Zone1 Evidence of the Hebrew Exodus

[Quantrill]

Why? What would be the point? I don't have anything else to add. I'm more than happy for you to believe whatever you want. It's called free will. If that is good enough for God then it is good enough for me.

I made the point in post #(57) concerning the questions I asked you in (56).

Quantrill

 

[hadit]

Lol if an Egyptian army saw a sea part, and then there army get swallowed up by it, they would have recorded that.

Not necessarily. Remember that they had just come from seeing their gods systematically struck down by God and their country decimated. Egypt is well-known for recording triumph, not disaster.

 

[TNHarley]

Not necessarily. Remember that they had just come from seeing their gods systematically struck down by God and their country decimated. Egypt is well-known for recording triumph, not disaster.

There are many documents that speak of failure and tragedies. Battle, economic, societal, natural.
I understand they were known for mostly recording victory and triumph but other documents exist. And if something magical like that happened, I think it would have been recorded. Or at least spoke of the people involved.

 

[ding]

I made the point in post #(57) concerning the questions I asked you in (56).

Quantrill

You are confusing embellishments in the OT with miracles performed by Jesus. I do believe Jesus did perform the miracles attributed to him. I do not believe everything you think was a miracle in the OT was a miracle.

Pick an event from the OT that you believe was a miracle and I'll explain the difference for you.m We can go through them one at a time.

 

[ding]

Good Old, Georgy Porgy

Kissed the girls and made them cry, but when the boys came out to play, Georgy Porgy ran away.

 

[Quantrill]

You are confusing embellishments in the OT with miracles performed by Jesus. I do believe Jesus did perform the miracles attributed to him. I do not believe everything you think was a miracle in the OT was a miracle.

Pick an event from the OT that you believe was a miracle and I'll explain the difference for you.m We can go through them one at a time.

There are no embellishments in the Old Testament.

I believe every miracle in the Old Testament was a miracle. Why do you believe Jesus miracles and not the miracles done by Moses, or Elijah, or Elisha, or many others? Or these?

(Num. 14:20-22) "And the LORD said....Because all those men which have seen my glory, and my miracles, which I did in Egypt and in the wilderness....."

(Deut. 11:2-7) "...I speak not with your children which have not known, and which have not seen the chastisement of the LORD your God, his greatness, his mighty hand, and his stretched out arm, and his miracles, and his acts, which he did in the midst of Egypt unto Pharaoh the king of Egypt, and unto all his land...."

(Deut. 29:3) "...thine eyes have seen the signs, and those great miracles:"

(Judges 6:11-23) "...where be all his miracles which our fathers told us of....Then the angel of the LORD put forth the end of the staff that was in his hand, and touched the flesh and the unleavened cakes; and there rose up fire out of the rock, and consumed the flesh and the unleavened cakes...."

Quantrill

 

[ding]

There are no embellishments in the Old Testament.

I believe every miracle in the Old Testament was a miracle. Why do you believe Jesus miracles and not the miracles done by Moses, or Elijah, or Elisha, or many others? Or these?

(Num. 14:20-22) "And the LORD said....Because all those men which have seen my glory, and my miracles, which I did in Egypt and in the wilderness....."

(Deut. 11:2-7) "...I speak not with your children which have not known, and which have not seen the chastisement of the LORD your God, his greatness, his mighty hand, and his stretched out arm, and his miracles, and his acts, which he did in the midst of Egypt unto Pharaoh the king of Egypt, and unto all his land...."

(Deut. 29:3) "...thine eyes have seen the signs, and those great miracles:"

(Judges 6:11-23) "...where be all his miracles which our fathers told us of....Then the angel of the LORD put forth the end of the staff that was in his hand, and touched the flesh and the unleavened cakes; and there rose up fire out of the rock, and consumed the flesh and the unleavened cakes...."

Quantrill

Pick an OT account that you believe was a miracle or supernatural act and I'll explain it for you.

 

[Quantrill]

Pick an OT account that you believe was a miracle or supernatural act and I'll explain it for you.

I presented several. Take your pick.

Quantrill

 

[ding]

I presented several. Take your pick.

Quantrill

Actually you didn't. Pick an account of a miracle you believe took place in the OT.

 

[hadit]

There are no embellishments in the Old Testament.

I believe every miracle in the Old Testament was a miracle. Why do you believe Jesus miracles and not the miracles done by Moses, or Elijah, or Elisha, or many others? Or these?

(Num. 14:20-22) "And the LORD said....Because all those men which have seen my glory, and my miracles, which I did in Egypt and in the wilderness....."

(Deut. 11:2-7) "...I speak not with your children which have not known, and which have not seen the chastisement of the LORD your God, his greatness, his mighty hand, and his stretched out arm, and his miracles, and his acts, which he did in the midst of Egypt unto Pharaoh the king of Egypt, and unto all his land...."

