Steven Avery

The Greek OT from A.D. 350 to A.D. 600 is called the "Septuagint" even though it has minimal connection to any translation done about 200 B.C. (what would be the real 'Septuagint')

First, Diogenes had the Israelites camping 38 years at Kadesh Barnea, looks like a misinterpretation of Deut 2:14,although they did "abode in Kadesh many days" Deut 1:46 ..

Now, are you claiming that Kadesh-Barnea in Sinai has decent evidence of a long-term ancient habitation. ? I'd be happy to look at the precise evidences. Meanwhile Kadesh-Barnea is likely in Arabia :-) There are severe limitations on Arabia Bible archaelogy, as you likely know. And the name in Sinai would have been placed on later. Do you have any ancient or archaelogical corroborative material for Kadesh Barnea in Sinai ?

Well, you could simplify questions by simply reading "The Exodus Case". Why don't you see what you can find on the web, ask a couple of pertinent questions, and I will augment it with a fuller expostion from the book, as I did with the chariot wheel pictures, one good one later found by Sven online.

Please be specific. How am I "abandoning Biblical literalism" ?

If someone says to me that

"biblical literalism demands that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre
is the tomb of Jesus," or

"the 'upper room' is such and such a house in Jerusalem,
look at the sign, it is even named the 'upper room' "

have I abandoned biblical literalism when I disagree with a very tenuous interpretation ?
Analogy to Exodus.

Have you ever even seen "The Exodus Case", much less read or skimmed it ?

Sure, and I could be the King of Denmark.
Ultimately, when we look at evidences we have to use a smidgen of common sense.

Now, if you really have another theory for the three pics, we could probably go into issues like size, what materials will not dissolve in salt water, other accounts from folks in the area, the details of the Lennart Moller discussion of Egyptian chariot wheel sizes and shapes and materials and more. However, are you seriously contending this, or just trying to be obstinate ?

Meanwhile, tell us about the professional archaelogists who have followed up on such clear evidences, seeking to get permissions from the Egyptian authorities and the various international coral protectors to start cutting and digging. And if you have none of those, does that make the evidence we do have, the videos and pictures and accounts and studies, less significant, or, to your way of thinking, non-existent ?

Now you are adding to the previous tacky accusations from "lie detector Amirault" against Ron Wyatt with your own accusations against Lennart Moller ?

You folks have absolutely no integrity.

Are there any honest folks here amongst the skeptics and infidels and stands up to the nonsense we have seen on this thread ?

Simply the following would be helpful..

"Oh, I don't want to be associated with nonsensical accusations and character assasination without real evidence".

Are you all cowed and silent in the face of such scurrilous stuff ?

Integrity first.

Shalom,
Praxeas
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/

Sven

:thumbs: :rolling:

Steven Avery

Point taken, and I appreciate your pulling out the better pic.
Moller (and others) have a lot about the various Egyptian chariots.
Perhaps the follow up to Lennart's work will be someone with permission and specialized equipment to try to pull off some material for analysis. I hope you can appreciate that there is a web of interrelated financial, governmental, environmental, scholastic and equipment issues.

Plus you have to deal with the ongoing mockery of the 'archaelogical establishement', a reflection of which we have seen on this forum.
However, the web site folks are just reporting. Lennart Moller and Ron Wyatt never, afaik, brought up the shroud for consideration. Doubtful if even Grant Jeffrey did, either, although he is more of a popularizer and reporter as well.

You know that is a classic fallacy :-) If Joel Brind wrote a report of the scholarship, then it stands or falls on its own merits, not simply because a Catholic publication was the one willing to publish. Have you seen another study of the various studies ? And compared it to Brind ? I am as non-RCC as just about anyone, however on certain issues I will study their materials.

That's reasonable. It is very possible that all sides have a tendency to overstate and fudge, sometimes deliberately, sometimes due to hidden bias.

I read the BAR debates, I met Dever when he talked nearby, I research issues as they come up. Folks on this forum should know by now that I do not in any way limit my studies to apologetic sources :-)

I was just extracting one major argument, without getting into the issues of the settlements in Israel and the dating thereof, or the comparison of Canaanite and Israelite culture, or the various debates about David and Solomon. Didn't want to get too far afield, and I don't claim any great expertise therein.

Shalom,
Praxeas
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/

Sven

:huh: My question was about the dating of the inscriptions.

Oh, you mean the 'archaelogical establishement' just like Answers in Genesis?

Yes. But since he talks about a conspiracy and is biased and I don't have his publication at hand, this makes me more then a bit suspicious. *shrug*

BAR supposedly means Biblical Archaeology Review? Which debates are you talking about specifically?

Then when are you going to read the book?

I just met you, so I can not tell.

That's why we are recommending to read the book.

RED DAVE

From RED DAVE:
From praxeus:
I know what the Septuagint is. How does this pertain to our discussion.

From RED DAVE:
From praxeus:
No. I'm claiming that nowhere in the entire Middle East is there any evidence of a long-term ancient encampment for some 2 million people. You are turning the tables, Dude.

From praxeus:
What is your justification for placing Kadesh-Barnea anywhere but in the standard location?

