Adam and his wife died physically after eating the Forbidden Fruit. Genesis 2:17 is Literal.

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Exactly how the first lifeforms came into existence is a mystery and may always be.

Agreed, but we probably have different ideas about what that means. We're past wondering where the first life came from, or what it looked like in broad strokes. It was unicellular marine life with a cell wall, nucleic acids, proteins, and assorted electrolytes at a minimum, and it reproduced by dividing.

We may never know its exact anatomy, physiology, or biochemistry, but we know what it was like in the main.

It does not mean that God does not want it to be translated. What it means is that nothing should be inserted or made something other or appear to be other than what was initially written. Furthermore, the copyists were very careful to be accurate.

You can't translate without changing meaning at least some of the time.

I looked for some jokes in Spanish translated into English here: 30 Hilarious Spanish Jokes for kids

Here are a few. I don't see jokes there, so I presume they're puns of some type in Spanish. I'm not a native speaker, so nuance escapes me:

5. What is the cat's favorite day?
Wednesday.

6. What does a fish do?
Nothing!

7. What is the most patient fruit?
It's pear.

10. What does superman wear when he smells bad?
Its perfume.

Here's the first in Spanish:

5. ¿Cuál es el día favorito del gato?
Miércoles.

I'm guessing that it's because miercoles (mee-AIR-co-lace) sounds a little like meow (spelled miau in Spanish). If not, I have no idea why they consider that a joke.

And look at the way believers retranslate at will and tell us what the words really meant. This thread began with that. What is a day of creation? Whatever you want it to be.

I'm quite certain that men looking into the heavens did not see literal pillars supporting anything.

You're looking in the wrong direction. They were said to be under the earth and supporting it. Overhead is the dome with the sun and stars embedded in it and with the holes that let in the rain from the water reserve above the dome.

We die physically when the brain is dead.

We die when metabolism ceases, which is irreversible. Brain death isn't ever the direct cause of death. No organ failure is. Organ failure leading to death always involves tissue hypoxia, which leads to cell death, the final common pathway, whether that resulted from pump failure (heart), gas exchange (lungs), or shock (inadequate intravascular volume and pressure). Kidney failure leads to death through electrolyte and pH disturbances, which in turn case the heart to fibrillate, which ends its pumping ability and leads to tissue and cellular hypoxia and the end of metabolism and cellular life.

 

[shunyadragon]

Well, great! Then I ask you: what is God’s Kingdom?

Our physical existence Created by God including every possible universe.

 

[YoursTrue]

Agreed, but we probably have different ideas about what that means. We're past wondering where the first life came from, or what it looked like in broad strokes. It was unicellular marine life with a cell wall, nucleic acids, proteins, and assorted electrolytes at a minimum, and it reproduced by dividing.

We may never know its exact anatomy, physiology, or biochemistry, but we know what it was like in the main.

Let me ask you this question: do scientists think that cells formed themselves by reacting somehow to the physical environment?

 

[YoursTrue]

Our physical existence Created by God including every possible universe.

Why do you think Jesus taught his disciples to pray for God's kingdom to come and that His will be done on earth as well as in heaven if it was already there and being fully accomplished?

Matthew 6:9,10
Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come,
your will be done,
on earth as it is in heaven.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

Basically not true among the academic archeologists and historians. There is no question based on the evidence of the origin of the Hebrews in the Levant. You need to specifically cite academic sources that support any other origin scenario.

The only options proposed for the history of the Hebrews is the fundamentalist view of Hebrews separate from Canaanites, but the entire ancestry in the Levant, versus the documented history of Hebrews as a Canaanite tribe going back to before 3000 BCE,

I reviewed Jensen's work. He is a traditional fundamentalist theologian, and believes in a literal interpretation of the Pentateuch and Exodus. Like many fundamentalist Christians he minimizes or even negates the link of Hebrews as Canaanite tribes, but nonetheless proposes a history of the Hebrews in the Levant and a literal interpretation of Exodus as an Exodus from Egypt. His writings do not remotely support an Exodus from the Indus River Valley.

