Noah's flood its reality

Genesis and the rest of the supernatural bits, pretty much, not to mention the knowledge afforded by a study of the myths and cultures of the times and places relevant to the development of biblical texts.

 

At the time, the Red Sea was quite shallow in places, and there were winds that were reasonably predictable that could move enough water to make the crossing passable for relatively short period of time.

Moses was clearly an outstanding general as demonstrated by his ability to round up and lead his people in escape, his subsequent movements of his people and his conquests. The technique he used for leading the pursuing army astray was brilliant - using the leadership techniques of the pursuing army to cause them to go in a direction that the pursuit would have seen as a reasonable escape route. Guessing that Moses had no knowledge about how the Red Sea worked and that instead he walked his people to an impassable barrier on the hopes that God would bail him out is very hard to believe.

And, would Moses have been praying and whacking his staff on the ground as the pursuing army progressed toward his people, trapped against the Red Sea? I should think so.

Even today, such a maneuver would be seen as the work of God and I'm sure any Christian or Jewish people would give him the credit, so that attribution by the people of his time can't be seen as anything but obvious behavior.


Does that detract from the account of the escape? I don't believe so. It's one heck of a story!

 

Around 2,000,000 Hebrews, their luggage, their flocks. One heck of a 'Short time'. .

 

come now, its just a story.

 

View attachment 24137

Yes it is not to you it was for taikoo a respond to post # 711 of taikoo interestingly it came out differently must be a bug????

 

Sorry.. I didn't misquote you intentionally.. Is there a glitch?

 

The Red Sea was shallow 65 million years ago.... and there was no Moses. Further.. Egypt controlled Sinai and the were a number of Canaanite towns that paid tribute to pharaoh ... and Egyptian troops garrisoned there.

 

I am EXTREMELY HAPPY that you have FINALLY accepted the fact that Human's are APES as this is shown in your above statement.....and I quote..."In your cut and paste post it is clear that humans evolved separate from other ape or groups."....end quote WanRen.

In that quoted sentence of yours you state..."humans evolved separate from other ape".....thus by the use of the word...OTHER....you acknowledge that HUMANS along with OTHER APES...etc.

You cannot believe how happy I am that is finally squared away....yes....HUMANS ARE APES....and specifically HUMANS ARE GREAT APES.

Now as for Evolution....ALL PRIMATES....Apes, Lemurs, Bush Babies, Marmosets, Tamarins, Capuchins, Monkeys, Lesser Apes and Great Apes...and other Primates.....ALL EVOLVED FROM ONE ORIGINAL COMMON MAMMALIAN PRIMATE!!!!

AboveAlpha

 

Agreed. My point really was that people who comment like the post I have quoted have no idea how many Hebrews the Bible says there were. 660,000 men alone plus wives families etc. Then the Bible often uses the term 'men' to indicate those in the age range able to carry arms. There may have been more.
Still, as you say, it's only a story.

 

Correction.. The Red Sea was NOT shallow. The only place its shallow is at Bab al Mendab. .. that's about 300 feet deep. There is also no tidal action.

 

There is a lot we don't really know about this. Did they all leave at once? Did the people they conquered join them and thus grow their numbers? New studies seem to show a close relationship between the people of Moses and others in the region - were these a source in addition to those actually in captivity in Egypt?

Another question I've had is the methods by which they survived while "wandering in the desert" for 40 years. That is a lot of mouths to feed for an army on the move. Well established western kings in rich lands have gone broke trying to do stuff on a far smaller scale than that.

 

There no water or pasture in Sinai.. and it only supports 600,000 today.

 

It is difficult to discern actual historical facts from the Bible as it was a collection of books written by man and has a great deal of mistranslations from the actual text.

So when one get's right down to it there really is not that much empirical scientific evidence to prove numbers of people or time passed or even the area they traveled through.

Thus such things are a question of Religious Beliefs and not Science as if there is anything that is contrary to empirical scientific evidence it would be Faith.

