24
Since the last decade of the twentieth century there is a growing consensus in
modern scholarship that the major elements of the Exodus tale (the Israelites
living in Egypt for 430 years, the exodus of this large group out of Egypt into
Canaan, and the intervening forty years of wandering in the Sinai Peninsula) are
also myths, not history25 Let us review the evidence. The existence of Moses,
the main protagonist of the Exodus account, as a historical person is not proven
either way, but certainly many elements are legendary. The story of Moses' birth,
his escape from harm by being put in a papyrus basket and left to drift on the
river before being discovered (Exodus 2:2-10) parallels closely the nativity story
of the legendary Akkadian king Sargon, who was also placed inside a basket to
escape dire circumstances and left to drift on the river before being rescued by
someone. The general flow of cultural influence and the antiquity of the
Akkadian legend make it seem likely that the Genesis account is based on the
Akkadian legend.26
Other details add to our doubt regarding the historicity of the story. We have at
least three names for Moses' father-in-law-Reuel (Exodus 2:18), Jethro (Exodus
3:1), and Hobab (Numbers 10:29; Judges 4:11).27 Even the name "Moses" itself
was originally Egyptian, not Hebrew.28
The date of the Exodus is also plagued with uncertainty According to 1 Kings
6:1, the Exodus happened 480 years before Solomon built the temple. This
places the event somewhere around 1495-1440 BCE. Yet the Israelites were
forced to build the cities of Pithom and Ramses, according to Exodus 1:8-11.
Now, there are only two possible pharaohs who might have had a role to play in
the building of the city of Ramses, since a city with that name could not have
been built by anyone else but by the pharaoh whose name it reflects, and both of
them reigned too late for biblical chronology to be accurate. The first Egyptian
pharaoh named Ramses came to power in 1320 BCE. This is a century too late to
be harmonized with biblical chronology. There is evidence from Egyptian
sources that a city called Pi-Ramses was built under a pharaoh named Ramses II,
who reigned over Egypt from 1279-1213 BCE. But the story of Israelite slaves
building Pi-Ramses could only have happened during his reign-more than two
hundred years after the time calculated by the biblical chronology29 Any
attempt to equate the Hyksos-a line of Semitic kings who ruled Egypt from the
mid-seventeenth to the mid-sixteenth centuries BCE-with the Israelites fail, too.
For the Hyksos were expelled from Egypt into Canaan by Pharaoh Amose
around 1570 BCE, which is too early for any of the biblical chronology to work.
It's simply more probable that the violent expulsion of the Hyksos became
embedded in the folktales of the Canaanite people, which forms the basis for the
oral tales that eventually became the Exodus narrative. But the main details of
the Exodus (Moses, the forty-year trek in Sinai, and the locations the Israelites
went through) must all be pieces of historical fiction.30
Now, according to Exodus 12:40, the Israelites lived in Egypt for 430 years.
Yet for all this time, there is simply no literary and archaeological evidence
outside the Hebrew Bible that records the sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt.31 A
similar problem exists with the number of people claimed to have left Egypt.
According to Exodus 12:37, there were six hundred thousand men, not counting
the women and children, who left with Moses. We are also told this one-million-
plus nation wandered for forty years in the wilderness in Sinai (Joshua 5:6).
Surely more than a million people wandering around for forty years would have
left some traces for archaeologists to find. Yet not a single piece of archeological
evidence has been found. This is not for want of trying, either.32
William Dever, an archaeologist normally associated with the more
conservative end of Syro-Palestinian archaeology, has labeled the question of the
historicity of Exodus "dead."33 Israeli archaeologist Ze'ev Herzog, provides the
current consensus view on the historicity of the Exodus: "The Israelites never
were in Egypt. They never came from abroad. This whole chain is broken. It is
not a historical one. It is a later legendary reconstruction-made in the seventh
century [BCE]-of a history that never happened." 34
The story of the conquest of Canaan told in the book of Joshua has suffered
much the same fate as the Exodus-archaeological discoveries have shown that it
simply did not happen the way the Bible describes. One of the most memorable
stories in the Bible is that of the conquest of Jericho by Joshua and the Israelites
(Joshua 6:1-2 1). We are told that on the seventh day of the siege, the Israelites
shouted and the priests blew the trumpets, which brought the walls of Jericho
tumbling down. Unfortunately, archaeological digs led by Kathleen Kenyon in
the 1950s showed that in the period most likely for this event (1550 to 1200
BCE), Jericho was either uninhabited or a small village with just a few huts.