If you believe Jensen describes any other option concerning Exodus please cite specifically.

It is the overwhelming archeological, historical, cultural, genetic, and linguistic direct link between Canaanites and Hebrews. The link is also directly related to a relationship with Egypt. There is absolutely no such evidence of any relationship with the Indus Valley.

I agree with you that based upon the present academic archaeologists and historians there is no other scenario but then the present archaeologists and historians do not answer any of the difficult problems associated with the Exodus. To name five- the river becoming red, the conflict on straw, the parting of water, the volcano at Sinai and the second Yam Suph.

So, I am trying and I hope in due course of time, some academic historians would also acknowledge these problems and how they get solved in the Indus Valley. Let me repeat that Research means Re-Search, so we cannot limit research by existing consensus. If that were the case, then there would be no research.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

But earlier, you wrote, "If [religion] is substituted by spiritualism then it would be good for this world." It seems you used spiritualism and egalitarianism synonymously. I try to avoid most religious words. I don't distance myself from spirituality, but I do from spirits, and wouldn't use the word spiritualism where I meant egalitarianism, nor spiritualism where I meant spirituality.

I use spiritualism in the sense of spiritualism and egalitarianism in the sense of egalitarianism not understanding them synonymously. To my mind Spiritualism is a psychic concept and egalitarianism is a social concept. They may go together but the logic is entirely different. I am in support of both, however.

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

I don't know if that's correct or not, but it might be. If so, it's due to anti-humanistic efforts in the world coming from the largest religions like American Christianity and Afghani Islam (both misogynistic), antidemocratic and authoritarian proclivities (MAGA, Putin), and those trying to concentrate wealth, power, and privilege while clamoring for deregulation while exploiting people and desecrating the environment. None of those is interested equality or equity, but humanism fights for that. It's fighting for women's reproductive freedom and LGTBQ+ equity, for example, against the forces I just enumerated.

I think you are misreading the present political situation. I do not find any political system that is not trying to concentrate wealth, power and privilege. All this talk about deregulation and deregulation is only to hide the deeper regulation, something like the deep state. So, I think I am with you that none of these are interested in inequality or equity.

In fact, I've now begun to feel that egalitarianism is a false objective.

Different people have different desires and what is important is that they be given opportunity to fulfill their desires. Economist Amartya Sen made one very interesting point. He said that if you make students equal in education, then their ages will be different. If you make them similar in age, then their education will be different. So, we have to decide what will be the key parameter of equality and to my mind the key parameter can only be equality of opportunity with the proviso that we aim at a spiritual world.

How that has to be done is a separate discussion.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

That's nice and timely illustration of that to which I referred when I wrote, "I recall a thread in which three believers gave completely different interpretations of what appears to be a story of a deity letting a demon toy with a man's life for no apparent reason. They would all say that they had God's help understanding the words, but they all had different understandings."
.

I follow what you’re saying. I do.
You mention “ambiguous and contradictory scripture “. Yeah, there’s a lot of that between translations, but from the unearthed original-language manuscripts, both Hebrew & Greek, there’s little room for disputing who the Bible’s God is! In fact, trinitariarians include Him in their trinity: known as the Father.

Of course, He has a name, Yahweh in Hebrew.

We find it over 6,800 times in the Hebrew Scriptures.
And yet, it’s been taken out! As if there’s been a concerted effort to hide Who God is. And not just Who He is; also what the Bible really teaches.


I’ll give you two examples (out of a multitude) of tenets that have been twisted:


One:
I know that you are skeptical - extremely - of those on here who post about their experiences with the dead, right? These experiences suggest that the dead are “alive in another realm.”
As an atheist though, you probably think that once a person dies, he doesn’t exist at all. Well, guess what, the Bible says that very thing!(Genesis 3:19; Psalm 146:3,4; Ecclesiastes 9:5; Psalm 115:17) No one can show me anywhere else, where it says different (without twisting the meaning in Hebrew & Greek).


