Evangelical dating site
On the basis of recent archaeological work, I concluded that a Moses-led group would have encountered little, if any, opposition if it had passed through the territories in question during the periods traditionally associated with this event.
However, recent archaeological evidence indicates that opposition to such a passage would be understandable during the Iron II period.
In seiner diesjährigen Botschaft zum Weihnachtsfest macht Bischof Prof. Martin Hein deutlich, dass Gottes Zusage vorbehaltlos allen Menschen gilt.Obviously someone else is writing about Moses and describing his activities (Cf. The Philistines are portrayed as being in Canaan in the days of Abraham (circa 2100 B. Archaeology has established that the Philistines are the Pelest of Ramesside era records and they did not settle in Canaan until circa 1175 B. Thus the Exodus account is _in error_ in having Philistines present circa 1512 B. The archaeological excavations revealed that some of the sites were in existence only in the 7th century B. so this anomaly suggests the Exodus account is no earlier. C.) "how" can one identify the route of the Exodus from the itinerary given in Numbers 33:1-50? That is to say, if there was an Exodus circa 1512/1446/1260 B. they probably did take "the way to the land of the Philistines" as the Philistines were not present to oppose them. (Protestant Exodus date) in Canaan to oppose Israel's Exodus and entry into Canaan from Egypt and _cannot_ have been written by an eye-witness whether that be Moses or someone else. The latter number came into existence no earlier than the 12th century B. The Pentateuch and its Exodus narratives use 22 letters not the 30 letters of Moses' days.We "know" Moses did _not_ write the Exodus account because it is presented in the third person format. The sites enumerated in Numbers 33:1-50 were most probably sites known to the narrator who wrote the account in the 7th/6th century B. so they most likely were in existence in his day (some may have been abandoned in his days while others were occupied but they did "exist" at least physically).
We have established that the account was written not earlier than the 7th/6th century B. because some of the sites mentioned did not come into existence until that time frame. He probably did not realize that some of these sites did not exist or were abandoned at the time he "thought" the Exodus occurred (1512/1446 B. It thus follows that even if one could satisfactorily identify a chain of sites or ruin heaps or tells in existence by 7th/6th century B. extending from Egypt across the Sinai to the Negev and Canaan these sites still would _not_ constitute the "real" route of the Exodus as it would have been most probably the way to the land of the Philistines following the shore of the Mediterranean Sea because there were no Philistines to oppose Israel's Exodus and entry into Canaan in 1512/1446/1260 B. Besides the fact that the Bible (Old and New Testaments) in various books suggests for some scholars different dates for the Exodus, the single most important impediment in establishing a date for the Exodus is Archaeologists' failure to find a period when _all_ the sites mentioned in the narratives were in existence at the same moment in time.For whatever archaeological timeframe that is chosen there are _always_ sites either not yet in exsitence or if in existence are unoccupied (deserted).