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

[AV1611VET]

... it would take the time and effort to understand each other’s POV.

-- Sorry, that just came out.

 

[SelfSim]

I couldn't resist adding to your words below, with a few of my own .. just for my own thread note emphasis, ie: no particular need for you to agree/disagree/respond (see below):

I believe our understanding of reality changes as we acquire more knowledge; in this case the difference between ‘natural’ and ‘other natural’ is the level of understanding.

.. and seeing as 'the supernatural' is defined as being beyond all understanding, and is hence a matter of pure Faith, 'the supernatural' becomes indistinguishable from a testable definition of 'a belief'. (Where, what I mean there, I posted in post #211: 'A belief is any notion held as being true out of preference, that does not follow from objective tests, and is not beholden to the rules of logic'.)

 

[SelfSim]

-- Sorry, that just came out.

There's always a small, limiting set of exceptions ...

 

[Neogaia777]

@Neogaia777.
I will address your recent posts collectively.

The history of Canaan in the video is based on the archaeological evidence pieced together not only from Egypt but also from Israel and Syria and is not a one sided story from Egypt.
You might think there is a paucity of archaeological evidence presented in the video, but it is far greater than the zero evidence found in the Sinai for the Exodus.

As the video reveals the other problem with Exodus is dating it.
It cannot have occurred during the New Kingdom when Canaan was already part of the Egyptian empire otherwise the Israelites would have had to battle the Egyptians all the way to their final destination which is not recorded in Exodus.
The only other possibility is at the very start of the New Kingdom when the Egyptians were pursing the Hyksos out of Egypt into the Near East.
In this case the Hyksos were the Israelites but as was pointed out to you in a previous post, the Hyksos were not monotheists.
If it came after the 12th century BC when Egyptian control of Canaan collapsed, it makes the Exodus pointless as the kingdom of Israel had already been established.

As the archaeological evidence from the video reveals the Israelites were indigenous to Canaan, they never migrated to Egypt to be enslaved which led to the Exodus.
They gained independence after the Egyptians withdrew from Canaan.

I thank you for your information, and I'll have to look into it more and consider the possible possibilities and impossibilities further.

Thank you very much.

God Bless.

 

[SelfSim]

I thank you for your information, and I'll have to look into it more and consider the possible possibilities and impossibilities further.

Might I enquire as to your purpose in doing that?
To me, I can see only one possible purpose: to keep the belief alive ..(?)

 

[Neogaia777]

I couldn't resist adding to your words below, with a few of my own .. just for my own thread note emphasis, ie: no particular need for you to agree/disagree/respond (see below):

.. and seeing as 'the supernatural' is defined as being beyond all understanding, and is hence a matter of pure Faith, 'the supernatural' becomes indistinguishable from a testable definition of 'a belief'. (Where, what I mean there, I posted in post #211: 'A belief is any notion held as being true out of preference, that does not follow from objective tests, and is not beholden to the rules of logic'.)

That is not necessarily true as to the definition of a belief. As I said, almost every great discovery started out as a belief, etc, and it wasn't until afterwards most of the time that they sought to find the evidence, etc, and it was only at that point that it became objectively testable, etc, but there was a time that it only existed as a belief, etc, which they had to have faith in at first, and the conviction to follow, and the evidence only came later, and from them following that all the way, etc. And as I also said, one day the quote/unquote "miraculous", or quote/unquote "supernatural" might one day become that also, etc, maybe with further discoveries in quantum physics/theory and the like maybe just being an example, etc.

But your definition of a belief is not totally valid if you ask me, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

Might I enquire as to your purpose in doing that?
To me, I can see only one possible purpose: to keep the belief alive ..(?)

Not necessarily, I'm going to try to be as objective as humanly possible, and if the exodus turns out to be absolutely disproven as a historical fact, then I might have to change or alter or modify my beliefs in order to keep them, etc. Like the story of the exodus being told to us for some other reason or take maybe, or for some other reason other than it being a literal history maybe, etc, and then I will have to pursue that or those avenues of thought after that for investigation after that, etc.

