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

[sjastro]

They went where God told them to go.

No trade route would lead through the Red Sea, for crying out loud.

God led them between a rock and a hard place on purpose.

Exodus 14:3 For Pharaoh will say of the children of Israel, They are entangled in the land, the wilderness hath shut them in.

Any land route, and the Egyptians would have overtaken them.

As Hercule Poirot once said try using your little grey cells for once.
If God permitted the parting of the Red Sea to drown the Egyptians, it didn't matter what the Egyptians did they were dealt a losing hand.

God could just as easily have dispatched the Egyptians with a giant sandstorm if a land route was taken, as what might have happened to an invading Persian army to Egypt some 1000 years after Exodus.

https://www.historicmysteries.com/archaeology/lost-army-of-cambyses/27957/

 

[Ophiolite]

Err .. could you please speak English, (if you're able)?

He is able, but frankly it makes more sense the way he wrote it here.

 

[SelfSim]

He is able, but frankly it makes more sense the way he wrote it here.

Ok then .. I'm open to your interpretation ..

 

[Ophiolite]

Ok then .. I'm open to your interpretation ..

I suppose I should have added some form of emoji. My sub-text was "his posts never make any sense, so this gobbledegook is an improvement".

 

[2PhiloVoid]

And when done in defense of the faith it's called martyrdom. As a curious aside, the first documented case of a suicide bomber was... Samson.

So, no biblical examples of people dying for what they wrote?

... what an awful analogy. Maybe try again.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I see this thread has dug itself into the mud ...

... I guess for some people, that form of movement is thought of as "progress."

 

[Ophiolite]

I see this thread has dug itself into the mud ...

So, you reject the possibility that it may have started in the mud?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

So, you reject the possibility that it may have started in the mud?

Oh, most certainly, it began in the mud ... I have no doubt about that.

 

[AV1611VET]

As Hercule Poirot once said try using your little grey cells for once.

Let's see what a harlot has to say for once, shall we?

If God permitted the parting of the Red Sea to drown the Egyptians, it didn't matter what the Egyptians did they were dealt a losing hand.

Kinda SOL, weren't they?

(Short On Luck)

Just like your science from time to time ... to time.

God could just as easily have dispatched the Egyptians with a giant sandstorm if a land route was taken, as what might have happened to an invading Persian army to Egypt some 1000 years after Exodus.

You betcha.

But He used the Red Sea to do it.

And let's see what Rahab the harlot has to say about it:

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.

Look what the two spies reported back to Joshua:

Joshua 2:23 So the two men returned, and descended from the mountain, and passed over, and came to Joshua the son of Nun, and told him all things that befell them:
24 And they said unto Joshua, Truly the LORD hath delivered into our hands all the land; for even all the inhabitants of the country do faint because of us.

And look what effect it had on Jericho when the Israelites showed up:

Joshua 6:1 Now Jericho was straitly shut up because of the children of Israel: none went out, and none came in.

This super fort, which was probably built to keep invaders out, fell prey to God's "psychological warfare;" as did Ai and other cities.

Your "giant sandstorm" scenario -- (which you pointed out probably happened a thousand years later against Persia) -- is too mundane an explanation.

I'll take what Rahab said, over what your "historic mystery archaeology" site has to say about it anytime.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ok then .. I'm open to your interpretation ..

My interpretation is simple.

Go write the U.S. Constitution from memory, then re-write it again later, then again later.

Then take your third-generation writing to the National Archives Museum and compare it for accuracy, and see how badly it shows how you mangled it.

 

[AV1611VET]

I suppose I should have added some form of emoji. My sub-text was "his posts never make any sense, so this gobbledegook is an improvement".

Do you know what I mean by "Arab phone"?

You know ... Grapevine, Chinese Whispers, the Telephone Game, etc?

Ever played it?

 

[AV1611VET]

I see this thread has dug itself into the mud ...

... I guess for some people, that form of movement is thought of as "progress."

Anything's progress when you believe what the Bible says, over what science says about the same thing.

 

[SelfSim]

My interpretation is simple.

Go write the U.S. Constitution from memory, then re-write it again later, then again later.

Then take your third-generation writing to the National Archives Museum and compare it for accuracy, and see how badly it shows how you mangled it.

