Author Topic: Breaking down Exodus (Read 5690 times)

Tre · « **on:** July 24, 2007, 07:18:58 AM »

On either the National Geographic or History channels, have any of you seen that show about Exodus?

They gave clear scientific theories on what may have caused the first six Plagues and even answered the mystery of the burning bush.

Really cool show.

Parker · « **Reply #1 on:** July 24, 2007, 12:43:45 PM »

Saw it last night...there is no proof other than the Bible of the Jews Exodus, nothing...You would think that Ramses would have left a little footnote. I had question this in high school, why was there no proof provided by the Egyptians?

24KT · « **Reply #2 on:** July 25, 2007, 05:29:45 AM »

Quote from: Tre on July 24, 2007, 07:18:58 AM

On either the National Geographic or History channels, have any of you seen that show about Exodus?

They gave clear scientific theories on what may have caused the first six Plagues and even answered the mystery of the burning bush.

Really cool show.

There have been other plausible scientific theories of the parting of the sea, and walking on water as well.

Colossus_500 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 25, 2007, 02:42:13 PM »

Quote from: jaguarenterprises on July 25, 2007, 05:29:45 AM

There have been other plausible scientific theories of the parting of the sea, and walking on water as well.

Butterbean · « **Reply #4 on:** July 25, 2007, 03:21:14 PM »

Quote from: Parker on July 24, 2007, 12:43:45 PM

why was there no proof provided by the Egyptians?

Maybe because they got "pwn3d" $:-\$

OzmO · « **Reply #5 on:** July 25, 2007, 03:53:04 PM »

When 600,000 slaves, and plagues of that magnitude happen, the "heroes" (Egyptians who took over leadership) who brought them back to "greatness" (a recovery from the economic collapse or problems they dealt with) would make sure the legacy of their contributions would be remembered.

the fact that there isn't a historical record of anything similar in the mists of thousands of historic records of Egypt's ancient history available and discovered, only points to the very strong possibility that exodus isn't factual.

It's not like what a person who experienced a embarrassing situation would do and not tell anyone.

Butterbean · « **Reply #6 on:** July 25, 2007, 04:14:51 PM »

Quote from: OzmO on July 25, 2007, 03:53:04 PM

It's not like what a person who experienced a embarrassing situation would do and not tell anyone.

My post was a joke.....sorry ....

it was lame...

OzmO, on kind of another note, what do you think about how the Jews are portrayed in the bible? Coming from your perspective in not believing major portions of the bible why do you think it presents such a scathing review of God's "chosen people?"

OzmO · « **Reply #7 on:** July 25, 2007, 04:53:09 PM »

Quote from: STella on July 25, 2007, 04:14:51 PM

My post was a joke.....sorry .... it was lame...

OzmO, on kind of another note, what do you think about how the Jews are portrayed in the bible? Coming from your perspective in not believing major portions of the bible why do you think it presents such a scathing review of God's "chosen people?"

i think they are indicative of the social struggles and events attach to any culture or history of a nation, race or what have you. i believe their struggles are no different from anyone and i don't believe they are any more chosen than your local pagan, Muslim, Buddhist, German, Italian etc..

They made mistakes, they did good things, bad things etc..

We must remember the people who chose the books to be included in the bible chose books that fit into what they believed was the truth or what support the direction of the new religion: Christianity.

Those books were written from a a number of people's perspective who may or may not have certain beliefs that caused them to look at things a certain way. For example a very morally conservative person might see an earth quake that destroyed a city they they believe was evil becuase the city allowed gay sex without penalty as a direct act of GOD. Logic and science tells us different.

Parker · « **Reply #8 on:** July 26, 2007, 04:47:00 AM »

Quote from: OzmO on July 25, 2007, 04:53:09 PM

i think they are indicative of the social struggles and events attach to any culture or history of a nation, race or what have you. i believe their struggles are no different from anyone and i don't believe they are any more chosen than your local pagan, Muslim, Buddhist, German, Italian etc..

They made mistakes, they did good things, bad things etc..

We must remember the people who chose the books to be included in the bible chose books that fit into what they believed was the truth or what support the direction of the new religion: Christianity.
Those books were written from a a number of people's perspective who may or may not have certain beliefs that caused them to look at things a certain way. For example a very morally conservative person might see an earth quake that destroyed a city they they believe was evil becuase the city allowed gay sex without penalty as a direct act of GOD. Logic and science tells us different.