(Deut. 29:3) "...thine eyes have seen the signs, and those great miracles:"

(Judges 6:11-23) "...where be all his miracles which our fathers told us of....Then the angel of the LORD put forth the end of the staff that was in his hand, and touched the flesh and the unleavened cakes; and there rose up fire out of the rock, and consumed the flesh and the unleavened cakes...."

Quantrill

The event may have been a natural phenomenon while the miracle was the specific timing of the event. IOW, the plagues that hit Egypt were natural, but for all ten of them to happen right when Moses said they would is miraculous.

 

[Quantrill]

Actually you didn't. Pick an account of a miracle you believe took place in the OT.

I gave you many. Read again post #(66). Pick which one you like.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

The event may have been a natural phenomenon while the miracle was the specific timing of the event. IOW, the plagues that hit Egypt were natural, but for all ten of them to happen right when Moses said they would is miraculous.

The plagues were miraculous. They were from God. God sent them. Thus the Old Testament speaks to God doing miraculous things. Scripture says God sent them...correct?

Quantrill

 

[ding]

The plagues were miraculous. They were from God. God sent them. Thus the Old Testament speaks to God doing miraculous things. Scripture says God sent them...correct?

Quantrill

Not quite. That was the Israelites using the historical event of their fleeing Egypt to teach about the covenant, obedience, justice and Israel's relationship with God.

The plagues were all common occurrences with flooding.

many scholars propose that the Plagues of Egypt in Exodus could have been a cascading series of natural events triggered by an extreme Nile flood, starting with red algae blooms (turning water "blood") that killed fish, leading to frog overpopulation, then insect swarms (lice, flies), livestock disease (boils), and eventually hail and locusts, all fitting a plausible, though intensified, ecological sequence linked to the Nile's cycle, though the Bible frames them as supernatural.

Naturalistic Explanations for the Plagues

• Plague 1 (Water to Blood): High floods carrying red silt or toxic dinoflagellates (like Pfiesteria) could turn the Nile red, kill fish, and make water undrinkable, as seen in papyri and scientific studies.
• Plagues 2-4 (Frogs, Lice, Flies): Dead fish and toxic water would drive frogs onto land, where their carcasses would feed insect larvae (gnats, midges, flies), causing massive swarms that could transmit diseases.
• Plagues 5-6 (Livestock Pestilence, Boils): The insects could spread diseases (like orbiviruses) to livestock, and bacterial infections could cause boils in people and animals.
• Plagues 7-8 (Hail, Locusts): Seasonal weather shifts could bring severe hail (possibly linked to volcanic activity from Santorini) and strong winds that would then drive locusts from their normal habitats.
• Timing: This sequence aligns with the Nile's flood season (July/August) and the subsequent cooler months (February-April), leading to Passover in spring.

Biblical vs. Natural Explanations

• Biblical View: The Book of Exodus presents the plagues as direct, supernatural acts by God, emphasizing their control by Moses and distinction between Israelite and Egyptian experiences.
• Scholarly View: Many scholars view the story as inspired by real ecological events, exaggerated or intensified for theological purposes, explaining the chain reaction.

 

[Quantrill]

Not quite. That was the Israelites using the historical event of their fleeing Egypt to teach about the covenant, obedience, justice and Israel's relationship with God.

The plagues were all common occurrences with flooding.

many scholars propose that the Plagues of Egypt in Exodus could have been a cascading series of natural events triggered by an extreme Nile flood, starting with red algae blooms (turning water "blood") that killed fish, leading to frog overpopulation, then insect swarms (lice, flies), livestock disease (boils), and eventually hail and locusts, all fitting a plausible, though intensified, ecological sequence linked to the Nile's cycle, though the Bible frames them as supernatural.

Naturalistic Explanations for the Plagues

• Plague 1 (Water to Blood): High floods carrying red silt or toxic dinoflagellates (like Pfiesteria) could turn the Nile red, kill fish, and make water undrinkable, as seen in papyri and scientific studies.
• Plagues 2-4 (Frogs, Lice, Flies): Dead fish and toxic water would drive frogs onto land, where their carcasses would feed insect larvae (gnats, midges, flies), causing massive swarms that could transmit diseases.
• Plagues 5-6 (Livestock Pestilence, Boils): The insects could spread diseases (like orbiviruses) to livestock, and bacterial infections could cause boils in people and animals.
• Plagues 7-8 (Hail, Locusts): Seasonal weather shifts could bring severe hail (possibly linked to volcanic activity from Santorini) and strong winds that would then drive locusts from their normal habitats.
• Timing: This sequence aligns with the Nile's flood season (July/August) and the subsequent cooler months (February-April), leading to Passover in spring.

