How reliable is the Old Testament and the first books of the Bible

[Verward]

There have been a lot of questions about whether the events in Genesis and Exodus actually happened. Does the archaeology of ancient Egypt actually agree with the accounts of Joseph going down into Egypt, and the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt? There is an interesting new book on the subject called "Finding the Missing Exodus" in which it links the seven years of plenty and seven years of famine during the time of Joseph in Egypt, with recorded high and low levels of the Nile flood. It also identifies when the exodus really happened and shows there was massive political and religious upheaval in Egypt after the event. They even closed all the temples to the pagan gods after the plagues proved that the gods were useless.

 

[Luke17:37]

There have been a lot of questions about whether the events in Genesis and Exodus actually happened. Does the archaeology of ancient Egypt actually agree with the accounts of Joseph going down into Egypt, and the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt? There is an interesting new book on the subject called "Finding the Missing Exodus" in which it links the seven years of plenty and seven years of famine during the time of Joseph in Egypt, with recorded high and low levels of the Nile flood. It also identifies when the exodus really happened and shows there was massive political and religious upheaval in Egypt after the event. They even closed all the temples to the pagan gods after the plagues proved that the gods were useless.

There's also a documentary about this subject called Patterns of Evidence: Exodus. It's on Netflix. Encourage you to have a look.

http://patternsofevidence.com

 

[Speedwell]

Unfortunately, none of that will shed any light on the matter at hand, which is not whether the exodus (or any other biblical event) actually happened, but whether the biblical text describing it is 100% accurate literal history or some other literary form.

 

[Verward]

If the question is whether the biblical text describing it is 100% accurate literal history consider a few points:

• Moses was named by Pharaoh's daughter, subsequent Pharaohs had similar names Kamose, Ahmose, Thutmose
• The Pharaoh was worried that the Israelites would outnumber them, the Hyksos were an ethnic minority in genuine threat of being outnumbered
• The Pharaoh was worried about their enemies fighting against them, the Hyksos had enemies in the south based in Thebes
• The Israelites worked on construction in the city of Ramases, the Hyksos capital was in Avaris which was later destroyed then rebuild as Pi-Ramases
  
• The plagues struck against the gods of Egypt, the pagan temples were all closed after the exodus
• Pharaoh chased after the Israelites in chariots, the war chariot had only recently been introduced into Egypt by the Hyksos
• If the exodus took place in 1602 BCE as I calculate from a literal chronology the city of Jericho would have fallen in 1562 BCE. Carbon dating established a date of 1560+/-40 BCE

 

[Speedwell]

If the question is whether the biblical text describing it is 100% accurate literal history consider a few points:

• Moses was named by Pharaoh's daughter, subsequent Pharaohs had similar names Kamose, Ahmose, Thutmose
• The Pharaoh was worried that the Israelites would outnumber them, the Hyksos were an ethnic minority in genuine threat of being outnumbered
• The Pharaoh was worried about their enemies fighting against them, the Hyksos had enemies in the south based in Thebes
• The Israelites worked on construction in the city of Ramases, the Hyksos capital was in Avaris which was later destroyed then rebuild as Pi-Ramases
  
• The plagues struck against the gods of Egypt, the pagan temples were all closed after the exodus
• Pharaoh chased after the Israelites in chariots, the war chariot had only recently been introduced into Egypt by the Hyksos
• If the exodus took place in 1602 BCE as I calculate from a literal chronology the city of Jericho would have fallen in 1562 BCE. Carbon dating established a date of 1560+/-40 BCE

You're still not there. If the Creationists are correct, then each and every word of the text was chosen by God in full, omniscient awareness if the least implication and nuance. Not just a reasonably accurate depiction of events, but a text which can be used as a source of logical premises for deductions about other matters entirely.
For example, the Creationists use the Noah story to conclude that the Fountains of the Great Deep erupted with such force as to blow chunks of the Earth into space to form the Asteroid Belt, and regard that conclusion as being just as true as anything in the Bible.

