Please Someone Address This

[Spikey4672]

Ok fair warning this is mostly a rant but i feel that it is in DESPERATE need of attention and no one seems to notice

I live in the deep south "Bible belt" of the U.S. which basically everyone has heard of Jesus and everyone claims to be a Christian. What I have found is that Christians nowadays are ignorant. Yes i said ignorant, and i mean it in the most literal way. I know Christians who could not argue for ANYTHING they believe in other than saying "well the Bible says this". Let me point out something, if the Bible is true (which as Christians we believe it is) then what is says should be true indefinitely. But Christians can't support it. They make no attempt to convince people that the Bible is fact, if you can't convince them the Bible is fact, then saying its in the Bible is a waste of time. Did you guys know that the Bible gave instructions on the treating of leprosy based off of the concept of germs CENTURIES before it was even introduced? Or the fact that history shows time and time again that those civilizations that turn away from God are destroyed (i.e. Roman empire is split, one half, the future Byzantine Empire, adopts Christianity, the Western Roman Empire does not, and continues mass murdering Christians in gladitorial games until Theodosius the Great. Needless to say, the Byzantine Empire lasts another 1000 years while the Western Roman Empire is sacked by Germanics). The world is FILLED with proof that the Bible is real and NO ONE BOTHERS USING IT. Another example, today in my debate class we had several PROFESSED CHRISTIANS vote to affirm gay marriage. Why? because none of them had any argument to back up their position, even though there are PLENTY of anit-gay arguments, to list a few according to research at the University of Texas, children of gay parents are 10X more likely to be sexually abused by a guardian, gays are responsible for over 65% of the United States cases of STDs, yet they make up LESS THAN 10% of the population, studies in Sweden interviewed 25 sets of identical twins (which means identical genes) where one twin was gay and ONLY 1 set was both twins gay (this debunks the whole "its not a choice" argument) and the list goes on. I proprose RIGHT NOW that we start to fight Christian ignorance. If you plan on backing up your beliefs, HAVE SOME BACKUP. Prove that the Bible is real, give evidence that is manifested throughout all of creation. If you don't know, ASK. There are some immensely intelligent men and women of God who find this information out (Ken Ham is an excellent source for any Creation v. Evolution arguments) So please, stop hurting Christianity. I can't tell you how many times people have assumed that I am stupid because I am a Christian, and it's just because previous Christians, with good intent, simply have no understanding of WHY they believe what they believe.

*sigh* glad i got that out of my system
Anybody else see this problem?

 

[Kings servant]

Ok fair warning this is mostly a rant but i feel that it is in DESPERATE need of attention and no one seems to notice

I live in the deep south "Bible belt" of the U.S. which basically everyone has heard of Jesus and everyone claims to be a Christian. What I have found is that Christians nowadays are ignorant. Yes i said ignorant, and i mean it in the most literal way. I know Christians who could not argue for ANYTHING they believe in other than saying "well the Bible says this". Let me point out something, if the Bible is true (which as Christians we believe it is) then what is says should be true indefinitely. But Christians can't support it. They make no attempt to convince people that the Bible is fact, if you can't convince them the Bible is fact, then saying its in the Bible is a waste of time. Did you guys know that the Bible gave instructions on the treating of leprosy based off of the concept of germs CENTURIES before it was even introduced? Or the fact that history shows time and time again that those civilizations that turn away from God are destroyed (i.e. Roman empire is split, one half, the future Byzantine Empire, adopts Christianity, the Western Roman Empire does not, and continues mass murdering Christians in gladitorial games until Theodosius the Great. Needless to say, the Byzantine Empire lasts another 1000 years while the Western Roman Empire is sacked by Germanics). The world is FILLED with proof that the Bible is real and NO ONE BOTHERS USING IT. Another example, today in my debate class we had several PROFESSED CHRISTIANS vote to affirm gay marriage. Why? because none of them had any argument to back up their position, even though there are PLENTY of anit-gay arguments, to list a few according to research at the University of Texas, children of gay parents are 10X more likely to be sexually abused by a guardian, gays are responsible for over 65% of the United States cases of STDs, yet they make up LESS THAN 10% of the population, studies in Sweden interviewed 25 sets of identical twins (which means identical genes) where one twin was gay and ONLY 1 set was both twins gay (this debunks the whole "its not a choice" argument) and the list goes on. I proprose RIGHT NOW that we start to fight Christian ignorance. If you plan on backing up your beliefs, HAVE SOME BACKUP. Prove that the Bible is real, give evidence that is manifested throughout all of creation. If you don't know, ASK. There are some immensely intelligent men and women of God who find this information out (Ken Ham is an excellent source for any Creation v. Evolution arguments) So please, stop hurting Christianity. I can't tell you how many times people have assumed that I am stupid because I am a Christian, and it's just because previous Christians, with good intent, simply have no understanding of WHY they believe what they believe.

