The Basis Behind The Biblical Story Of The Exodus

There are many theories that attempt to explain the basis behind the biblical story of the Exodus. Most use archeological evidence to try and explain what the biblical story is based off of, or if it is rooted in fact. There is a fairly new theory that attempts to explain the lack of archaeological evidence of the Exodus spoken of in the Old Testament or Torah. This theory is that the Canaanites were the Israelites, or became the Israelites, and there was no Exodus, or conquering of the land of Canaan by the Joshua and his people. This theory is not entirely inaccurate, but does not seem plausible because of other archaeological evidences supporting other theories of the Exodus.
Most educated persons and historians agree that the stories in
the bible did not happen, or did not happen the way they are described in the bible. However, it is also fairly widely accepted that the Bible is rooted in truth, and although it is unclear what “actually happened,” there is some definite archaeological evidence that backs up stories from the bible. That being said, much is still up to interpretation. If the bible is to be believed however, there are a plethora of theories designed to back up various biblical stories. In other words, much of archaeology is based off of supporting the bible, or disproving it. The theories discussed are examples of this phenomenon. It seems that some are much more plausible than others.
Some scholars believe that there was no exodus out of Egypt, and that is was the people in the land of Canaan, the Canaanites, who over time became the Israelites.
There are many theories for the stories of the Israelites conquest/immigration to the land of Canaan. Yet a new one, even more radical, and critical of the bible, states that the Israelites were a group of Canaanites. This theory is spearheaded by Israel Finkelstein, Professor of Archaeology in the Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Civilizations, at Tel Aviv University. Finkelstein is a biblical critic, believing that the most events in the bible did not happen as described. One of his counter theories was this idea that because of isolation, a small group of Canaanite nomads and farmers became the original Israelites, and that there was no conquest of Canaan, or Exodus from Egypt. Despite various archaeological digs and artifacts, there are some major holes in his argument, and although the Exodus and conquest of Canaan may not have happened the way it is told in the Bible, other evidence is
unignorable.
Sigmund Freud came up with a theory that the Exodus came from the beliefs in the one god, Aten, in Egypt during the time of the Pharaoh Akhenaten.
One of the most fascinating points from this theory, is that the idea of the one all powerful god is not seen in any other region of the world. Finkelstein’s theory is undermined greatly in that he cannot explain where the notion of only one god comes from, or how it is either planted or developed in the Israelite-to-be culture. On top of that, the Canaanite culture is said to have not only be a polytheistic religion, but also believed in sacred prostitutes/priestesses (who were ceremonially impregnated by the men of the society), which seems quite far fetched from the biblical notion that you should not desire thy neighbor's wife, and one should not commit adultery. Where does this three hundred and sixty turnaround in values come from? Why do the Canaanites suddenly start to believe in only one all powerful god, when the rest of the world believes in various polytheistic religions. Because these major questions cannot be answered by Finkelstein’s theory, it does not seem like a plausible
explanation.
Finkelstein’s theory has good thoughts behind it, attempting to fill in a gap where there is a lacking amount of evidence that supports the biblical account, but it unfortunately falls short in filling in this hole. More questions are raised than answered. It also contradicts Freud’s theory of the Exodus, which has many genius overlaps and connections that seem incredibly plausible. Until certain questions discussed are answered, Finkelstein’s theory that the Canaanites became the Israelites should not be accepted as the truth.