There was certainly no fortified wall that could have dramatically came tumbling
down!35 The same negative results greet excavations at Al (Joshua 8:21-29),36
Gibeon (Joshua 10:1-2),37 Lachish (10:32),38 and other cities.39 Indeed,
according to archaeologists Bill Dever and Lawrence Stager, almost all of the
roughly thirty cities Joshua was supposed to have conquered were either
uninhabited at that time or destroyed by other means, or never even destroyed.40
The story of the united kingdom of Israel under David and Solomon also
seems to be unraveled by archaeology. According to the Bible, David's kingdom
consisted of a united Israel and Judah along with other kingdoms he conquered-
Syria and Hamath to the north; Moab, Ammon to the east; Philistine to the west;
and Edom to the south (2 Samuel 8: 3-13; 10). Surely such a vast empire would
have left immense archaeological evidence of its existence. The date normally
ascribed to King David's reign is 1005-970 BCE. And although no one doubts
the existence of King David,41 there is no archaeological evidence for his
kingdom beyond his existence. As archae-ologistJohn Laughlin noted: "[T] here
is little in the overall archaeological picture of the tenth century BC that can be
connected with David."4' Whatever evidence there is points to the fact that the
story about the grandeur of David's empire is a myth of a fictional golden age
created by later writers. David's "vast" empire is a myth.43 If David was indeed
king, he never ruled over the vast regions described in the Bible.44
David's son Solomon has not fared much better. According to the Bible,
Solomon, who was king around 970-931 BCE, ruled over an even larger empire
than his father did. His vast kingdom supposedly spanned from the Euphrates
River to the border of Egypt (1 Kings 4:21). Solomon's fame and influence
spread far and wide (1 Kings 10:1). His diplomatic skills were proven by his
securing alliances with other nations such as Egypt (1 Kings 3:1) and Tyre (1
Kings 5). He was also known for his massive architectural projects, including the
Temple in Jerusalem (1 Kings 6) and the royal palace on Ophel (1 Kings 7). He
also improved on the fortifications of Jerusalem, Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer (1
Kings 9:15). He also built forty thousand stalls of horses for his fourteen
thousand chariots and twelve thousand horsemen (1 Kings 4:26).
And yet, as in the case with his father David, modern archaeology simply
finds no evidence for this empire or for any of his supposed architectural
undertakings. Solomon's temple is described in detail in 1 Kings 6, yet despite
the extensive archaeological digs in the city, in the words of archaeologist John
Laughlin, "not a single piece of this building has been found."4' There is also no
sign of any of the other grand architectural works that he supposedly built; his
palace, or the fortifications atJerusalem, Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer.46
The archeological evidence for the population, settlement patterns, and
economic resources of Judah turns out to be the same for the time of Solomon as
for the time of David. But as archaeologists Finkelstein and Silberman succinctly
put it: "As far as we can see on the basis of archaeological surveys, Judah
remained relatively empty of permanent population, quite isolated and very
marginal right up to and past the presumed time of David and Solomon, with no
major urban centers and with no pronounced hierarchy of hamlets, villages and
towns." 47
Modern archaeology is no friend of the Bible.
MYTHS, LEGENDS, AND FAIRY TALES IN THE BIBLE
We are all familiar with stories of talking animals in Aesop's Fables-the hare and
the tortoise and the fox who cried "sour grapes" are just two of the many
endearing tales we treasure from our childhood. Aesop's fables came from
around the sixth century BCE and are therefore near contemporaries of stories
told in the Pentateuch.48 While we cannot say one directly influenced the other,
we can safely say that telling tales like these is how ancient storytelling cultures
conveyed moral lessons. In the Old Testament (OT), something evangelicals
would like us to believe is a purely historical document, we find the same kinds
of themes. Genesis 2 introduces us to a talking snake who urged Eve to partake
of the forbidden fruit. In Numbers 22 we find the story of Balaam and his talking
donkey.