*sigh* glad i got that out of my system
Anybody else see this problem?

Can't argue with that but I will add. How can you expect many Christians today to defend their faith when the only " truth " they know is what they hear from man? This is the reason why there are so many false doctrines In the church today. People hear a pastor say it but won't bother to go to the source ( The Bible ) to make sure that what they were told is the truth!

 

[Spikey4672]

That's why i believe that we should educate on a biblical basis. One of the best examples i know of is the creation museum founded by Ken Ham and his associates at Answers in Genesis. They use science, geology, archaeology, astrology, biology, and other fields of science to prove that creationism does have more scientific backing then evolution. Christians need to be aware of how to prove the Bible and how God is mirrored in the world around them rather than just believing what people say, that's just ignorant

 

[miamited]

That's why i believe that we should educate on a biblical basis. One of the best examples i know of is the creation museum founded by Ken Ham and his associates at Answers in Genesis. They use science, geology, archaeology, astrology, biology, and other fields of science to prove that creationism does have more scientific backing then evolution. Christians need to be aware of how to prove the Bible and how God is mirrored in the world around them rather than just believing what people say, that's just ignorant

Hi spikey,

Ok, prove to me that God parted a sea.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Spikey4672]

Searching for Moses - Answers in Genesis

And for those who don't feel like reading i will summarize
Creationists have lately been arguing with modern secular archaeologists that the dating of Egyptian history is about 300 years off. The argument behind this is that there is much evidence for the biblical account, it's all just dated about 300 years off. Some of the evidence includes...
1. 12th century pharoah named Amenemhet III was succeeded by a female, his daughter. This is almost never seen in the Egyptian royalty, possible explanation he had two heirs but one was Hebrew and the other drowned in the Red Sea
2. Excavations in the city of Kahun show the presence of a large number of Asiatics (people from Asia, they can tell from the skeletons what race the people were). These remains have no explanation, but are dated coincedentaly at the same time of the Israelites enslavement, if you follow the teaching that the current dating is off by 300 years
3. Excavations in Kahun also show a large number of babies buried at the same time (Bible says Pharoah ordered the murder of all male babies in the Israelites cities).
4. Manetho, a 13th century Egyptian priest, recorded that Khasekemre-Neferhotep I as the last Egyptian pharoah before the Hyksos occupied Egypt without a battle. Why was there no battle? Most of Pharoah's army was at the bottom of the Red Sea!
5. Recordings on papyrus found and dated to be in the 13th century record the water being as blood (that's in the Bible too)
6. There is a small window of time where the slaves left, leaving behind a lot of what would be considered necessities, thus drawing the conclusion that they left quickly and en masse, this is determined by excavations in Kahun still being in tact, so they weren't pillaged, and the timing does not match up with the completing of the pyramid(s).

This is just scraping the surface, so i suggest you read the whole article. If evidence shows that the Bible was correct about all of this, and it has been proven that there is a way the Red Sea could have parted using natural forces, what is the argument that it didnt happen?