AboveAlpha

 

Oh I agree. I doubt there was an Exodus.

 

Well....they did find Egyptian Chariots berried in area were Moses crossed the REED SEA as Moses did not Part the RED SEA as this is a mistranslation.

As well the Egyptian Glifs to confirm the Exodus but not the number of years in the desert or anything else.

AboveAlpha

 

That nut Ron Wyatt claimed there were Chariots.. There aren't.. Reed Sea is just Yam Suf... Reeds grow in fresh water.

 

The whole story is an impossible one as recorded in the Bible. It infers that they all left together. The Red Sea is not passable as recorded, but the Reed Sea is. Even tribes of nomads had to move from place to place to keep themselves and flocks alive in Sinai/Negev deserts. 2 Families, Abraham and Lot, fell out because there was not enough pasture for just the 2 families.
The logistics of supplying such a large group would prove hard for us today. For them impossible. They would need tons of food each day, lakes of water each day. Neither were available in anything near to meet the need.
The Jews would not accept outsiders joining the nation, though the Kenites settled among them.
There's little evidence of any invasion of Palestine by the Hebrews, apart from the Bible. Some of the stories of city conquests have proved false and others doubtful.

 

its just a story.

 

You can walk across Sinai in ten days.. Why linger without water or pasture??

 

citations?

 

There is no mention of the Exodus in Egyptian glyphs.

There is one vague mention of the Manetho Letter .. about the expulsion of the lepers.

 

Osarseph is a legendary figure of Ancient Egypt who has been equated with Moses. His story was recounted by the Ptolemaic Egyptian historian Manetho in his Aigyptiaca (first half of the 3rd century BC); Manetho's work is lost, but the 1st century AD Jewish historian Josephus quotes extensively from it.

The story depicts Osarseph as a renegade Egyptian priest who leads an army of lepers and other unclean people against a pharaoh named Amenophis; the pharaoh is driven out of the country and the leper-army, in alliance with the Hyksos (whose story is also told by Manetho) ravage Egypt, committing many sacrileges against the gods, before Amenophis returns and expels them. Towards the end of the story Osarseph changes his name to Moses.

Also much debated is the question of what, if any, historical reality might lie behind the Osarseph story.

The story has been linked with anti-Jewish propaganda of the 2nd and 1st centuries BC as an inversion of the Exodus story, but an influential study by Egyptologist Jan Assmann has suggested that no single historical incident or person lies behind the legend, and that it represents instead a conflation of several historical traumas, notably the religious reforms of Akhenaten (Amenophis )

continued.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osarseph

 

More rationalization, ambiguity, and subjectivity. Surely you can do better. "quite shallow", "at the time", "reasonably predictable"

"Guessing" seems to be an expected display coming from you. So when are you going to show when and where science, at the Red Sea, demonstrated that the waters could be parted by wind and leaving the sea bed dry enough for the people to cross over and their feet remain dry?

You asked a question, then answered the same question, therefore there is no need for me to respond to an already answered question. However I will respond to your answer: my response to that answer is; Then do so.

Then where is the problem? You have not shown where science has demonstrated such ability at the Red Sea.

You overlooked the scientific problem that in order for the people to cross over and remain dry shod, there would have to have been sustaining winds to keep the waters held back. Winds of such force required to hold back the water, would have also prevented the people from even entering the area where the waters were being held back.. Also is the problem that when the waters were released and resumed their current flow, the horses and chariots were enveloped in those waters. That would indicate that the waters were not sufficiently shallow to allow a wind to part that amount of water. One heck of a try on your part, but nowhere sufficient to represent a scientific answer. In other words, your rendition does not 'hold water'.

 

I dont think there are any "chariots" either. C'mon AA, you can do better'n that.

 

Your claim is so noted: Now where is the supporting evidence that science defeated or has proven those things that you mention to be false?