Biblical vs. Natural Explanations

• Biblical View: The Book of Exodus presents the plagues as direct, supernatural acts by God, emphasizing their control by Moses and distinction between Israelite and Egyptian experiences.
• Scholarly View: Many scholars view the story as inspired by real ecological events, exaggerated or intensified for theological purposes, explaining the chain reaction.

The Word of God calls you a liar. As do I. See again post #(66).

See (Num. 14:20-22) (Deut. 11:2-7) (Deut. 29:3).

The point being you don't believe the Bible is the Word of God. Thus you must present your bullshit to counter the Word of God.

God clearly states that these are miraculous events. But you don't believe it. So you must put your spin, your shit, on it.

Quantrill

 

[hadit]

Not quite. That was the Israelites using the historical event of their fleeing Egypt to teach about the covenant, obedience, justice and Israel's relationship with God.

The plagues were all common occurrences with flooding.

many scholars propose that the Plagues of Egypt in Exodus could have been a cascading series of natural events triggered by an extreme Nile flood, starting with red algae blooms (turning water "blood") that killed fish, leading to frog overpopulation, then insect swarms (lice, flies), livestock disease (boils), and eventually hail and locusts, all fitting a plausible, though intensified, ecological sequence linked to the Nile's cycle, though the Bible frames them as supernatural.

Naturalistic Explanations for the Plagues

• Plague 1 (Water to Blood): High floods carrying red silt or toxic dinoflagellates (like Pfiesteria) could turn the Nile red, kill fish, and make water undrinkable, as seen in papyri and scientific studies.
• Plagues 2-4 (Frogs, Lice, Flies): Dead fish and toxic water would drive frogs onto land, where their carcasses would feed insect larvae (gnats, midges, flies), causing massive swarms that could transmit diseases.
• Plagues 5-6 (Livestock Pestilence, Boils): The insects could spread diseases (like orbiviruses) to livestock, and bacterial infections could cause boils in people and animals.
• Plagues 7-8 (Hail, Locusts): Seasonal weather shifts could bring severe hail (possibly linked to volcanic activity from Santorini) and strong winds that would then drive locusts from their normal habitats.
• Timing: This sequence aligns with the Nile's flood season (July/August) and the subsequent cooler months (February-April), leading to Passover in spring.

Biblical vs. Natural Explanations

• Biblical View: The Book of Exodus presents the plagues as direct, supernatural acts by God, emphasizing their control by Moses and distinction between Israelite and Egyptian experiences.
• Scholarly View: Many scholars view the story as inspired by real ecological events, exaggerated or intensified for theological purposes, explaining the chain reaction.

That doesn't remove the miraculous component from them. The fact that Moses commanded them to occur at the times God told him to is miraculous, even if they are natural. As well, we can't forget that the Children of Israel were protected from the plagues and watched from safety.

 

[ding]

The Word of God calls you a liar. As do I. See again post #(66).

See (Num. 14:20-22) (Deut. 11:2-7) (Deut. 29:3).

The point being you don't believe the Bible is the Word of God. Thus you must present your bullshit to counter the Word of God.

God clearly states that these are miraculous events. But you don't believe it. So you must put your spin, your shit, on it.

Quantrill

Believing the Old Testament (OT) was embellished doesn't inherently invalidate the entire Bible for everyone; it depends on individual faith perspectives, with some seeing it as a text with historical elements and theological truths (not literal facts), while others who hold a purely inerrant view might find it diminishes the Bible's divine authority, but historically, the Bible has always been viewed with varied interpretations, from literal to metaphorical. Many scholars treat it as a complex collection of religious literature, acknowledging historical elements while recognizing supernatural narratives and cultural embellishments, much like other ancient texts.

Perspectives on Embellishment & Invalidation:

• For many believers: Recognizing embellishment or literary devices in the OT (like exaggerated numbers or symbolic narratives) doesn't invalidate its core message or God's truth; it's seen as a human-authored text inspired by God, meant to convey spiritual meaning, not a modern history textbook.
• For literalists: If the OT contains outright embellishments or historical inaccuracies, it challenges their belief in biblical inerrancy (the idea that the Bible is without error) and can lead to questioning its divine status.
• For historians/scholars: The Bible is a source, but not always a literal history; some narratives (like the scale of the Exodus) lack external corroboration, leading scholars to view it as faith-based text with historical kernels, not solely as factual records.

Historical Context:

• Even early Christian thinkers, like Marcion, rejected parts of the OT, showing varied interpretations of its relevance.
• Scholars often differentiate between the Bible's theological purpose (revealing God's relationship with humanity) and its historical accuracy, acknowledging inconsistencies within the text itself (e.g., differing genealogies in Matthew and Luke).

In essence, whether embellishment invalidates the Bible hinges on one's definition of the Bible's purpose and inspiration—as a divine, inerrant truth or as a divinely inspired collection of literature conveying faith and history.

