• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Exodus Archeology Evidence

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
Name the Church Fathers please and their letters.
It would be nice if you would do your own homework, but nonetheless the following thread in the past in this forum I began sometime ago deals with it in detail.


I will resurrect the thread and we can discuss it further,
 

gnostic

The Lost One
In all those years what have you determined?

That you couldn’t reconcile the scriptures with known history.

Myth may as well be synonymous with fiction. You should use the word fiction if that is what you have concluded.

That neither books about Abraham, Joseph & Moses could name any of the kings that they were supposedly “contemporary“ to, because i think the authors (of Genesis & Exodus) didn’t write during those times (eg Bronze Age).

Take for instance, Joseph in Egypt, the authors have named the Joseph’s slave master - the king’s guard captain, Potiphar (Genesis 39), and have named Joseph’s father-in-law, the high priest of On (Heliopolis) Potipherah (Genesis 41), two insignificant fictional characters, BUT couldn’t name the king of Egypt, who made Joseph the second most powerful person in charge of Egypt, other than calling him “pharaoh“, which isn’t a name but title for a monarch that wasn’t even used in Egypt until the 18th dynasty, eg from 15th century BCE and onwards.

Then in the Exodus, like Exodus 1 & 2, the king who ruled Egypt at the time of Moses’ birth, not only the king was nameless, so was princess - the King’s Daughter (Exodus 2) - just as nameless and yet she had adopted the foundling and raised him in the “royal” family.

And it is most likely a different king was ruling Egypt, 80 years later, who eventually allowed Israelites, their freedom, after Egypt been through a series of plagues, but this king was also nameless.

My guess, is that the authors of Genesis & Exodus were living in Babylon at the time of exile (6th century BCE), have no access to Egyptian sources or records, so they invented stories where the kings (and 1 princess) weren’t given any names that could have identified which the Bronze Age dynasties & periods.

Without any names of Egypt’s monarchs, people have to guess when the stories of Joseph and Moses as to what periods they were contemporary.

Plus, there are no Egyptian records that can verify the events claimed in Genesis & in Exodus.

Dis you know many of Egypt’s monarchs, not only the names they were born with, but their royal names (written in hieroglyphs and within cartouches) too, their names also appeared in king lists or in royal annals.

Plus we know of their names of their fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, sons, daughters, etc? As a king often married his sister(s), incest was normal practice.

These names are often found inscribed on stone walls of tombs, or on sarcophagus or coffins, or inscribed on stone stelae that recorded their achievements. These are what I would call “CONTEMPORARY” RECORDS.

That’s one of the main reasons why I view all stories prior to the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, to be mythological, as none of it can be verified, historically or archaeologically.
 

Dimi95

Прaвославие!
Take for instance, Joseph in Egypt, the authors have named the Joseph’s slave master - the king’s guard captain, Potiphar (Genesis 39), and have named Joseph’s father-in-law, the high priest of On (Heliopolis) Potipherah (Genesis 41), two insignificant fictional characters, BUT couldn’t name the king of Egypt, who made Joseph the second most powerful person in charge of Egypt, other than calling him “pharaoh“, which isn’t a name but title for a monarch that wasn’t even used in Egypt until the 18th dynasty, eg from 15th century BCE and onwards.
Potiphar - he whom Re gives
Potipherah - he whom Ra has given
Pharaoh - house of Ra/mouth of Ra

The word pharaoh was first used to refer to the palace of the king and its greatness, not just to the king himself. From the Twelfth Dynasty onward, the word appears as:
'Great House, may it live, prosper and be in health'
But this is only with reference to the royal palace and not the person.
It was not until sometime during the Second Intermediate Period of the New Kingdom (1800BC-1550BC) that 'pharaoh' became a term of address for the king himself.
The earliest confirmed evidence is found in a letter addressed to Akhenaten (c. 1353–1336BC).
Beginning with the nineteenth dynasty 'pr-ꜥꜣ' on its own was used as regularly as 'ḥm' - 'Majesty'.

The word came to be used metonymically for the Egyptian king under the New Kingdom (starting in the 18th dynasty)
 

GoodAttention

Well-Known Member
That neither books about Abraham, Joseph & Moses could name any of the kings that they were supposedly “contemporary“ to, because i think the authors (of Genesis & Exodus) didn’t write during those times (eg Bronze Age).