 

[Kings servant]

Searching for Moses - Answers in Genesis

And for those who don't feel like reading i will summarize
Creationists have lately been arguing with modern secular archaeologists that the dating of Egyptian history is about 300 years off. The argument behind this is that there is much evidence for the biblical account, it's all just dated about 300 years off. Some of the evidence includes...
1. 12th century pharoah named Amenemhet III was succeeded by a female, his daughter. This is almost never seen in the Egyptian royalty, possible explanation he had two heirs but one was Hebrew and the other drowned in the Red Sea
2. Excavations in the city of Kahun show the presence of a large number of Asiatics (people from Asia, they can tell from the skeletons what race the people were). These remains have no explanation, but are dated coincedentaly at the same time of the Israelites enslavement, if you follow the teaching that the current dating is off by 300 years
3. Excavations in Kahun also show a large number of babies buried at the same time (Bible says Pharoah ordered the murder of all male babies in the Israelites cities).
4. Manetho, a 13th century Egyptian priest, recorded that Khasekemre-Neferhotep I as the last Egyptian pharoah before the Hyksos occupied Egypt without a battle. Why was there no battle? Most of Pharoah's army was at the bottom of the Red Sea!
5. Recordings on papyrus found and dated to be in the 13th century record the water being as blood (that's in the Bible too)
6. There is a small window of time where the slaves left, leaving behind a lot of what would be considered necessities, thus drawing the conclusion that they left quickly and en masse, this is determined by excavations in Kahun still being in tact, so they weren't pillaged, and the timing does not match up with the completing of the pyramid(s).

This is just scraping the surface, so i suggest you read the whole article. If evidence shows that the Bible was correct about all of this, and it has been proven that there is a way the Red Sea could have parted using natural forces, what is the argument that it didnt happen?

 

[miamited]

Searching for Moses - Answers in Genesis

And for those who don't feel like reading i will summarize
Creationists have lately been arguing with modern secular archaeologists that the dating of Egyptian history is about 300 years off. The argument behind this is that there is much evidence for the biblical account, it's all just dated about 300 years off. Some of the evidence includes...
1. 12th century pharoah named Amenemhet III was succeeded by a female, his daughter. This is almost never seen in the Egyptian royalty, possible explanation he had two heirs but one was Hebrew and the other drowned in the Red Sea
2. Excavations in the city of Kahun show the presence of a large number of Asiatics (people from Asia, they can tell from the skeletons what race the people were). These remains have no explanation, but are dated coincedentaly at the same time of the Israelites enslavement, if you follow the teaching that the current dating is off by 300 years
3. Excavations in Kahun also show a large number of babies buried at the same time (Bible says Pharoah ordered the murder of all male babies in the Israelites cities).
4. Manetho, a 13th century Egyptian priest, recorded that Khasekemre-Neferhotep I as the last Egyptian pharoah before the Hyksos occupied Egypt without a battle. Why was there no battle? Most of Pharoah's army was at the bottom of the Red Sea!
5. Recordings on papyrus found and dated to be in the 13th century record the water being as blood (that's in the Bible too)
6. There is a small window of time where the slaves left, leaving behind a lot of what would be considered necessities, thus drawing the conclusion that they left quickly and en masse, this is determined by excavations in Kahun still being in tact, so they weren't pillaged, and the timing does not match up with the completing of the pyramid(s).

This is just scraping the surface, so i suggest you read the whole article. If evidence shows that the Bible was correct about all of this, and it has been proven that there is a way the Red Sea could have parted using natural forces, what is the argument that it didnt happen?

Hi spikey,

I'm going to assume that all this was written to answer my question. So, let me see if I can summarize what you've responded:

1. There is a 'possibility' that might explain a woman being held as Pharoah. Can we prove that this is the reason that Sobeknefru acceded to the throne? Can we prove that Amenemhat's son was killed by drowning in the Red Sea? Facts cannot be 'proved' just by there being 'possibilities'.

2. Again with the 'possibilities', and this one asks us to also accept the possibility that the dating is off by 300 years. Where does that leave Amenemhat?