So what’s going on with these experiences certain ones are having?! Certainly not all are ‘mistaken’!
I’m sure you’re aware of my posting for at least the past two years about this subject, like “Lincoln’s Ghost” on Wikipedia, or on this very site highlighting the activities of a couple spirit mediums & ghost hunters. It’s not been just to show there’s more going on than naturalism, but also I’d like to point out that such “conversations with (supposed) dead human spirits” contradicts the Bible’s statements, and that is the sole purpose of these beings / entities / (ok, I won’t use the word - lol).
IOW, if the dead are indeed living, then the Bible is wrong.
The same purpose applied to the 14-century work “Divine Comedy”, Dante’s visions into the spirit afterlife, complete with dead tour guides (Virgil, Beatrice & St Bernard), revealing dead people alive, in hell, purgatory & paradise.

This all contradicts Scripture, by design.



Two:
This is related, to a degree..
The Hebrew word for “soul,” (in the Bible,) is “ne•pes / ne•phesh”.
The Greek equivalent, is “psy•khe”.

Throughout the Bible, it is consistently stated that the soul, dies! And stays dead!

See for yourself… In whatever version you choose, read the verses below. Wherever you read “body”, or “life”, or “me”, or “person”, or “corpse”, etc., an interlinear will show the word is “soul”:

Referencing its mortality, death, and it stays dead:
Genesis 19:19, 20; Numbers 6:6; 6:11; 19:11; 23:10; Joshua 2:13, 14; Judges 5:18; 16:16, 30; 1Kings 20:31, 32; Psalm 22:29; Ezekiel 18:4, 20; Matthew 2:20; 26:38; Mark 3:4; Hebrews 10:39; James 5:20…

being “cut off” or destroyed: Genesis 17:14; Exodus 12:15; Levitcus 7:20; 23:29; Joshua 10:28-39; Psalm 78:50; Ezekiel 13:19; 22:27; Acts 3:23; Revelation 8:9; 16:3…

killed by sword: Joshua 10:37; Ezekiel 33:6…

killed by suffocation: Job 7:15…

being in danger of death due to drowning: Jonah 2:5…

And this list is not by any means exhaustive (although I am - whew! Lol)

There is, in fact, not one case in the entire Scriptures, Hebrew and Greek, in which the words neʹphesh or psy·kheʹ are joined with words such as immortal, indestructible, imperishable, deathless, or the like. However as I’ve just shown, there are scores of texts in the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures that speak of the neʹphesh or psy·kheʹ (soul) as mortal and subject to death.

But people aren’t taught this… such Scriptures referencing the soul, in most Bibles, use words like “body” or “person”, effectively hiding that souls die. (And earth wide, people are told the soul is immortal.)

Now why would such a teaching be hidden? Because this understanding, coupled with the above (“human spirits are alive”), would make the Bible’s real teachings on death, very difficult to accept. Also what would be difficult to accept (for the religious), is God’s means of reversing death & the harm it has caused, i.e., the promised future Resurrection.


It’s very late… this may not even make sense, I’m so tired.

Good night (or, good morning,lol)

 

[shunyadragon]

I agree with you that based upon the present academic archaeologists and historians there is no other scenario but then the present archaeologists and historians do not answer any of the difficult problems associated with the Exodus. To name five- the river becoming red, the conflict on straw, the parting of water, the volcano at Sinai and the second Yam Suph.

So, I am trying and I hope in due course of time, some academic historians would also acknowledge these problems and how they get solved in the Indus Valley. Let me repeat that Research means Re-Search, so we cannot limit research by existing consensus. If that were the case, then there would be no research.