Take for instance, Joseph in Egypt, the authors have named the Joseph’s slave master - the king’s guard captain, Potiphar (Genesis 39), and have named Joseph’s father-in-law, the high priest of On (Heliopolis) Potipherah (Genesis 41), two insignificant fictional characters, BUT couldn’t name the king of Egypt, who made Joseph the second most powerful person in charge of Egypt, other than calling him “pharaoh“, which isn’t a name but title for a monarch that wasn’t even used in Egypt until the 18th dynasty, eg from 15th century BCE and onwards.

Then in the Exodus, like Exodus 1 & 2, the king who ruled Egypt at the time of Moses’ birth, not only the king was nameless, so was princess - the King’s Daughter (Exodus 2) - just as nameless and yet she had adopted the foundling and raised him in the “royal” family.

And it is most likely a different king was ruling Egypt, 80 years later, who eventually allowed Israelites, their freedom, after Egypt been through a series of plagues, but this king was also nameless.

My guess, is that the authors of Genesis & Exodus were living in Babylon at the time of exile (6th century BCE), have no access to Egyptian sources or records, so they invented stories where the kings (and 1 princess) weren’t given any names that could have identified which the Bronze Age dynasties & periods.

Without any names of Egypt’s monarchs, people have to guess when the stories of Joseph and Moses as to what periods they were contemporary.

Plus, there are no Egyptian records that can verify the events claimed in Genesis & in Exodus.

Dis you know many of Egypt’s monarchs, not only the names they were born with, but their royal names (written in hieroglyphs and within cartouches) too, their names also appeared in king lists or in royal annals.

Plus we know of their names of their fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, sons, daughters, etc? As a king often married his sister(s), incest was normal practice.

These names are often found inscribed on stone walls of tombs, or on sarcophagus or coffins, or inscribed on stone stelae that recorded their achievements. These are what I would call “CONTEMPORARY” RECORDS.

That’s one of the main reasons why I view all stories prior to the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, to be mythological, as none of it can be verified, historically or archaeologically.


So is your conclusion that the lack of names makes the Exodus scripture an unreliable CONTEMPORARY record?

Sure, I can understand your point of view.

It is your use of the word mythological that I do not understand, because what are you saying exactly?

Shouldn’t your conclusion be, there is no evidence for a literal consideration of the Exodus story?
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
So is your conclusion that the lack of names makes the Exodus scripture an unreliable CONTEMPORARY record?

Sure, I can understand your point of view.

It is your use of the word mythological that I do not understand, because what are you saying exactly?

Shouldn’t your conclusion be, there is no evidence for a literal consideration of the Exodus story?
It is ot the lack of names of the kings and Pharaohs that are the main issue. It is the lack of context of the Exodus record in history as recorded in the Pentateuch and the lack of corresponding records and references outside the Pentateuch that are the main issues. The lack of supporting evidence for Moses, the lack of evidence for the actual Exodus journey event, Joshua and Joshua's invasion of the Levant.

I consider it "Created History" loosely based on the Canaanite Hyksos expulsion from Egypt. The relationship between the Hyksos and the Hebrews is an interesting possibility currently lacking good evidence,
 
Last edited:

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member

Jews and Arabs Descended from Canaanites​

DNA analysis, from bodies found at several sites, explains more than half of ancestry

Jonathan Laden November 14, 2024 48 Comments 154239 views Share
DNA

After examining the DNA of 93 bodies recovered from archaeological sites around the southern Levant, the land of Canaan in the Bible, researchers have concluded that modern populations of the region are descendants of the ancient Canaanites. Most modern Jewish groups and the Arabic-speaking groups from the region show at least half of their ancestry as Canaanite.

In the study, published in Cell in May, 2020, the researchers explain that they used existing DNA analysis of 20 individuals, from sites in Israel and Lebanon, and then added 73 more, taking DNA from the bones of individuals found at Tel Megiddo, Tel Abel Beth Maacah and Tel Hazor (Northern Israel), Yehud (central Israel) and Baq’ah (central Jordan). By first eliminating individuals closely related to other individuals in the sample, then comparing the remaining 62 DNA samples against a dataset of 1,663 modern individuals, they were able to establish the genetic link to the modern populations. The ethnic groups either still living where Canaan once dominated, or from that area prior to moving elsewhere, are largely descended from the Canaanites.