3. Do these excavations show that they were not Egyptian babies, because your 'fact' is slightly off. Pharaoh did not order all male babies killed, but the Hebrew male children.

4. You ask why there was no battle? Then you offer up a possible answer. Is there any proof that your answer is correct as to why there was no battle?

5. Alright, so let's say the water 'seemed' as blood. Most people would just assume that some kind of red dirt had made it into the water system, but in either case this doesn't speak to God dividing a sea.

6. Is again guesswork that the find of some left behind household goods indicate that some people, the slaves as you explain, left quickly. Ok, I'm even willing to accept that this guesswork may or may not be correct in its assumptions, but... How does that prove that God divided a sea?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Spikey4672]

Hi spikey,

I'm going to assume that all this was written to answer my question. So, let me see if I can summarize what you've responded:

1. There is a 'possibility' that might explain a woman being held as Pharoah. Can we prove that this is the reason that Sobeknefru acceded to the throne? Can we prove that Amenemhat's son was killed by drowning in the Red Sea? Facts cannot be 'proved' just by there being 'possibilities'.

2. Again with the 'possibilities', and this one asks us to also accept the possibility that the dating is off by 300 years. Where does that leave Amenemhat?

3. Do these excavations show that they were not Egyptian babies, because your 'fact' is slightly off. Pharaoh did not order all male babies killed, but the Hebrew male children.

4. You ask why there was no battle? Then you offer up a possible answer. Is there any proof that your answer is correct as to why there was no battle?

5. Alright, so let's say the water 'seemed' as blood. Most people would just assume that some kind of red dirt had made it into the water system, but in either case this doesn't speak to God dividing a sea.

6. Is again guesswork that the find of some left behind household goods indicate that some people, the slaves as you explain, left quickly. Ok, I'm even willing to accept that this guesswork may or may not be correct in its assumptions, but... How does that prove that God divided a sea?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

To address your contention that all of these are possibilities and not actual facts, most of what we know about the past is guesswork, secular or not. Even if a document was left that said an event happend, there is still questions of if it is correct. There is no way to provide you any kind of pure hardcore evidence in a box to show you that all of the events in the Bible happend. What i have attempted to do is provide you with evidence that all seem to line up in a perfect timeline that coincidentally coincides with the biblical account. For your specific question, since we know
1. The Hebrews were slaves to the Egyptians (btw to answer #3 the hebrews were of an Asiatic race which is identifiable from the more Negroid race of the Egyptians)
2. Evidence shows they left quickly and en masse after a series of 10 plagues that have been recorded by Egyptian priests and the Bible
3. Evidence shows there was a pharoah who had a "missing heir"
4. Further there is also evidence that shows that the same pharoah had a daughter who could not have children
5. Egypt lost to the Hyksos without a fight after the Bible claims pharoah's army drowned
6. We know the Israelites went from Egypt to the Sinai Peninsula
7. We know that by natural causes the Red Sea can part
So if you add all this up the what is the chance that all of this just so happens to coincide with the story written in the Bible? The chances that all of this is just coincidence and not that the Bible is true is slim to none.

 

[miamited]

Hi spikey,

Listen, before we get off on the wrong foot here, you don't have to prove anything to me. I believe absolutely everything the Scriptures tell me. The creation event was about 6,000 years ago and spanned 6 rotations of the earth (day). The waters of the flood covered the whole earth, etc. etc.

My point, however, is that no, we cannot with any empirical evidence prove any 'facts' of the Scriptures. It must be believed on faith, but that faith is not something built on a foundation of sand. If the 'facts' of the Scriptures could be proven through empirical evidence then we wouldn't have any atheists on the planet. We might not all agree on who God is, but there wouldn't be any doubt in anyone's mind that there is a God.

Now, just as you conclude, what we have are a line of 'coincidences' that may, depending on who is doing the interpreting, be interpreted to support various 'facts' of the Scriptures.