We find parallels in myths, legends, and religious fairy tales that were
contemporaneous with the authors of the canonical Bible in every stage of its
development. Here I can only devote space to one such myth concerning the
similarities in the stories of the virgin birth, found in Matthew and Luke, with
those found in GrecoRoman culture.
First, let's look at the birth stories of clearly mythical gods of the
Mediterranean world. Many of the popular deities were born of virgins. For
example, in the Greek myth, Perseus was born of the virgin Danae, by Zeus who
took the form of a shower of gold to impregnate her. Phoenician mythology
claimed Adonis to be born of the virgin Myrrh. Parthenogenesis was also the
explanation for the birth of the Phrygian deity Attis from his mother Cybele.49
Similarly, even in stories told about historical figures we find common themes.
Great men must have their greatness injected into their DNA from the time they
were conceived. Thus the idea of conception by gods, either virginally or via
some form of unusual intercourse was a common element in the stories told
about them. Alexander the Great (356-323 BCE) was conceived when his
mother-to-be dreamed of a bolt of lightning-a symbol of Zeus-entering her
womb. The Roman emperor Augustus Caesar (63 BCE-14 CE) was conceived
when Apollo, in the form of a snake, had intercourse with Augustus's mother,
who was sleeping in the temple. Apollo was also implicated in the conception of
the Greek philosopher Plato (ca. 427 BCE-ca. 347 BCE) and the Greek
mathematician Pythagoras (sixth century BCE).50 It is not just Zeus or Apollo
that did all the impregnating in the ancient world. In the Roman legend of
Romulus and Remus, we are told they were conceived when Mars, the god of
war, impregnated their mother, Rhea Silvea, the vestal virgin.51
So it should not come as a surprise that the early Christians came up with
similar stories aboutJesus. He was born of a virgin mother, Mary, who was
impregnated by an act of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 1:20; Luke 1:35).
Evangelicals protest that the stories about those other gods and GrecoRoman
heroes are mere myths and legends, whereas the story of Jesus' conception and
birth is grounded in world history. In the nativity stories of Matthew and Luke,
we find references to historical figures, such as King Herod the Great (ca. 79-4
BC) and the Roman governor of Syria, Qiiirinius (ca. 51 BCE-21 CE). Herod
tried to have Jesus murdered by ordering the killing of all male infants aged two
and below, while the reason we're told Joseph and Mary had to go to Bethlehem
from Nazareth was due to the census conducted by Qpirinius.
These figures do not just form a backdrop to the stories but were integral to
the plot. Yet, rather ironically, it's these very figures that when laid bare show us
how the nativity stories are merely ancient fairy tales historicized. The story of
Herod's involvement in the nativity is told in chapter 2 of Matthew. There we
read that after Jesus was born, "wise men from the east" (Matthew 2:2) came to
Jerusalem to look for the newborn "king of the Jews." They had seen a star in the
east that led them to Judea. Their enquiries reached the ears of Herod. He was
worried about this possible threat to his throne and summoned the chief priests
and the teachers of the law to inquire from them where the Messiah would be
born. They told him Bethlehem was the ordained place for his birth since it was
prophesied in the OT (Micah 5:2). Herod then told the wise men to look for the
newborn and to inform him of the baby's whereabouts on the pretext that he, too,
would want to worship the new "king of the Jews." The star then led the wise
men to Bethlehem until it "stood over where the young child was" (Matthew
2:9). Upon seeing the babyJesus, the wise men gave him gifts of gold, incense,
and myrrh and worshipped him. Then they went back to their own country by
another route, having been warned by an angel in a dream not to go back to
Herod. Then an angel appeared to Joseph, again in a dream, telling him to take
his family to Egypt for fear of King Herod, which he did. So Herod, realizing the
wise men had outwitted him, had given orders to slaughter all the baby boys less
than two years of age in and around Bethlehem (Matthew 2:16). After Herod
died, Joseph took his family from Egypt back to Judea. But when he heard that
Archelaus was reigning in his father's stead, they went to live in Nazareth of
Galilee instead.