Canaanite culture was dominant in the Southern Levant during the Bronze Age (3,500-1,200 B.C.E.) As Iron Age I began, the Canaanite city-states faded. The Israelites self-identified as a separate group. As Volkmar Fritz speculates in Israelites and Canaanites, the Israelites may have formed distinct living arrangements, establishing small villages on peripheral land not previously settled and living mostly in four-room houses. Ultimately, the Israelites formed the states of Israel and Judah, while other biblical states, Ammon, Moab, Aram-Damascus, and Phoenician city-states, emerged. Today, the region consists of Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, and southwest Syria.

The study in Cell not only establishes that the ancient Israelites were descended from the Canaanites, but also establishes that the Canaanite people across the separate city-states of the southern Levant, and over a period of 1,500 years, were a genetically cohesive people.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
So is your conclusion that the lack of names makes the Exodus scripture an unreliable CONTEMPORARY record?

Sure, I can understand your point of view.

It is your use of the word mythological that I do not understand, because what are you saying exactly?

Shouldn’t your conclusion be, there is no evidence for a literal consideration of the Exodus story?

You are not paying attention, GoodAttention.

The Exodus was written in the 6th century BCE, when prominent Jews were living in exile after the fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar II’s Babylonian army in 587 BCE. There are no evidence that Exodus (book) existed in the Late Bronze Age. Hence, the Exodus ISN’T A CONTEMPORARY SOURCE!!!

Do you even know what contemporary means?

The Exodus isn’t contemporary to Moses; Moses isn’t even a historical figure. His story was invented by the exiled priests/authors. The story may set in the Late Bronze Age, but the Exodus wasn’t written in the Late Bronze Age.

Some Jewish traditions as well as some Christian traditions, may claimed that the Genesis, Exodus, Numbers & Leviticus that Moses was the author, but that’s clearly false, just as the Book of Enoch wasn’t written by Enoch.

In ancient Egypt, they have their own religion, and with them, their own corpus of vast variety of their own myths about their respective gods.

But many of monarchs in the 2nd millennium BCE, particularly in the Middle Kingdom period (dynasties 11 & 12), and even more so in the New Kingdom period (dynasties 18 & 19, less so with 20th dynasty), there are abundance of contemporary texts, that we can piece together their lives including their families, and that’s how we can verify their existence.

i am much more familiar with the history of Old Kingdom dynasties & the New Kingdom dynasties than I am with the Middle Kingdom dynasties. With the Old Kingdom it is more about archaeology than written historical texts, but with the New Kingdom it is both texts & archaeological evidence that verify each other.

Plus, there are numbers of independent sources and evidence that verify the reigns of these kings, because there are frequent correspondents that were exchanged between Egypt and other kingdoms, including the Hittite rulers, the Mari, Assyria, Babylonia, and even with Canaan with Megiddo.

The Iron Age kingdoms of Judah and of Israel, on the other hand, there are no contemporary records of the respective kings. The only information you get from these two kingdoms, comes from the books of Kings that were written during exile at Babylon. Few events of 1 & 2 Kings are verified by independent sources, eg from Assyria, during the 7th and 6th centuries BCE.

What you don’t seems to understand, GoodAttention, that the more decades or centuries have passed, the less reliable are the sources.

Contemporary sources are generally preferable to sources written decades or centuries later.

The Exodus isn’t reliable.
 

GoodAttention

Well-Known Member
You are not paying attention, GoodAttention.

The Exodus was written in the 6th century BCE, when prominent Jews were living in exile after the fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar II’s Babylonian army in 587 BCE. There are no evidence that Exodus (book) existed in the Late Bronze Age. Hence, the Exodus ISN’T A CONTEMPORARY SOURCE!!!

Do you even know what contemporary means?

The Exodus isn’t contemporary to Moses; Moses isn’t even a historical figure. His story was invented by the exiled priests/authors. The story may set in the Late Bronze Age, but the Exodus wasn’t written in the Late Bronze Age.

Some Jewish traditions as well as some Christian traditions, may claimed that the Genesis, Exodus, Numbers & Leviticus that Moses was the author, but that’s clearly false, just as the Book of Enoch wasn’t written by Enoch.

In ancient Egypt, they have their own religion, and with them, their own corpus of vast variety of their own myths about their respective gods.

