Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Johnny Skeptic · 11-20-2007, 09:55 AM

Dave's last post was post #290. Here it is:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

Quote:

Johnny Skeptic

"Not only that, but if the ten plagues occured, that would have been the end of Egypt as a dominant power in the Middle East, and that did not happen."

Fundies always overlook that part, don't they?

Quote:

Originally Posted by afdave

How do you figure that? They were invaded easily by a foreign power. Why is this invasion not a logical result of the 10 plagues?

I was hoping that the issue of the Ten Plagues would give Dave some difficulties. Apparently it did.

Pappy Jack · 11-20-2007, 11:33 AM

As with many threads that Dave has either started or been intimately involved with, it seems that he abandons those which pose questions he is both unable answer and unable to avoid answering any longer. This will not prevent him later reposting elsewhere the material that raised the questions in the first place, then claiming to have 'addressed' the questions in said abandoned threads (or 'elsewhere'). Of course, he is always called on this, but it doesn't seem to stop him repeating the same pattern continuously. I have no explanation for this behaviour, except Constant Mews' argument that Dave's main purpose on these threads is Witnessing. I would be very surprised if Dave returns again to this topic as I doubt that he has anything of substance to post that can counter the criticisms that have already cast serious doubt on the arguments he made in the OP. So the thread may as well be locked down as another Dave trainwreck.

Minimalist · 11-20-2007, 11:37 AM

Maybe we should ask the Mods to "sticky" it?

Pappy Jack · 11-20-2007, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minimalist

Maybe we should ask the Mods to "sticky" it?

Okay with me.

-Jay- · 11-20-2007, 02:51 PM

Dave's been really busy over in E/C lately. Feel free to visit him there. :devil1:

regards,

NinJay

Lucretius · 11-21-2007, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

Dave's been really busy over in E/C lately. Feel free to visit him there. :devil1:

regards,

NinJay

I know and I just wish you "science types" would finish off his unscientific ramblings once and for all and give us "literary/historian types" a chance to tear him apart as well.
Just being selfish you are,keeping all the fun to yourselves

-Jay- · 11-21-2007, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucretius

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

Dave's been really busy over in E/C lately. Feel free to visit him there. :devil1:

regards,

NinJay

I know and I just wish you "science types" would finish off his unscientific ramblings once and for all and give us "literary/historian types" a chance to tear him apart as well.
Just being selfish you are,keeping all the fun to yourselves

There's plenty to go around.

regards,

NinJay

Velexia · 11-21-2007, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by afdave

MODERN SCHOLARS THINK EXODUS IS A MYTH
Many modern scholars (including liberal Christian scholars) believe that the epic events described in the Book of Exodus and depicted in the excellent movie starring Charlton Heston, The Ten Commandments, are simply myths.

Yes, that's right.

They think there was no oppression of the Israelites, no 10 plagues, no Passover, no mass exit during the night, no miraculous crossing of the Red Sea, no wandering in the desert, no conquest, no miraculous deliverance at Jericho, etc.

They think all this is made up and they believe that some Jewish scribe or scribes who lived in the kingdom years wrote down all the "tall tales" of Exodus from various sources they received which in turn were written down from oral tradition because supposedly Moses was a dumb goat herder who didn't know how to write. They even question whether there ever was such a person as Moses!

Incredible.

Yet, that's what they think and many scholarly(?) papers have been written to defend this view.

WHY DO THEY THINK THIS?
Well, there are probably many reasons, but one key reason is that no one could find any archaeological evidence of the existence of the Israelites in Egypt ...

UNTIL RECENTLY ...

Turns out that the following evidence for Israel's activities DOES exist ... scholars were looking in the right places, but they were looking in the WRONG TIME PERIOD!!

DAVID ROHL SOLVES THE MYSTERY
As I point out in my ever-expanding book review of Rohl's Pharoahs and Kings: A Biblical Quest, some of the evidence uncovered by looking in the RIGHT time period is ...

