Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Rolf Furuli <furuli AT online.no>]

Dear Bill,

I note that when you speak about "absence of evidence is not evidence 
of absence," you say that  in *many cases* this does not hold, but 
you avoid any all-proposition. You are perfectly correct. And let us 
now  state the problem in scientific terms.

Hypothesis 1: A herd of elephants ran through the field irrigated by 
rain last night. Prediction: We expect to find footprints of the 
elephants in the mud.

Hypothesis 2: A group of 600,000 men and their families stayed in 
Sinai some time between the 11th and 15th centuries B.C.E. 
Prediction: We expect to find ...

Yes, what do we expect to find? Taking into account that this is said 
to have happened more than 3,000 years ago, and the account says that 
the group did not build houses and cities, what will we expect to 
find? Perhaps this is a situation where "absence of evidence is not 
evidence of absence"? If it is not, we should be able to point to 
definite  things that we would expect to find.

A related question is this: Do we have any knowledge at all regarding 
Sinai from the time between the 11th and the 15th century? Which 
finds have been made? Have traces of other occupants been found, or 
was Sinai void of any people during these centuries?

The mentioned example is an archaeological one. Some days ago I 
focused upon the text of the Pentateuch and formed the hypothesis: 
"The Pentateuch was written in the 15th century by a man called 
Moses."  To doubt that something that is written in the Pentatauch 
really happened is a psychological matter that is based on logic, or 
faith, or philosophy etc. By forming this hypothesis I tried to put 
the matter regarding the writing of the Pentatauch into a scientific 
setting. The hypothesis predicts that we will not find anachronisms 
in the text, and i discussed some possibilities. Then I asked the 
list members to mention other predictions that could be tested. But 
no one responded. So, I try again with a question based on the 
hypothesis: Which sides/characteristics/matters in the Hebrew text of 
the Pentateuch forbid a 15th century writing?

If we cannot point to anything, a rejection of a 15th century writing 
is only based on logic, faith, philosophy etc, and it is not based on 
scientific evidence.


Best regards,

Rolf Furuli
University of Oslo





> Karl wrote:
>
> > I think Moses wrote Exodus about 1440 BC telling the true story of the
> > exodus. This is what is indicated when cross referencing other
> > verses in the Bible. But a Naturalist will come along and say that it
> is
> > impossible for the story to be true, because of all the claims of the
> > supernatural acting into history.
>
> I expect you know better but this isn't why people think the account is
> not historically accurate. A principle often quoted on this list is
> ``absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'', but the reality is,
> in many cases, exactly that. I give you an example. Not far from where I
> work is a large playing field, the ground is always soft there. Either
> it rains or it is irrigated. Suppose someone says that a herd of
> elephants ran through the fields last night. Laying to one side whether
> this is reasonable thing to claim, if I go to the playing fields and
> there are no elephant footprints then this is evidence of absence, i.e.
> that no elephants ran through there last night. It is this problem which
> plagues the Exodus account and has prompted a few discussions of the
> meaning of eleph, usually translated thousand, in these accounts.
> According to the accounts there were 600,000+ men not counting women or
> children who lived for 40 years in the Sinai region. Even if we grant
> supernatural feeding and so on so that there is no question about what
> did they eat or drink, there is still no evidence of such large number
> of people occupying the Sinai region at that time. So even allowing
> supernatural intervention does not solve the problem. Its not a case of
> supernaturalist against naturalists, it's a case of whether you allow
> outside evidence to inform your understanding of the texts. I see
> nothing in either the Christian or Jewish religious traditions which
> bars adherents from examining the evidence and allowing that evidence to
> influence their understanding of the texts.
>
>
> Bill Rea, Ph.D. ICT Services, University of Canterbury \_
> E-Mail bill.rea AT canterbury.ac.nz                       </   New
> Phone +64-3-364-2331, Fax  +64-3-364-2332             /)  Zealand
> Unix Systems Administrator                           (/'
>
> _______________________________________________
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew