Continuing research into the possibility of the reality of the Exodus, and current data/conclusions.

[Hans Blaster]

The difference is that I have never stated explicitly or implicitly that the Bible is an example of retrospective falsification. Nor have I even seriously entertained the notion that it met the criteria to be considered an example of retrospective falsification. Whereas you assuredly, on record, explicitly asked your question concerning the impact of oral transmission on the US Constitution.

Oral transmission and the US Constitution? What? The committee on style wrote up the conventions resolution and then it was signed. The original is on the Mall in Washington and I have seen it with mine own eyes.

 

[AV1611VET]

What are babbling on about now?

Your number crunching to get your desired result.

AV1611VET: I did it myself with a calculator and got nearly the same results as he did.

sjastro: If your claim of being able to derive Ussher's creation date with a calculator ...

I didn't claim that.

In fact ...

I took a calculator and worked out the genealogies once on my own, independent of Bishop Ussher, and came up with a variance of only some 100 years.

That's close enough that I just use his dates for the sake of Occam's razor.

SOURCE: POST 361

 

[AV1611VET]

If you were able to calculate the creation dates using Matthew's and Luke's genealogies ...

Matthew's genealogies start with Abraham, chief.

Luke goes back to Adam, but doesn't give lifespans.

 

[AV1611VET]

This has been shown by scholars so which if any is the correct date?

I'd love to see how scholars used a calculator with Matthew and Luke, seeing as calculators only work with numbers.

Are you saying they made the numbers up?

If so, I would agree with you.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The Bible is indeed valuable, if It is being used by academia to show that It is a product of retrospective falsification by taking 20,000 and retrospectively falsifying it to 603,550.

Frankly, I'm not concerned about the OP topic. It's minor, for several dozen reasons all related to the field(s) of Biblical Criticism, fields that I'm under no fear whatsoever to traverse. As in NADA! So, you're majoring on minors in advocating and pushing for the notion of Biblical Inerrancy.

Moreover, they should probably just close this thread down rather than allowing it to continue. It's becoming a nuisance.

 

[SelfSim]

Moreover, they should probably just close this thread down rather than allowing it to continue. It's becoming a nuisance.

It keeps coming back though.
Its two other predecessor threads were shut down for some reason .. (with no public explanations).

PS: It looks like they were expunged from the public forum record also, what's more(?)

 

[AV1611VET]

Frankly, I'm not concerned about the OP topic. It's minor, for several dozen reasons all related to the field(s) of Biblical Criticism, fields that I'm under no fear whatsoever to traverse. As in NADA! So, you're majoring on minors in advocating and pushing for the notion of Biblical Inerrancy.

Moreover, they should probably just close this thread down rather than allowing it to continue. It's becoming a nuisance.

You can always click that (+ UNFOLLOW) button.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You can always click that (+ UNFOLLOW) button.

I wasn't following this thread in the first place. For me to follow a thread, I'd have to see some intensive research going on within it.

 

[AV1611VET]

I wasn't following this thread in the first place. For me to follow a thread, I'd have to see some intensive research going on within it.

Okie doke.

 

[Ophiolite]

Oral transmission and the US Constitution? What? The committee on style wrote up the conventions resolution and then it was signed. The original is on the Mall in Washington and I have seen it with mine own eyes.

Exactly! And in his responses not a scintilla of recognition of how absurd his question was. (I suspect a cabal of bored, octagenarian, philologist trolls.)

 

[Neogaia777]

I wasn't following this thread in the first place. For me to follow a thread, I'd have to see some intensive research going on within it.

Most of the research indicates that the mass exodus from Egypt, ten plagues and all of that, the very first passover, etc, might not have happened according to the way the Bible said it does/did, if it even happened at all, and so I am continuing my research into the truth of the rest of it, from here, etc.

But please note that this does not make all of the rest of it, not true, etc. And in fact, if we're talking probabilities/possibilities here, that there was a man named Jesus Christ, who went about doing many, many things way beyond normal, the scale is still tipped about that way that that is still probably pretty much true, etc, which then begs the question of how did he did it, or where did he get this power from, if this is still pretty much true, etc? Also did he know the truth about the exodus also, etc? and how was he able to do this still regardless, etc?

Which I tried to get into a bit on my last post, about three pages back now, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

Most of the research indicates that the mass exodus from Egypt, ten plagues and all of that, the very first passover, etc, might not have happened according to the way the Bible said it does/did, if it even happened at all, and so I am continuing my research into the truth of the rest of it, from here, etc.

But please note that this does not make all of the rest of it, not true, etc. And in fact, if we're talking probabilities/possibilities here, that there was a man named Jesus Christ, who went about doing many, many things way beyond normal, the scale is still tipped about that way that that is still probably pretty much true, etc, which then begs the question of how did he did it, or where did he get this power from, if this is still pretty much true, etc? Also did he know the truth about the exodus also, etc? and how was he able to do this still regardless, etc?

Which I tried to get into a bit on my last post, about three pages back now, etc.

God Bless.

