WILLOWTREE

http://www.bibleorigins.net/Shattere...tictablet.html

"Despite claims by a number of scholars that there is NOTHING -archaeologically speaking- to link to the Exodus traditions to in the Southern Sinai, I maintain that there is. I have attempted to "link" various elements and motifs appearing in the Exodus narratives with archaeological findings in the Southern Sinai left by Asiatics FROM Egypt."

http://biblicalstudies.qldwide.net.a...nd_israel.html

The above site provides very good evidence substantiating Velikovsky including carbon dating verification of the 600 ghost years contained in conventional Egyptian chronology.

Enjoy !

Willowtree

rlogan

Talk about lame. Annoying word games, nothing more.

There is no evidence here of the Exodus.

Instead, the lame assertion that the "tradition" of Moses breaking the tablets somehow evolved from inscriptions at old Egyptian mines.

So this Judean sees this sign with "mine shaft no. 2" on it and from there the story of Moses leading his people out of bondage in Egypt and coming down the mountain with the ten commandments evolves.


You can't make stuff like this up.

BrianJ

Hi,

But, people do make this stuff up, and make a lot of money out of gullible people who are not familiar with the subject.

You and I, and probably the most of the membership here, can see that there is no evidence for the Exodus presented in the links, but some people think that quoting someone that believes in a 15th century Exodus is all that is required. It does not matter to them that the author of the page has not supported a single thing, the important thing seems to be that they wrote it in the first place so there must be evidence!

I don't think that anyone in their right mind would touch Velikovsky with a barge pole, yet we see his date for the Exodus presented as support for a 15th century Exodus, despite the page claiming that Velikovsky wants to date it 600 years earlier during the 13th dynasty.

I think that WT is genuinely interested in dating the Exodus, but until he comes out of his obsession with Gene Scott and studies the work of real scholars such as, Albright, Noth, Mendenhall, Gottwald, Alt, Finkelstein, Whitelam, Coote, Callaway, et al, he is going to remain in a state of ignorance of this subject.

Brian.

WILLOWTREE

Personal attacks and insults directed at sources reveals rage concerning their evidence and the inability to refute.

If you want to actually debate the evidence and specifics then of course I will.

Continue the ad hominem insults ? = fear of debating the claims/evidence/specifics.

WT

Vorkosigan

At this point there is not much one can say. You cite a document based on references that are over a decade old, with some going back before WWII. Your other document appears to be even worse. Neither document really deals with counterarguments. Velikovsky has long since been rejected and the world has moved on.

Why don't you become familiar with the list of scholars that Brian wrote above, and enter the debates on biblical chronology with a firmer foundation?

WILLOWTREE

Agreed.

This is true because my opponents have asserted and declared that there is no evidence for ancient Israel/Exodus out of Egypt in existence, therefore they must repeat that incessantly and never recognize any lest they admit their previous assertions and declarations were in error.

This is not an evolution debate where evos can invoke the latest scientific discoveries as an excuse for some earlier theory embraced and since falsified.

Surley you are not arguing perceived antiquity is to be equated with error ?

Brian and I have dealt with this point previously and neither of us agree that age is synonymous with error.

Maybe I am misunderstanding your point ?

Yes his enemies have long been humiliated and are hoping nobody remembers his total refutation of their conventional chronology.

Nobody has refuted Velikovsky.

He is only rejected by the descendants of the status quo who have spoken up for that which their ego and reputations will not allow them to withdraw.

Do I agree with everything Velikovsky argues ?

No.

Does anyone agree with everyone on everything ?

No.

Brian likes to say Albright supports his Exodus date yet does Brian agree with everything Albright says and argues ?

Dr. Scott supports Velikovsky in ONE vital area:

His Tell el Armarna arguments proving the Biblical dating of the mid-15th century Exodus date.

Can the above support be separated from Velikovsky's 600 years conventional Egyptian chronology falsification ?

I honestly do not know.

But Dr. Scott is very careful when speaking. He has only endorsed Velikovsky's use of Amarna in support of the mid-15th century Exodus date.

How ironic that Velikovsky enemies just dismiss his research via ad hominem attacks and never debate his arguments. This alone is excellent proof that Velikovsky was on to something to put it mildly.

Brian has declined to debate.

His decline comes outright and via insults directed at my sources.

Why don't you follow your own advice ?

Answer: Because you are not interested in any evidence which doesn't support your a priori beliefs.

The mid-15th century Exodus is a fact based on the evidence and based upon the refusal of opponents to cease from arguing the man (= fear of truth) and engage the evidence and the let the truth be decided wherever the facts lead.

Intelligitimate

You seem to eat up whatever that idiot evangelist Dr. Gene Scott says.

WILLOWTREE

Insults = inability to refute.

I could call you an idiot and this is not the purpose of a debate Forum.

The fact that you made this school-yard insult only reflects on yourself.

WT

Johann_Kaspar

Crap, crap and crap. :down:
Please, read Anati. :thumbs:

Lindum

Hi WT,

Do you really believe what you write? Strange that I've never detected any rage in Brain's posts before - but then I've probably lost my "rage-sense" along with my "god-sense".

Cheers.

PS: How is the map reading going? Any luck yet in measuring from the GP to the Med coast? I know it's very tricky, just wondering if you've managed that yet.