancient Israelites have this shared communal experience of escape from bondage as their central identifying experience. That event was followed by other central experiences... the Babylonian exile in 586 bc (which historians do believe occurred) and the new understanding of their religion that grew out of being displaced from the Temple. Again when Jerusalem was sacked, rabbinical Judaism was truly born and temple worship and sacrifice became a relic of the past.

When you get down to it, it's what people draw out of the experience that has value. Whether or not Moses literally parted the Red Sea is immaterial. The bottom line is that the Hebrews understood their relationship with YHWH in a wholly new way.

[stopbush]

45. I appreciate your post. There's nothing to argue about.

Of course, as a non-believer in gods, the Hebrews having any relationship with Yahweh remains to me an exercise in group fantasy. They see a relationship with god. I see a bunch of people having an inner monologue with themselves.

One interesting point you make: "The fact remains that the ancient Israelites have this shared communal experience of escape from bondage as their central identifying experience." So sad that they found their refuge in the bondage that is religious belief.

[stopbush]

86. So, if an author wrote a story that started out saying,

"Ever since George Washington chopped down a cherry tree and told his father he did it because he could not tell a lie, Americans have been a people with a greater sense of honest than others," it would be beyond the pale for me to point out that, 1) the cherry tree/can't tell a lie story is a myth, and, 2) even were it true, Americans are no more honest than anybody else. Do I have that right?

[IndianaGreen]

47. Just like Christians fundies do, and both are equally wrong!

There is no archaeological evidence supporting the notion that there was an exodus or a large nation of slaves in Egypt. These stories are not based on facts!

You also have an ethical issue if you were to take literally the story of the Pharaoh/Moses conflict. According to Exodus, Pharaoh was first inclined to let Moses and his people go, yet in Exodus chapter 4 it explicitly says that God will harden Pharaoh's heart. What is this bullshit? Pharaoh ready to let Moses and his people go, yet this God frak the whole deal up by turning Pharaoh into a stubborn idiot. What kind of sadistic game is this God playing with the human race?

The other ethical issue involves this same God slaughtering every first born in Egypt, from teenagers to babies. This is another example in the Bible of a God carrying out crimes against humanity and just plain genocide? How can anyone bow down to such a sadistic deity?

The God of the Bible is DEAD. He died in Auschwitz. The Holocaust showed that the God that was in charge of history and human events was either AWOL at the time of Israel and humankind's greatest need, or never was in charge of anything (if he existed at all).

Here is the most likely thing that happened: This was a labour dispute from day one. Moses wanted Pharaoh to accept his followers' observance of the Sabbath; no work on the seventh day. Pharaoh rejected this proposal. This rejection became the basis of the "we were slaves in Egypt" claim. It was a religious slavery in that the people of Israel were prevented from observing the Sabbath.

Egypt's First Born was only one person: Pharaoh's male heir to the throne. When Pharaoh's son suddenly died, because of illness or an accident, the entire kingdom went into mourning. It was at this time that Moses took advantage of the situation by getting his people together and getting the frak out of Egypt.

One thing all archaeologists agreed on, the Israelites never crossed the Red Sea, but the shallow Sea of Reeds in northern Egypt.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

56. Indiana, the problem you describe is called "theodicy."

It posits the question: how can God be both all powerful and all-loving?

It's a question people have wrestled with from time immemorial.

Certainly the problem of human suffering can be a barrier to belief in God. I hear your pain!

[aquart]

13. "Biblical scholars"?

You don't know to read the bible. You don't understand history. And you can't distinguish the difference between mythology and "fantasy."

And, when making an ass of yourself, it really helps to have links and citations.

[stopbush]

17. Do your own research. I did mine years ago.

Your laziness is showing.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

36. There is no consensus of opinion about Exodus being fiction as you assert

Many Talmudic, Christian, and Muslim scholars disagree with that position.


