Evidence for The Exodus Indeed Was Found (1978) - MOD WARNING

I wouldn't call your lack of knowledge of the OT something to
laugh about.

 

For Starters Sinai and Canaan belonged to the Egyptians and there is no way that 2 million people and their livestock could survive in Sinai.

 

You're wasting your time, Margot. He's another Mitt.

- - - Updated - - -

 

Do Europeans and Brits have such a problem with literalism and fundamentalism?

 

Very few in the UK, we have a national curriculam so the hardcore fundy will get some education whether they like it or not.

 

Brits have problems with EVERYTHING.

In the Established Church I find most are satisfied with what they are told. They don't really think too much about what they listen to or sing. I once asked a man in a C of E service who had just sung the Nunc Dimmitis if he understood what he had just sung? ' Lord lettest though thy servant depart in peace according to they word'. When I told him he had actually asked to die he was a bit non-plussed. He thought it meant going home - earthly home.

Yes we do have fundamentalists and literalists but some colleges are not so reluctant to acknowledge modern thinking. I don't think these things are so prominent as in the US. Religion seems to be more of a private thing for most people. Not that they will not acknowledge their beliefs but usually not prominently. You occasionally see an outreach stall on the local market by a local free church, and of course the JW's. There is also an Easter Parade through part of the town where perhaps 200+ people March. Now the local hospital is threatened with closure, 7000 people turned up for a march through town.

Reminds me of the Vicar and Curate shaking hands with the congregation after the morning service. The vicar watched as many members made their way to the local pub. 'Why do they go there after the service' he asked his Curate. Who replied 'That's down to their thirst after righteousness'.

 

Drinking wine after church helps a person to remember Jesus.

1 Corinthians 11:25 (CEV) = "After the meal, Jesus took a cup of wine in his hands and said, “This is my blood, and with it God makes his new agreement with you. Drink this and remember me."

 

The number appears to be closer to 600,000 but many scholars do put the number
at 2+ million

What's your reason for asking this?

Exodus 12:37-38New American Standard Bible (NASB)
37 Now the sons of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand
men on foot, aside from children. 38 A mixed multitude also went up with them, along with
flocks and herds, a very large number of livestock.

That number is commonly associated with the men.

 

That's the way. Avoid facing whom you accuse.

She's not wasting her time. She's discussing the Bible with someone who has
honestly studied it and doesn't limit it to only the OT and what people have told
him to think.

Arguing with is far more a waste of time but I'm dedicated to teaching the
errors of your limited knowledge of the Bible.

 

It says 600,000 men... How about wives and children? 2 million is reasonable.

 

I haven't avoided you. I've watched your posts and felt it unnecessary to do anything - except, of course - to have a good laugh.

You avoided telling me why I should accept the OT passages which Matthew used at Jesus birth when they are clearly, to anyone who has studied, taken out of context. You post a website to confirm your position and it turns out to refute your position. It says that Matthew was simply comparing Jesus with the nation of Israel (Singular). Oh Dear. Anything taken out of context becomes void when used in another context. You avoid telling me why Joseph and Mary should be careless parents by, as you tell me, going from Nazareth back through Herod's territory where Jesus faced the greatest danger, instead of going a few miles West into Syria - if Herod had found where they were - where Herod had no jurisdiction. Herod would not have ventured into Syrian territory for several reasons.
1. Rome came down on hard on any of it's provinces which fought each other. As with Tetrarch Herod and king Aretas - when the Romans sent Vitellus and an army to support a defeat Herod. Factors intervened. Tiberius died and the army returned to Rome. But Aretas returned home where we find him in the book of Acts.
2. Herod was already both ill, and in Caesar's black book.
3..Herod had a limited army against the much larger 3 garrisons stationed in Syria.

Christianity has lifted a verse completely out of context so Matthew can fulfil a non-prophecy. If only you had studied the history of the time you would realise the stupidity or what you say.

In fact you've refuted virtually every point without explanation for doing so - except that the Bible is right - which it clearly isn't.

And I haven't limited it to the OT. I've compared the 2.
You are just a troll who has no answers. That's why I don't converse with you.

I'm afraid I find your posts comical and evidence of your lack of understanding of the Real Bible. But then Christianity cannot change it's interpretation of the OT or it would be finished.
Jesus the Jewish teacher would not be acceptable.

I'm agnostic. You believe what you want. You're no different to Islam who have used the same scriptures with a different interpretation. Others have done the same. Hebrews have adapted earlier beliefs to form their own religion.

Good luck and goodbye.