So you're telling us human memories are prone to error, and therefore, so are any recounted stories of the Exodus.
You have defeated your own arguments.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Anything's progress when you believe what the Bible says, over what science says about the same thing.

That may be the case for some fellow Christians as they sit and read it from a particular angle. To their credit and in full consideration of the Fundamentalist's perspective, or even that of Independent Baptists, I think there is a small justification for seeing the Bible in the way that they do. But from where I'm sitting, I can do both ... I.E. believe in the Bible and affirm the usefulness of mainstream science.

And why is that? I can do both because I know where the historical and epistemological limits of the Bible are, and moreover, I know where those of science are as well.

The outcome is that I not only get to have my cake, I get to eat it too. And, mmmmmm, mmmmmmm !!! It's sooooo goooooooood !

 

[AV1611VET]

So you're telling us human memories are prone to error, and therefore, so are any recounted stories of the Exodus.

Absolutely.

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

You have defeated your own arguments.

How?

 

[partinobodycular]

... what an awful analogy. Maybe try again.

I realize that from a Judeo Christian perspective it's quite disturbing, but from the fundamental standpoint of what constitutes a suicide bomber, Samson was indeed a suicide bomber. It's important to remember that there are always differing perspectives, but they're not always equally valid. In this case for example, given the benefit of time, and a hard earned understanding of how people use such concepts as honor and martyrdom to justify all manner of atrocities, it's important to realize that sometimes things done in the name of a cause... even a justified one, say more about our propensity for violence then they do about our desire to embody the spirit of Micah 6:8.

Look back across history and tell me how many atrocities were perpetrated in the name of a just cause, because those are the things that our history is littered with. Not to say that there isn't such a thing as just causes, for indeed there are, but even acts done in the name of a just cause have a cost, for they define what we are as the children of a loving God. We're violent... we simply find a way to justify it, and then pretend that that justification made it right. But quite often being justified isn't enough to make an act righteous.

I'm sorry if you think that the OT is somehow supposed to serve as a shining example of how we as humans are supposed to behave, it didn't, that came a few centuries later, when we were shown that what's justified isn't always what's righteous... and sometimes that's a very hard choice.

So yeah, Samson was a suicide bomber, he died for a cause. God I'm sure will understand, as should we. But think of him the next time people die.

 

[AV1611VET]

And why is that? I can do both because I know where the historical and epistemological limits of the Bible are, and moreover, I know where those of science are as well.

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.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I realize that from a Judeo Christian perspective it's quite disturbing, but from the fundamental standpoint of what constitutes a suicide bomber, Samson was indeed a suicide bomber. It's important to remember that there are always differing perspectives, but they're not always equally valid. In this case for example, given the benefit of time, and a hard earned understanding of how people use such concepts as honor and martyrdom to justify all manner of atrocities, it's important to realize that sometimes things done in the name of a cause... even a justified one, say more about our propensity for violence then they do about our desire to embody the spirit of Micah 6:8.

Look back across history and tell me how many atrocities were perpetrated in the name of a just cause, because those are the things that our history is littered with. Not to say that there isn't such a thing as just causes, for indeed there are, but even acts done in the name of a just cause have a cost, for they define what we are as the children of a loving God. We're violent... we simply find a way to justify it, and then pretend that that justification made it right. But quite often being justified isn't enough to make an act righteous.

I'm sorry if you think that the OT is somehow supposed to serve as a shining example of how we as humans are supposed to behave, it didn't, that came a few centuries later, when we were shown that what's justified isn't always what's righteous... and sometimes that's a very hard choice.

So yeah, Samson was a suicide bomber, he died for a cause. God I'm sure will understand, as should we. But think of him the next time people die.

Have you ever heard of the term "equivocation"? You just committed one of these little bad boys ...

Surely, you see the incongruities (plural) between the story of Samson in the book of Judges and, for instance, the horrible thing that took place on 9/11. If you can't see those incongruities, please refrain from taking a Philosophy class, because you will likely fail.

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

 

[SelfSim]

You have defeated your own arguments.

How?

I rest my case due to evidence of your inability to recognise your own delusions.

 

[AV1611VET]

So yeah, Samson was a suicide bomber, he died for a cause. God I'm sure will understand, as should we. But think of him the next time people die.

It's one thing to kill yourself.

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.