Note that I am agnostic at best and am in no way Old Testament.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

57. On this we agree.

Scholars actually study the ancient texts from many perspectives: historical, literary, socialogical, textual, etc.

The historicitiy of the events is not central for most scholars.

[stopbush]

66. There's no consensus of opinion on the Exodus due to the basic divide

between scholars with a religious dogma to defend and scholars who look at the evidence objectively.

The objective scholar asks whether the supposed historic event occurred.

The defender of dogma asks how the event could have occurred, and then attempts to provide a divine reason for why it occurred.

Unfortunately, the defender of dogma never concerns himself with the whether, as is made clear by the many posts in this thread that assert that the whether is irrelevant.

The objective observer sees no reason to consider the how - let alone, the why - if the whether cannot be proven to be true in the first place.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

68. Your own dogma is blinding you as I and others have clearly shown

[stopbush]

70. Really? I'm simply citing the lack of evidence to support the Exodus story.

If you can provide evidence to support the story, I'm all ears.

Sorry if my "dogma" doesn't regard hearsay, tradition and religious dogma as evidence. I'm going to go ahead and guess that you agree with my dogmatic opinion when the religion under discussion is polytheist in nature, or if it's Mithrasism or Zoroastrianism.

Am I wrong?

BTW - care to point out the fallacy in my "whether/how" argument in the post above?

[GoesTo11]

59. Link?

[Howardx]

4. the story of exodus is not true

sorry you cant deal.

[cali]

6. that's irrelevant to the lesson that Rabbi Lerner is preaching.

I'm deeply sorry that your grasp of the obvious is so pathetically lame.

[oberliner]

8. Well, alrighty then

Somebody ought to break up all these Seders!

[Howardx]

9. just to be fair

the easter story is not true either. both are myths.

[roguevalley]

27. given the symbol in your post, what beliefs do you have so that

we can kick them in the nuts? apparently you have your own beliefs if that symbol has meaning for you. perhaps you can tell us what god/goddess beliefs you have so we can nitpick the hell out of them at the appropriate holy day.

[Howardx]

31. i have no religious beliefs

i grew out of believing in myths around age 7. maybe you should give it a try.

[azurnoir]

33. You mean like solstice?

its kind of an astronomical fact, but then again there is Beltane which is coming up, basically May Day or the beginn8ing of the growing season

[LeftishBrit]

12. Whether you think it's true or not...

it is of profound symbolic importance in the cultural history of Jews and Christians (and probably Muslims) and even of secular people with any links to these traditions.

Rabbi Lerner is using these traditions to deliver a moving and powerful message - and one which I would have thought you'd approve of as a pro-Palestinian poster.

[stopbush]

21. I have no problem whatsoever with the symbolic importance of

the Exodus myth. I only object to assertions that the myth is fact.

Here's the problem with that moving and powerful message: Rabbi Lerner apparently believes that the story gets its power by being portrayed as an historic fact, which it isn't. He believes the story would have less impact were he to admit it was a myth, or a morality play along the lines of Aesop's fables. Ergo, his "message" rings hollow when it need not be so.

Myth has always been a powerful instructive force to humankind. Why not place the Exodus story squarely where it belongs - among the instructive myths that man has written for himself over the ages? I think the answer is that for the author, believing it to be historic somehow makes it "true," and the author feels the need to have the weight of "fact" behind his article.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

54. Surely all atheists, Christians, Muslims, Hindus etc believe Judaism is based on untruths?

Just as all Jews believe that all the above positions are? I don't see it being particularly relevant to the OP, but it's not as controversial a position as you make out.

N.B. "Untruths" rather than "lies" - I see no reason to believe that at all much of Judaism has its roots in deliberate falsehoods as opposed to simple mistakes (I think the same is true of Hinduism and most other "organic" relgions, whereas "founded" religions like Christianity and Islam probably have some element of deliberate deception at their roots, I suspect)

[cali]

5. all religion is largely rooted in metaphor and myth

what most see as important are the messages encoded in those metaphors and myths. And your comment is wholly irrelevant to the point that Rabbi Lerner is making.