They did a special on the "Lost Years" of Jesus...There are gospels that were not included about Jesus that stated he killed a man...They wanted to present Jesus in a different light, and that wouldn't fit in.

Dos Equis · « **Reply #9 on:** July 26, 2007, 11:04:29 AM »

Quote from: jaguarenterprises on July 25, 2007, 05:29:45 AM

There have been other plausible scientific theories of the parting of the sea, and walking on water as well.

Specifically?

loco · « **Reply #10 on:** July 26, 2007, 11:53:21 AM »

Quote from: Parker on July 24, 2007, 12:43:45 PM

Saw it last night...there is no proof other than the Bible of the Jews Exodus, nothing...You would think that Ramses would have left a little footnote. I had question this in high school, why was there no proof provided by the Egyptians?

Quote from: OzmO on July 25, 2007, 03:53:04 PM

the fact that there isn't a historical record of anything similar in the mists of thousands of historic records of Egypt's ancient history available and discovered, only points to the very strong possibility that exodus isn't factual.

Are you guys serious? You really believe that just because no archaeological evidence has yet been found to support something that the Bible mentions automatically means that it isn't true? Has archaeology already found everything? Then they should stop looking.

The Hittite civilization
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/hittite-faq.htm

Quote

The Old Testament mentions the ancient Hittite civilization more than 50 times, either by their Hebrew name "Chitti" or by their designation as the sons and daughters Heth. However, prior to their rediscovery in the 19th century, there appeared to be no evidence for their existence outside of the Bible. Skeptics cited the missing evidence as evidence that the Bible actually fabricated their existence. This called the reliability of the biblical account into question. Basically the skeptics said, "We can't find any evidence for the Hittite civilization outside of the Bible. This demonstrates that the Bible cannot be trusted as an historical source."

Then, in the 19th and 20th centuries archaeologists hit the jackpot, not only identifying extrabiblical references to the Hittite civilization, but by actually finding and excavating the ancient Hittite capital city of Hattusa (modern day Boðazköy in northern Turkey). The rediscovery of this ancient civilization vindicated the Biblical record.

Evidence for the Hittites was bolstered in Egypt with the discovery of a treaty between Pharaoh Ramses II and the Hittite Empire. Originally written on silver tablets in Heliopolis and Hattusus, a huge copy was found on a wall of the great Karnak Temple. After years of fighting between the Hittites and the Egyptians, Ramses II and the Hittite king settled on a treaty whereby the territory of Syria and Canaan would be divided between them.

King David
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/the-house-of-david-inscription-faq.htm

Quote

The House of David Inscription (also known as the "Tel Dan Inscription") was discovered in 1994 during excavations at the ancient city of Dan. It is considered by many to be the first reference to the "House of David" discovered outside the biblical text.

The House of David Inscription appears to be a fragment of a victory monument erected by a king of Damascus (Aram) during the 9th century BC, some 250 years after King David's reign. The fragment specifically mentions victories over a "king of Israel" (probably Joram) and a king of the "House of David" (probably Ahaziah).
The House of David Inscription (Tel Dan Inscription) currently resides in the Israel Museum, Jerusalem.

Ancient Roman Crucifixion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion#Archaeological_evidence_for_ancient_crucifixion

Quote

Despite the fact that the ancient Jewish historian Josephus, as well as other sources, refer to the crucifixion of thousands of people by the Romans, there is only a single archaeological discovery of a crucified body dating back to the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus which was discovered in Jerusalem. It is not surprising that there is only one such discovery, because a crucified body was usually left to decay on the cross and therefore would not be preserved. The only reason these archaeological remains were preserved was because family members gave this particular individual a customary burial.
The remains were found accidentally in an ossuary with the crucified man's name on it, 'Yehohanan, the son of Hagakol'. The ossuary contained a heel with a nail driven through its side, indicating that the heels may have been driven through the sides of the tree (one on the left side, one on the right side, and not with both feet together in front). The nail had olive wood on it indicating that he was crucified on a cross made of olivewood or on an olive tree. Since olive trees are not very tall, this would suggest that the condemned were crucified at eye level. Additionally, the piece of olive wood was located between the heel and the head of the nail, presumably to keep the condemned from freeing his foot by sliding it over the nail. His legs were found broken. It is thought that since in Roman times iron was expensive, the nails were removed from the dead body to cut the costs, which would help to explain why only one has been found, as the back of the nail was bent in such a way that it couldn't be removed.