 

[Verward]

You're still not there. If the Creationists are correct, then each and every word of the text was chosen by God in full, omniscient awareness if the least implication and nuance. Not just a reasonably accurate depiction of events, but a text which can be used as a source of logical premises for deductions about other matters entirely.
For example, the Creationists use the Noah story to conclude that the Fountains of the Great Deep erupted with such force as to blow chunks of the Earth into space to form the Asteroid Belt, and regard that conclusion as being just as true as anything in the Bible.

The problem there is not with the word but with the hearers. People filter the things that they hear through a veil of preconceived ideas and imaginations. Things like pride creep in and they think they understand but they get tripped up by the smallest detail. In the case I have been looking at, that of Bible chronology, there are many inerrant Bible chronologies and they don't all agree with each other, which makes no sense except that some or all have misunderstood the things they have been reading.

 

[RickG]

If the question is whether the biblical text describing it is 100% accurate literal history consider a few points:

• The Israelites worked on construction in the city of Ramases, the Hyksos capital was in Avaris which was later

The only problem is that archeology shows that there have been no Hebrew artifacts found in Egypt during the time of Ramases.

 

[Verward]

The only problem is that archeology shows that there have been no Hebrew artifacts found in Egypt during the time of Ramases.

The Israelites were not in Egypt during the time of Ramases. They were in Egypt during the time of the 15th dynasty rulers known as the Hyksos, whose capital was in Avaris. After the Hyksos were expelled from Egypt the city of Avaris was abandoned, and eventually rebuilt in the time of Ramases. There is no reason to think artefacts would survive through four centuries and the destruction of a city.
I also suspect that with the Israelites living in Egypt for hundreds of years prior to their departure many of their goods would look Egyptian.

 

[Papias]

If the question is whether the biblical text describing it is 100% accurate literal history ....

There has been a ton of archeological work looking into the events described in Exodus. The evidence is clear that the whole exodus story never happened. Biblical archeologists and historians have agreed on this for at least 20 years. There were plenty of expectations a century ago that archeology would confirm the stories in the first books of the Bibles, but as the evidence piled up, it soon became clear that it didn't happen as described in the Bibles. Some basic and well supported facts we now know:

• The Jews were never enslaved in Egypt - instead, they developed from earlier Canaanites, and never had to "conquer" the land they always had.
• There is no evidence that Moses ever existed outside of legend, like Hercules.
• No Egyptian records support the enslavement of the Hebrews, or any other Biblical story - and the Egyptians have good records.
• No Egyptian records support the drowning of their army in the red sea, or any other Biblical story - and the Egyptians have good records.
• Jericho has been studied extensively with massive digs and archeological testing - the Biblical story does not appear to have happened. In fact, the famed walls of Jericho were destroyed by the Egyptian army centuries before the Hebrew mythology was supposed to have happened.

and so on.

This is the consensus view of Biblical archeological historians. Some examples:

• Here is a book by a well known biblical archeological historian, who points out that the stories never actually happened. Read page 6 here: https://books.google.com/books?id=0QHHITXsyskC&pg=PA6#v=onepage&q&f=false
• Even the Conservative Jews have accepted reality here - just the first few paragraphs of this article should make that clear: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/09/books/new-torah-for-modern-minds.html?pagewanted=all
• Here is a good video describing this, by the top Archeologist at Israel's Tel Aviv University. You might notice that he's introduced by Rabbi Wine, who was one of the most respected Rabbis before his recent death.

The other videos by Dr. Finkelstein in that same series are also useful.

What you have referenced so far are the many pulp fiction books put out by scammers looking to make money. They know that they can take money from Christians who will buy books that say that the events in the first few books of their Bible happened, and that most Christians won't bother to notice that they aren't experts, nor that the experts themselves are clear that the Exodus never happened.