[aquart]

14. And what is "myth," dear?

Troy was a myth. Then we dug up Troy. The story of the minotaur, a myth. Then we dug up Knossos.

May I suggest Hebrew Myths by Raphael N. Patai and Greek Myths by Robert Graves?

[cali]

20. I've read Greek Myths by Graves,

Thanks for the rec for Hebrew Myths. My point was obvious. And it's hardly terribly controversial. Myths are often rooted in something factual or in a larger "truth".

[Donald Ian Rankin]

52. ...um, the minotaur really *was* a myth...

Knossos is real; there is a palace there with an awfully confusing layout, the labrys may well have been a type of ceremonial double-headed axe, but the minotaur was a myth.

Likewise, Troy was very likely a real city, and it may well have been sacked by the Greeks, but almost certainly not by a man invulnerable except for one heal trying to recover a woman who's father was a God disuguised as a swan from a man who judged a context between goddesses...

[LeftishBrit]

11. How can you say that with such assurance?

I am myself an atheist, and would thus not believe in many of the Biblical details - e.g. the parting of the Red Sea. (Though of course many people do believe the Biblical version - and it's worth noting that on this subject they include not only religious Jews, but Christians and Muslims.)

However, one cannot jump from that to assuming that the Jews were never in Egypt, and that they didn't escape. That's quite a leap.

[aquart]

15. Considering Moses is an Egyptian name, quite a leap indeed.

[stopbush]

85. Yes, and Pharaoh is a Jewish word not to be found in the Egyptian records!

[stopbush]

25. Simple question: where's the garbage?

Israel supposedly wandered in the desert for 40 years (set aside that the distance they traveled from Egypt to the promised land was and still is only about a 10-day walk). Exodus 38 says that when the Jews left Egypt, they numbered 635,050 men over twenty years of age (they only counted the men over 20 - kids and women weren't counted). But do the math: there had to be at least as many women over 20 in that mob. That brings you to at least 1.2-million people. Throw in the children and the livestock. You're talking at least 1.5 million people, wandering in the desert and increasing their numbers for 40 years.

Yet, where's the trail of garbage from this mob? There are many archaeological sites in the Holy Land that date to that time, small villages, for example, and all of them bear traces that humans were there: garbage, broken pottery shards, etc. But for the Exodus, with over a million people moving, eating, drinking, crapping and making what humans make best - garbage - the evidence is nada.

Sound likely?

As far as the Jews being slaves in Egypt - no doubt some Jews were in Egypt. The Egyptians kept copious records (in fact, we can thank the Egyptians for the very first written mention of "Israel"). But there is nothing in the Egyptian records that confirms the Biblical account of the Jews being slaves or the Exodus. Nothing.

In fact, many historians now believe that the Jews were native in Canaan. There was no need to wander for 40 years to a promised land because that's were they came from.

Even Wikipedia has decent articles and sourcing on all of this. Fun stuff. Why not give it a shot? Why the great resistance to actual history and archaeology?

[roguevalley]

30. newer research suggests that Jews left Egypt in small groups over

a period of time and settled in Canaan, assimilating and annexing land and cities through peaceful means. the stories were written long after and many of them during their enslavement. they were written to help people cope, thinking of a heroic past could lead to a better future.

[Howardx]

32. what research?

can you point to a source or link? i dont believe you.

[roguevalley]

34. first, I don't care what you believe. secondly, unlike some of the

posters here, I will attempt to find links.

[Howardx]

what made you think i cared what you thought?

when you attacked me upthread? forget the links im sure they are bs anyways.

[stopbush]

37. Why do you say they were enslaved? There's no research that suggests that,

especially "newer" research. Also, there's nothing to suggest that Jews lived in Egypt in great or even moderate numbers. And, "assimilating land and annexing cities through peaceful means?" Where did you get that one? I know its the opposite of the genocide Yahweh demanded in the OT, but really. What source says that Israel used "peaceful means" to annex cities and conquer other people and to take their land and property? Your post is a textbook lesson in the use of euphemism.

