Exodus evidence

[Ace777]

If I wasn't a mutant, copy error, I would look just like my parents.

In A Sexual reproduction the "parent" makes an exact copy of itself. In sexual reproduction the DNA is recombined so that no two people are alike. Even identical twins are not exact. I know some identical twins. If they are together I can easily tell them apart. If I run into one or the other sometimes I do not know which one I am talking to and I am too embarrassed to ask.

 

[Gene2memE]

In A Sexual reproduction the "parent" makes an exact copy of itself.

Not on a genetic basis. Mutations occur in asexual reproduction, just like they do in sexual reproduction.

The main drawback is that harmful mutations are more likely to accumulate harmful mutations and weaken natural selection pressure.

"We find that asexual individuals harbor many more DNA mutations than sexual individuals. Importantly, asexual genotypes are more likely to retain mutations in highly-conserved sites (shared across species) that cause protein changes. Such mutations may be detrimental to asexually reproducing populations, and may increase the likelihood of extinction among lineages that do not undergo sex."

Source: Mutation Accumulation in an Asexual Relative of Arabidopsis

Even basic binary fission, mutation occurs.

 

[Astrid]

In A Sexual reproduction the "parent" makes an exact copy of itself. In sexual reproduction the DNA is recombined so that no two people are alike. Even identical twins are not exact. I know some identical twins. If they are together I can easily tell them apart. If I run into one or the other sometimes I do not know which one I am talking to and I am too embarrassed to ask.

"Asexual." And not exact.

Here's your chance to agree that you are wrong.

 

[rvs]

I think people can research Exodus while also agreeing with evolution. I agree with evolution and am intrigued with Exodus, and how they survived while traveling. I'm confused as to why some people automatically think these researchers agree with 6-day creation when researching Exodus.

I still don't understand the curse tablet from Mount Ebal. How come they didn't make a blessing tablet that would help people? If they wanted to make a curse tablet, what were they upset about? Why would anyone want to make a curse tablet? I learned from the Dr. Falk video that epigraphy needs to be in a row, yet the epigraphy wasn't in a row. How come?

Two screenshots from Dr. Falk video

May 15, 2023 Dr. Dave A. Falk showed his disappointment about Mt. Ebal curse amulet. "This is terrible epigraphy. It's some of the worst I've ever seen", says Dr. Dave A. Falk.

Please listen it's at that time stamp in video that Dr. Falk expresses

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I think people can research Exodus while also agreeing with evolution. I agree with evolution and am intrigued with Exodus, and how they survived while traveling. I'm confused as to why some people automatically think these researchers agree with 6-day creation when researching Exodus.

The story of Exodus in no way clashes with the theory of evolution, not one bit. It's mainly a problem of historicity than biology.

 

[AV1611VET]

I still don't understand the curse tablet from Mount Ebal. How come they didn't make a blessing tablet that would help people?

They did.

The "blessing tablet" is on Mt Gerizim.

Deuteronomy 11:29 And it shall come to pass, when the LORD thy God hath brought thee in unto the land whither thou goest to possess it, that thou shalt put the blessing upon mount Gerizim, and the curse upon mount Ebal.

 

[AV1611VET]

The story of Exodus in no way clashes with the theory of evolution, not one bit.

Not directly, no.

But indirectly, yes.

It's mainly a problem of historicity than biology.

Everything's a "problem" to scientists, isn't it?

As it should be.

Scientists can't think themselves out of a wet paper bag, when it comes to Biblical history.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Not directly, no.

But indirectly, yes.

Neither directly nor indirectly, no.

Everything's a "problem" to scientists, isn't it?

As it should be.

Scientists can't think themselves out of a wet paper bag, when it comes to Biblical history.

No, as I said, it's a problem for historians, not biologists. Two very different groups and two very different disciplines. Though to you, anyone who goes against your literal reading of the Bible is a 'scientist' and 'academian' so why should we care what you label people?

 

[common prophets]

I think people can research Exodus while also agreeing with evolution.

The bigger problem is people are split between exodus as myth and exodus with no evidence. Unwilling to see exodus is truth if from indus valley

 

[Astrid]

The bigger problem is people are split between exodus as myth and exodus with no evidence. Unwilling to see exodus is truth if from indus valley

Any story becomes true if you change all the drtails.

 

[AV1611VET]

The bigger problem is people are split between exodus as myth and exodus with no evidence.

I couldn't have said this better, myself?

Just out of curiosity, what do you think of those who say it didn't happen because there's no evidence of it?

And what do you think of those who say it didn't happen, then turn around and call the Israelites "desert nomads"?

I mean, if it didn't happen, how did they get into the desert in the first place?

 

[AV1611VET]

Any story becomes true if you change all the details.

In the case of the exodus, what details do we change?

God tells us what He did, why He did it, how He did it, when He did it, where He did it, what order He did it in, gives us specific conversations between individuals, how many participated, and who the eyewitnesses were.

