This could go in either FQ or IMHO.
I realize that Jews are highly diverse and the answer will invariably be “it depends,” of course. But when Jews celebrate Passover, Purim, etc., do they regard the Exodus of Israelite slaves from Egypt, or the Esther-Haman-Xerxes story, to be actual historical events?
Speaking for this one non-observant, mostly atheist Jew, I assume that there is some historical basis for these holidays.
Ditto.
I think the book of Esther is probably mostly historical, with some exaggeration and enhancement of the story. I think the Passover story has some echo of historical events.
Huh. I consider both as myths with no historical basis. I thought only a very few actually thought otherwise. I am surprised to read that some here do.
I think the exodus could be based on some actual event. That doesn’t mean much, history has plenty of examples where religion has driven people to migrate. I wouldn’t trust any of the details and don’t believe any miracles occurred, but a story about a minority religious group looking for a new home isn’t unbelievable.
My rabbi considers a lot of it as myth.
I think that they are mostly myths that may have a seed of truth as their origin, some more than others.
This is the first time I’ve heard this. A quick Google tells me that Biblical scholars consider it to be a complete myth.
I think most myths have some historical component, too.
I learned on this very Board that the entire Exodus story was a myth. Before that, I thought that the Jewish people were slaves and rose up against Egypt and wandered in the desert.
So, I would say that some Jews certainly consider the Passover story to be at least somewhat fact-based.
–Atheist, non-observant half-Jewish person who had no idea about the actual history
I think it’s important to note that the word “myth” has more than one meaning.
According to one definition, a myth is a particular type of story or folklore. (Merriam-Webster’s dictionary gives as the first definition: “a usually traditional story of ostensibly historical events that serves to unfold part of the world view of a people or explain a practice, belief, or natural phenomenon.”) Calling something a “myth” in this sense of the word does not necessarily imply that it is false or has no basis in reality—it just means it fits that particular type or genre.
But the word “myth” is also used to mean a false or mistaken belief. In this sense of the word, a myth is, by definition, untrue.
I’m fairly sure many of my ancestors were slaves in ancient Rome.
Egypt? Much less likely, but can’t be ruled out.
I always thought it was the most plausible. King marries Shebrew. Evil advisor plots against her and other Jews. Shebrew and Uncle fast, pray and come up with cunning plan. Evil advisor is hoisted by his own petard. King and Jews live happily ever after. I once read the story of Esther described as ’ a minor Persian harem intrigue’
I think “myth with no historical basis” is pretty clear. And my belief is that most of those stories are myths with some historical basis. God turning Lot’s wife into a pillar of salt probably has less historical basis than the Purim story, which always seemed plausible (in broad strokes) as “a minor Persian harem intrigue”. But there are probably pillars of salt somewhere that prompted Lot story.
Mine also.
I was raised, and remain, pretty much entirely secular; though I have immediate family members who went in the other direction and became more observant Jews.
Then there’s Hanukkah, which is based on historical events, but we tend to gloss over them and teach our kids that it’s about the “miracle of the oil”…or we teach the actual history in generic terms, as a version of the Exodus story with the serial numbers filed off. (“The evil monarch [Antiochus/Pharaoh] tried to oppress the Jews, but the hero [Judah Maccabee/Moses] led us to freedom!”)
Back when I lived with my folks and TLC and Discovery were more reliable, I saw a documentary on a cluster of salt pillars in one of the deserts in the Middle East. It does indeed look like, though I am NOT saying it is, a bunch of people turned to salt.
Completely agree. Myths are the stories a culture settles in on telling itself that promote particular cultural values and identity. They can be completely historically accurate or completely fictional. Or taken out of context of history. Or a mix.
In these cases I had understood without historical basis. But the story of Passover is still key to Jewish identity. We were all slaves. This happened to me. All must be free. It is the story we tell that shapes our values.
Chanukah OTOH is a mix. The war was real. The aftermath not told as part of the story. It was not good. The oil bit all myth added much later.
In college, for one of my English requirements I took a class called “The English Bible as Literature”, which was a breakdown of the Old Testament bible strictly from an historical, anthropological point of view, reflecting upon the KJV of the Bible’s contribution to literature. It was definitely not a class for religious, bible study types, and I imagine anybody mistaking the class for bible study was sorely disappointed, if not offended.
The professor of the class held the theory that the Exodus was based on a historical event, but due to mistranslation because use of vowels in Hebrew was poorly understood, the Israelites actually fled through a place called The Sea of Reeds, which was basically a swamp, not the Red Sea. The Israelites, mainly fleeing on foot, got though ok, but the Egyptians’ chariot wheels got stuck in the mud.
Not quite as grand a vision as Charlton Heston’s Moses parting the waters in The Ten Commandments!
That’s not really a theory – I don’t think there’s even evidence that Egyptians had enslaved the Jewish people. It’s more of a just-so story to explain why the story is there.