It won't be easy for me if it turns out that way, but I am willing, etc.

I would have to start exploring avenues of thought that I sometimes have like in my post #230, etc, as just one example of how my beliefs would need to change, etc, and it might put me back at square one on quite a few things, etc.

But I'm willing, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

Does that link give us the exact number from each of the twelve tribes, like the Bible does?

Yes, it does, and they are less also, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

There are certain core beliefs that I will never be able to abandon or change, etc. Like there being a very real God and/or other spirit beings here with us as being a very, very real reality in our lives, as I've had quote a few encounters with them (and still do sometimes) and have also encountered, on multiple occasions, a very really God here with me/you/us in our lives also, that has shown up or shown out for me multiple different times in my life, etc, and I'll never be able to deny those, etc, so that's not ever going to change, etc. And my belief is Jesus being able to many, many things beyond what we right now know as normal right now, is probably not ever going to change either, etc, also his crucifixion and resurrection and the truth he taught also, etc. And obviously, that implies his existence also, etc. Anyway, none of those things are ever going to change, etc. Which leads me to posts/thoughts like in post #230 here, etc.

So, whichever way this goes, I'm going to have to reconcile everything with that or those, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

@sjastro

If the exodus and some of the earlier parts of the Bible are not factually or historically true, then at what point do you think it becomes reliable as being true in a factual or historical way, if any at all?

I'd say Jesus was a real person, and that all or most of what we have about him, including the ability to perform some very real factual miracles, is factually true, even if you don't, etc, but how far back do you think the Bible is reliable as being factually true, if any at all etc?

I've heard stories about some of it being modified or sometimes changed completely during their time spent in Babylon in exile, but I'd have to look into that more to see if it is factually true, etc.

What are your thoughts, etc?

Also, what would you hypothesize for someone like me if I think Jesus was someone (a real person that actually existed), that could do or perform the miraculous as being a real thing, or 100% factually true?

Like what do you think he believed, etc? Did he believe everything literally? And if so, then was he decieved? Or how or where did he get the ability to perform miracles from for someone who still believes that to be factually true, etc?

Also, about the OT, why the stories if not factually true, etc?

God Bless.

 

[Ophiolite]

@sjastro

If the exodus and some of the earlier parts of the Bible are not factually or historically true, then at what point do you think it becomes reliable as being true in a factual or historical way, if any at all?

I'd say Jesus was a real person, and that all or most of what we have about him, including the ability to perform some very real factual miracles, is factually true, even if you don't, etc, but how far back do you think the Bible is reliable as being factually true, if any at all etc?

I've heard stories about some of it being modified or sometimes changed completely during their time spent in Babylon in exile, but I'd have to look into that more to see if it is factually true, etc.

What are your thoughts, etc?

Also, what would you hypothesize for someone like me if I think Jesus was someone (a real person that actually existed), that could do or perform the miraculous as being a real thing, or 100% factually true?

Like what do you think he believed, etc? Did he believe everything literally? And if so, then was he decieved? Or how or where did he get the ability to perform miracles from for someone who still believes that to be factually true, etc?

Also, about the OT, why the stories if not factually true, etc?

God Bless.

If the Bible stories are not factually true then the implication is that they are myths. One might think that a myth has as much or even greater spiritual value than a factually true story, but I understand forum rules prohibit asserting that any Bible story is a myth.

Consider the feeding of the five thousand. If this is a story of how the personal sacrifice of a family to share their bread and fishes led to others to do the same with the food they had been concealing, then that selfless act has, for me, a much greater spiritual significance than some fancy supernatural act of creating more bread and fish on the fly. For then you have a tale of Jesus inspiring selflessness in a community, leading them to conduct their lives on that occassion exactly as he advocated.

But what do I know? I'm just some anonymous, de facto internet atheist.