From RED DAVE:
From praxeus:
The burden of evidence lies with you. Send me a copy of The Exodus CAse, and I'll read it. Otherwise, post your sources or be ignored.

From RED DAVE:
From praxeus:
The Bible quite obviously places the Exodus in Sinai. What is your justification for abandoning it?

From praxeus:
No. But I have read a review and seen the photographs. I have better things to do with my money.

From RED DAVE:
From RED DAVE:
Well, Your Majesty, we sure do. And common sense tells me that an unattributed, unverified underwater photograph is proof of exactly nothing. Where's the artifact itself?

From praxeus:
Bring out the artifact, the wheel or wheels, and let's have a competent archaeologist examine them. Otherwise, no cigar.

From praxeus:
Extraordinary statements require extraordinary evidence. The burden of proof is on you and Wyatt.

From RED DAVE:
From praxeus:
God Blurred Ron's Photo of the Ark of the Covenant -- Right!

Talk about tacky!

From praxeus:
No integrity at all.

From praxeus:Indeed, Your Highness. Next stop, Tivoli Gardens.

From praxeus:You Jewish like me?

RED DAVE

Sven

Do you mean this one:




BTW, there was a lot wrong with your quotes. Time for an edit!

Steven Avery

Ok, that is a whole nother issue, and I think there are multiple inscriptions referenced. The ones in Sinai have been claimed to be later Nabatean, on one link I gave.

Yes, consider them part of the "Biblical Archaelogy" establishment :-)

Fair enough. Perhaps I am more attuned to conspiracy theories, as in the FDA/drug-company/med-journal/med-school/media linkages. However, I accept that this can be a turn-off.

About two years ago they had a major article on the Min/Max debate, Finkelstein and others, perhaps Dever (not Kitchen, and no Ron Wyatt supporters :-) were represented as I recall. And then there was all sorts of follow-ups in the letters and stuff in later issues. With all the criticisms of BAR/Shanks , many justified, it was quite a well-done section.

Dunno. If it is at my library (ie. Barnes & Nobles, Borders) I'll give it a greater look through than I have in the past.

Shalom,
Praxeas
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Messianic_Apologetic/

RED DAVE

Ron Wyatt - Munchausen Syndrome

RED DAVE

Gooch's dad

Praxeus, are you simply going to ignore these pictures of other brass handwheels? Are you still claiming that Wyatt fraud picture is actually NOT a brass handwheel?

Here's another, which is almost identical to the one in that Wyatt picture. It has 6 spokes rather than 4, but is otherwise almost identical:



Your response?

Steven Avery

The name "Septuagint" is given to manuscripts that don't fit the description.. an anachronism. Then the name "Septuagint" itself is used as evidence of the late manuscripts antiquity or accuracy.

Similarly if Kadesh-Barnea in Sinai was given the name say in A.D. 300, that is not much evidence for the sites antiquity, or as supporting it as a location matching the Bible description. The real Kadesh-Barnea could be elsewhere, we cannot judge much just from knowing a location was given the name at some time, just as we cannot assume much about a manuscript called the 'Septuagint'.

There are large areas of the Middle East where Biblical archaelogy is very restricted, so your statement is beyond our knowledge.

I think we are going in circles, much like the Exodus travels themselves !. Start with the Aqaba crossing, and Mount Sinai in Arabia. That would make Kadesh-Barnea likely in Arabia, unless the Israelites doubled back to Sinai, despite the Egyptian outposts. Unlikely. We really cannot atomize Kadesh-Barnea away from the complete Exodus account.

That's fine. The posters who simply repeat unsubstantiated accusations of fraud, such as based on two or three parties removed lie detector claims, and never even retract them when challenged, would do well to switch to "ignore" mode. I did however offer to answer specific questions from the Lennart Moller book, when they arise.

Not at all. Finding the Red Sea in Sinai was always a major bewilderment, leading to the infamous Sea of Reeds theories. Multiple ancient historical accounts placed the Exodus in Arabia. Even Paul specifically stated that Mount Sinai as in Arabia (and the attempts to stretch that to Sinai were weak). The real mystery is why, before Ron, most (not all) modern searchers were barking up the wrong mountains.

Because it is not in the Bible, combined with common sense, and an appreciation for those who went out in the field, like Ron, to really find the locales.

Seriously, have you ever seen a weaker review than that one ? Does it really act as a balm on your disinterest that there was a skeptical reviewer far lazier and far less informed than the accusers on this forum ?

Yes, you saw a couple of photograghs. You are now expert on the 300 page book ! :-)

That is more reasonable. Maybe Barnes & Nobles will put it on the shelf and you can read it there.. or the library will get it in.. :-) Tis worthwhile.

Waiting for some folks from the professional establishement to actually do something worthwhile on the Exodus issues. The folks with the money, equipment, political/scholastic/governmental muscle to stop mocking and do some real work. However, don't forget to exhale and re-inhale while waiting for that crew.

And if I do that, will you go "illegal, throw them in jail" etc. It is hilarious when folks take boths sides against the middle because they want to close their eyes and ears.
Ron Wyatt passed away in 1999. WorldNetDaily did a very fine "deathbed interview" with him about a week before his death. Yes, I am a Jewish believer, raised Conservative (social) Judaism, Bar Mitzvah, etc.