But many of monarchs in the 2nd millennium BCE, particularly in the Middle Kingdom period (dynasties 11 & 12), and even more so in the New Kingdom period (dynasties 18 & 19, less so with 20th dynasty), there are abundance of contemporary texts, that we can piece together their lives including their families, and that’s how we can verify their existence.

i am much more familiar with the history of Old Kingdom dynasties & the New Kingdom dynasties than I am with the Middle Kingdom dynasties. With the Old Kingdom it is more about archaeology than written historical texts, but with the New Kingdom it is both texts & archaeological evidence that verify each other.

Plus, there are numbers of independent sources and evidence that verify the reigns of these kings, because there are frequent correspondents that were exchanged between Egypt and other kingdoms, including the Hittite rulers, the Mari, Assyria, Babylonia, and even with Canaan with Megiddo.

The Iron Age kingdoms of Judah and of Israel, on the other hand, there are no contemporary records of the respective kings. The only information you get from these two kingdoms, comes from the books of Kings that were written during exile at Babylon. Few events of 1 & 2 Kings are verified by independent sources, eg from Assyria, during the 7th and 6th centuries BCE.

What you don’t seems to understand, GoodAttention, that the more decades or centuries have passed, the less reliable are the sources.

Contemporary sources are generally preferable to sources written decades or centuries later.

The Exodus isn’t reliable.


Your skill for verbosity doesn't impress me much gnostic, any fool can recite known history and/or tell me what isn't in the scriptures.

It is your ability to avoid, dance, and/or manipulate my questions that I find impressive! It is clear you didn't pay any attention to what I wrote.

So, if you are capable of answering, the question is "shouldn’t your conclusion be, there is no evidence for a literal consideration of the Exodus story?"
 

GoodAttention

Well-Known Member
It is ot the lack of names of the kings and Pharaohs that are the main issue. It is the lack of context of the Exodus record in history as recorded in the Pentateuch and the lack of corresponding records and references outside the Pentateuch that are the main issues. The lack of supporting evidence for Moses, the lack of evidence for the actual Exodus journey event, Joshua and Joshua's invasion of the Levant.

I consider it "Created History" loosely based on the Canaanite Hyksos expulsion from Egypt. The relationship between the Hyksos and the Hebrews is an interesting possibility currently lacking good evidence,

I put you in the same basket as gnostic and anyone else that does the same.

Pick a lane.

If you are going to say "these are the reasons the scriptures are false" and then in the exact same breath say "by the way this is what I THINK it is" then your words read like sophistry.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
The Exodus was written in the 6th century BCE, when prominent Jews were living in exile after the fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar II’s Babylonian army in 587 BCE. There are no evidence that Exodus (book) existed in the Late Bronze Age. Hence, the Exodus ISN’T A CONTEMPORARY SOURCE!!!

Perhaps, but what is your evidence that it was written in the 6th century BCE? So, for example, why not the 5th?

(I get so tired of folks pretending to know what they don't know.)
 

Dimi95

Прaвославие!
@gnostic
From all the evidence i can see , i think that the pharaoh of the time of the Exodus was the first pharaoh of the 19 dynasty
Pharaoh Menpehtyre Ramesses I.

The stories about him are very controversial.

I am trying to figure out how many stories are about him.

Because he exists within ancient Egyptian time.

Do you know anything about him?
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Your skill for verbosity doesn't impress me much gnostic, any fool can recite known history and/or tell me what isn't in the scriptures.

It is your ability to avoid, dance, and/or manipulate my questions that I find impressive! It is clear you didn't pay any attention to what I wrote.

So, if you are capable of answering, the question is "shouldn’t your conclusion be, there is no evidence for a literal consideration of the Exodus story?"

No, I am talking about real evidence that come in 2 forms:
  1. Physical evidence of archaeological site or object that can be dated to certain time or period.
  2. Physical evidence of the texts - literary evidence like inscribed stone or clay tablets, or extant manuscript or scrolls made of parchment or papyri, etc - literary evidence that can be dated to certain time or period.
Do you know why archaeologists, historians and philologists/translators know so much about the ancient Egyptians and ancient Assyrians/Babylonians, of their respective histories?

Many of the literary evidence survived and can be translated today, about their rulers, not just in tombs or other structural buildings (archive, palaces, temples, etc) that they have constructed, "contemporary", but also found written on walls, stone stelae, on clay tablets, on papyri codices or scrolls, etc.