 

[AV1611VET]

Consider the feeding of the five thousand. If this is a story of how the personal sacrifice of a family to share their bread and fishes led to others to do the same with the food they had been concealing, then that selfless act has, for me, a much greater spiritual significance than some fancy supernatural act of creating more bread and fish on the fly. For then you have a tale of Jesus inspiring selflessness in a community, leading them to conduct their lives on that occassion exactly as he advocated.

A literal interpretation of that story, coupled with a literal interpretation of how the widow of Zarephath was fed,* explains well how the animals aboard the Ark could have been fed, without Noah having to take food aboard.

1 Kings 17:14 For thus saith the LORD God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste, neither shall the cruse of oil fail, until the day that the LORD sendeth rain upon the earth.
15 And she went and did according to the saying of Elijah: and she, and he, and her house, did eat many days.
16 And the barrel of meal wasted not, neither did the cruse of oil fail, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake by Elijah.

 

[Ophiolite]

A literal interpretation of that story, coupled with a literal interpretation of how the widow of Zarephath was fed,* explains well how the animals aboard the Ark could have been fed, without Noah having to take food aboard.

Irrelevant. I addressed @Neogaia777 's question, providing one possible answer to his question. If you wish to provide other possible answers direct them to him, not me. I'm not interested.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm not interested.

Your lack of interest leads to remarks like this:

Consider the feeding of the five thousand. If this is a story of how the personal sacrifice of a family to share their bread and fishes led to others to do the same with the food they had been concealing, then that selfless act has, for me, a much greater spiritual significance than some fancy supernatural act of creating more bread and fish on the fly. For then you have a tale of Jesus inspiring selflessness in a community, leading them to conduct their lives on that occassion exactly as he advocated.

... which I'm not going to let go unchecked.

 

[Ophiolite]

Your lack of interest leads to remarks like this:



... which I'm not going to let go unchecked.

My lack of interest was in your reply, not in @Neogaia777 's post.

I see absolutely nothing about your reply that somehow check's my contribution. I'm sad that your agenda rich narrow mindedness prevents you from recognising a different yet sincere appreciation of the ethical teachings of portions of the New Testament.

 

[Neogaia777]

If the Bible stories are not factually true then the implication is that they are myths. One might think that a myth has as much or even greater spiritual value than a factually true story, but I understand forum rules prohibit asserting that any Bible story is a myth.

Consider the feeding of the five thousand. If this is a story of how the personal sacrifice of a family to share their bread and fishes led to others to do the same with the food they had been concealing, then that selfless act has, for me, a much greater spiritual significance than some fancy supernatural act of creating more bread and fish on the fly. For then you have a tale of Jesus inspiring selflessness in a community, leading them to conduct their lives on that occassion exactly as he advocated.

But what do I know? I'm just some anonymous, de facto internet atheist.

That's an intriguing hypothesis, and a good point about spiritual significance over the literal, but with it being reported of; Jesus at least, doing so very much, and so very, very many of them (supernatural/miracles, or whatever you want to call them) I'm not quite ready to abandon all of those as if at least some of them weren't literally true, or didn't actually happen, or were not still an actual part of our literal history yet, but I am having to rethink some of the things way back in the OT now maybe, etc. Or I'm at least going to do a lot more research on it first, and try to discover a lot more about it first in the end, etc.

For example if some of the things way back in the OT were not literally or actually true, then I'm going to have to try and figure out what point they were changed, or maybe were not, or why they are told to us the way they are, or maybe some other reasons or lessons or motivations or things yet, and that's sometimes not easy to do sometimes, etc, but I'm willing to give it a try, etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

That's an intriguing hypothesis, and a good point about spiritual significance over the literal, but with it being reported of; Jesus at least, doing so very much, and so very, very many of them (supernatural/miracles, or whatever you want to call them) I'm not quite ready to abandon all of those as if at least some of them weren't literally true, or didn't actually happen, or were not still an actual part of our literal history yet, but I am having to rethink some of the things way back in the OT now maybe, etc. Or I'm at least going to do a lot more research on it first, and try to discover a lot more about it first in the end, etc.

