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

[dlamberth]

That's why God had it documented and divinely preserved.

Only after centuries of retelling of the stories by oral story traditions with religious embellishment as the story line was passed on.

 

[SelfSim]

Only after centuries of retelling of the stories by oral story traditions with religious embellishment as the story line was passed on.

Oral or documented, the errors accumulate because of the mind's influences.

Objective science however, is specifically designed to expose those perceptional influences and its evidence persists for future demonstrations of the distinctions of what's (or was) real .. and what's (or was) perceptional.

One has to actually look to see that though.

 

[dlamberth]

Oral or documented, the errors accumulate because of the mind's influences.

Objective science however, is specifically designed to expose those perceptional influences and its evidence persists for future demonstrations of the distinctions of what's (or was) real .. and what's (or was) perceptional.

Agreed. Along with that, the critical analysis understanding of the first 5 books of the Bible are that they come from different sources.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

And what do you do, when the two contradict?

Here are my standards, laid out nice and simple:

1. Bible says x, Science says x = go with x
2. Bible says x, Science says y = go with x
3. Bible says x, Science says ø = go with x
4. Bible says ø, Science says x = go with x
5. Bible says ø, Science says ø = free to speculate on your own

Prime Directive: Under no circumstances whatsoever is the Bible to be contradicted.

They tell you what I'm going to believe when the Bible and Science are in agreement.

They tell you what I'm going to believe when the Bible and Science aren't in agreement.

And they tell you what I'm going to do when neither the Bible nor Science mention something.

Let's see your standards laid out that concisely and clearly.

And I'm especially interested when you do when the two conflict.

You've already run this schematic, pseudo-praxis by me in the past, AV.

And what do I do when the two contradict? .................. I study harder. I read more widely, think more deeply and analyze [tear apart], bit by bit, both perspectives on as many philosophical levels as I have time for.

In other words, I do what I was trained to do in both my undergraduate and graduate work: I start by studying and realizing that not every issue a human person deals with in the world is made up of only simple, dichotomous elements.

And what would come first? What would come first is initiating the effort to understand the nature and function of the sciences and where and when they are applicable, on the one hand, and to understand the nature of the biblical literature, and what it amounts to on multiple levels, on the other hand, as well as bring in some missing philosophical ingredients that are necessary to navigate the rough epistemological and ontological terrain.

 

[AV1611VET]

Only after centuries of retelling of the stories by oral story traditions with religious embellishment as the story line was passed on.

Does that include our constitution, which is now over two centuries old?

Or is our constitution somehow exempt?

 

[partinobodycular]

Joshua 2:8 And before they were laid down, she came up unto them upon the roof;
9 And she said unto the men, I know that the LORD hath given you the land, and that your terror is fallen upon us, and that all the inhabitants of the land faint because of you.
10 For we have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red sea for you, when ye came out of Egypt; and what ye did unto the two kings of the Amorites, that were on the other side Jordan, Sihon and Og, whom ye utterly destroyed.
11 And as soon as we had heard these things, our hearts did melt, neither did there remain any more courage in any man, because of you: for the LORD your God, he is God in heaven above, and in earth beneath.

But here's the thing, real or not, those stories had a very profound effect, an effect that was only magnified by wandering around in the desert and letting those 'stories' become legends. It's those legends that then struck fear into the hearts of their enemies. And that fear was their greatest weapon.

But how do we know if those stories are true or not?

We can be fairly certain that they're not, judging by the reaction of the spies that Moses sent in to scout out the land. If those scouts had just witnessed all of the miraculous events that the OT describes then the scouts wouldn't have been intimidated by anything that lay on the other side of the Jordan. But as it was, they were terrified. Why? Wasn't God's presence more obvious then, than at any other time in history? They were terrified because the stories weren't true.

So you wander around in the desert. Meanwhile... somehow, all of the adult men who had crossed the Red Sea, died... except for the two scouts who gave favorable reports. And for forty years the legends grow... from 20,000 men to 600,000. From a wandering band of starving nomads traipsing aimlessly around in the desert, to an army being led and fed by God himself.

And lo and behold the enemy is paralyzed with fear and trepidation... as Sun Tzu said, "All warfare is based on deception". It wasn't necessary for those stories to be true, it was only necessary for their enemies to believe that they were true. Human minds are very good at imagining monsters, and so Moses created one.

 

[AV1611VET]

Oral or documented, the errors accumulate because of the mind's influences.

Yes.

It's called retrospective falsification.

And the Author of the Bible knows how that works.