• Moses was named by Pharaoh's daughter, subsequent Pharaohs had similar names Kamose, Ahmose, Thutmose
• The Pharaoh was worried that the Israelites would outnumber them, the Hyksos were an ethnic minority in genuine threat of being outnumbered
• The Pharaoh was worried about their enemies fighting against them, the Hyksos had enemies in the south based in Thebes
• The Israelites worked on construction in the city of Ramases, the Hyksos capital was in Avaris which was later destroyed then rebuild as Pi-Ramases
  
• The plagues struck against the gods of Egypt, the pagan temples were all closed after the exodus
• Pharaoh chased after the Israelites in chariots, the war chariot had only recently been introduced into Egypt by the Hyksos
• If the exodus took place in 1602 BCE as I calculate from a literal chronology the city of Jericho would have fallen in 1562 BCE. Carbon dating established a date of 1560+/-40 BCE

These are all unsupported claims, most being obviously false. For instance, the Hyksos were not the Hebrews, and had nothing to do with them. The Hyskos doesn't even match the basics of the Exodus story, such as the basic fact that the Hysos were driven out, instead of escaping.

The plagues? There is no evidence that the plagues happened. The pagan temples were closed after the exodus? That's silly, Egypt has had pagan religion from the deep past all the way up to Jesus' day.

There is no carbon dating support for the Biblical story of Jericho, as shown above.

A lot of those points, even if true, don't support the idea that the exodus story happened.

The word of God contains His message for us, and it's clear from archeology that the message isn't literal history, but rather telling us how he chooses people. Like biology, and geology, this is another area where failing to understand what the experts have found (such as the Biblical archeologists) only makes us look less credible.

In Christ-

Papias

 

[Luke17:37]

There has been a ton of archeological work looking into the events described in Exodus. The evidence is clear that the whole exodus story never happened. Biblical archeologists and historians have agreed on this for at least 20 years. There were plenty of expectations a century ago that archeology would confirm the stories in the first books of the Bibles, but as the evidence piled up, it soon became clear that it didn't happen as described in the Bibles. Some basic and well supported facts we now know:

• The Jews were never enslaved in Egypt - instead, they developed from earlier Canaanites, and never had to "conquer" the land they always had.
• There is no evidence that Moses ever existed outside of legend, like Hercules.
• No Egyptian records support the enslavement of the Hebrews, or any other Biblical story - and the Egyptians have good records.
• No Egyptian records support the drowning of their army in the red sea, or any other Biblical story - and the Egyptians have good records.
• Jericho has been studied extensively with massive digs and archeological testing - the Biblical story does not appear to have happened. In fact, the famed walls of Jericho were destroyed by the Egyptian army centuries before the Hebrew mythology was supposed to have happened.

and so on.

This is the consensus view of Biblical archeological historians. Some examples:

• Here is a book by a well known biblical archeological historian, who points out that the stories never actually happened. Read page 6 here: https://books.google.com/books?id=0QHHITXsyskC&pg=PA6#v=onepage&q&f=false
• Even the Conservative Jews have accepted reality here - just the first few paragraphs of this article should make that clear: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/09/books/new-torah-for-modern-minds.html?pagewanted=all
• Here is a good video describing this, by the top Archeologist at Israel's Tel Aviv University. You might notice that he's introduced by Rabbi Wine, who was one of the most respected Rabbis before his recent death.

The other videos by Dr. Finkelstein in that same series are also useful.

What you have referenced so far are the many pulp fiction books put out by scammers looking to make money. They know that they can take money from Christians who will buy books that say that the events in the first few books of their Bible happened, and that most Christians won't bother to notice that they aren't experts, nor that the experts themselves are clear that the Exodus never happened.



These are all unsupported claims, most being obviously false. For instance, the Hyksos were not the Hebrews, and had nothing to do with them. The Hyskos doesn't even match the basics of the Exodus story, such as the basic fact that the Hysos were driven out, instead of escaping.

The plagues? There is no evidence that the plagues happened. The pagan temples were closed after the exodus? That's silly, Egypt has had pagan religion from the deep past all the way up to Jesus' day.

There is no carbon dating support for the Biblical story of Jericho, as shown above.

A lot of those points, even if true, don't support the idea that the exodus story happened.

The word of God contains His message for us, and it's clear from archeology that the message isn't literal history, but rather telling us how he chooses people. Like biology, and geology, this is another area where failing to understand what the experts have found (such as the Biblical archeologists) only makes us look less credible.

