Was the Exodus natural or supernatural, fact or fiction?

[GreatestIam]

What a reasonable come back! You must have spent a great deal of time on that.

Instead of demonstrating all the great cultures that exist where no one believes in G*D, you DODGE!

Let me dodge. I give up. Your faith is just too much for me.

“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”

“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”
Martin Luther “


There is dodging and then there is not bothering with those who have their heads up some God's ass because they believe that he will save their sorry ass with miracles and magic.

As to comparing the morality of the U S Christian nation ---- with the highest incarceration rate of all the free world, --- to another country, happy to.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94f2h-5TvbM&feature=player_embedded]Atheists are immoral -- debunked - YouTube[/ame]

Regards
DL

You guys..... too funny! When you are asked to demonstrate a better country than the USA, that was formed by Christians, and Judeo/Christian values, you will not. Instead, you focus on some tiny, insignificant little point, and try to make it into a mountain. "Morality", really.... the libs/democrats/progressives/communists/socialists/islamic extremists/homosexual activists have been telling us for decades that morality is bad, BAD. Now you want to hold it up high, like it is something "valuable"? Promote the "morals" here, in this country, and then tell us about how you approve of morals, hypocrit.

All of those groups are saying morality is bad!

Get the quotes or be seen as lying.

Regards
DL

 

[Foxfyre]

The historical stories of the Old Testament are never of events documented at the time they happened, but are rather told over and over through the decades and centuries before somebody finally writes it all down. In the process, as is the case with all of human history, the stuff of legends almost certainly gets caught up in the stories and become parts of the retelling.

Think of our own lore and legends built up around George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, et al. Much of it fabricated and without concrete verification, but all containing kernals of actual events and circumstances. Some of the detail and imagery is almost certainly embellished by the story tellers; but the events themselves did occur.

The Archeological and Anthropological research has discovered an explusion of the Mosiac peoples from Egypt around the time the Exodus is believed to have happened. This expulsion very likely also included the Israelites. It was likely interpreted as a military victory by the Egyptians. And seen as liberation by God by the Israelites.

It is not necessary to verify every fact or event included in the narrative to know that the event was important and significant to the people.

 

[konradv]

Your point?

The Israelites were Canaanites. There was no mass migration and conquest.

No the Canaanites were not Israelites (unless they married into the Israelites). The Canaanites are the direct descendents of Ham's son Canaan. Long after that Abraham (from one of Noah's other sons) fathered, Issac, who's son, Jacob, was named Israel by G*d. His twelve sons became the twelve tribes of Israel......

That's the political propaganda of the Bible. Archaeology says differently.

 

[logical4u]

Let me dodge. I give up. Your faith is just too much for me.

“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”

“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”
Martin Luther “


There is dodging and then there is not bothering with those who have their heads up some God's ass because they believe that he will save their sorry ass with miracles and magic.

As to comparing the morality of the U S Christian nation ---- with the highest incarceration rate of all the free world, --- to another country, happy to.

Atheists are immoral -- debunked - YouTube

Regards
DL

You guys..... too funny! When you are asked to demonstrate a better country than the USA, that was formed by Christians, and Judeo/Christian values, you will not. Instead, you focus on some tiny, insignificant little point, and try to make it into a mountain. "Morality", really.... the libs/democrats/progressives/communists/socialists/islamic extremists/homosexual activists have been telling us for decades that morality is bad, BAD. Now you want to hold it up high, like it is something "valuable"? Promote the "morals" here, in this country, and then tell us about how you approve of morals, hypocrit.

All of those groups are saying morality is bad!

Get the quotes or be seen as lying.

Regards
DL

I do not need to "quote". Islam promotes deceit and murder for those that do not believe. The rest of those support the murder of the unborn and the deceit it takes to convince females that the children they are murdering are really not "children". Homosexual activists claim they are the same as a heterosexual couple (talk about obvious deception).

Now, if you will "use reason", it is clear that these groups teach immoral behaviors as a way of life. Once corruption is accepted, it tends to get worse with time and more destructive to society.

But not everyone chooses to use their G*d given gift of reason, we will see if your answer demonstrates "reason".

 

[logical4u]

The Israelites were Canaanites. There was no mass migration and conquest.

No the Canaanites were not Israelites (unless they married into the Israelites). The Canaanites are the direct descendents of Ham's son Canaan. Long after that Abraham (from one of Noah's other sons) fathered, Issac, who's son, Jacob, was named Israel by G*d. His twelve sons became the twelve tribes of Israel......

That's the political propaganda of the Bible. Archaeology says differently.

Archaelogy is stuff that was left behind. Because a "scientist" says that it means blah, blah, blah, does not necessarily mean that blah, blah, blah, actually occured. There are other explanations. Is your "faith" in archaelogy that strong, or do you switch beliefs with each new "scientific" explanation?

Archaelogical digs can be corrupted (or framed). Do you have "other" evidence?

 

[Foxfyre]

No the Canaanites were not Israelites (unless they married into the Israelites). The Canaanites are the direct descendents of Ham's son Canaan. Long after that Abraham (from one of Noah's other sons) fathered, Issac, who's son, Jacob, was named Israel by G*d. His twelve sons became the twelve tribes of Israel......

That's the political propaganda of the Bible. Archaeology says differently.

Archaelogy is stuff that was left behind. Because a "scientist" says that it means blah, blah, blah, does not necessarily mean that blah, blah, blah, actually occured. There are other explanations. Is your "faith" in archaelogy that strong, or do you switch beliefs with each new "scientific" explanation?

Archaelogical digs can be corrupted (or framed). Do you have "other" evidence?

When it comes to scientific interpretation of archeological concepts of thousands of years ago, some degree of faith is required to believe or disbelieve just as it requires a degree of faith to believe or disbelieve in God or any religious concept. There has probably been more written by archeologists using ancient ruins and artifacts citing support for Biblical events than there has been written by archeologists who attempt to disprove those same events.

Right now there is a massive excavation project underway in Jordan - see Tall el-Hammam Excavation Project, Jordan - in which the supervising archeologists are increasingly convinced they are unearthing the ancient Biblical City of Sodom. If they are right, will they be able to discern evidence for the Biblical apocalyptic event associated with that city? Time will tell.

It is the same with everything. Those who believe in the 'big bang' on faith will discount any scientific opinion that offers a different explanation. Those who do not wish to believe in intelligent design will dismiss Einstein's opinion about that. Those who want to believe in anthropological global warming hunt for scientists who will confirm their beliefs and dismiss those scientists who do not.

It is highly unlikely that we have the absolute truth about anything on Earth as we continue to grow and unfold more science as we evolve. And in my opinion, we currently have a teensy fraction of all the science, history, archeology, etc. that there is to know. And future generations will look back on us as the 'dark ages'.