Quote:

* A Papyrus dated to the generation just prior to the birth of Moses listing slaves with Hebrew names–Menahem, Issachar, Asher, and Shiprah (one of the names of a Hebrew midwife listed in Exodus 1:15-21) (p. 276)
* Manetho wrote that that in the reign of Dudimose (the Pharoah of the Exodus under the New Chronology), ‘a blast of God smote us’ (i.e. the Egyptians) (p. 283)
* The 13th Dynasty of Egypt ended abruptly with the reign of Dudimose and we are told by Manetho that a foreign power took over the rule of Egypt. This would make sense if Dudimose’s army had just been destroyed as related in the Book of Exodus.
* The archaeology of Avaris (northern city in the land of Goshen) shows that, at approximately at this time, there was a terrible catastrophe–shallow burial pits all over Avaris into which victims had been hurriedly cast. (p. 279)
* The palace and cult statue of Joseph the Vizier of Egypt (p. 327)
* Evidence for the fallen walls and burned city of Jericho in the correct time period thus vindicating Garstang and refuting Kenyon (p. 299)

WHY WERE SCHOLARS LOOKING IN THE WRONG TIME PERIOD?
This is explained in two of my recent posts HERE and HERE in which I show that ...

* Conventional Egyptian Chronology is out by several hundred years
* This is because of an assumption by Egyptologists that Shoshenk I = the Biblical Shishak
* But this is wrong as shown by the map below and my articles linked above
* The assumption is based upon an ERROR by Champollion, the Father of Egyptology, and has never been questioned until Rohl

Dean Anderson deemed this information to be off topic recently when posted on the "Genesis: Oral Tradition? Or Written History?" thread, so I have started a new thread to discuss it. If the mods want to merge my other post over here, that's fine with me.

Read my short article, see if you agree and give me some feedback. While you may not agree with Rohl on other points, do you agree with him regarding Champollion's Big Mistake?

But of course, the Islamic faith, among countless others are myths, it would be incredible to think otherwise.

Israelite presence in Egypt proves one thing, and one thing only: Israelite presence in Egypt.

Suddenly a significant portion of Hispanic men are the King of Jews now, because they have the name of Jesus, which was once used only as a title?

People write the darnedest things.

Shoshenk I is Shishak now? Sorry I didn't follow that transition...I suppose it follows that Josephine is Jesus too?

Minimalist · 11-21-2007, 08:15 PM

At one point Rohl was claiming that Shoshenq (Shishak) was really Rameses II, too.

He wants to rearrange all of ancient history because the bible account has shit to support it.

Seems much easier to simply dismiss thte bible account as what it is....later fiction from the 7th century.

juergen · 11-21-2007, 09:16 PM

Woohoo! I read all 15 pages! Good read. A lot of side-stepping, I must say, but it's turned into a nice barn-dance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

What kind of God would make it difficult to evaluate evidence when he could easily make it easy for people to evaluate evidence, even easy for the average sixth grader?

I'm guessing the kind of God who would create the world in 6 days, yet hide all of the evidence, plant false evidence to really test people's faith?

Our faith gotta be strong, so here's another thing for us to work on: the flewd.

And in case we think it's easy to work through the last 2, some in-depth study of the Exodus will make us strong.

The concept of unwavering faith in the face of factual reality is clearly more important than the eternal station of a soul, or something.

Quote:

if you haven't read The Bible Unearthed, you should. He explains in much better detail than I ever could.

I know the comment wasn't directed at me, but I'm getting that in the mail next week!

I wonder what will happen with some of those unanswered questions from this thread?

juergen

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-20-2007, 11:33 AM	#362
Pappy Jack Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: French Pyrenees Posts: 649	As with many threads that Dave has either started or been intimately involved with, it seems that he abandons those which pose questions he is both unable answer and unable to avoid answering any longer. This will not prevent him later reposting elsewhere the material that raised the questions in the first place, then claiming to have 'addressed' the questions in said abandoned threads (or 'elsewhere'). Of course, he is always called on this, but it doesn't seem to stop him repeating the same pattern continuously. I have no explanation for this behaviour, except Constant Mews' argument that Dave's main purpose on these threads is Witnessing. I would be very surprised if Dave returns again to this topic as I doubt that he has anything of substance to post that can counter the criticisms that have already cast serious doubt on the arguments he made in the OP. So the thread may as well be locked down as another Dave trainwreck.

11-20-2007, 11:37 AM	#363
Minimalist Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,808	Maybe we should ask the Mods to "sticky" it?

11-20-2007, 02:51 PM	#365
-Jay- Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Eastern U.S. Posts: 4,157	Dave's been really busy over in E/C lately. Feel free to visit him there. :devil1: regards, NinJay

11-21-2007, 08:15 PM	#369
Minimalist Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,808	At one point Rohl was claiming that Shoshenq (Shishak) was really Rameses II, too. He wants to rearrange all of ancient history because the bible account has shit to support it. Seems much easier to simply dismiss thte bible account as what it is....later fiction from the 7th century.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.