In Christ-

Papias

In Christ? You write that the birth of the Jewish nation, from whom Christ descends (through Mary) is a lie, and you finish with In Christ? You have a very serious biblical authority problem. In fact, according to your line of thinking, your faith is built on myths. Jesus is the last Adam, the Seed of the Woman, the Door of salvation, the Seed of Abraham, the Lion of Judah, the Son of David. Do you believe Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses and David were myths, too? Stop mocking God's Word, which is true (Matthew 4:4, 2 Timothy 3:16). Don't believe everything the "experts" tell you. They are often godless people who want to try to explain history and science without the Creator God and without any regard for the truth. I urge you to watch documentary I posted, Patterns of Evidence: Exodus.

 

[Hieronymus]

You're still not there. If the Creationists are correct, then each and every word of the text was chosen by God in full, omniscient awareness if the least implication and nuance. Not just a reasonably accurate depiction of events, but a text which can be used as a source of logical premises for deductions about other matters entirely.
For example, the Creationists use the Noah story to conclude that the Fountains of the Great Deep erupted with such force as to blow chunks of the Earth into space to form the Asteroid Belt, and regard that conclusion as being just as true as anything in the Bible.

That's a caricature you pose as the norm among creationists.
There are several ideas floating around to make sense of several things.
The problem is obviously that it all took place long ago.
It has been described, but not in technical detail, in Scripture for millenia though.
Your reason for not believing it is your belief in naturalistic models under the guise of science.
By the way, GOD is the creationist.

 

[Hieronymus]

There has been a ton of archeological work looking into the events described in Exodus. The evidence is clear that the whole exodus story never happened.

That's just not so, friend.

Biblical archeologists and historians have agreed on this for at least 20 years.

Not anymore though.
You should update your knowledge, you're lagging.

Even the Table of Nations (Genesis 10) is backed by evidence and is considered the authority in that field of science.

 

[Speedwell]

That's a caricature you pose as the norm among creationists.

So you don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot?

By the way, GOD is the creationist.

LOL! God is the creator. Whether He is a Creationist or not is what we are discussing.

 

[Hieronymus]

So you don't like it when the shoe is on the other foot?

I don't like that shoe to be on any foot.
But ToE is mandatory religion, sold off as proven fact.
I'm sure you can appreciate the difference between that and overzealous creationists.
I could however be true though, singe the Flood was a huge unimaginable mess of water and earth.
I don't know, it happened long ago.

LOL! God is the creator. Whether He is a Creationist or not is what we are discussing.

Whatever makes you feel smart, bro...

 

[Papias]

You have a very serious biblical authority problem.

It sounds like you are unhappy that I don't accept your human interpretation of scripture, and instead go by an interpretation which fits with the rest of God's revelation, the physical world. Every word of the Bibles is not necessarily literal - as you yourself know.

Don't believe everything the "experts" tell you. They are often godless people who want to try to explain history and science without the Creator God and without any regard for the truth.

Oh, the Synagogue of Conservative Jews is godless? Did you bother to read any of my links? The university of Tel Aviv in Israel is made up of godless people? All while your purported reference (David Rohl) has stated he's godless. I didn't bring up the godless bit, you did - while your single, crackpot source is godless and my many sources are not.

I urge you to watch documentary I posted, Patterns of Evidence: Exodus.

Oh, by the guy who failed to complete his own Ph.D. in Egyptian Archeology, and instead used his rock band money to build up and promote his own mythology, which is dismissed by the people who actually know what they are talking about? That's the huckster you go to for information? That's pretty sad. You can see he has an online store for his books and videos - it's just a money making scam, a perfect example of what I described in my earlier post. Thanks for providing such a clear example of people who peddle lies for money, in contradiction to the evidence.

If we are to bear a solid witness for Jesus, we can't be seen falling for debunked fringe approaches.

In Christ-

Papias

 

[Luke17:37]

It sounds like you are unhappy that I don't accept your human interpretation of scripture, and instead go by an interpretation which fits with the rest of God's revelation, the physical world. Every word of the Bibles is not necessarily literal - as you yourself know.



Oh, the Synagogue of Conservative Jews is godless? Did you bother to read any of my links? The university of Tel Aviv in Israel is made up of godless people? All while your purported reference (David Rohl) has stated he's godless. I didn't bring up the godless bit, you did - while your single, crackpot source is godless and my many sources are not.