OzmO · « **Reply #11 on:** July 26, 2007, 11:19:56 PM »

Quote from: loco on July 26, 2007, 11:53:21 AM

Are you guys serious? You really believe that just because no archaeological evidence has yet been found to support something that the Bible mentions automatically means that it isn't true? Has archaeology already found everything? Then they should stop looking.

The Hittite civilization
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/hittite-faq.htm
King David
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/the-house-of-david-inscription-faq.htm

Ancient Roman Crucifixion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion#Archaeological_evidence_for_ancient_crucifixion

We are talking about exodus not king David, roman crucification etc.... An incredible thing happen to them in exodus and there is no record of it any where. Which indicates to a strong possiblity it never happen the way it was portrayed in the Bible.

Stay on subject..... BTW just becuase you find a physical location wrote about in the bible like jericho's well doesn't mean the rest of the BS is exactly true.

loco · « **Reply #12 on:** July 27, 2007, 05:08:43 AM »

Quote from: OzmO on July 26, 2007, 11:19:56 PM

We are talking about exodus not king David, roman crucification etc.... An incredible thing happen to them in exodus and there is no record of it any where. Which indicates to a strong possiblity it never happen the way it was portrayed in the Bible.

Stay on subject..... BTW just becuase you find a physical location wrote about in the bible like jericho's well doesn't mean the rest of the BS is exactly true.

OzmO, you crack me up.

Skeptics in the past made fools out of themselves by saying the very same thing that you are saying now about Exodus. The Hittite civilization, King David and Roman crucifixion are just several of many examples of this.

Foolish skeptics in the past said that if the Hittite civilization was mentioned so many times in the Bible and if they were so influential to Egypt and the Hebrews, you would think there would be a record of it somewhere outside of the Bible. Well, not only did archaeologists recently find Egyptian records of the Hittites, but they also found the ruins of the Hittite civilization itself. The existence of the Hittites was denied until 1906.

Foolish skeptics in the past said that King David was a myth because you would think that if such a great king of Israel really did exist, there would be at least one record of him outside the Bible. Well, archaeologists did in 1994 find evidence of King David outside of the Bible.

Foolish skeptics in the past said that if what the Bible and what the great Historian Josephus wrote, that thousands of people were crucified by the Romans around the time of Jesus, then why do we not have a single archaeological evidence of it? Archaeologists recently found that evidence.

The list goes on and on. These skeptics made fools out of themselves by saying the very same things that you guys are now saying about Exodus. If you want to give a better reason for believing that Exodus is BS, that's a different story. But to say that it is BS only because no record of it has yet been found outside of the Bible is not very intelligent, especially in light of the example these foolish skeptics have already left for you.

Parker · « **Reply #13 on:** July 27, 2007, 05:12:44 AM »

It was said that the Exodus could of happened over a period of time, but not a mass Exodus...But there is a arch. who has found a place which used to be a water way, and their is tons of Bronze (the Egyptians-Ramses warriors had bronze weapons), also thru the dessert area where it was said that the Jews had walked, there were tons of grinding stones for germ.

OzmO · « **Reply #14 on:** July 27, 2007, 10:20:54 AM »

Quote from: loco on July 27, 2007, 05:08:43 AM

OzmO, you crack me up.

Skeptics in the past made fools out of themselves by saying the very same thing that you are saying now about Exodus. The Hittite civilization, King David and Roman crucifixion are just several of many examples of this.

Foolish skeptics in the past said that if the Hittite civilization was mentioned so many times in the Bible and if they were so influential to Egypt and the Hebrews, you would thing there would be a record of it somewhere outside of the Bible. Well, not only did archaeologists recently find Egyptian records of the Hittites, but they also found the ruins of the Hittite civilization itself. The existence of the Hittites was denied until 1906.

Foolish skeptics in the past said that King David was a myth because you would think that if such a great king of Israel really did exist, there would be at least one record of him outside the Bible. Well, archaeologists did in 1994 find evidence of King David outside of the Bible.

Foolish skeptics in the past said that if what the Bible and what the great Historian Josephus wrote, that thousands of people were crucified by the Romans around the time of Jesus, then why do we not have a single archaeological evidence of it? Archaeologists recently found that evidence.