The missing heir of the Pharaoh may have died of some disease or been killed in a battle or some accident of life. And you shouldn't even be concerned to show that the Red Sea might part by some natural occurrence. While I'd be interested in reading your evidence of such, it wasn't any natural event that caused the parting of the Red Sea. There is no natural event that would part the sea in the manner that the description of the event tells us.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Albion]

And you shouldn't even be concerned to show that the Red Sea might part by some natural occurrence. While I'd be interested in reading your evidence of such, it wasn't any natural event that caused the parting of the Red Sea. There is no natural event that would part the sea in the manner that the description of the event tells us.

I can't agree to that ^, but I'm thinking that the problem here is not with the indefensible (like saying the Earth is only 6000 years old), but an OP that perhaps takes on too much at once.

 

[theophilus40]

If the 'facts' of the Scriptures could be proven through empirical evidence then we wouldn't have any atheists on the planet.

There are people who would deny the truth regardless of the evidence. Jesus provided empirical evidence through the miracles he performed and his enemies still denied the truth even though they saw these miracles. The religious leaders knew he raised Lazarus from the dead but instead of believing him they plotted to kill Lazarus.

Answers in Genesis is an excellent place to find evidence supporting the Bible. Here are two other good sites:

Evolutionary Truth by Piltdown Superman

Science Against Evolution Official Home Page

Here is a good site for anyone who wants to understand what the Bible teaches about homosexuality.

http://truefreedomtrust.co.uk/

 

[Spikey4672]

Hi spikey,

Listen, before we get off on the wrong foot here, you don't have to prove anything to me. I believe absolutely everything the Scriptures tell me. The creation event was about 6,000 years ago and spanned 6 rotations of the earth (day). The waters of the flood covered the whole earth, etc. etc.

My point, however, is that no, we cannot with any empirical evidence prove any 'facts' of the Scriptures. It must be believed on faith, but that faith is not something built on a foundation of sand. If the 'facts' of the Scriptures could be proven through empirical evidence then we wouldn't have any atheists on the planet. We might not all agree on who God is, but there wouldn't be any doubt in anyone's mind that there is a God.

Now, just as you conclude, what we have are a line of 'coincidences' that may, depending on who is doing the interpreting, be interpreted to support various 'facts' of the Scriptures.

The missing heir of the Pharaoh may have died of some disease or been killed in a battle or some accident of life. And you shouldn't even be concerned to show that the Red Sea might part by some natural occurrence. While I'd be interested in reading your evidence of such, it wasn't any natural event that caused the parting of the Red Sea. There is no natural event that would part the sea in the manner that the description of the event tells us.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

While i do agree with you that a lot of the Scripture and Christianity does require faith, my objection is that if the events in the Bible happend, then there should be evidence to support it. If I can't convince someone that the Bible is true on a historical level, how can I convince them to believe it on a spiritual level. I also believe that God created nature, he can command Earth to do whatever he wants. The miracle of parting the Red Sea wasn't a miracle because it parted, it's a miracle because God parted it for the Israelites specifically. Just to say that this is not a supernatural event per say doesnt make it any less of a miracle. I have heard arguments that a metorite destroyed Sodom. Well isn't it coincidental that this occured after to strange men (angels) came and took Lot and his family out of the city? God used what he created to do his work. Believe me im not trying to instigate an argument i am just pointing out it's much easier to convince people to agree with the faith part of Christianity if you can convince them that it is factually accurate

 

[theophilus40]

If the 'facts' of the Scriptures could be proven through empirical evidence then we wouldn't have any atheists on the planet.

I have responded to this before but I have thought of something else I should add.

And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
(2 Corinthians 4:3-4 ESV)
​

The reason some people don't believe in God isn't lack of evidence but blindness which keeps them from seeing the evidence. If you have read The Chronicles of Narnia think about the dwarfs in the final book. That is why prayer should be a major part of evangelism. All our efforts to tell unbelievers the truth will be useless unless God opens their eyes so they can understand it.