Right, TNHarley ?

 

[ding]

That doesn't remove the miraculous component from them. The fact that Moses commanded them to occur at the times God told him to is miraculous, even if they are natural. As well, we can't forget that the Children of Israel were protected from the plagues and watched from safety.

I'm not criticizing or making fun of anyone who reads these accounts literally. I'm not TNHarley . I do believe God revealed himself to Abraham. I do believe these accounts are inspired by the Holy Spirit to deliver certain truths and lessons. I see great value and wisdom in these accounts.

 

[ding]

There are many documents that speak of failure and tragedies. Battle, economic, societal, natural.
I understand they were known for mostly recording victory and triumph but other documents exist. And if something magical like that happened, I think it would have been recorded. Or at least spoke of the people involved.

You really are a dolt. Ancient Egyptians are just like you. They dismiss their defeats and ignore their incongruities.

Ancient Egyptians had a strong tendency to avoid recording major military defeats or national disasters in official monumental inscriptions, focusing instead on glorifying pharaonic victories and divine favor for propaganda, so major losses were often minimized, ignored, or presented favorably, fitting a common pattern in ancient record-keeping. While official accounts omit them, some scholars argue that tactical analyses of defeats might exist in less public documents, but monuments universally celebrate triumphs.

Why Defeats Were Ignored

• Propaganda: Temple walls and stelae were designed to exalt the pharaoh as a divine ruler, so negative events undermined this image.
• Divine Order: A defeat suggested a disruption of the cosmic order (Ma'at), which was contrary to the message official records aimed to convey.
• Historical Norm: This practice wasn't unique to Egypt; many ancient cultures favored recording victories over defeats.

Examples & Nuances

• Merneptah Stele: While praising victories, it mentions conflict with Israel, showing some interaction, but doesn't detail losses.
• Subtlety: While outright admissions of defeat were rare, some evidence suggests they might have analyzed failures in less public, perhaps military, contexts, but this is less common in surviving monumental texts.

In essence, if an event didn't serve the pharaoh's divine image, it often didn't make it into the enduring public record, especially if it was a setback.

 

[Quantrill]

Believing the Old Testament (OT) was embellished doesn't inherently invalidate the entire Bible for everyone; it depends on individual faith perspectives, with some seeing it as a text with historical elements and theological truths (not literal facts), while others who hold a purely inerrant view might find it diminishes the Bible's divine authority, but historically, the Bible has always been viewed with varied interpretations, from literal to metaphorical. Many scholars treat it as a complex collection of religious literature, acknowledging historical elements while recognizing supernatural narratives and cultural embellishments, much like other ancient texts.

Perspectives on Embellishment & Invalidation:

• For many believers: Recognizing embellishment or literary devices in the OT (like exaggerated numbers or symbolic narratives) doesn't invalidate its core message or God's truth; it's seen as a human-authored text inspired by God, meant to convey spiritual meaning, not a modern history textbook.
• For literalists: If the OT contains outright embellishments or historical inaccuracies, it challenges their belief in biblical inerrancy (the idea that the Bible is without error) and can lead to questioning its divine status.
• For historians/scholars: The Bible is a source, but not always a literal history; some narratives (like the scale of the Exodus) lack external corroboration, leading scholars to view it as faith-based text with historical kernels, not solely as factual records.

Historical Context:

• Even early Christian thinkers, like Marcion, rejected parts of the OT, showing varied interpretations of its relevance.
• Scholars often differentiate between the Bible's theological purpose (revealing God's relationship with humanity) and its historical accuracy, acknowledging inconsistencies within the text itself (e.g., differing genealogies in Matthew and Luke).

In essence, whether embellishment invalidates the Bible hinges on one's definition of the Bible's purpose and inspiration—as a divine, inerrant truth or as a divinely inspired collection of literature conveying faith and history.

Right, TNHarley ?

Again, see post #(66). God is clear. The Word of God is clear. God did miraculous deeds to free the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. He specifically states that they are 'miraculous'.

Yet you don't believe what it says. You must not allow anyone to believe what it says. It said that. But ding says it doesn't mean that. ding says it must mean something ding dreams up. Something ding pulled out of his ass.

You don't believe the Bible is the Word of God. You're a pretender. A fake.

Quantrill

 

[ding]

Again, see post #(66). God is clear. The Word of God is clear. God did miraculous deeds to free the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. He specifically states that they are 'miraculous'.

Yet you don't believe what it says. You must not allow anyone to believe what it says. It said that. But ding says it doesn't mean that. ding says it must mean something ding dreams up. Something ding pulled out of his ass.

You don't believe the Bible is the Word of God. You're a pretender. A fake.

Quantrill

It makes me sad that you feel that way.