Now we know Herod was the sort of fellow who could have gone around
killing babies. We know from theJewish historianJosephus (37-100 CE) that,
among other things, he murdered his wife, had his brother-in-law and three of his
sons executed, and had the Jewish high priest Aristobolus III and forty-five
members of the Jewish religious council (the Sanhedrin) killed for su
pporting
the Hasmoneans. The most dramatic point in Matthew's nativity story was when
Herod was said to have ordered the slaughtering of all the male children "in
Bethlehem and all the surrounding countryside" (Matthew 2:16). Herein lies a
major problem: there is no other account of this massive slaughter in any other
source-neither in the rest of the NT nor in any other secular records. Josephus's
account of Herod and his exploits spanned four books in his ,newish Antiquities
(books 14-17). From his description of Herod, it is quite obvious that Joseph-Lis
hated him. He laid out in detail the crimes committed by Herod, many of which
were of a lesser kind than the slaughter of the children. Yet nowhere in
Josephus's work do we find any mention of this massacre. This silence speaks
volumes, for he should have been in a position to know, and he would have had
every reason to tell the story if he had known about it. But he said nothing. Most
scholars have correctly interpreted this to mean that the incident never happened
and was just an invention of Matthew''
As an aside, it is also interesting to consider this story from the framework of
the problem of evil. Note that God intervened by revealing to the wise men in a
dream not to go back to Jerusalem so Herod would not know exactly where the
baby Jesus was to kill him. It was because of not knowing this that Herod had all
the male babies below two years of age in Beth lehem slaughtered. It was also
revealed to Joseph in a dream to take Mary and Jesus and flee to Egypt to avoid
this massacre. As the critical nineteenth-century historical scholar David Strauss
(1808-1874) pointed out, if God wanted to avoid the massacre of the innocents,
he could easily have intervened supernaturally at the beginning by making the
wise men avoid Jerusalem altogether and head on to Bethlehem directly. That
way Herod would never have heard of the birth of the Messiah.53
There are other reasons to doubt the historicity of Matthew's account. As
many scholars have noted, Matthew's account of this section-including the flight
from Egypt and slaughter of male children-parallels the story of Moses found in
Exodus. In Exodus 1:22 we're told that the pharaoh ordered that every male baby
born shall be killed by being thrown into the river. That Moses' flight from Egypt
is so obviously in Matthew's mind when he wrote this account can also be seen
from the fact that he used a passage from Hosea (11:1-2), which actually referred
to the original Exodus, as a prophetic passage about the return to Judea of
Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. The Exodus story was the source that provided
Matthew with the base material with which to construct the story54 The author
of Matthew would not have considered this method unusual, since it is a
wellknown Jewish exegetical method known as aggadic midrash. This involves
recasting older stories into newer ones and thereby reading "deeper" meanings
into old text. This can be seen even in the OT where Moses' parting of the Red
Sea (Exodus 14:2-31) is recast as the story of Joshua parting the River Jordan
(Joshua 3:14-17). Likewise, the historical connection between Herod and Jesus
is an invention of the Gospel of Matthew.
According to the Gospel of Luke, and in contradiction to Matthew, it was the
census called by Qpirinius that compelled Joseph and the pregnant Mary to
travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem (Luke 2:1), rather than (as in Matthew) the
other way around (and for a different reason: fear of Herod's successor,
Archelaus). The census is undoubtedly a historical event. But unfortunately, the
problems begin to pile up the moment we consider the whole story in more
detail.55
• According to Luke 2:3-4, Joseph had to go to Bethlehem because he was a
Why Faith Fails The Christian Delusion Page 20