Oh, by the guy who failed to complete his own Ph.D. in Egyptian Archeology, and instead used his rock band money to build up and promote his own mythology, which is dismissed by the people who actually know what they are talking about? That's the huckster you go to for information? That's pretty sad. You can see he has an online store for his books and videos - it's just a money making scam, a perfect example of what I described in my earlier post. Thanks for providing such a clear example of people who peddle lies for money, in contradiction to the evidence.

If we are to bear a solid witness for Jesus, we can't be seen falling for debunked fringe approaches.

In Christ-

Papias

How can we bear a solid witness for Jesus on the basis of fairy tales?

If there was no real Adam, there was no pre-curse world, no original sin, no promise of a Savior (Genesis 3:15) to fix the curse, no first blood sacrifice that points to the ultimate Lamb of God (Genesis 3:21, Leviticus 17:11) who died to clothe men in the righteousness that comes from God. If there was no Abraham, there was no promise of the Seed of Abraham (Genesis 22). If there was no Moses, there was no Ten Commandments and no Torah (Genesis - Deuteronomy). If there was no David, there was no promise of the Son of David. If God has been lying about all these things being history, and all these prophecies concerning the Messiah (which Jesus fulfilled, literally) and that's okay with you, why exactly do you believe the Bible is credible when it tells you that Jesus rose from the dead? When do you think God stopped lying and started telling the truth? How does Jesus' death solve our sin problem if our sin problem might just be a myth? How exactly would you tell someone that the gospel is relevant? If I were listening to you as an unbeliever, I would think, "He doesn't even believe the Bible. Why should I?" and I'd walk away. I am not going to stake my eternal destiny on a fairy tale. Either it's true, or it's lie. I know it's true.

 

[Speedwell]

How can we bear a solid witness for Jesus on the basis of fairy tales?

If there was no real Adam, there was no pre-curse world, no original sin, no promise of a Savior (Genesis 3:15) to fix the curse, no first blood sacrifice that points to the ultimate Lamb of God (Genesis 3:21, Leviticus 17:11) who died to clothe men in the righteousness that comes from God. If there was no Abraham, there was no promise of the Seed of Abraham (Genesis 22). If there was no Moses, there was no Ten Commandments and no Torah (Genesis - Deuteronomy). If there was no David, there was no promise of the Son of David. If God has been lying about all these things being history, and all these prophecies concerning the Messiah (which Jesus fulfilled, literally) and that's okay with you, why exactly do you believe the Bible is credible when it tells you that Jesus rose from the dead? When do you think God stopped lying and started telling the truth? How does Jesus' death solve our sin problem if our sin problem might just be a myth? How exactly would you tell someone that the gospel is relevant? If I were listening to you as an unbeliever, I would think, "He doesn't even believe the Bible. Why should I?" and I'd walk away. I am not going to stake my eternal destiny on a fairy tale. Either it's true, or it's lie. I know it's true.

If don't know through your own personal experience that you're a sinner, but only believe it because you read about it in a book, then you're in big trouble anyway.

 

[Verward]

There has been a ton of archeological work looking into the events described in Exodus. The evidence is clear that the whole exodus story never happened. Biblical archeologists and historians have agreed on this for at least 20 years. There were plenty of expectations a century ago that archeology would confirm the stories in the first books of the Bibles, but as the evidence piled up, it soon became clear that it didn't happen as described in the Bibles. Some basic and well supported facts we now know:

• The Jews were never enslaved in Egypt - instead, they developed from earlier Canaanites, and never had to "conquer" the land they always had.
• There is no evidence that Moses ever existed outside of legend, like Hercules.
• No Egyptian records support the enslavement of the Hebrews, or any other Biblical story - and the Egyptians have good records.
• No Egyptian records support the drowning of their army in the red sea, or any other Biblical story - and the Egyptians have good records.
• Jericho has been studied extensively with massive digs and archeological testing - the Biblical story does not appear to have happened. In fact, the famed walls of Jericho were destroyed by the Egyptian army centuries before the Hebrew mythology was supposed to have happened.

and so on.