(1) This ia a well known problem in the arid Middle East. The rivers and by the way the Red Sea commonly will turn red, and the fish and shell fish die from what is called the Red Tide. This is fairly common in Arid regions like the Middle East, and is the reason Hebrew Law in the Torah prohibits eating shell fish.

red tide definition - Google Search

1. a discoloration of seawater caused by a bloom of toxic red dinoflagellates.
   (2) Please explain the conflict on straw because I see none and it does not make sense, Making Mud bricks only require a small amount of straw, which is plentiful in Egypt. The Bricks need a lot of clay, which is plentiful in Egypt.
   (3) The parting of the waters has many possible natural explanations, but as the Exodus account describes this is an act of God to save the Hebrews and needs no natural explanation.
   Some scientists have proposed natural explanations for the parting of the Red Sea in the Exodus story, including wind setdown, tsunamis, and reefs:Wind setdown
   A strong, persistent wind can lower water levels in one area while raising them in another. This could create a gap in the water, allowing the Israelites to cross before the wind died down and the water rose again.
   • Tsunami
     A tsunami could have caused the water to retreat and advance rapidly, but some scientists say this wouldn't have created the gradual divide described in the story.
   • Reefs
     A 67 mph wind blowing overnight could have exposed a reef that was closer to the surface 3,500 years ago. The Israelites could have crossed over the reef before the wind died down and the water rose again.
   Other explanations include meteorological phenomena like Medicane, tidal resonance, or Rossby waves.
   
   (4) Volcano??? The pillars of fire described in Exodus were Created by by God and need no natural explanation. The volcanoes in the Indus Valley are mud volcanoes no natural pillars of fire.
   (5) Thus far, we have identified two different bodies of water called ים סוף in the Bible: Yam Suph – A lake in the region near Egypt between the Gulf of Suez and the Mediterranean. Yam Soph – The Red Sea's Gulf of Aqaba.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

You mention “ambiguous and contradictory scripture “. Yeah, there’s a lot of that between translations, but from the unearthed original-language manuscripts, both Hebrew & Greek, there’s little room for disputing who the Bible’s God is!

Ambiguity and vagueness might be due to translation. If so, a clear message is forever out of my reach, since I will never become fluent in the original languages.

Contradiction is unlikely to be due to translation.

All of this tells me that this is not a book to go to for advice or information.

As an atheist though, you probably think that once a person dies, he doesn’t exist at all.

I don't assume that, but neither do I assume otherwise. I don't need to guess, and so I don't.

 

[Elijah2]

It's such a disappointment that Seminary education excludes Scholarly fact based education. Has anyone else here read both "The Origins of Judaism" by Adler, and "The Valediction of Moses" by Dershowitz? It's really hard to know if we have anything from "Judaism" that is worth the paper it's printed on. There are so many contradictions in Bibles - both OT and NT - that to just hear anyone claim the Bible is inerrant, or nearly so, just tells me they haven't been paying attention to what the book says. As Jeremiah 16 said would come to pass - we should all be telling Elohim that we've all inherited lies from our fathers - Jews included.
Read it and weep. One Disciple to Another

 

[shunyadragon]

It's such a disappointment that Seminary education excludes Scholarly fact based education. Has anyone else here read both "The Origins of Judaism" by Adler, and "The Valediction of Moses" by Dershowitz? It's really hard to know if we have anything from "Judaism" that is worth the paper it's printed on. There are so many contradictions in Bibles - both OT and NT - that to just hear anyone claim the Bible is inerrant, or nearly so, just tells me they haven't been paying attention to what the book says. As Jeremiah 16 said would come to pass - we should all be telling Elohim that we've all inherited lies from our fathers - Jews included.
Read it and weep. One Disciple to Another

I can empathize concerning your concerns about the history of Judaism and Christianity, and problems of the prevalence of the belief in a literal or near literal interpretation of the Pentateuch. Though it must be understood that the authors and compilers of the Pentateuch, and the Bible as a whole was believed to be literal history, This is also a problem of Muslims concerning the Pentateuch and the Quran.

You, of course, attempt to justify the original teachings and laws of Judaism, but I cannot justify original teachings concerning any ancient. religion in today's world

I do believe the teachings of Joshua (Jesus) were corrupted to become a Roman religion.