 

[Aviela]

Ok fair warning this is mostly a rant but i feel that it is in DESPERATE need of attention and no one seems to notice

I live in the deep south "Bible belt" of the U.S. which basically everyone has heard of Jesus and everyone claims to be a Christian. What I have found is that Christians nowadays are ignorant. Yes i said ignorant, and i mean it in the most literal way. I know Christians who could not argue for ANYTHING they believe in other than saying "well the Bible says this". Let me point out something, if the Bible is true (which as Christians we believe it is) then what is says should be true indefinitely. But Christians can't support it. They make no attempt to convince people that the Bible is fact, if you can't convince them the Bible is fact, then saying its in the Bible is a waste of time. Did you guys know that the Bible gave instructions on the treating of leprosy based off of the concept of germs CENTURIES before it was even introduced? Or the fact that history shows time and time again that those civilizations that turn away from God are destroyed (i.e. Roman empire is split, one half, the future Byzantine Empire, adopts Christianity, the Western Roman Empire does not, and continues mass murdering Christians in gladitorial games until Theodosius the Great. Needless to say, the Byzantine Empire lasts another 1000 years while the Western Roman Empire is sacked by Germanics). The world is FILLED with proof that the Bible is real and NO ONE BOTHERS USING IT. Another example, today in my debate class we had several PROFESSED CHRISTIANS vote to affirm gay marriage. Why? because none of them had any argument to back up their position, even though there are PLENTY of anit-gay arguments, to list a few according to research at the University of Texas, children of gay parents are 10X more likely to be sexually abused by a guardian, gays are responsible for over 65% of the United States cases of STDs, yet they make up LESS THAN 10% of the population, studies in Sweden interviewed 25 sets of identical twins (which means identical genes) where one twin was gay and ONLY 1 set was both twins gay (this debunks the whole "its not a choice" argument) and the list goes on. I proprose RIGHT NOW that we start to fight Christian ignorance. If you plan on backing up your beliefs, HAVE SOME BACKUP. Prove that the Bible is real, give evidence that is manifested throughout all of creation. If you don't know, ASK. There are some immensely intelligent men and women of God who find this information out (Ken Ham is an excellent source for any Creation v. Evolution arguments) So please, stop hurting Christianity. I can't tell you how many times people have assumed that I am stupid because I am a Christian, and it's just because previous Christians, with good intent, simply have no understanding of WHY they believe what they believe.

*sigh* glad i got that out of my system
Anybody else see this problem?

It can be difficult to be a Christian at times for various reasons. However, some of your statements are pretty generalized and not all Christians can be simply lupped in one category or the other. We all have differing gifts. Yet, we are told to be ready to share our faith in a respectful way etc.:

But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
1 Peter 3:15

I think we need to do our part and do it as God would want us to do it. We also need to realize the Holy Spirit needs to work in others lives and trust that He is mighty to save.

 

[dhh712]

That's why i believe that we should educate on a biblical basis. One of the best examples i know of is the creation museum founded by Ken Ham and his associates at Answers in Genesis. They use science, geology, archaeology, astrology, biology, and other fields of science to prove that creationism does have more scientific backing then evolution. Christians need to be aware of how to prove the Bible and how God is mirrored in the world around them rather than just believing what people say, that's just ignorant

I hope there will be a way for this to be done. I feel a large problem, one which we can see, is that the lobbyists have too much control in the way science is taught from the world instead of from the Bible. There's too much money in worldly science for it to be taken from a different source (at least that's what it seems like to me). That propaganda of worldly science being put forth as absolute fact is one of the most heinous deceptions ever thrust upon mankind.

 

[miamited]

To address your contention that all of these are possibilities and not actual facts, most of what we know about the past is guesswork, secular or not. Even if a document was left that said an event happend, there is still questions of if it is correct. There is no way to provide you any kind of pure hardcore evidence in a box to show you that all of the events in the Bible happened.

Hi Spikey,

Yes, you are correct and that is exactly my point. We may infer evidences point to a particular event possibly happening, but there is no hard and fast evidence that we can lay our hands on to 'prove beyond any doubt' that these things really happened.

