schriverja

Paul spoke to the Jewish crowd (presumably not as educated as Paul) in Aramaic , proving that the Jewish people of that time spoke Aramaic. That is my point... Jesus uses it when speaking to Paul in Acts 26. Paul uses it to address the crowds in Acts 21 and 22. It's not a question of Mary using one word, it's a question Jewish people using and understanding the Aramaic language, which, according to the Bible, they did... Unless the Bible is wrong, of course.

archaeologist

No it doesn't prove that at all. If you go back to chapter 21 you would see this:

This does not mean everyone spoke Aramaic andif Paul used the language it dstill does not mean that everyone spoke it. Your fellow Americans (if you are one) can speak german, french, Spanish, does that mean you can? it is an example and I do not care if you can or not) The point is just because paul spoke to a few people doesn't mean it was the common language.

Jesus can speak in any language He wants, if He couldn't He would not be God.

What is wrongis your application of the Biblical passages. You are extrapolatying one incident to all Jewish people and the ancient world inspite of the evidence that states Greek was the universal language of the time.

schriverja

Once again, you are wrong. Acts 21, verse 30 states that the whole city was roused against Paul. Now, why would he speak aramaic to the whole city, as Acts 21:40 and again in 22:2 states he used?

Kapyong

Gday,

Pardon?
Dozens of early Christian books about Jesus DID survive.
NONE of them contain a claim to have met Jesus, or anyone who ever knew Jesus (apart from the forged 2 Peter.)

None of the Gospels contain a claim to have met Jesus, or anyone who knew him.

None of the epistles contain a claim to have met Jesus, or anyone who knew him.

THAT evidence DID survive.
And shows NO-ONE ever met Jesus ar anyone who knew him.


Your attempt to change the subject confirms that you have NO evidence of any kind for the exodus. And - your claims about Jericho are NOT supported by actual archeologists.



Once again, you attempt to change the subject to avoid the fact that you are wrong.

YOU claimed exodus evidence would be mistaken for Egyptian evidence. I asked WHERE is that 'egyptian' evidence that is really the exodus?

You FAILED to provide any, because there is NONE. Your posts are all preaching, and no facts.

There is NO evidence for the exodus,
and there WOULD be if it happened.

Archeologists agree - it never happened.


What is wrong with your reading comprehension?
I SPECIFICALLY used the example of the millions of tons (seriously, not an exaggeration) of dried shit that would be left behind.

You deliberately IGNORED that point, then had the audacity to say "what evidence" after I GAVE you the example.

That's what I mean by preaching - you don't actually bother to answer the points that people bring up here - you just ignore the facts and keep on preaching.

You seem to be pretending that 600,000 people did NOT have a shit in 40 years ?!

You really believe that 30 million pairs of shoes and clothing NEVER wore out?

What about the millions of campfires?

What about the millions of sacrifices they had to carry out?
Where are the bones?


The exodus never happened - that's the fact.
Preaching your fairy tales is going no-where.



K.

Kapyong

Gday,

Read your posts and all you will find are faithful contributions from apologists, no independent thought, it's all Christian belief, and what you are saying is not true.


K.

Minimalist

I've known Arch for a long time and he thinks it is different because he just knows that his 'god' is real and all the others are false.

Now, where have I heard that line of reasoning before? Oh, yeah.... EVERYWHERE!

arnoldo

There is no definitive archaeological proof that the exodus happened. However, if genuine (and translated accurately), the Merneptah Stele does establish that there was an antagonistic relationship between the nation of Israel and Egypt.

Israel is wasted, its seed is no longer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele

Kapyong

Gday,

There is no EVIDENCE that it happened at all.
And,
there WOULD be, if it had happened.

This is a conclusive argument that it did NOT happen.

Nowadays, only faithful believers think it did.
Archeologists don't.



So what?
Egypt was a power then.
They trampled on many peoples.

That has NOTHING to do with the exodus.


K.

archaeologist

Still doesn't prove that all of them spoke aramaic, that is an assumption you cannot prove.

I do not claim I have met you, does that mean we do not interact?

Not changing the subject but providing examples for you.n You have proven my theory that americans do not know what examples are anymore. By the way, jericho was at the end of the exodus and the beginning of the conquest.

Doesn't matter what they agrre on, they do not count. The events happened whether they accept it or not.

No i didn't ignore it at all. Do you think they just took a crap above ground? Do you think all the toilet areas would have survived earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, windstorms, sandstorms plus the millions of other people roaming the desert who may have used the same spots for their dumping grounds?

What is an example of evidence you are looking for? For all the people taking a crap a Qumran, do you know how many toilets they found? Very few.

Wrong again on all points as you may dismiss it BUT the Bible is an ancient document and is evidence.

Actually i do not address many of your points for they are not dealing with common sense or reality. You forget they mayhave found the alter of Joshua, with bones but guess what--it is dismissed like everything else. presenting evidence to people like you is a waste of time because you have the right to accept it or reject it then demand more.

Well you get very little now because you do not want to believe but just like demanding things you cannot have.

You would be wrong and you provide no evidence proving what i say isa not true. You can't for I have spoken nothing but the truth. I can say the exact same thing to you but change apologist to secular.

You argue, as do so many archaeologists, from silence. You do not find evidence for an event thus it must not have happened. I have no evidence you typed and submited your post, thus it did not happen.

Remember the Hittites. No evidence save for the Bible for 1900 years then allof a sudden guess who was discovered--the Hittites and their empire. be careful about dismissing biblical events, you will get embarrassed.

Archaeology and archaeologists are not the final say. You need to read K.A. Kitchen's book The Bible In Its World. Archaeology, like all science, is far too limited to dictate what took place in the past.

Stop going to the absurd people and stick to reality. You argue from a limited science pinning your hopes on fallible men over a diviine Bible, I am not the one making a mistake or being irrational.

Toto

I remember post 55 in this thread and other discussion here on the Hittites.