 

600,000 armed men. That means over 20 years old.. (Numbers 1:3) So if you include males under that age, add wives of those in the Army and wives of the males too young to be in the Army (they married very early), add all the children of the large families they had in those days, I suggest 2.5 - 3 million.

Of course it's all just a story as we know.

 

Absolutely.. and even an impoverished family had 10-20 goats.. .. so figure another 5 million goats at a minimum....... Its a silly story for children... unless you take it as didactic literature about God's mercy and redemption.

Literalist/fundamentalists are missing the whole purpose of the stories.

 

I avoided nothing and anyone who has studied the OT and the NT can see clearly that
nothing is taken out of context. The geneaology in Matthew is Joseph's.

Not true. Matthew was citing Joseph's genealogy. And accurately, too. It's all about
Jesus and not Israel as a nation. Oh Dear.

There's nothing careless about going to Nazareth. In fact, you gave three good reasons
why going to Galilee was far more responsible.

Thanx.

A verse? If you'd honestly studied the OT and NT you'd know that there are at least 40
prophecies and none of them are taken out of context. You've limited you google searches
to the OT and only from sites that, so far, have been against Christianity.

https://jewsforjesus.org/answers/prophecy/top-40-most-helpful-messianic-prophecies/

In correct. The Bible is accurate.

Irrelevant.

Islam doens't have the same scriptures. Also the Hebrews didn't adapt earlier beliefs to form
their own. That's ludicrous.

You're going nowhere and you know it.

I'll be here to correct your mistakes.

 

Yes, as I said, 600,000 men. Why do you believe 2 million couldn't have
been in Egypt?

 

600,000 couldn't have survived in Sinai.. much less 2 million with their herds. Remember.. at the time of King David.. Jerusalem was 12 acres and 1500 people.

They were story tellers and exaggerated everything.

 

I was right. It is pointless debating with you. In the above post you have not read what I said. You've replied to things I did not say and even refuted things you've said before. Used Christian sites to support your view, while criticising me for using secular sites.

In Red. Replies to 2 things I did not say.
In Blue. Reply which contradicts something you said before.

Every time you post you show your lack of knowledge aside from what you have been told.

Matthew 3:15 uses the quote 'I called my Son out of Egypt'.

Hosea 11:1 'When Israel was a child, I loved him, and I called my son out of Egypt. But the more I called him the farther he moved from me, offering sacrifices to the image of Baal and burning incense to idols.'................... WAS THIS JESUS?

Every Bible that has a commentary, or cross referencing, relates these two, and so do Nativity plays down the centuries. Christianity relates them - especially in Carol Services.

Matthew says 'Herod's brutal action fulfilled what God had spoken through the prophet Jeremiah "A cry was heard in Ramah - weeping and great mourning. Rachel weeps for her children, refusing to be comforted, for they are dead'.
Jeremiah says 'A cry is heard in Ramah - deep anguish and bitter weeping - Rachel weeps for her children, refusing to be comforted - for her children are gone. (NOTE)But now this is what the Lord says "Do not weep any longer, for I will reward you" says the Lord "Your children will come back to you from the distant land of the enemy . There is hope for your future" says the Lord "your children will come again to their own land."
And where were the Children (Israel)? In a foreign Land. No slaughtered children - no raising from the dead..

I could give you more but it would be a waste of time.

I knew I was right to give up on you.

I leave it to other posters to decide whether you or I have knowledge of the scriptures.

By the way there are far more so called prophecies than 40. Last I heard was over 300. Needless to say most are rubbish. Simply a sentence or thought. And every religion has been formed by taking from earlier religions. You should study ancient histories and cultures. It started with the worship of nature and animism and progressed through tens of thousands of years becoming more 'sophisticated' as knowledge improved, until we have a multiplicity of religions

 

The Hebrews borrowed from the Egyptians, Babylonians and from the North Coast Canaanite. They borrowed their myths and poetry and laws.

Are you familiar with the Egyptian Book of the Dead, Ras Shamra or the Code of Hammurabi?