From my perspective I am a Universalist (not UU} and try to view ancient religions in the context of their culture and time of when their scripture was compiled. This includes all religions. I find it extremely problematic to justify the validity of any ancient religion I consider all religions to be the evolving spiritual nature of humanity. The problem with ancient religions is "tribalism" which impacts their relationship with those outside the tribe. Any form of making peace and resolution such as the illusion of ecumenism is naive idealism, and not realistic I have to accept the unresolvable problems in the nature and between ancient religions and realize there is no hope of change from the perspective of the ancient religions entrenched in the justification of their own scriptures, I can debate, discuss and dialogue concerning the corruption, conflicts, past paradigms endlessly, but to what ends and purpose? Living in the past paradigms is not the hope of the future of humanity.

 

[YoursTrue]

It's such a disappointment that Seminary education excludes Scholarly fact based education. Has anyone else here read both "The Origins of Judaism" by Adler, and "The Valediction of Moses" by Dershowitz? It's really hard to know if we have anything from "Judaism" that is worth the paper it's printed on. There are so many contradictions in Bibles - both OT and NT - that to just hear anyone claim the Bible is inerrant, or nearly so, just tells me they haven't been paying attention to what the book says. As Jeremiah 16 said would come to pass - we should all be telling Elohim that we've all inherited lies from our fathers - Jews included.
Read it and weep. One Disciple to Another

I read a lot. I'd be interested in seeing a precis at least of those two books. I'll see if the local libraries here have copies.

 

[YoursTrue]

It's such a disappointment that Seminary education excludes Scholarly fact based education. Has anyone else here read both "The Origins of Judaism" by Adler, and "The Valediction of Moses" by Dershowitz? It's really hard to know if we have anything from "Judaism" that is worth the paper it's printed on. There are so many contradictions in Bibles - both OT and NT - that to just hear anyone claim the Bible is inerrant, or nearly so, just tells me they haven't been paying attention to what the book says. As Jeremiah 16 said would come to pass - we should all be telling Elohim that we've all inherited lies from our fathers - Jews included.
Read it and weep. One Disciple to Another

I just checked about the book by Dershowitz. He wrote a lot of books about Israel and religion -- I didn't know that. Should be an interesting read to see his take on things. Even if I don't agree.

 

[Elijah2]

I read a lot. I'd be interested in seeing a precis at least of those two books. I'll see if the local libraries here have copies.

"The Valediction of Moses" is over 100 dollars. Another book, although of far less quality of reason, is "The Moses Scroll" by Ross Nichols. Just observing the translations to English, either is much better than what we have today. The basic Covenant is on my site on several links if you wade through it. It's on the one about the gospel and the law, as well as the one "Romans Proves Paul Lied" - at the end of chapter 1, if I recall correctly.

"The Origins of Judaism" and "Why the Bible Began" carry on from the study in "The Bible Unearthed". Jonatan Adler is a rare academic today - well spoken, superb reasoning, and presented in a way that anyone can grasp it.

I'd recommend doing searches on Youtube to watch Adler's interview when his book came out - may have been Mythvision or Gnostic Informant... ??

 

[Elijah2]

I can empathize concerning your concerns about the history of Judaism and Christianity, and problems of the prevalence of the belief in a literal or near literal interpretation of the Pentateuch. Though it must be understood that the authors and compilers of the Pentateuch, and the Bible as a whole was believed to be literal history, This is also a problem of Muslims concerning the Pentateuch and the Quran.

You, of course, attempt to justify the original teachings and laws of Judaism, but I cannot justify original teachings concerning any ancient. religion in today's world

I do believe the teachings of Joshua (Jesus) were corrupted to become a Roman religion.

From my perspective I am a Universalist (not UU} and try to view ancient religions in the context of their culture and time of when their scripture was compiled. This includes all religions. I find it extremely problematic to justify the validity of any ancient religion I consider all religions to be the evolving spiritual nature of humanity. The problem with ancient religions is "tribalism" which impacts their relationship with those outside the tribe. Any form of making peace and resolution such as the illusion of ecumenism is naive idealism, and not realistic I have to accept the unresolvable problems in the nature and between ancient religions and realize there is no hope of change from the perspective of the ancient religions entrenched in the justification of their own scriptures, I can debate, discuss and dialogue concerning the corruption, conflicts, past paradigms endlessly, but to what ends and purpose? Living in the past paradigms is not the hope of the future of humanity.

