Did anyone see "Exodus Decoded" on the HIstory Channel?

[Behind the Aegis]

The name of the show is "Exodus Decoded." It will play again on the History Channel at 7am and 1pm today (Monday, April 2). I am assuming the times are CST since I am looking at TVGuide.com set to my area. It is a two-hour program.

The show was very interesting and provided scientific evidence that the Exodus may be true by using archeology, vulcanology, and other sciences.

[aquart]

1. How nice.

[Up2Late]

2. Here are the time for re-plays

<http://www.history.com/shows.do?action=detail&showId=180013>

Monday, April 02 08:00 AM

Monday, April 02 02:00 PM

Usually, these are EDT.

So, what do you mean about "...Exodus may be true..." Did they show the probably locations of events like the crossing of the Red Sea?

[Behind the Aegis]

3. History alive.

"So, what do you mean about "...Exodus may be true..." Did they show the probably locations of events like the crossing of the Red Sea?"

Yes. They point out that the crossing wasn't at the "Red Sea," but rather the "Reed Sea." They also explain the plagues based on science, rather than 'belief.' The speculate that one of the reasons so many dismissed the Exodus as "myth" was because the wrong time was being explored. It really was very interesting. You'll have to watch it if you can.

[TechBear_Seattle]

6. The one problem I have with shows like this

Is that they still treat the Bible as if it were an abolutely true, irrefutable account of things that really did happen. Rather than spend a bunch of time coming up with possible scientific explanations, why don't they come up with evidence showing that the Ten Plagues, the Exodus, etc. are not just some 3000 year old Paul Bunyan stories?

[kwassa]

4. I saw it, it was junk.

I couldn't believe the History Channel could show such dubious history. It really was ridiculous. Jacobovici just made huge logic leaps everywhere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exodus_Decoded

The Exodus Decoded is a 2006 documentary created by Jewish Canadian filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici, in which new evidence regarding the alleged escape of Hebrew slaves from Egypt is explored.

(note: the same people just found the ossuary of Jesus)

As Dr. Hendel writes in his review, "The made-for-TV documentary, The Exodus Decoded, begins with some excellent special effects and a short excerpt from the Steven Spielberg-George Lucas thriller, Raiders of the Lost Ark. This introduction sets the stage for a fast-paced show with high production values and dramatic footage. Unfortunately, unlike the Indiana Jones movie, this film presents itself as non-fiction. Watching it reminded me of an expensive infomercial, in which the actor-salesman makes increasingly exaggerated claims for his product—it makes you lose weight, adds muscle, and makes you rich to boot. In this case, the actor-director is selling a highly dubious bundle of theories about the historical and scientific veracity of the Biblical Exodus"

[kwassa]

5. More criticism of the show

http://www.bib-arch.org/bswbOOexodusbeware.html

Viewer Beware: The Exodus Decoded

Reviewed by Ronald Hendel, University of California, Berkeley

August 21, 2006

excerpts:



By the end of the film I grew weary of the piling-on of amazing discoveries. Each one is historically dubious and requires a willing suspension of disbelief. For example, the time-frame is wrong. We know from archaeological surveys that the Israelite settlement of the land began in the latter part of the 1200s B.C.E. The first historical reference to the Israelites dates from 1207 B.C.E. But if the Exodus really represents the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt (which occurred in the late 1500s), then the Hyksos-Israelites must have been wandering in the desert for 300 years. That’s a lot of manna.

If the date of 1525 is several centuries too early for the Exodus, then most of the film’s claims are eliminated, including Ahmose as the pharaoh of the Exodus and the Santorini volcano as the proximate cause of the Egyptian plagues and the parting of the Reed (or Red) Sea.

Most of the other claims are equally arbitrary and ungrounded in historical evidence. We know that one of the Hyksos kings was named Jacob-Har. But there’s no reason to equate this king with the Biblical Jacob, who was not a king of Egypt. The name Jacob was a commonplace in West Semitic cultures of the second millennium B.C.E.

A real howler is the claim that the the Beni Hasan mural depicts Jacob and his sons migrating to Egypt. This mural dates from hundreds of years earlier than the Hyksos king Jacob-Har, and it depicts a group of traveling West Semitic traders and metalworkers under the leadership of a certain Abisha. There’s no reason to think that it depicts Jacob and his sons.

(much more in the article)

[TechBear_Seattle]

7. Many thanks for the link

I've been talked at by many fanatics who think the Hyksos "prove" the story of the Exodus.