For example if some of the things way back in the OT were not literally or actually true, then I'm going to have to try and figure out what point they were changed, or maybe were not, or why they are told to us the way they are, or maybe some other reasons or lessons or motivations or things yet, and that's sometimes not easy to do sometimes, etc, but I'm willing to give it a try, etc.

God Bless.

@Ophiolite

I think Jesus did so very many of them so that, well, for one, so that there couldn't be any doubt about him doing them first of all, etc, and then secondly, to cause us to wonder how exactly it was that he was able to do these kinds of things, etc. And I think he may have did this most especially just in case we ran into the truth about some of these other things, etc, i.e. certain things maybe not being actually literally true in the OT and the like, etc. But and/or anyway, I think he did as many of these things that he did, so there could, for one, be no doubt, and then two, or secondly, etc, so that we would always wonder about just how it was exactly that he was able to do these kinds of things, etc.

And I think the evidence for that is kind of overwhelming on that point, etc, which was just how he (Jesus) fully intended for it to be, etc.

There is a scripture on that as well, but I'll spare you of that for now, etc.

God Bless.

 

[SelfSim]

There are certain core beliefs that I will never be able to abandon or change, etc. Like there being a very real God and/or other spirit beings here with us as being a very, very real reality in our lives, as I've had quote a few encounters with them (and still do sometimes) and have also encountered, on multiple occasions, a very really God here with me/you/us in our lives also, that has shown up or shown out for me multiple different times in my life, etc, and I'll never be able to deny those, etc, so that's not ever going to change, etc. And my belief is Jesus being able to many, many things beyond what we right now know as normal right now, is probably not ever going to change either, etc, also his crucifixion and resurrection and the truth he taught also, etc. And obviously, that implies his existence also, etc. Anyway, none of those things are ever going to change, etc. Which leads me to posts/thoughts like in post #230 here, etc.

So, whichever way this goes, I'm going to have to reconcile everything with that or those, etc.

God Bless.

I don't say this with any malice, but I reckon I have that definition of belief right on the mark.
Your above post clearly demonstrates your deep comittment to, and unswerving faith for holding your core belief as being absolutely true ... regardless of any objective evidence, or logical arguments to the contrary.

I'm rather chuffed that you've helped me to test out my distinction of 'belief' .. and it passes with yet more verifying evidence.

 

[Neogaia777]

I don't say this with any malice, but I reckon I have that definition of belief right on the mark.
Your above post clearly demonstrates your deep comittment to, and unswerving faith for holding your core belief as being absolutely true ... regardless of any objective evidence, or logical arguments to the contrary.

I'm rather chuffed that you've helped me to test out my distinction of 'belief' .. and it passes with yet more verifying evidence.

You've not provided any logical arguments to the contrary, @sjastro has maybe, about the exodus maybe, etc, but as for other things, or everything else, etc, no one has so far provided any logical evidence or arguments to the contrary, etc. For example, like if you can disprove Jesus, then be my guest, etc.

And are you in denial of the fact that many of the most monumental discoveries started out as having a belief, etc?

Because in my opinion your very own definition of a belief in post #242 is still somewhat lacking, etc, and is clearly "not objective" and is actually very much "severely severely biased", etc.

God Bless.

 

[Neogaia777]

Where, what I mean there, I posted in post #211, A belief is any notion held as being true out of preference, that does not follow from objective tests, and is not beholden to the rules of logic'.)

All views start out as being held out as being possible because of some kind of bias, or preference, etc, and it isn't until afterwards that they then seek to follow it up with some kinds of objective tests, and/or logic, or evidence, etc.

This is how every great discovery in science, and in life, or "whatever", was ever, ever made, etc.

God Bless.