I agree that the stories were written to portray a heroic past. It's a typical mouse-that-roared story. Egypt was THE power in the world in 2000BC. What better foil could an ancient writer find than Egypt, were he writing a story of the little nation whose god toppled the major power in the world? It would be like El Salvador defeating the USA.

Fiction - all of it.

[Vegasaurus]

62. That's right

Jews were never persecuted, murdered, kicked out of everywhere they ever lived for 2000 years.

They were treated as royalty.

In fact, there never was a Holocaust.

It's a myth, by those pushy Jews who just want a lot of attention (and to control the world, the money supply, the media).

[stopbush]

64. Your post is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

If the Exodus happened, it happened anywhere from 3500 to 4000 years ago, not 2000 years ago. The Holocaust - which nobody has even suggested didn't happen - occurred a little over 60 years ago. Unlike the Exodus fiction of the OT, there is undeniable and copious historic EVIDENCE that the Holocaust occurred.

Hate to break it to you, but history and time started before the advent of Jesus, ie: 2000 years ago. Your Christian perspective is showing, and it's blinding you to the obvious.

[Vegasaurus]

90. I don't have a "Christian perspective" nt

[roguevalley]

28. the red sea could be a mistranslation of the reed sea, a much

shallower place to cross.

[stopbush]

65. Could you explain how that mistranslation occurred?

I hear this claim asserted all the time, but I've never seen a cogent explanation for how it could happen.

Were the Bible written in English, one could see that the omission of the letter "e" from the word "reed" got mistranslated/mis-transcribed as "red." Is that what you're saying happened?

I don't see how the mistake could have been made in the Hebrew. The words for "reed" and "red" in Hebrew bear no similarity to each other, AFAIK. The Bible in Exodus 14 has "yam suph (sea of reeds or Red Sea)" Yam=sea, and suph maybe = reed or seaweed. But in I Kings 9, the term "yam suph" directly refers to the Red Sea. Also, Numbers reports that after Israel crossed the yam suph or Red Sea (reed sea?), they were moving along the shore and camping and decamping for many days. The Red Sea is the only body of water in the area that is large enough to accommodate such a scenario. The word "yam suph" also appears as a reference to the Red Sea (not Reed Sea) in Jeremiah.

In short, every reference in the OT to the term "yam suph" refers to the Red Sea, but for some reason, people claim that the reference in Exodus 14 is some kind of exception.

But there's a larger issue with believing that Israel crossed a shallow sea of reeds rather than the Red Sea: it removes the claim of a mighty miracle by god to save Israel (ie: the parting of the Red Sea), reducing the miracle to a rather mundane story of chariots getting stuck in a mud pit. Not very inspirational, is it?

Any light you can shed on your claim is appreciated.

[IndianaGreen]

100. The mistranslation occurred in the King James version of Bible

The Yam Suph

"Red Sea" or "Sea of Reeds"?

Dennis Bratcher

The problem is that the biblical account never refers to the Red Sea by name. In fact, nowhere in the entire Old Testament Hebrew text is the body of water associated with the exodus ever called the "Red Sea." Instead in the Hebrew text the reference is to the yam suph. The word yam in Hebrew is the ordinary word for "sea," although in Hebrew it is used for any large body of water whether fresh or salt. The word suph is the word for "reeds" or "rushes," the word used in Ex. 2:3, 5 to describe where Moses' basket was placed in the Nile. So, the biblical reference throughout the Old Testament is to the "sea of reeds" (e.g., Num 14:25, Deut 1:40, Josh 4:23, Psa 106 : 7., etc.).