Why look here among those who gather under the umbrella of being Christian on this site. We can't even agree among ourselves that God created this realm in six days; that God did in fact part a sea; that God caused the shadow of the sun to back up a distance of several steps; that God made the sun to stand still in the noonday over Israel for an extended period of time.

Friend, if we can't even offer up some kind of factual evidence to prove these events to those who walk around with the Scriptures tucked securely under their arm, then how in the world would one expect to show such proof to the fully unbelieving?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Sketcher]

I am 100% with your sentiment, that Christians need to be able to defend their beliefs well, back up what they say, and so forth. Unfortunately, none of the examples you gave are proof that the Bible is true. I believe that it is true, but the examples you gave do not prove it. I recommend that you read up: Logical Fallacies. Liberals and unbelievers commit these all the time.

 

[Spikey4672]

I don't consider myself an expert on the subject so thank you sketcher for the constructive criticism (and yes i did read the attached article)

 

[Vanguard PCD]

To add to miamited's argument (which is not to bash, but to try and prove to a non-believer...a rather difficult task):

1. The Hebrews were slaves to the Egyptians (btw to answer #3 the hebrews were of an Asiatic race which is identifiable from the more Negroid race of the Egyptians)

Yet there is not a shred of physical evidence that the Hebrews were slaves to the Egyptians. No hieroglyphs ever mention it.

2. Evidence shows they left quickly and en masse after a series of 10 plagues that have been recorded by Egyptian priests and the Bible

What evidence? There is nothing on the Egyptian side, and nothing has been found through archaeology about that many people wandering around the desert for 40 years.

5. Egypt lost to the Hyksos without a fight after the Bible claims pharoah's army drowned

Per ancient history, the Hyksos were kicked out of lower Egypt by the Egyptian army.

6. We know the Israelites went from Egypt to the Sinai Peninsula

Yet no physical evidence has ever been found. Surely ~1 million people migrating and wandering around for 40 years would leave some trace?

7. We know that by natural causes the Red Sea can part

A very rare occurrence. No evidence has ever been found on the floor of the Red Sea. That guy who claimed to have found a chariot wheel was shown to be a fake. Besides, it was not the "Red Sea" that they went through. It was the "Reed Sea," or simply the Sea of Reeds, which is a marshland. Chariots could not follow.

One theory is that the Hyksos people, along with others, settled in Canaan and became the Hebrews. The defeat at the hands of the Egyptians was an embarrassment, so they changed the story to one of freedom from slavery by divine means. THIS IS NOT MY THEORY.

Just playing the advocate here as an example of how hard it is to convince someone, especially if they know a thing or two.

 

[miamited]

Hi PA,

I'd be curious to know how your understanding of the crossing of the 'Reed Sea' would fit this description:

Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and all that night the LORD drove the sea back with a strong east wind and turned it into dry land. The waters were divided, and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left. The Egyptians pursued them, and all Pharaoh's horses and chariots and horsemen followed them into the sea. During the last watch of the night the LORD looked down from the pillar of fire and cloud at the Egyptian army and threw it into confusion. He made the wheels of their chariots come off so that they had difficulty driving. And the Egyptians said, "Let's get away from the Israelites! The LORD is fighting for them against Egypt." Then the LORD said to Moses, "Stretch out your hand over the sea so that the waters may flow back over the Egyptians and their chariots and horsemen." Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and at daybreak the sea went back to its place. The Egyptians were fleeing toward it, and the LORD swept them into the sea. The water flowed back and covered the chariots and horsemen--the entire army of Pharaoh that had followed the Israelites into the sea. Not one of them survived. But the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left. That day the LORD saved Israel from the hands of the Egyptians, and Israel saw the Egyptians lying dead on the shore.

Twice it is mentioned that the Israelites passed through with a 'wall of water' on their right and on their left. Then the account concludes with Egyptian soldiers lying dead on the shore. How, in a sea of reeds that is only marshy ground that while chariots may have gotten bogged down, do soldiers lay dead on the shore. Couldn't they have just gotten off of their chariots and walked out just as the Hebrews had walked in? Just curious.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted