juvenissun
... and God saw that it was good.
- Apr 5, 2007
- 25,452
- 805
- 73
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The Torah is about this world and living this life. Hence, the afterlife is not mentioned nor is it important.
What specifically in Genesis must be historically true to make Christian theology work? There is a lot of stuff in there about Jacob's speckled goats and so forth that I assume is not essential.No mistakes. Theology is theology and history is history.
I do not know if Genesis is historically true. But I do know it must be theologically true.
Since nobody knows the historical fact, so, it still has a higher probability to believe it is historically true than not.
This is exactly how history does not work... Nothing about this is historically rigorous or analytical even in the slightest. According to just about every single archaeologist who has published anything about the Levant during the Bronze Age, there was no battle of Jericho and the story was probably invented out of cloth. There's no evidence Amenhotep had anything to do with an Exodus event.Of course Moses is a Historical figure. The writing about him in Wikipedia just shows that the secular world is very desperate to hide the light under a bushel. There may be stories about the man that are intended to embellish him, such as the story from Sargon the Great (1800 B.C.) about when he was a newborn, but these stories do not negate his historical existence. The Exodus can be verified by studying secular history along with the Bible. For instance, the destruction of Jericho has now been very well established to have taken place around 1550 B.C.-1555 B.C., if we trace time backwards, we will find that the Pharoah who resisted the Israelites leaving Egypt and is said by the Bible to have drowned in the Red Sea while pursuing them, would have been Amenhotep. Some of the Egyptian writings about him: "The bull who conquers the lands." "He who inspires great terror." He had only one child. A son who died in infancy. Amenhotep reigned (In the lower chronology) from 1526 B.C. to 1506 B.C. Before his funeral, an unusual mask was placed over his face and his burial place was moved a number of times. A magician made the claim that he served under his reign for 21 years. This testimony, I think was to resolve any doubts in the Egyptian people that the person buried in such a way, was really Amenhotep. Therefore, it is logical that the destroyers of Jericho, would have been the Israelites. According to Geologists, it would not have been an earthquake alone to have made the Jericho walls fall the way they did. It would also have taken a miracle.
Correct. There's no empirical evidence that Exodus occurred.This is exactly how history does not work... Nothing about this is historically rigorous or analytical even in the slightest. According to just about every single archaeologist who has published anything about the Levant during the Bronze Age, there was no battle of Jericho and the story was probably invented out of cloth. There's no evidence Amenhotep had anything to do with an Exodus event.
The miracle is yet to come. And that miracle would be an explanation for breaking the prohibition against summoning the dead.
Funny logic.
Moses is needed, but is not needed as a real person.
How about Abraham, Issac and Jacob? or Joshua and Samuel? Do they need to be real?
How about King David? Does he "need" to be real?
No wonder the Catholic doctrine is a mess today.
Taking the Garden of Eden as an example, it does not need to be literal IMO. The story of original sin can simply be a way of saying that all humans have a tendency to want to be our own gods. Christianity solves this original sin by providing communion with Jesus (or whatever). Taking everything literal just makes you easy pickings for atheist apologists.
Where's the evidence that Christ walked on water, except that the New Testament says that he did?
Correct. There's no empirical evidence that Exodus occurred.
As everybody knows, some of the gospels describe how Peter, James, and John went to a mountaintop where they saw Jesus meet Moses and Elijah.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfiguration_of_Jesus
Many Christians believe that portions of the Bible are simply religious fiction. The Exodus story is commonly dismissed as fiction, because the God it portrays is not palatable to modern tastes. On the other hand, most Christians consider the Transfiguration story to be historical. The Transfiguration implies that Moses was historical.
(1) If you think the Exodus story is literally true, how do you rationalize God's behavior with the "God is love" expectations?
(2) If you don't think the Exodus story was literally true, then what did actually happen? Who was Moses? When did Moses live? What did Moses actually do? ...
Moses is dead. Whoever says otherwise is wrong. And there's no accepted tradition in Judaism that says he did not die.
This is exactly how history does not work... Nothing about this is historically rigorous or analytical even in the slightest. According to just about every single archaeologist who has published anything about the Levant during the Bronze Age, there was no battle of Jericho and the story was probably invented out of cloth. There's no evidence Amenhotep had anything to do with an Exodus event.
A few weeks ago I thought it might be nice to read a Bible that my mother had given me so I could tell her that I was reading it. What did I open the Bible to? - Exodus 11:4-5Why cannot you see Exodus as an act of saving love by God? Those who suffered were those who stubbornly rejected God. In that respect what is the difference between the sentiment here and the NT book of Revelation. Why exactly do you not like Moses? Not sure this dislike is sufficient reason to make everything you disagree with into symbols, metaphors and multifaceted allegories.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+11:4-5&version=NIV4 So Moses said, “This is what the Lord says: ‘About midnight I will go throughout Egypt. 5 Every firstborn son in Egypt will die, from the firstborn son of Pharaoh, who sits on the throne, to the firstborn son of the female slave, who is at her hand mill, and all the firstborn of the cattle as well.
I see it as payback for what the Egyptians had earlier done to the Israelites: enslaving them and then murdering every son that was born to them.A few weeks ago I thought it might be nice to read a Bible that my mother had given me so I could tell her that I was reading it. What did I open the Bible to? - Exodus 11:4-5
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus+11:4-5&version=NIV
Literally these were the first words I saw upon opening that Bible, and I felt totally disgusted. It was as if God was telling me "don't read the Bible anymore, because that's not who I am". (Sometimes I wonder if God might exist even though I labeled myself as an atheist.)
How can anybody read that verse and not be disgusted? God deliberately hardens that heart of Pharaoh so that he can punish the whole nation of Egypt - down to the animals?
Another message of this story is that all the people of Egypt and its animals were property of Pharaoh. Of course this would have been normal morality for ancient cultures. Wives and children were often treated as property - just like cattle. The head of the household often had the right to kill his own wife and children with no questions asked. But why would God play by the moral rules of the bronze age - unless the whole thing is merely a bronze age fable? So God kills all these first born Egyptians to punish the leader - after God deliberately hardened the heart of that leader to give God the opportunity to show that He was mightier than the Egyptian gods. Ugh.I see it as revenge against what the Egyptians had earlier done to the Israelites: enslaving them and then murdering every son that was born to them. It was payback time.
And if you read the entire account of the plagues, Pharaoh had already hardened his own heart, repeatedly, before it says God began hardening it. That is, God gave him, and Egypt, multiple chances before He gave up on them.
My thoughts, anyway.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?