I've been studying the ancient things a while and have not seen a more reasonable cause and effect system of justice and morality as was given in the 3000 year old Sinai Covenant Standards. For me, it made a lot more sense than the Laws of Maat or Hammurabi. Dare I say perfectly reasonable and natural - very close to what any decent person would think?

 

[Bharat Jhunjhunwala]

(1) This ia a well known problem in the arid Middle East. The rivers and by the way the Red Sea commonly will turn red, and the fish and shell fish die from what is called the Red Tide. This is fairly common in Arid regions like the Middle East, and is the reason Hebrew Law in the Torah prohibits eating shell fish.

red tide definition - Google Search

1. a discoloration of seawater caused by a bloom of toxic red dinoflagellates.
   (2) Please explain the conflict on straw because I see none and it does not make sense, Making Mud bricks only require a small amount of straw, which is plentiful in Egypt. The Bricks need a lot of clay, which is plentiful in Egypt.
   (3) The parting of the waters has many possible natural explanations, but as the Exodus account describes this is an act of God to save the Hebrews and needs no natural explanation.
   Some scientists have proposed natural explanations for the parting of the Red Sea in the Exodus story, including wind setdown, tsunamis, and reefs:Wind setdown
   A strong, persistent wind can lower water levels in one area while raising them in another. This could create a gap in the water, allowing the Israelites to cross before the wind died down and the water rose again.
   • Tsunami
     A tsunami could have caused the water to retreat and advance rapidly, but some scientists say this wouldn't have created the gradual divide described in the story.
   • Reefs
     A 67 mph wind blowing overnight could have exposed a reef that was closer to the surface 3,500 years ago. The Israelites could have crossed over the reef before the wind died down and the water rose again.
   Other explanations include meteorological phenomena like Medicane, tidal resonance, or Rossby waves.
   
   (4) Volcano??? The pillars of fire described in Exodus were Created by by God and need no natural explanation. The volcanoes in the Indus Valley are mud volcanoes no natural pillars of fire.
   (5) Thus far, we have identified two different bodies of water called ים סוף in the Bible: Yam Suph – A lake in the region near Egypt between the Gulf of Suez and the Mediterranean. Yam Soph – The Red Sea's Gulf of Aqaba.

1. The fact that the water of the Nile turns red every year. Infact supports that this was not the river of Mitsrayim mentioned in the Bible because there the river becoming blood is a special incident which is followed by the plagues of lice, flies, frogs, etc., which all indicate shortage shortage of red water. Therefore, it doesn't work.



2. I agree that mud bricks were made and can be easily made in Egypt but that is precisely the point. If the mud bricks required small amounts of straw, then why would the Pharaoh ask them to collect that small amount of straw and why would there be such a huge conflict that took place indicates that stroke was a major ingredient of the production of the bricks, which points to burnt bricks rather than mud bricks.



3. Yes there can be a miraculous event regarding parting of the sea but if there are two options, one where you have a natural explanation as well as divine intervention, and another in which you only have divine intervention, then one should take the former. That is the natural event plus divine intervention. The divine intervention in that case was the eruption of a mud volcano at the particular time at the particular place.



4. I would repeat number three.



5. The first Yam Suph does not work because if the waters of the Yam Suph parted and the Hebrews walked across it, then the Pharaoh's army could easily come across come around the bitter lakes to confront the Hebrews. The second Yam Suph does not work because there would be no reason for the Hebrews to take such an arduous journey across the desert, for no purpose to reach the Yam Suph.

I really request you to consider my hypothesis with an open mind. Thank you.

 

[shunyadragon]

1. The fact that the water of the Nile turns red every year. Infact supports that this was not the river of Mitsrayim mentioned in the Bible because there the river becoming blood is a special incident which is followed by the plagues of lice, flies, frogs, etc., which all indicate shortage shortage of red water. Therefore, it doesn't work.