So what details do we change to "make it true"?

Or are you talking about academia, which changes virtually every detail of it, then claims it's true that it didn't happen?

 

[sjastro]

Since science is an evidence based subject, an appropriate description for the lack of evidence is the adage which gained popularity in astrophysics “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”.
This can be applied to Exodus where the lack of evidence does not disprove Exodus but runs into a serious problem.

Archaeological activity started in the Sinai in the early 20th century and has accelerated in recent decades.
This is the current status of archaeological finds in the Sinai.

​

There is a dearth of Late Bronze Age sites which corresponds to the Exodus time frame and those that have been found such as at Serabit-El-Khadem is an Egyptian temple and a turquoise mine used by the ancient Egyptians, but nothing that can be attributed to the Exodus.

What is even more significant are the archaeological sites found which predate the Late Bronze Age.
The archaeological evidence from these sites reveals nomadic groups which travelled in small numbers and lived in temporary campsites. Their small numbers with their livestock made them very mobile as they quickly travelled across the Sinai in search for more hospitable environments.

By comparison the Israelites all two million of them semi occupied the Sinai for forty years without leaving a shred of evidence which should have been much easier to find by the archaeologists than what was left by their predecessors.
The lack of evidence adage is a very flimsy argument for the support of the Exodus which also avoids answering the question how a large population could survive in an inhospitable environment.
Being a science forum miracles are ruled out.

 

[AV1611VET]

By comparison the Israelites all two million of them semi occupied the Sinai for forty years without leaving a shred of evidence which should have been much easier to find by the archaeologists than what was left by their predecessors.

Do you realize the Israelites dwelt openly in the desert, having artifacts made of more gold than Fort Knox?

Not to mention wearing very expensive clothing?

Do you think they just left stuff lying around all over everywhere?

And anything of no value would have been cleaned up by the locals.

In addition, they wouldn't leave tents and clothing behind for the simple reason that the law of entropy was suspended.

Nothing wore out.

Deuteronomy 29:5 And I have led you forty years in the wilderness: your clothes are not waxen old upon you, and thy shoe is not waxen old upon thy foot.

The lack of evidence adage is a very flimsy argument for the support of the Exodus which also avoids answering the question how a large population could survive in an inhospitable environment.

God fought for them.

Being a science forum miracles are ruled out.

Nice try, but your gag rule, if enforced, means you'll be prevented from being given important information that would explain nicely why you can't find this, that, and the other things.

It's like saying my car stopped running, and I don't want to hear anything about not having gasoline in the tank.

 

[Ace777]

exodus as myth and exodus with no evidence.

Exodus as a myth is a myth for people who deny the evidence. Go to any museum in the middle east and their storage room is filled with evidence that they would not dare to put on display. Even at one time they tried to destroy the ancient artifacts.

 

[AV1611VET]

Exodus as a myth is a myth for people who deny the evidence. Go to any museum in the middle east and their storage room is filled with evidence that they would not dare to put on display. Even at one time they tried to destroy the ancient artifacts.

Ya.

I believe they only put on display what enhances current scientific paradigms, as pertains to evolution.

 

[Ace777]

oI believe they only put on display what enhances current scientific paradigms, as pertains to evolution.

Scientific Progress: Scientists often engage in revisionism by promotion of existing theories, hypotheses, and experimental results. As compared to what gets hidden and swept under the carpet.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Scientific Progress: Scientists often engage in revisionism by promotion of existing theories, hypotheses, and experimental results. As compared to what gets hidden and swept under the carpet.

I really do hope you understand history better than science as you claimed earlier, because your understanding of science and how it works is rather... wrong.

 

[Ace777]

I really do hope you understand history better than science

There are only seven days in a week and 24 hours in a day. So I am limited to that. I know what I know and that is enough for me. Why would I or should I care what you think I do or do not know or what you think I should or should not know? You can live up to your standard for yourself and I will live up to my standard for myself.

But if you think I am wrong about something, then bring it on and show me where I am wrong. Chances are you do not have a right understanding of what I am saying. The concept of being right with God extends beyond intellectual study alone. While study and understanding are valuable, faith plays a crucial role. In fact, Jesus Himself emphasized childlike faith, saying, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these” (Mark 10:14, NIV). Faith involves trust, surrender, and a heartfelt connection with God, transcending mere knowledge. Thank you for highlighting this essential aspect!

Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding; 6in all your ways acknowledge Him, and He will make your paths straight. Proverb 3 5

 

[Ophiolite]

Why would I or should I care what you think I do or do not know or what you think I should or should not know?

Because they may be able to provide insights that are of value to your growth. I welcome intentional or accidental revelations of particular instances of my ignorance that are made my other members. Why would I not? Perhaps your unwillingness to consider comments on your apparent confused knowledge in some areas contributes to that confusion.