jewish spearman Aor

**Zeibek** · 09-25-2008, 13:00

Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking

LOL! Sorry to bust your balls here, but the bible is in no way a historical document. You cannot rely on it to learn history... or much anything, really. To quote Penn Jilette: "the bible contains equal amounts of truth, history and pizza".

First of all I'm not a Christian, nor am I an apologist, but though the Bible is mostly BS it does contain some even useful reference to historical events, like the one given by Mein Panzer in the beginning of this thread. However, trying derive historical truths about events that happened too long a time ago (such as the Exodus and Moses) based purely on the Bible is generally useless.

**The Celtic Viking** · 09-25-2008, 13:07

Originally Posted by Zeibek

First of all I'm not a Christian, nor am I an apologist, but though the Bible is mostly BS it does contain some even useful reference to historical events, like the one given by Mein Panzer in the beginning of this thread. However, trying derive historical truths about events that happened too long a time ago (such as the Exodus and Moses) based purely on the Bible is generally useless.

If there are sources outside of the bible, then use them instead. Your example of Moses and the exodus is great, since archaeology has proven that it never happened.

**Foot** · 09-25-2008, 13:09

And when there aren't the Bible is a wonderful resource to help interpret archaelogical evidence. It was the biblical references to Ararat (the kingdom rather than the mountain) that helped to discover the lost civilisation of Urartu in Armenia.

Foot

**Dumbass** · 10-01-2008, 19:50

Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking

If there are sources outside of the bible, then use them instead. Your example of Moses and the exodus is great, since archaeology has proven that it never happened.

How can archeology prove that Moses and Exodus never happened? Because the jews definetly were slaves to egypt who then had an exodus and went to israel.

The bible is an historical text, and there's much about ancient civilisation that would be unknown if not for the bible. There is however a lot of symbolism that needs to be interpretted in order to fully understand the bible.

**Hax** · 10-01-2008, 21:17

How can archeology prove that Moses and Exodus never happened? Because the jews definetly were slaves to egypt who then had an exodus and went to israel.

Splitting an ocean in two.

**Dumbass** · 10-01-2008, 22:16

Well actually, there's archeological evidence to support the sea opening a path for the jews. There's actually a book that explores the truths of the old testament with numerous archeological and geological findings. I remember it said that various egyption chariots, weapons and debris was found, preserved in the mud of the seabed, evidence that some sort of pursuit of the jews did take place. My memory of it is quite foggy, but I think the book also explains of how a volcano eruption (or was it meteorite?) caused a huge disturbance in the tidal patterns and how this could have possibly lead to the sea receding.
I should dig this book up and find out what it says. Please note that it's a book that looks at the archeological and geological facts and is not one that finds workarounds for the bible story to be able to fit into modern day science.

**Foot** · 10-01-2008, 23:31

Originally Posted by Dumbass

Well actually, there's archeological evidence to support the sea opening a path for the jews. There's actually a book that explores the truths of the old testament with numerous archeological and geological findings. I remember it said that various egyption chariots, weapons and debris was found, preserved in the mud of the seabed, evidence that some sort of pursuit of the jews did take place. My memory of it is quite foggy, but I think the book also explains of how a volcano eruption (or was it meteorite?) caused a huge disturbance in the tidal patterns and how this could have possibly lead to the sea receding.
I should dig this book up and find out what it says. Please note that it's a book that looks at the archeological and geological facts and is not one that finds workarounds for the bible story to be able to fit into modern day science.

I'm sorry, but how does the finding of chariots and weapons lead one to the conclusion that the jews were chased across there? That is proof of nothing except that chariots and weapons are being found at the bottom of the red sea. If the bible story didn't exist would there be any evidence to suggest that the jews crossed there? I doubt it.

Take for example one of the stories in Joshua, where in a southern campaign the israelite army captured the towns of Lachish and Debir (and others). Both Lachish and Debir show signs of destruction toward the end of the 13th cent. BC (the specific date for Debir is given as 1225BC), so it would follow that the Israelites, because of the OT story, were the cause behind such evidence. Yet there exists a victory stele of the Egytian Pharaoh Merneptah, dated 1223BC, that speaks of general plundering by Egyptians in the region of Lachish and Debir. Furthermore the "Sea Peoples" from across the mediterranean were settling the coast of Canaan in force. If we didn't have the OT story then suspicion for the destruction of Lachish and Debir would fall on the Egyptians or the "Sea People" not the Israelites. The OT is not an historical document, it was an oral tradition for centuries after the events that it claims to portray, and archaeology is the stick by which we must measure it, not the other way round.

Foot

**SwissBarbar** · 10-02-2008, 00:41

example: "And there was a great battle in heaven, Michael and his angels fought with the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven."

not that historical, the bible is no historic proof but just a religious story, happening in historical periods of time