The bible claims Pharaoh had male newborns killed. But there's no historic proof?

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

So no proof of Pharaoh killing first born children. Just the lies.

 

[Philip_B]

So no proof of Pharaoh killing first born children. Just the lies.

The passage I cited above, does not make reference to first born children, but rather to male children. You appear to want some evidence, and your only alternative seems to be to dismiss everything as lie. That is not the only way to understand what is presented, and you have provided no evidence that it did not happen.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

The passage I cited above, do not make reference to first born children, but rather to male children. You appear to want some evidence, and your only alternative seems to be to dismiss everything as lie. That is not the only way to understand what is presented, and you have provided no evidence that it did not happen.

But there's no evidence it happen. So I'm pretty much done.

 

[Philip_B]

But there's no evidence it happen. So I'm pretty much done.

If a tree falls in the forest when there is no one to hear, does it make a noise?

The absence of evidence apart from the record of Exodus does not mean that it did not happen. You are arguing from silence.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

For some perspective, the Norse discovery of America is only mentioned in the Greenlander Saga and Saga of Erik the Red. As a consequence it was dismissed as fantastic till academics started to consider it possible in the 19th century but dubious, and only confirmed when Norse sites were discovered in the 20th.

Similarly the Trojan wars and the entirety of Mycenaean civilisation was dismissed, as all was based on one source - Homer - that was clearly taken to be the primary source for all other 'secondary' sources. Then Schliemann found Troy and Mycenae based on it.

There are many such examples, Biblical like Belshazzer or Pilate's title that were dismissed based on other sources only to be confirmed archeologically; or non-Biblical, like Celtic and Punic human sacrifice that people thought was just Roman propaganda.

It is just by luck that certain texts survived or not, or certain evidence. We probably have less than 2% of ancient texts and if I recall, they think we have less than 5% of ancient Egyptian monuments discovered. Of these, they are overwhelmingly funerary, leading to a misapprehended culture of Egypt as death-obsessed, and actually having a paucity of historical accounts - short of kings' lists and such. Accounts like the battle of Kadesh or Hapshetsut's expedition to Punt are exceptions. It is the equivalent of trying to reconstruct US history based on the Arlington National Cemetery say, with a few extra monuments here and there. It will have large lacunae. It depends how much you trust the source for it, the Bible, or not, as a historical source - but the lack of outside evidence does not mean it didn't happen, nor would the killing of slave children be unheard of or important enough to be recorded. It does no credit to a Pharoah to record how he feared his slaves and tried to kill their children - that shows him as scared and it is not a battle or whatnot to be celebrated. It is similar to how we see a lack of Roman monuments to their defeats from the Principate and Dominate, which go unmentioned often, outside of histories that frequently have axes to grind and thus mention them.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

If a tree falls in the forest when there is no one to hear, does it make a noise?

The absence of evidence apart from the record of Exodus does not mean that it did not happen. You are arguing from silence.

Claiming a king did something .When there's no proof. Is a lot different than a tree falling.I just see a history of lies .

 

[Oompa Loompa]

The bible claims a king named Pharaoh had a bunch of first born male newborns killed. But there's no historic proof of this. If that never happen, then nothings true in the bible. After that. Any thoughts?

I am curious as to what you do believe about the Bible.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

To play devil's advocate, I can counter that by simply saying no evidence has yet been found. It doesn't mean no evidence exists, only that no evidence has been found.

There is no documented evidence that I stubbed my toe this morning on the dinning room table. But that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

So no proof of Pharaoh killing first born children. Just the lies.

It concerns me how quickly you conclude the Bible is lying when it is absent of proof. There is no documented proof of the resurrection either. Do you believe the resurrection is a lie as well?

 

[Oompa Loompa]

If a tree falls in the forest when there is no one to hear, does it make a noise?

Nope. The tree never fell because nobody documented it.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

I am curious as to what you do believe about the Bible.

I'm not sure what to believe about the bible.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

It concerns me how quickly you conclude the Bible is lying when it is absent of proof. There is no documented proof of the resurrection either. Do you believe the resurrection is a lie as well?

If there is no documented proof of the resurrection, besides the bible. Then it probably didn't happen.

 

[Eftsoon]

If there is no documented proof of the resurrection, besides the bible. Then it probably didn't happen.

There's plenty of evidence dating from within 2 years of Christ's death. Christianity was in full sway and beliefs about the resurrection started to be codified within 2 years of Christ's death.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Exodus1:15-22
The king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, one of whom was named Shiphrah and the other Puah, ‘When you act as midwives to the Hebrew women, and see them on the birthstool, if it is a boy, kill him; but if it is a girl, she shall live.’ But the midwives feared God; they did not do as the king of Egypt commanded them, but they let the boys live. So the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and said to them, ‘Why have you done this, and allowed the boys to live?’ The midwives said to Pharaoh, ‘Because the Hebrew women are not like the Egyptian women; for they are vigorous and give birth before the midwife comes to them.’ So God dealt well with the midwives; and the people multiplied and became very strong. And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families. Then Pharaoh commanded all his people, ‘Every boy that is born to the Hebrews* you shall throw into the Nile, but you shall let every girl live.’​

This is the text that elates to the OP. The absence of known evidence outside of scripture of this account is simply that. It does not imply that the story is not true. The story may well be true, and who knows, one day we may find the evidence. It may also be a micro event that has been told in a way the records it as a macro event.

It is a shame that this has been derailed by those missing the point of the OP. If we require external corroboration for everything in scripture, then there will be no place for faith. There is a lot that is remarkable in the accounts of Moses, and he formed a very significant component in Jewish eschatological hope. Compare how many times Moses is referred to in John as against David. The point is we need to understand the Moses story a little better.

Yes, I remembered that story about how Moses became "Moses". The problem with the Exodus story is that it is very sure that it did not happen as told in the Bible. There may be some truth behind the story itself, but many of the claims of Exodus appear to have never happened at all.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

If there is no documented proof of the resurrection, besides the bible. Then it probably didn't happen.

What would "proof" look like for you?

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

What would "proof" look like for you?

Historical proof. Besides the bible.

 

[Joy]

MOD HAT ON

After Staff Review

This Thread
is Now
Permanently Closed

RV's: Multiple Violations -
Blasphemy and Contempt of Christianity​

It is considered blasphemy to insult or mock Christianity or any part of the Trinity-Father (God), Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit. Honest debate about the nature of God and Christian Theology is allowed, but derogatory remarks are not. Contemptuous remarks regarding Christianity or Christian practices are not allowed.

MOD HAT OFF​