Postcard73

Thanks for clarifying. Since this statement directly followed your comments about AIDS victims, I thought you were still referring to the modern situation...
Hence the at the end of the sentence...

Julian

Thank you, Kosh, for your correction. Being Danish I was thinking litres but writing pounds. Duh! I just love the visual of 5 million creatures walking around in a big circle by a waterhole for 40 years.

Muhahahaha! (Sorry, that just sorta slipped out...)

Julian

Jim Larmore

QUOTE][i[]Originally posted by leonarde [/i]
I was talking from an archaeological point of view.......yes, if there is a written record of deaths (any deaths at any time and at any place), then that would at least give us a clue but the complaint was: no bodiesQUOTE][i[]Originally posted by leonarde [/i]

Don't pay attention to this I'm experimenting

QUOTE][i[]Originally posted by leonarde [/i]
The bodies may well be there but they are just another group of deceased people, spread over the greater Egypt area, who died of some unknown causes in the ancient world, at the time a HUGE category, and not one limited to one generation.
Continue to test

Amaleq13

Jim,


Select PREVIEW REPLY instead of SUBMIT REPLY and you will be able to see what the post will look like without actually posting it. You can also correct it and PREVIEW it again and again.

sismofyt

Looking at Julians numbers, logic tells me, that the exodus is impossible. Only with magic aka divine intervention could those 5 million beings cross the desert.

So why are theists looking for archaeological evidence? Why would it matter?

(OT, ja Julian det er et fantastisk forum!)

Mageth

Maybe they had still-suits like the Fremen in Dune.

Postcard73

The thing I find particularly frustrating about many theists (there are some this would not apply to) is that they dismiss any archaeological evidence as flawed or misinterpreted the instant it contradicts the Bible, but they celebrate when something appears that seems to support the Bible. Look at the James Ossuary. The thing has been thoroughly labelled a fraud, but they still won't drop it...

Postcard73

It may be a bit of a stretch to say there is no evidence whatsoever supporting the Exodus and Conquest because there are signs of destruction at a few sites mentioned in Joshua; however, the vast majority of evidence that does exist - combined with the tremendous amount of evidence that does not exist where it should - indicates that the Exodus and Conquest never happened. This is not an unsupported assertion. There are several books on the subject written by respected scholars. I already mentioned Who Were the Early Israelites and Where Did They Come From? several times in this thread. You could also take a look at others like The Bible Unearthed and Archaeology and the Bible. These books present clear, concise arguments disputing the validity of the traditional Jewish Exodus. Please provide me with references to the archaeological evidence contradicting their claims.

Sauron

"News to you"? Really?

What texts have you read on burial practices of ancient Egyptians, cross-indexed by wealth and social status?


Based upon your extensive research, I presume?

Hint: you're wrong about this.

Sauron

How does this address anything in the previous posts?

1. The question was whether the plague of the firstborn ever happened.

2. Someone asked "what kind of evidence would you like to see?"

3.. Sarpedon discussed two kinds of evidence from burials:
(a) mass graves for the poor, and
(b) tombs for the rich.

He commented that neither have been found.

4. You accused him of switching his standard of proof in the middle of his post.

5. Wayne pointed out that it wasn't a switch at all; it was a discussion of two different types of burial evidence, based upon status and economic standing.

6. NOW you're saying that it depends on whether a writer of the period would have thought such an event worthwhile to write about. That has nothing to do with the absence of large numbers of graves from such an alleged event. That evidence wouldn't be literary in form, it would be physical evidence.

Moreover, if it's your assertion that a massive die-off that affected every first born living thing wouldn't be newsworthy in Egypt, then you're simply being intellectually dishonest.

No, you're waffling because your accusation of switching proof didn't stand.