Now the simple fact is, we do not know exactly what body of water is referenced by yam suph in Scripture, which is the origin of much of the debate. The translation "Red Sea" is simply a traditional translation introduced into English by the King James Version through the second century BC Greek Septuagint and the later Latin Vulgate. It then became a traditional translation of the Hebrew terms. However, many modern translations either translate yam suph as "Sea of Reeds" or use the traditional translation and add a footnote for the Hebrew meaning.

http://www.cresourcei.org/yamsuph.html

[bemildred]

71. Truly awesome thread hijack, I congratulate you.

And of course you are quite right. I would say however that calling it a "lie" is a bit provocative, nobody calls a novelist a liar, yet he is making stuff up wholesale. Storytellers are not necessarily liars. The lie comes in when you assert that your story is literally or historically true. When you leave your story a story, it can be good, useful, meaninful, educational, many good things, without being a lie.

[stopbush]

73. Thanks for the thanks.

You say calling the Exodus story a lie is "a bit provocative." You then say "the lie comes in when you assert that your story is literally or historically true." Well, that' exactly what Rabbi Lerner did in his piece, which is why I termed it a lie.

And no one calls a novelist a liar because he isn't asserting that his novel is a history. Even historical novels like Gone With The Wind are presented with the understanding that the Civl War was a historic event while Rhett and Scarlett are fictional characters.

Too bad people can't see the Bible for the historical novel/fiction/allegory that it is.

[bemildred]

74. You said "A compelling story based on a lie".

That's not quite accurate. The lie lies :-) in claiming it is more than a story. Nobody accuses Homer of being a liar. Although the notion that it is compelling is questionable too.

[stopbush]

76. Many people don't even accuse Homer of being Homer.

You know the old saying: Homer's works weren't written by Homer...they written by somebody else named Homer.

:evilgrin:

[bemildred]

78. Did you know Shakespere was gay? And he was really some aristocrat?

And that Homer was a woman and so was one of the authors of the Torah?
:evilgrin:

Butler developed a theory that the Odyssey came from the pen of a young Sicilian woman, and that the scenes of the poem reflected the coast of Sicily and its nearby islands. He described the evidence for this theory in his The Authoress of the Odyssey (1897) and in the introduction and footnotes to his prose translation of the Odyssey (1900). Robert Graves elaborated on this hypothesis in his novel Homer's Daughter. In a lecture titled "The Humour of Homer", delivered at The Working Man's College in London, 1892, Butler argued that Homer's gods in the Iliad are like men but "without the virtue" and that the poet "must have desired his listeners not to take them seriously."

Wikipedia

Modern biblical critics have called the author of the oldest texts in the Hebrew Bible J, standing for Jahweh. Bloom and translator Rosenberg, authors of many works of literary criticism and of Jewish and biblical studies, have collaborated on a clear but controversial translation and analysis of parts of the Pentateuch using the term Jahweh. Bloom claims that the author of J was a woman, living in or at the time of the Solomonic court, 950-900 B.C.E., who wrote these selections not as a religious or historical treatise but as a literary work that Bloom compares to Shakespeare. While Rosenberg's translation is both modern and moving, he has made significant changes in the meanings of the Hebrew text. The proofs offered for these theories are no substitute for hard evidence. Nevertheless, The Book of J deserves consideration as a literary work.

http://www.amazon.com/Book-J-Harold-Bloom/dp/0802141919

[stopbush]

81. And all this time I thought Shakespeare was French!

pronounced: Shak-es-pierre.

[bemildred]

79. And a shameless plug:

http://www.amazon.com/Treatise-Gods-Maryland-Paperback-Bookshelf/dp/080185654X

[ProgressiveMuslim]

24. Anybody care to comment on the substance?

[Violet_Crumble]

29. I will...

I think he's overexaggerating a fair bit when he says 'Millions of Jews have been watching Israel's role in Gaza and the West Bank with particular horror this year.' I suspect he is getting that feeling from talking to his own congregation and from the circles he travels in, but I don't think that translates into the wider population...