[On the Road]

9. Actually, Dr Handel is Guilty of Overstating His Own Case

Since antiquity, the Exodus had always been dated to the 15-16th century. It was only in the modern era that it was redated the 13th century. This was based on identifying Ramses as the Pharaoh of the exodus, but the reasons for that are not particularly sound. The identification of the Israelites with the Hyksos has likewise been discussed since ancient times. It's not so much of a one-to-one identification, but that there are distinguishing characteristics that suggest a historical basis for legends and beliefs springing up.

I don't buy all the claims of the program (and did not see the part about the Greeks), but the evidence is interesting to see in it's visual context, and these are still open questions.

Jacobovici's rebuttal, which is on the same link, is worthwhile reading, too.

[On the Road]

8. I Saw Most of It

and really enjoyed it. I wrote a paper on the date of the Exodus in college, comparing various schools of thought, and there was a lot of new material here. AFAIC, it is not a settled question. Contrary to the clips of the traditional scholars, the most commonly accepted date (13th C) is not particularly well supported, and there is a school of thought that the whole exodus was fabricated.

To show how open-ended the question is, some of the same arguments and supporting material are used by David Rohl, a writer who supports redating the Exodus and other Biblical history, and has some compelling material. But he moves the needle in the other direction, claiming that the Exodus and other Israelite history happened later than the accepted date.

The thing that I found unsettling was that the show really oversimplified and presented conclusions rather than qualifying and explaining the evidence. Some of what he claimed as new and unique evidence has been noted and used before. Also the phraseology ("according to the Bible...") seemed geared toward evangelical Christians. Maybe it's just TV, but it is the History Channel after all, and they should be doing history rather than myth.

[BurtWorm]

10. Read The Bible Unearthed

for an alternative view:

http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Unearthed-Archaeologys-Vision-Ancient/dp/0684869128

Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com's Best of 2001
The Bible Unearthed is a balanced, thoughtful, bold reconsideration of the historical period that produced the Hebrew Bible. The headline news in this book is easy to pick out: there is no evidence for the existence of Abraham, or any of the Patriarchs; ditto for Moses and the Exodus; and the same goes for the whole period of Judges and the united monarchy of David and Solomon. In fact, the authors argue that it is impossible to say much of anything about ancient Israel until the seventh century B.C., around the time of the reign of King Josiah. In that period, "the narrative of the Bible was uniquely suited to further the religious reform and territorial ambitions of Judah." Yet the authors deny that their arguments should be construed as compromising the Bible's power. Only in the 18th century--"when the Hebrew Bible began to be dissected and studied in isolation from its powerful function in community life"--did readers begin to view the Bible as a source of empirically verifiable history. For most of its life, the Bible has been what Finkelstein and Silberman reveal it once more to be: an eloquent expression of "the deeply rooted sense of shared origins, experiences, and destiny that every human community needs in order to survive," written in such a way as to encompass "the men, women, and children, the rich, the poor, and the destitute of an entire community." --Michael Joseph Gross

From Publishers Weekly
Finkelstein, director of Tel Aviv University's excavations at Megiddo (ancient Armageddon), and Silberman, author of a series of successful and intriguing books on the political and cultural dimensions of archeology, present for the first time to a general audience the results of recent research, which reveals more clearly that while the Bible may be the most important piece of Western literature--serving concrete political, cultural and religious purposes--many of the events recorded in the Old Testament are not historically accurate. Finkelstein and Silberman do not aim to undermine the Bible's import, but to demonstrate why it became the basic document for a distinct religious community under particular political circumstances. For example, they maintain that the Exodus was not a single dramatic event, as described in the second book of the Bible, but rather a series of occurrences over a long period of time. The Old Testament account is, according to the authors, neither historical truth nor literary fiction, but a powerful expression of memory and hope constructed to serve particular political purposes at the time it was composed. The authors claim quite convincingly that the kingdoms of Israel and Judah became radically different regions even before the time of King David; the northern lands were densely populated, with a booming agriculture-based economy, while the southern region was sparsely populated by migratory pastoral groups. Furthermore, they contend, "we still have no hard archaeological evidence--despite the unparalleled biblical description of its grandeur--that Jerusalem was anything more than a modest highland village in the time of David, Solomon, and Rehoboam." Fresh, stimulating and highly engaging, this book will hold greatest appeal for readers familiar with the Bible, in particular the Old Testament--unfortunately, a shrinking percentage of the population. 16 pages of b&w photos not seen by PW. Agent, Carol Mann.

[dtotire]

11. I recommend this book n/t