In Egypt, many of the things we know about Egyptian kings, are found on written on stone stelae, that commemorated each king's achievements, including victories against their enemies, such as the Nubians, Libyans, Hittites, Syrians, Canaanites, etc. For instance, the earliest mention of "Israel", inscribed on the Merneptah Stele, at Thebes; Merneptah (1213 - 1203 BCE) was son and successor of Ramesses II (1279 - 1213 BCE).

Do you know what is the oldest "biblical" text ever discovered?

It contained a passage from Numbers 6:24-26 (the Priestly Blessings, found inscribe in paleo-Hebrew inscriptions, the 2nd (KH2) of two very small sheets of silver rolled up that would have been wore as amulet, hence it was known as the Silver Scrolls.

The Silver Scrolls were discovered in 1979, at one of the caves at Ketef Hinnom (Cave 25), Jerusalem, caves that were used between 650 and 588 BCE, as burial chambers. There are many artifacts, but it is the Ketef Hinnom scrolls that hold the most value as it is the oldest evidence.

The amulet or scrolls themselves have been dated between 620 & 590 BCE.

So far, there are nothing older than these 2 sheets of silver.

The Dead Sea Scrolls for example, discovered in 1946, contained many scrolls in the Qumran caves, the oldest scrolls were the mid-4th century BCE, eg the Great Isaiah Scroll (356 BCE to be more precise).

The question for me with regards to the Ketef Hinnom scrolls, was the Priestly Blessing (Numbers 6:23-27) just originally independent of the book of Numbers?

Perhaps, but what is your evidence that it was written in the 6th century BCE? So, for example, why not the 5th?

(I get so tired of folks pretending to know what they don't know.)

There are nothing older than the Ketef Hinnom scrolls.

We may one day find something older than those scrolls, but certainly nothing exist in the Bronze Age.

Beside that, in Bronze Age Canaan, particularly in the 2nd millennium BCE, they tends to write on clay tablets, using cuneiform characters, not alphabets until the 12th or 11th century BCE. Although there are some Egyptian hieroglyphs and hieratic texts found in some correspondents with Egyptian garrisons in Canaan, Canaanite people in the early to mid-2nd millennium BCE, wrote mainly cuneiform, like the people from Mesopotamia.

If, hypothetically the Exodus (and other books ascribed to Moses) was written in the mid-2nd millennium BCE, would it be in Canaanite cuneiform or Egyptian hieratic or hieroglyphs? In what writing system would Ten Commandment originally written in (hypothetically)?

It certainly wouldn't be in paleo-Hebrew alphabets, as the alphabets weren't invented yet.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
@gnostic
From all the evidence i can see , i think that the pharaoh of the time of the Exodus was the first pharaoh of the 19 dynasty
Pharaoh Menpehtyre Ramesses I.

Ramesses I, as you know, ruled first in the 19th dynasty, but he couldn't be king of Egypt, as he only ruled for 2 years, from 1292 to 1290 BCE.

Before his reign, he was military general for Tutankhamun (1341 - 1323 BCE), to the 18th dynasty's last king Horemheb (1319 - 1292 BCE).

Plus, if the exodus out of Egypt, occurred in Ramesses I's reign, then that would have meant the Israelites (Joshua) would have invaded Canaan, when that Ramesses II (1279 - 1213 BCE), the grandson of the 1st Ramesses, Canaan was under Egypt's empire, so Joshua and the Israelites couldn't have taken Canaan without meeting Egyptian armies, under Ramesses II and his son Merneptah I (1213 - 1203).

There was also war between Egypt and the Hittite empire, fighting over control of Syria and Canaan, between 1275 and 1261 BCE, including the Battle of Kadesh 1274 BCE. Do you think the Israelites could have entered Canaan without facing the Hittite army or the Egyptian army?

The army 's presence under Seti I, Ramesses II and Merneptah in both Syria and Canaan are well-documented. There are even peace treaty between Egypt and the Hittite, one written in Egyptian hieroglyphs, and one in Hittite cuneiform, after the Battle of Kadesh.
 

GoodAttention

Well-Known Member
No, I am talking about real evidence that come in 2 forms:
  1. Physical evidence of archaeological site or object that can be dated to certain time or period.
  2. Physical evidence of the texts - literary evidence like inscribed stone or clay tablets, or extant manuscript or scrolls made of parchment or papyri, etc - literary evidence that can be dated to certain time or period.
Do you know why archaeologists, historians and philologists/translators know so much about the ancient Egyptians and ancient Assyrians/Babylonians, of their respective histories?