[ProgressiveMuslim]

38. It would be interesting to have some real polling numbers on that.

[oberliner]

42. Have you seen the recent J Street poll?

Do you approve or disapprove of the recent military action that Israel took in Gaza?

Strongly approve 47
Somewhat approve 28
Somewhat disapprove 16
Strongly disapprove 9

Total Approve 75
Total Disapprove 25

[ProgressiveMuslim]

44. That's pretty horrifying. Do you approve, Oberliner?

[oberliner]

48. Of the poll or of the invasion?

I opposed the invasion but I don't know what to think about the poll.

[oberliner]

43. I agree with you

I think there are some American Jews who view those events the way he describes but I think they are definitely a minority.

Polling data from ADL to J Street appears to bear that out.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

53. I might buy "a million", but probably not "millions".

There are somewhere between 10 and 20 million Jews, probably about 12-13m. I reckon than 10% of those horrified by Israel's behaviour is just about plausible, but 20% isn't.

[azurnoir]

35. I pretty much agree with VC

however I have to wonder if there has not been a bit of change in the months since cast lead as more of the details are emerging, one can always hope

[bemildred]

50. There has been a change in the direction of the wind.

But it's hard to assess what it means or how much is due to "Cast Lead", and how much to other things, like Obama, the rising of more important issues like the economy, etc., IMHO.

[IndianaGreen]

49. The First Born of Egypt was only one person: Pharaoh's male heir to throne

He was the only one that died suddenly, due to illness or accident.

It is possible that Moses and the Israelites were all Egyptians, but were monotheists, and that their "slavery" was their inability to practice freely their religion including keeping the Sabbath.

The story of Passover is one of freedom. I have posted in DU before, as rabbi Lerner did in OP, of the irony of celebrating a holiday having the celebration of freedom at its core while Israel is oppressing the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories.

When it comes to irony and hypocrisy, there isn't a single monotheistic religion that lacks an abundance of it, except for the Bahais.

[Ken Burch]

94. Of course, that may just be because the Bahis aren't in power anywhere.

n/t.

[Ken Burch]

51. I wish people would actually deal with what the OP is saying:

The Passover story(whether real or apocryphal)is a liberation story. The State of Israel has ceased being, at the moment, a state that has anything to do with the liberation of anybody. And it has become the enemy of liberation for the Palestinian people.

That state needs to either radically change, or, if it won't to be done away with and replaced with something better and more just for all. The present situation is a disaster for Palestinians AND Israelis, chaining both in a prison of oppression(and yes, the Israelis probably have slightly more luxuriant cells, but that will change if the country continues down its inflexible, reactionary, and militarist present course.

Or, as Arlo Guthrie once put it "Children of Abraham, this ain't glory".

[ProgressiveMuslim]

58. This is the point I was hoping would be debated.

No such luck.

Diverted by discussion of religion origin and polling numbers.

What does it mean that the slaves have become slaveholders and are incapable of recognizing that??

[azurnoir]

89. Unwilling is more like it

it seems the premise for what is going on today is steeped in being the victimized in the past, something that recurred as a cycle in the Bible victimized-victimizer or how many times has the promised land been taken away from those to whom it was promised?

[GoesTo11]

61. Could Jews discuss current politics at a Seder?

Maybe they could use the seder as the basis for discussion. Just an idea. You heard it here first.

[Ken Burch]

92. As I understand it, the Seder has often taken on political resonance

Lerner himself has written explicitly political Seder texts for years now.

The same thing has been done, of course, in progressive Christian congregations with Christmas and Easter services.

I'm sure things like that have happened in the rites of other faith traditions as well.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

55. I largely agree

My (secular Jewish) family celebrate (very laxly) seder once a year, and we always wince when we get to the "but next year we may be in the land of Israel".

One of the most famous British patriotic ballads features the line "Britains never, never, never shall be slaves". I have always thought that "never, never, never shall keep slaves" would be a prouder boast.