Did Moses Write the Pentateuch?

[Tim]

@OneGod

@Tim

So we have evidence that the ancient Israelites are genetically and linguistically closely tied to the Levant,

Surely. The Hebrews lived in the Levant after the Exodus and intermarried. So this is expected. Question is how did R-M124 get in?

1. The level of genetic similarity between Jews, Canaanites and Leventine Arabs is sufficiently high to indicate that it is basal, not due to intermarriage. (“These populations are consistent with having 50% or more of their ancestry from people related to groups who lived in the Bronze Age Levant and the Chalcolithic Zagros.”)

2. R-M124 is very low among Ashkenazi Jews. This indicates that R-M124 is not basal in the Jewish population. (See my previous post giving evidence for this.)

3. Among non-Ashkenazi Jews, R-M124 is far less common within the priesthood (“Cohanim”) than outside it. As the priesthood would be less likely to inter-marry than other Jews, this indicates that it is R-M124 that entered some Jewish populations by intermarriage. (Evidence in same post.)

4. There are pockets of high R-M124 population scattered throughout Southwest Asia overlapping post-diaspora Jewish populations, meaning that we don’t need to further East, or further back in time, to explain the very limited ingress of R-M124 into some Jewish populations. [1]

5. We have been presented no evidence of R-M124 in the ancient Indus Valley, and only a survey based on an extremely small sample from one modern population in Bihar (which is part of the Ganges watershed, not the Indus) – making this survey unreliable.

It can therefore be seen that R-M124 is a complete red herring – so I wish you’d stop harping on about it.

6. You have completely failed to even attempt to explain why the ancient Israelites spoke Hebrew, a Leventine language, unrelated to the languages spoken in the ancient Indus valley.

@OneGod

The evidence you say is good. Indus is better.

Indus is completely awful!

@OneGod

1] Egypt was known as KMT before 13c BCE. No place named Misr ever. Indus had the city named Mathura in literature from 2000 BCE.

This is not evidence – it is just three unrelated statements, of questionable accuracy.

I would note:

1. Misr is the Arabic word for Egypt. Given that Hebrew (“Mizraim”) and Arabic (“Misr”) are very closely related languages, this should not be surprising.

2. Current day Mathura is hundreds of kilometers from the Indus Valley, and has existed for thousands of years.

3. Mathura only has one letter in common with either Misr or Mizraim. This is no evidence whatsoever that they are the same place.

Thus, this is not evidence linking the ancient Israelites to the Indus Valley.

@OneGod

2] Pharaoh title could be redacted. In any case it is weak circumstantial evidence.

Better than no substantive evidence at all. This is likewise not evidence linking the ancient Israelites to the Indus Valley.

@OneGod

3] Multiple geographical problems. 3a] Egypt no parting of the sea. Indus: Obstruction of Indus River by mud volcano. 3b] Egypt No volcano at Sinai. Indus Taftan. 3c] No need to go to Aqaba, the third Yam Suf. The third Yam suf would be Shatt al-Arab.

1. This is easily explained by the fact that the Exodus narrative is widely regarded as being legendary NOT historical – a point you have completely failed to address!

2. [Addendum] Even if the Exodus narrative is not wholly legendary, the fact that it was written several centuries after its purported events leave it open to having ahistorical elements enter into the narrative. I would note that insisting that “Pharaoh” is an ahistorical element, but that the volcano, etc are historical is a fallacious Special Pleading.

3. Are you now equating the Red Sea with the Indus River? Ludicrous!

4. There are volcanoes all over the Medditeranean and Southwest Asia – no need to go as far east as the Indus.

5. There are likewise candidates for “Yam suf” far closer.

This is likewise not evidence linking the ancient Israelites to the Indus Valley.

@OneGod

4] No character parallel to Moses in Egyptian literature.

1. Again, this is easily explained by the fact that the Exodus narrative is widely regarded as being legendary NOT historical.

2. In any case, this claim is false, as I have already explained:

@Tim

@OneGod

No character parallel to Moses in Egyptian literature.

Osarseph ?

Also:

Other Egyptian figures which have been postulated as candidates for a historical Moses-like figure include the princes Ahmose-ankh and Ramose, who were sons of pharaoh Ahmose I, or a figure associated with the family of pharaoh Thutmose III.[92][93] Israel Knohl has proposed to identify Moses with Irsu, a Shasu who, according to Papyrus Harris I and the Elephantine Stele, took power in Egypt with the support of “Asiatics” (people from the Levant) after the death of Queen Twosret; after coming to power, Irsu and his supporters disrupted Egyptian rituals, “treating the gods like the people” and halting offerings to the Egyptian deities. They were eventually defeated and expelled by the new Pharaoh Setnakhte and, while fleeing, they abandoned large quantities of gold and silver they had stolen from the temples.[94] [Wikipedia]

@OneGod

Krishna is parallel.

And as I’ve explained before legendary parallels are commonplace and thus absolutely worthless as evidence.

This is likewise not evidence linking the ancient Israelites to the Indus Valley.

@OneGod

The name Mitsrayim was (wrongly) used for ancient land of Indus Valley; and (rightly) used for post-Exodus Egypt. It is, therefore, correct to use that name in the post-Exodus context.

Given (i) we have no evidence that the Exodus happened, there is likewise no evidence that “post-Exodus Egypt” is named any different from pre-Exodus Egypt, and (ii) we likewise have no evidence that it was ever “used for ancient land of Indus Valley” (rightly or wrongly), this is all just so much fact-free hand-waving.

I would conclude by saying that you have no evidence whatsoever linking “Mizraim” with the Indus Valley. It is all just wishful thinking on your part.