This is the consensus view of Biblical archeological historians. Some examples:

• Here is a book by a well known biblical archeological historian, who points out that the stories never actually happened. Read page 6 here: https://books.google.com/books?id=0QHHITXsyskC&pg=PA6#v=onepage&q&f=false
• Even the Conservative Jews have accepted reality here - just the first few paragraphs of this article should make that clear: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/09/books/new-torah-for-modern-minds.html?pagewanted=all
• Here is a good video describing this, by the top Archeologist at Israel's Tel Aviv University. You might notice that he's introduced by Rabbi Wine, who was one of the most respected Rabbis before his recent death.

The other videos by Dr. Finkelstein in that same series are also useful.

What you have referenced so far are the many pulp fiction books put out by scammers looking to make money. They know that they can take money from Christians who will buy books that say that the events in the first few books of their Bible happened, and that most Christians won't bother to notice that they aren't experts, nor that the experts themselves are clear that the Exodus never happened.



These are all unsupported claims, most being obviously false. For instance, the Hyksos were not the Hebrews, and had nothing to do with them. The Hyskos doesn't even match the basics of the Exodus story, such as the basic fact that the Hysos were driven out, instead of escaping.

The plagues? There is no evidence that the plagues happened. The pagan temples were closed after the exodus? That's silly, Egypt has had pagan religion from the deep past all the way up to Jesus' day.

There is no carbon dating support for the Biblical story of Jericho, as shown above.

A lot of those points, even if true, don't support the idea that the exodus story happened.

The word of God contains His message for us, and it's clear from archeology that the message isn't literal history, but rather telling us how he chooses people. Like biology, and geology, this is another area where failing to understand what the experts have found (such as the Biblical archeologists) only makes us look less credible.

In Christ-

Papias

Thanks for your detailed response.

Yes many people have pointed out that the Hyksos were not the Hebrews, from their names and their burial rituals and their worship of Seth and the fact that they were the ruling class not slaves it is clear that they weren't Hebrews or Israelites. This fact doesn't rule out the possibility of them being the rulers over the Israelites, the oppressors not the slaves. In fact everything does fit in very well with them being the oppressors. The only thing that doesn't fit is standard Bible chronology and the book I mentioned points out a flaw in these chronologies and places the exodus around 1602 BCE.

Yes one of the Hyksos rulers Aphophis/Apepi closed all the temples and didn't allow worship of gods other than Seth. That didn't last long of course.

Carbon dating shows a destruction of Jericho 1560+/-40 BCE, consistent with a calculated date of 1562 BCE.

There are only two alternatives, the exodus happened as described or it didn't. If it didn't happen the first five books of the bible are a work of fiction. The person who wrote the ten commandments including the one about not bearing false witness was lying. Books of the Bible referring to the exodus are referencing a myth or a lie. The passover celebrating the departure from Egypt was again a lie. Jesus celebrated the passover with his disciples. Was he unaware that the whole thing was a fabrication? Is this how the word of God works, nothing to be taken literally, sorry for the confusion folks it was just a story?

I do respect the work of Dr. Finkelstein and others, and their efforts to set forth the problem, and it is one that can't be ignored.

 

[Papias]

Thanks for your detailed response.

You are welcome! : )

There are only two alternatives, the exodus happened as described or it didn't.

True - it either happened literally as literally described, or it has a deeper meaning.

Let's think about that a second in general. First, you recognize that we live on a globe, not a flat earth under a dome, right? And that geologists have long recognized that a literal flood of Noah never happened, right?

The scriptures, if read literally, clearly describe a flat earth, under a hard dome, under water, with the stars as little lights inside the dome. You can see the dozens of verses that say this, in post #3, here: http://www.christianforums.com/threads/wrench-in-the-gears.7949579/#post-69701869
Plus, biblical scholars have recognized this for centuries, and even Martin Luther rejected the idea of that earth went around the sun because it contradicts the scripture.

So do you think that because the scriptures "lied" about the earth and the flood, that they can't be trusted?