 

He only reads what he wants to read, in the way he wants to read it. The 2 incidents I gave in my previous post prove that. 'Matthew' takes out of context verses to make his claims.
It occurs time and again.
An interesting one is the quote from Psalm 22:18-19. To understand this you need to read and study the story of David and to understand the Hebrew way of 'storytelling' to get their point over. Jesus used this so often in stories and parables to help people understand.
If you accept the story of David as recorded in the Bible then his life was one of being persecuted to the depths, both of his body and his soul. Then reaching the heights, only to be plunged again into despair. Pursued by Saul who intended to take his life. Living in caves. Being in want. Dealing badly with war in his own family. Betrayed by his beloved son, Absolam, and having to flee to Moab. His men finally defeating and killing Absolam. His mistakes that cost him dearly, brought disaster upon his people. This psalm is simply an outpouring of grief and distress during one of those periods.
You can see examples of this in the book of Jonah, similarly in Job - who also uses the phrase 'They have gaped upon me with their mouth'. (17:10) as does David in Psalm 22. Look at verses 12-16 where David is helpless, enclosed about. His hands and feet 'pierced' ( useless ). The phrase 'a sword, (or more recently) or a thorn, in my side' has been in use for centuries. V18 stems from the practice of stripping victims of battle of their clothing. In the case of crucifixion the same applied. How many victims of crucifixion before and after Jesus had suffered the same fate. And, as you will know, crucifixion had been around for centuries before the Romans used it.
The Psalms are full of the same pictures. The fact that Jesus is 'quoted' as reciting Psalm 22:1 is really irrelevant. As a good Jew he would have had an excellent grasp on the Psalms.

If you study the OT without preconceived ideas it's clear that this is simply David's cry in distress.

 

Remember that God provided manna and prevented their sandals from wearing out.

 

Why not? God took care of every need.

Yes. This is irrelevant.

Story tellers didn't write the Bible. God wrote the Bible God doesn't exaggerate
because there's no need to do so.

 

Only because you can't support your claims and I can.

Not true. You've said all of the above. I've not refuted anything I've said.

Correction. You've used hate sites that are against Christianity. I've not used one site
that was against Judaism.

Again not true. You've been all about the genealogy of Jesus and the
trip to Nazareth before going to Egypt. In fact that was in your last post.

This was in blue
There's nothing careless about going to Nazareth. In fact, you gave three good reasons
why going to Galilee was far more responsible.[/quote]
You're wrong, again. I specifically answered your posts. Nothing I said was refuted.
Comparing and being are two different actions. It's quite simple.

Jesus, God's son, was called out of Egypt. By the way, it's Matthew 2:15.

Israel made sacrifices to baal. You're trying too hard to make them the same.

Jeremiah says 'A cry is heard in Ramah - deep anguish and bitter weeping - Rachel
weeps for her children, refusing to be comforted - for her children are gone. (NOTE) But
now this is what the Lord says "Do not weep any longer, for I will reward you" says the
Lord "Your children will come back to you from the distant land of the enemy . There is
hope for your future" says the Lord "your children will come again to their own land."
And where were the Children (Israel)? In a foreign Land. No slaughtered children - no
raising from the dead.[/quote]
What in the world are you trying to show here?

Not true. Most skeptics try to make the claim that all religions come from another. They
are wrong. Like you they look for similarities and try to make it to be a reason to believe
that all came from one.

Thankfully Judaism and Christianity didn't come from another source.

 

You're wrong, again. I specifically answered your posts. Nothing I said was refuted.
Comparing and being are two different actions. It's quite simple.

Jesus, God's son, was called out of Egypt. By the way, it's Matthew 2:15.

Israel made sacrifices to baal. You're trying too hard to make them the same.


Jeremiah says 'A cry is heard in Ramah - deep anguish and bitter weeping - Rachel
weeps for her children, refusing to be comforted - for her children are gone. (NOTE) But
now this is what the Lord says "Do not weep any longer, for I will reward you" says the
Lord "Your children will come back to you from the distant land of the enemy . There is
hope for your future" says the Lord "your children will come again to their own land."
And where were the Children (Israel)? In a foreign Land. No slaughtered children - no
raising from the dead.[/quote]
What in the world are you trying to show here?

Not true. Most skeptics try to make the claim that all religions come from another. They
are wrong. Like you they look for similarities and try to make it to be a reason to believe
that all came from one.

Thankfully Judaism and Christianity didn't come from another source.[/QUOTE]

There is NO question that the Pentateuch was borrowed from Sumer, Egypt and the North Coast Canaanites. The Hebrews had no history or narratives about their origins until they were exiled in Babylon.

 

Similarities aren't conclusive evidence. This is a motive skeptics try to use to make
Judaism come from previous religions. The evidence is weak. Christianity didn't
come from anywhere except Jesus.

There are no myths.

If I remember correctly it was something Joseph Smith used to create his non Christian religion.
He claimed the plates came from his created angel Moroni and that they were from God. An
Egyptian scholar, 1960's (?) recognized them and mormonism was busted.

Thankfully nothing like that exists in Judaism or Christianity.