The Red Tide in the rivers and sea around Egypt does not occur every year. An extreme event like described in Exodus is not common and special incident. Nonetheless it more than adequately describes. The bold above is ridiculous. There is no such thing as a "shortage of red water" in the occurrence of plagues that have been known to rarely take place in the arid Middle East. It is possible that the plague of the frogs are actually fleeing the toxic Red Tide.

2. I agree that mud bricks were made and can be easily made in Egypt but that is precisely the point. If the mud bricks required small amounts of straw, then why would the Pharaoh ask them to collect that small amount of straw and why would there be such a huge conflict that took place indicates that stroke was a major ingredient of the production of the bricks, which points to burnt bricks rather than mud bricks.

That is a question that is not resolvable by your argument

3. Yes there can be a miraculous event regarding parting of the sea but if there are two options, one where you have a natural explanation as well as divine intervention, and another in which you only have divine intervention, then one should take the former. That is the natural event plus divine intervention. The divine intervention in that case was the eruption of a mud volcano at the particular time at the particular place.

The parting of the Red Sea is a very possible natural event explain by known events in the region as described in the reference,

As described "mud volcanoes" in the Indus Valley cannot represent the pillars of fire, no fire, There are known volcanic events in ancient history in the Dead Sea Valley and the Mediterranean that may be in the memories of the Hebrews in ancient history that may resemble pillars of fire,

The events of Exodus are described as Divinely direct events, and do not need natural explanations, none the less natural events in the Egypt and the region do occur and the geography like those in Exodus.

4. I would repeat number three.

Repeat does not work without explanation, Mud volcanoes no fire. Still waiting . . .

5. The first Yam Suph does not work because if the waters of the Yam Suph parted and the Hebrews walked across it, then the Pharaoh's army could easily come across come around the bitter lakes to confront the Hebrews. The second Yam Suph does not work because there would be no reason for the Hebrews to take such an arduous journey across the desert, for no purpose to reach the Yam Suph.

Total failure to respond to the facts that Yam Suphs do correspond to the regional features of Egypt as references.

I really request you to consider my hypothesis with an open mind. Thank you.

I have, but even the above does not remotely address the documented facts of the Exodus account and the Pentateuch as occurring in Egypt and the Levant.

The bottom line is Divine directed events do not need natural explanations, though the events described in Exodus do fit what is known of the region around the events of Exodus, You still have failed to respond to archaeology, historical, geographic and genetic evidence that more than documents the events of Exodus are set in Egypt and the Levant,

You are the one without an open mind and ignoring the overwhelming evidence I have provided clinging to Indus Valley scenario in your imagination without evidence to support your argument. I have more than adequately responded to all your points and objections.,

You continually ignore that the genetic, cultural, linguistic, archeological, and historical relationship of the Hebrews, Canaanites and Egyptians goes back before 3000 BCE.

 

[YoursTrue]

"The Valediction of Moses" is over 100 dollars. Another book, although of far less quality of reason, is "The Moses Scroll" by Ross Nichols. Just observing the translations to English, either is much better than what we have today. The basic Covenant is on my site on several links if you wade through it. It's on the one about the gospel and the law, as well as the one "Romans Proves Paul Lied" - at the end of chapter 1, if I recall correctly.

"The Origins of Judaism" and "Why the Bible Began" carry on from the study in "The Bible Unearthed". Jonatan Adler is a rare academic today - well spoken, superb reasoning, and presented in a way that anyone can grasp it.

I'd recommend doing searches on Youtube to watch Adler's interview when his book came out - may have been Mythvision or Gnostic Informant... ??

thanks for that. The tracing of translations can be a fascinating study.

 

[River Sea]

@Bharat Jhunjhunwala @GoodAttention

What happened during the Adam and Eve era in the Kapurthala area—nothing, a lot, or something?

Who were living at Kapurthala and ready to meet Adam and Eve if they traveled near the rivers and in this area, or would they'd not know that these two people even were in the garden of Eden, because how would anyone know?

Just because Adam and Eve walked about, how would anyone know that these people actually witnessed the Garden of Eden?