And He took care of that nicely throughout history.

 

[AV1611VET]

Agreed. Along with that, the critical analysis understanding of the first 5 books of the Bible are that they come from different sources.

Is that what they teach in college nowadays?

 

[AV1611VET]

And what do I do when the two contradict? .................. I study harder. I read more widely, think more deeply and analyze [tear apart], bit by bit, both perspectives on as many philosophical levels as I have time for.

And how does that work out for you?

Do you end up resolving the conflict?

Or just make it worse?

 

[partinobodycular]

If you can't see those incongruities, please refrain from taking a Philosophy class, because you will likely fail.

Indeed I shall refrain. Not that I have any disdain for failure, it's a constant companion, rather having but a 9th grade education, formal classes never have been my cup of tea.

I'm sorry that I have to be the one to tell you this, but you're in gross error.

No need to be sorry, I expect you to point out my errors, just as you'll likely understand if I disagree.

 

[dlamberth]

Does that include our constitution, which is now over two centuries old?

Or is our constitution somehow exempt?

Our constitution is a completely different subject that comes with original documents preserved. Where as the Exodus story is way older with unknown original story telling sources centuries before they were written down. The same with the first 5 books of the Bible.

 

[partinobodycular]

It's another to stand before a judge and told to either take back what you wrote or said, or be burned at the stake.

So, would you take back your claims? And do you really think that you're that unique? Hence your threshold isn't really all that high.

 

[AV1611VET]

So you wander around in the desert. Meanwhile... somehow, all of the adult men who had crossed the Red Sea, died... except for the two scouts who gave favorable reports. And for forty years the legends grow... from 20,000 men to 600,000. From a wandering band of starving nomads traipsing aimlessly around in the desert, to an army being led and fed by God himself.

Aside from having a decimal place problem, you left a LOT out of these forty years of wandering.

While your version has a "small group" of starving people wandering around aimlessly in the desert, God's version has these "handfuls of men" being attacked by elite desert warriors, Hades-bent on their elimination.

Exodus 17:8 Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim.
9 And Moses said unto Joshua, Choose us out men, and go out, fight with Amalek: to morrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the rod of God in mine hand.
10 So Joshua did as Moses had said to him, and fought with Amalek: and Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill.
11 And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed: and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed.

How is it a group of 20,000 men, women, and children withstood these elite desert warriors?

Not to mention the Moabites and the Ammonites?

 

[AV1611VET]

Our constitution is a completely different subject ...

Suuure it is.

... that comes with original documents preserved.

Bingo!

Where as the Exodus story is way older with unknown original story telling sources centuries before they were written down. The same with the first 5 books of the Bible.

Ditto for the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20?

Were they written by "unknown original story telling sources centuries before they were written down"?

 

[AV1611VET]

So, would you take back your claims?

I didn't write the claims in the Bible.

And I'm not the one with whom ...

Jeremiah 36:23 And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he cut it with the penknife, and cast it into the fire that was on the hearth, until all the roll was consumed in the fire that was on the hearth.

... then later went out and wrote it again:

Jeremiah 36:32 Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words.

You'd think Jeremiah was asking to die, wouldn't you?

And do you really think that you're that unique?

Ask my DNA.

Hence your threshold isn't really all that high.

As I said here years ago:

I would like to think that, should I ever get called into question for what I believe, and told to recant or die, I would like to think that God would give me the strength to tell them to take a hike.

 

[AV1611VET]

I would like to think that, should I ever get called into question for what I believe, and told to recant or die, I would like to think that God would give me the strength to tell them to take a hike.

I went and looked it up.

Here it is:

I would hope that when the time comes, God would give me the strength and courage to stand (or fall) for the Truth.

 

[dlamberth]

Were they written by "unknown original story telling sources centuries before they were written down"?

They were written down many centuries after the supposed events.

 

[SelfSim]

Yes.

It's called retrospective falsification.

And the Author of the Bible knows how that works.

And He took care of that nicely throughout history.

Obviously not .. he got it wrong from the get-go.

 

[SelfSim]

I would like to think that, should I ever get called into question for what I believe, and told to recant or die, I would like to think that God would give me the strength to tell them to take a hike.

I went and looked it up.
Here it is:

I would hope that when the time comes, God would give me the strength and courage to stand (or fall) for the Truth.

What in the world, in your past, has caused such a deep, deep cynicism and distrust of the good aspects of human nature?

 

[AV1611VET]

They were written down many centuries after the supposed events.

Wow.