- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,789
- 52,555
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
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.
Like what?Quite the contrary, there is much evidence, and this evidence is contrary to a global flood.
What about the parting of the Red Sea in Exodus
And the entire Egyptian army drowned in the Sea of Reeds, right?I think some bible scholars believe the actual translation describes a "sea of reeds" rather than the red see.
The key words are 'Yam Suph". The KJV translates that as Red Sea. However, Yam Suph is mentioned some 23 times in the the Tanakh. Both the NJPS and SET (Jewish versions) translate it as "sea of reeds".
Examples:
Exodus 13:18
KJV: "But God led the people about, through the way of the wilderness of the Red sea: and the children of Israel went up harnessed out of the land of Egypt."
NJPS: "So God led the people roundabout, by way of the wilderness at the Sea of Reeds. Now the Israelites went up armed out of the land of Egypt."
SET: "So God turned the people toward the way of the Wilderness to the Sea of Reeds. The Children of Israel were armed when they went up from the land of Egypt."
Like what?
And here I thought you were going to say a Chinese coin dated 5000 BC!Stratigraphic sediments that represent many different types of sedimentation processes that are completely void of flood sediments.
And the entire Egyptian army drowned in the Sea of Reeds, right?
That'd be an even better story, no?And the entire Egyptian army drowned in the Sea of Reeds, right?
Um ... these guys just weren't your average run-of-the-mill acquired slaves.Oh! I forgot to mention that part. There is zero evidence, historical or archeological, of Hebrew slaves being present in Egypt during the reign of Ramses or any time there about. Sorry, but that is a fact.
Reading the Bible, shows that the Israelites were neither captured in war, nor sold as slaves.The difficulty of distinguishing between slaves and levied peasant labour has bedevilled the study of this subject. Private ownership of slaves, captured in war and given by the king to their captor, certainly occurred at the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty (1550 - 1295 BCE). Sales of slaves occurred in the Twenty-fifth Dynasty (732 - 656 BCE), and contracts of servitude survive from the Twenty-sixth Dynasty (ca 672 - 525 BCE) and from the reign of Darius: apparently such a contract then required the consent of the slave. Slaves were usually kept naked, espesially the women.
The Old Testament also recounts tales of slavery in Egypt: slave-dealers sold Joseph into bondage there, and the Hebrews suffered collective enslavement (Exodus, chapter 1) prior to the Exodus. However, the historicity of the Biblical account is questioned. It is noteworthy that outside of the Biblical account, no evidence has ever been found indicating the systematic enslavement of Israelites.
I'll bet Rick thinks this was a fable too:That'd be an even better story, no?
So if archaeologists are looking for Hebrew slaves in the Egyptian books, they do err, not knowing the Scriptures.
Let's put it a different way. No Hebrew artifacts nor records of which the Ancient Egyptians adapt in keeping.
Plants do not have nostrils:
Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. (Gen 7:22).
If God can preserve three men in a fire, can He not preserve a plant under water?
I contend your interpretation is based on cherry-picking.
Um ... these guys just weren't your average run-of-the-mill acquired slaves.
They were, in fact, long-time residents of Egypt ... born and bred in Egypt ... who were enslaved by one king of Egypt in a single generation.
To be specific, here's what the Bible says:
Exodus 1:8 Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.
It doesn't say: there arose up a new king over Egypt, which registered the Hebrews as slaves.
In fact, the king had plans to exterminate them, not register them as slaves.
Note what Wikipedia says:
Reading the Bible, shows that the Israelites were neither captured in war, nor sold as slaves.
So if archaeologists are looking for Hebrew slaves in the Egyptian books, they do err, not knowing the Scriptures.
The flood miracle achieved its purpose. That's all that mattered.
God was not trying to impress scientists by leaving evidence lying around for them to pick at.
]it was a miracle that should not have left evidence and did not.
The purpose of the flood miracle was to cleanse the earth of human pollution, not leave evidence behind for scientists to pick at.
Even the dirty flood waters had to be purified afterwards.
The flood miracle achieved its purpose. That's all that mattered.
God was not trying to impress scientists by leaving evidence lying around for them to pick at.
Well then
it was a miracle that should not have left evidence and did not.
Chapter and verse? Or is this just more ad hoc on your part?
The exact date of the eruption of Santorini, is unknown. If you rely on the Radiocarbon dating of an olive tree found in that vicinity, this would indicate that the eruption occurred somewhere about 1645---1600 BC, these dates, however, conflict with the usual date range from archaeological evidence, which is between 1550 and 1500 BC. Which is about the time of the Expulsion of the Shepherd kings. <snip>
Scientifically speaking...
Opinions are like heads, everyone has one, tho some do lose 'em..You should have quit while you're ahead. There is zero scientific evidence for the Flood.
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?