Many of the literary evidence survived and can be translated today, about their rulers, not just in tombs or other structural buildings (archive, palaces, temples, etc) that they have constructed, "contemporary", but also found written on walls, stone stelae, on clay tablets, on papyri codices or scrolls, etc.

In Egypt, many of the things we know about Egyptian kings, are found on written on stone stelae, that commemorated each king's achievements, including victories against their enemies, such as the Nubians, Libyans, Hittites, Syrians, Canaanites, etc. For instance, the earliest mention of "Israel", inscribed on the Merneptah Stele, at Thebes; Merneptah (1213 - 1203 BCE) was son and successor of Ramesses II (1279 - 1213 BCE).

Do you know what is the oldest "biblical" text ever discovered?

It contained a passage from Numbers 6:24-26 (the Priestly Blessings, found inscribe in paleo-Hebrew inscriptions, the 2nd (KH2) of two very small sheets of silver rolled up that would have been wore as amulet, hence it was known as the Silver Scrolls.

The Silver Scrolls were discovered in 1979, at one of the caves at Ketef Hinnom (Cave 25), Jerusalem, caves that were used between 650 and 588 BCE, as burial chambers. There are many artifacts, but it is the Ketef Hinnom scrolls that hold the most value as it is the oldest evidence.

The amulet or scrolls themselves have been dated between 620 & 590 BCE.

So far, there are nothing older than these 2 sheets of silver.

The Dead Sea Scrolls for example, discovered in 1946, contained many scrolls in the Qumran caves, the oldest scrolls were the mid-4th century BCE, eg the Great Isaiah Scroll (356 BCE to be more precise).

The question for me with regards to the Ketef Hinnom scrolls, was the Priestly Blessing (Numbers 6:23-27) just originally independent of the book of Numbers?



There are nothing older than the Ketef Hinnom scrolls.

We may one day find something older than those scrolls, but certainly nothing exist in the Bronze Age.

Beside that, in Bronze Age Canaan, particularly in the 2nd millennium BCE, they tends to write on clay tablets, using cuneiform characters, not alphabets until the 12th or 11th century BCE. Although there are some Egyptian hieroglyphs and hieratic texts found in some correspondents with Egyptian garrisons in Canaan, Canaanite people in the early to mid-2nd millennium BCE, wrote mainly cuneiform, like the people from Mesopotamia.

If, hypothetically the Exodus (and other books ascribed to Moses) was written in the mid-2nd millennium BCE, would it be in Canaanite cuneiform or Egyptian hieratic or hieroglyphs? In what writing system would Ten Commandment originally written in (hypothetically)?

It certainly wouldn't be in paleo-Hebrew alphabets, as the alphabets weren't invented yet.

So you are not capable...

I think it is time you found a different hobby or interest.
 

shunyadragon

shunyadragon
Premium Member
I put you in the same basket as gnostic and anyone else that does the same.

Pick a lane.

If you are going to say "these are the reasons the scriptures are false" and then in the exact same breath say "by the way this is what I THINK it is" then your words read like sophistry.
You are out of touch with the reality of the archeological, historical, and geologic evidence of the real known history of the Middle East, and for that matter humanity and the world. You are relying only on your subjective beliefs,
 

GoodAttention

Well-Known Member
You are out of touch with the reality of the archeological, historical, and geologic evidence of the real known history of the Middle East, and for that matter humanity and the world. You are relying only on your subjective beliefs,

I have never once denied any evidence, and in fact my subjective opinion of the scriptures is founded by it.

If you think I am looking to uphold the literal Greek/Latin reading of the scriptures you are grossly mistaken.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
I have never once denied any evidence, and in fact my subjective opinion of the scriptures is founded by it.

If you think I am looking to uphold the literal Greek/Latin reading of the scriptures you are grossly mistaken.

Unless you are from Greek Orthodox Church and can read the Greek Septuagint Bible (eg Codex Vaticanus), or you are from Roman Catholic Church and can read the Latin Vulgate Bible, most modern translations of the Old Testament in English, are mainly translated from the Hebrew source - the Masoretic Text - eg Leningrad Codex.

The problem wouldn’t be the “literal Greek/Latin reading”.
 
Top