We might also still have say, an Abraham, who set out to the land of Cannan from Ur of the Chaeldes, a regional flood that wiped out the very first descendants of Adam and Eve, an Adam and Eve, etc, we just don't know from here, etc. And we probably won't know for sure, until there is more evidence, etc. But this thing with the exodus, should cause us all to go back and all re-re-examine our interpretations of what we all previously thought, and/or believed, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

We might also still have say, an Abraham, who set out to the land of Cannan from Ur of the Chaeldes, a regional flood that wiped out the very first descendants of Adam and Eve, an Adam and Eve, etc, we just don't know from here, etc. And we probably won't know for sure, until there is more evidence, etc. But this thing with the exodus, should cause us all to go back and all re-re-examine our interpretations of what we all previously thought, and/or believed, etc.

God Bless.

Did we have a David and Solomon, a first temple, the Ark of the Covenant, etc, etc, etc?

More research is clearly needed/indicated, and it's probably going to keep me pretty busy for quite a while from here, etc.

But I still believe in Jesus, and where he went, and in his coming back, and when that finally does happen, then "watch out world", because your soul better be ready/prepared, etc.

Because at that point, having completely blown him off because you refused to believe in what he did, and the fact that the scales were always way, way tipped in the favor of the fact that he was indeed a miracle worker, "just because", etc, isn't going to cut it, etc.

God Bless.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Most of the research indicates that the mass exodus from Egypt, ten plagues and all of that, the very first passover, etc, might not have happened according to the way the Bible said it does/did, if it even happened at all, and so I am continuing my research into the truth of the rest of it, from here, etc.

But please note that this does not make all of the rest of it, not true, etc. And in fact, if we're talking probabilities/possibilities here, that there was a man named Jesus Christ, who went about doing many, many things way beyond normal, the scale is still tipped about that way that that is still probably pretty much true, etc, which then begs the question of how did he did it, or where did he get this power from, if this is still pretty much true, etc? Also did he know the truth about the exodus also, etc? and how was he able to do this still regardless, etc?

Which I tried to get into a bit on my last post, about three pages back now, etc.

God Bless.

If you're wanting to get a better angle on the [possible] historicity of a [possible] event like The Exodus, you have a lot of research work ahead of you to do.

And keep in mind, finding the best answer for any historically laden topic or issue, or even just finding a seemingly feasible and credible position on it, is going to require a broad, and deep, Inter-disciplinary approach.

 

[sjastro]

Your number crunching to get your desired result.

AV1611VET: I did it myself with a calculator and got nearly the same results as he did.

sjastro: If your claim of being able to derive Ussher's creation date with a calculator ...

I didn't claim that.

In fact ...

I took a calculator and worked out the genealogies once on my own, independent of Bishop Ussher, and came up with a variance of only some 100 years.

That's close enough that I just use his dates for the sake of Occam's razor.

SOURCE: POST 361

Instead of engaging in this rant, why don’t you provide the calculations and show how it differs from Ussher’s.
I suppose they will be based on the ridiculously long life spans of the patriarchs quoted in the OT.

 

[sjastro]

Matthew's genealogies start with Abraham, chief.

Luke goes back to Adam, but doesn't give lifespans.

The problem here ‘chief’ is not where the genealogies start but in both lines from David to Jesus, Matthew records 28 generations and Luke 42.
Furthermore both lineages have Joseph as being the “biological” father of Jesus which makes it very difficult to explain not only the difference in the generation number but Matthew and Luke differ as to whose son of David is Joseph directly related to.
In Matthew it is Solomon, in Luke it is from Nathan David’s third son.

 

[sjastro]

I'd love to see how scholars used a calculator with Matthew and Luke, seeing as calculators only work with numbers.

Are you saying they made the numbers up?

If so, I would agree with you.

I’m not suggesting anything of the sort.
The 17th century theologian John Lightfoot used excerpts from the Bible including Luke’s genealogy to come up with a creation date of 3929 BC.

The problem is not in making up the numbers but using numbers based on ridiculously long life spans in some cases exceeding 900 years, and parents being fertile well into their hundreds to have children.

 

[AV1611VET]

Instead of engaging in this rant, why don’t you provide the calculations and show how it differs from Ussher’s.
I suppose they will be based on the ridiculously long life spans of the patriarchs quoted in the OT.

I'll pass.

 

[AV1611VET]

The problem here ‘chief’ is not where the genealogies start but in both lines from David to Jesus, Matthew records 28 generations and Luke 42.

Gen ... knee ... sis 5

Gen ... knee ... sis 10

1 Core ... rinth ... thee ... ands 1 - 9

Quit adding other stuff in, or you'll confuse yourself.

Get a calculator and use Genesis 5, Genesis 10, and 1 Corinthians chapters 1-9.

You don't even need a scientific calculator.

Use and abacus if you can.

 

[AV1611VET]

The 17th century theologian John Lightfoot used excerpts from the Bible including Luke’s genealogy to come up with a creation date of 3929 BC.

So John Lightfoot already met your challenge and proved you wrong?

If your claim of being able to derive Ussher's creation date with a calculator is true which I frankly I don't believe, then you can prove me wrong by the using the same calculator to work out the creation dates based on Matthew's and Luke's genealogies.