OR - that we were mistaking illustrative stories for literal history? I think that's a lot more likely. In the same way, deciding that the Exodus is a parable meant to convey a point (and not literal history) is very much in keeping with how you and I already approach sections of the Bibles - after all, we both know that the scriptures contain both parable and literal history. The only discussion point is deciding which sections likely fall in each category. Remember that Jesus himself is the author of our scriptures - and we know quite well that Jesus often taught in parables, right? Maybe seeing the Exodus as literal history is as silly as a person who got upset because someone said that the Good Samaritan might be a parable, and not literal history that really happened?

The passover celebrating the departure from Egypt was again a lie. Jesus celebrated the passover with his disciples. Was he unaware that the whole thing was a fabrication? Is this how the word of God works, nothing to be taken literally, sorry for the confusion folks it was just a story?

As pointed about above, it's not all literal vs. nothing literal. We both already know there is literal and non-literal stuff in the scriptures. We don't say "oh, because Exodus 19:4 says that the Jews were flown out of Egypt by giant eagles, and we don't think that literally happened, the whole Bible must be a lie!" - now do we? Stories make points - regardless of whether or not they literally happened.

I do respect the work of Dr. Finkelstein and others, and their efforts to set forth the problem, and it is one that can't be ignored.

Just as the realization that the earth went around the sun, in contradiction of scripture, wasn't a huge problem for Christianity in the long run (though it seemed like a big problem to many Christians at the time), I'm not so sure that this is a big problem that can't be ignored.

In Christ-

Papias

 

[Verward]

You are welcome! : )



True - it either happened literally as literally described, or it has a deeper meaning.

Let's think about that a second in general. First, you recognize that we live on a globe, not a flat earth under a dome, right? And that geologists have long recognized that a literal flood of Noah never happened, right?

The scriptures, if read literally, clearly describe a flat earth, under a hard dome, under water, with the stars as little lights inside the dome. You can see the dozens of verses that say this, in post #3, here: http://www.christianforums.com/threads/wrench-in-the-gears.7949579/#post-69701869
Plus, biblical scholars have recognized this for centuries, and even Martin Luther rejected the idea of that earth went around the sun because it contradicts the scripture.

So do you think that because the scriptures "lied" about the earth and the flood, that they can't be trusted?

OR - that we were mistaking illustrative stories for literal history? I think that's a lot more likely. In the same way, deciding that the Exodus is a parable meant to convey a point (and not literal history) is very much in keeping with how you and I already approach sections of the Bibles - after all, we both know that the scriptures contain both parable and literal history. The only discussion point is deciding which sections likely fall in each category. Remember that Jesus himself is the author of our scriptures - and we know quite well that Jesus often taught in parables, right? Maybe seeing the Exodus as literal history is as silly as a person who got upset because someone said that the Good Samaritan might be a parable, and not literal history that really happened?



As pointed about above, it's not all literal vs. nothing literal. We both already know there is literal and non-literal stuff in the scriptures. We don't say "oh, because Exodus 19:4 says that the Jews were flown out of Egypt by giant eagles, and we don't think that literally happened, the whole Bible must be a lie!" - now do we? Stories make points - regardless of whether or not they literally happened.




Just as the realization that the earth went around the sun, in contradiction of scripture, wasn't a huge problem for Christianity in the long run (though it seemed like a big problem to many Christians at the time), I'm not so sure that this is a big problem that can't be ignored.

In Christ-

Papias

There is a distinction between our understanding of particular words and phrases from an ancient language and an entire collection of books being questionable. I haven't read anything that makes me think the sun moves around the earth or that the earth is flat and there certainly isn't volumes describing this in the Old Testament.

Yes, there are parables, and there is symbolic language in places, and there are people getting muddled over which is which. To say that the entire exodus account and all the associated events including the wandering in the wilderness, the conquering of the promised land, the receiving the of the law, plus much more, never happened and is just a parable puts the entire Bible into the category of "not to be taken literally". I suppose that means "eternal life" was never meant to be taken literally, we just die, might as well just eat drink and be merry.

I would have thought people would be pleased to hear that there is a simple resolution to the problem of reconciling the biblical account of the exodus with archaeological evidence, but apparently not.