The list goes on and on. These skeptics made fools out of themselves by saying the very same things that you guys are now saying about Exodus. If you want to give a better reason for believing that Exodus is BS, that's a different story. But to say that it is BS only because no record of it has yet been found outside of the Bible is not very intelligent, especially in light of the example these foolish skeptics have already left for you.

no, what i said it because of the lack of evidence in such a huge event there is a strong possibility it didn't happen the way the Bible says it did.

What's funny is how in writing our meanings can get mistaken.

Colossus_500 · « **Reply #15 on:** July 27, 2007, 10:54:04 AM »

Ozmo,

Do you believe that:

Jesus is the Son of God?

Jesus Died for Your Sins and Mine?

God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are one in the same? (the Trinity)

Jesus was sinless?

Jesus rose from the dead to conquer death, and that he resides in heaven with the Father?

Jesus will return as ruler over all?

(i didn't know where else to put this post, so i thought i'd just put it here. i hope you don't mind.)

OzmO · « **Reply #16 on:** July 27, 2007, 11:00:46 AM »

Quote from: Colossus_500 on July 27, 2007, 10:54:04 AM

Ozmo,

Do you believe that:

Jesus is the Son of God?

Jesus Died for Your Sins and Mine?

God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are one in the same? (the Trinity)

Jesus was sinless?

Jesus rose from the dead to conquer death, and that he resides in heaven with the Father?

Jesus will return as ruler over all?

(i didn't know where else to put this post, so i thought i'd just put it here. i hope you don't mind.)

I believe in God and I believe in the truth what ever that maybe. I don't believe the Bible is 100% true or the 100% word of God.

Butterbean · « **Reply #17 on:** July 30, 2007, 12:25:15 PM »

Quote from: OzmO on July 27, 2007, 11:00:46 AM

I believe in the truth what ever that maybe.

What the hizznet

OzmO · « **Reply #18 on:** July 30, 2007, 01:25:49 PM »

Quote from: STella on July 30, 2007, 12:25:15 PM

What the hizznet

What's a hizznet?

BTW...... I believe in the truth. GOD should not be a mystery. But unfortunately if you take every message sent to us over time, he has never be very direct. Oh yes, he's been direct as far as Exodus is concerned but that was written so many years ago and so much of it is un-provable and when viewed objectively it's easy to see it was written with an agenda. A human agenda.

Every religion believes they bring the truth. How is one to know? And in this modern era GOD has not come out and communicated with us as he allegedly did to moses, buddah, Mohamed, etc....

So what am i to believe in the absence of direct contact from GOD and the chaos of religious turf wars?

I believe in GOD. I believe in the truth...what ever that may be.

Colossus_500 · « **Reply #19 on:** August 03, 2007, 11:50:49 AM »

Quote from: OzmO on July 30, 2007, 01:25:49 PM

I believe in GOD. I believe in the truth...what ever that may be.

Do you believe God to be truth? Do you believe that God loves you? How can you believe in something you are unsure about?

OzmO · « **Reply #20 on:** August 03, 2007, 11:54:52 AM »

Quote from: Colossus_500 on August 03, 2007, 11:50:49 AM

Do you believe God to be truth? Do you believe that God loves you? How can you believe in something you are unsure about?

Yes.

yes.

I'm not at all unsure about GOD.

Colossus_500 · « **Reply #21 on:** August 03, 2007, 12:52:33 PM »

Quote from: OzmO on August 03, 2007, 11:54:52 AM

Yes.

yes.

I'm not at all unsure about GOD.

But you said you believe in God and you believe in the truth "whatever that may be".

Doesn't that mean that truth and God are two separate entities?

OzmO · « **Reply #22 on:** August 03, 2007, 04:02:53 PM »

Quote from: Colossus_500 on August 03, 2007, 12:52:33 PM

But you said you believe in God and you believe in the truth "whatever that may be". Doesn't that mean that truth and God are two separate entities?

No it doesn't.

the truth is what the reality of what God is and his message. I believe in that. In almost all religions there are similar constants; messages. those aren't the whole truth but they certainly parts of the truth.

Al-Gebra · « **Reply #23 on:** August 05, 2007, 01:07:48 AM »

Quote from: STella on July 25, 2007, 04:14:51 PM

My post was a joke.....sorry .... it was lame...

i thought it was brilliant.

Al-Gebra · « **Reply #24 on:** August 05, 2007, 01:10:11 AM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on July 26, 2007, 11:04:29 AM

Specifically?

yeah, these theories are "off the books" . . . they are not to be revealed to ordinary people like you. Just the truly enlightened, like j____s & B__G__M.