Jon,
Then I think we are amused by the same thing! Hope to have a response to your longer post today!
1 Like
So why shouldn’t I then go on to claim that the tales of miracles and resurrection are also not real events? After all what is less believable? An Exodus tale with shaky history or tales of miracles and dead bodies rising again?
It is ABSURD to believe in the dead rising but not that a mere exodus took place. Therefore if the more easily believed story is shown to be false, what hope does the resurrection have?
The house used in that movie is a restaurant in the community of Kingsland Texas. I have eaten there often. I guess I am saying there is archaeological evidence of the Texas Chain Saw Massacre movie…
1 Like
We all have look to our hearts and conscience for what is believable and what is not. For whatever reason, I find it much easier to believe the stories of the New Testament than the stories of the Old Testament.
The Old Testament seems firmly entrenched in the primitive religious ideas of antiquity. It is virtually devoid of the real balm of human existence: an afterlife for our eternal soul.
If you think an Exodus happened BEFORE the existence of the Philistine pentapolis … when the story clearly says Exodus happened AFTER … I suppose you would be happy believing anything.
But you believe that the Exodus is not accurately recorded in the Bible… Therefore if you are correct, the Bible is bogus and cannot be trusted.
I think it is quite clear that the Old Testament has LOTS of parts that are bogus. If you need the Old Testament to believe in an afterlife … I would challenge the foundation of your faith.
I am of the mind that if the Old Testament cannot be trusted, the New Testament and it’s even more fantastical claims cannot either.
Ah… so you are a visiting Atheist come to bring the BioLogos audience true happiness?
George
No… I am a Theist trying to determine if the Biblical claims are consistent with reality. You have just admitted they aren’t. If you are correct, then I can no longer take it seriously. If one part fails that isn’t even that amazing, how much more should the fantastical stories be rejected?
It comes down to this: Is the Bible the inspired word of God, who is truth? Then Exodus happened as it is written.
If it isn’t, then I am wasting my time on it.
This is a good point to raise !!! I think it goes a long way to show how complex is the interface between HISTORY and LEGEND !
Here is a background discussion from the Wiki article on Merneptah’s Stele:
“Egypt was the dominant power in the region during the long reign of Merneptah’s predecessor, Ramesses the Great, but Merneptah and his own successor, Ramesses III, faced major invasions. The problems began in Merneptah’s 5th year (1208), when a Libyan king invaded Egypt from the West in alliance with various northern peoples.”
" Merneptah achieved a great victory in the summer of that year, and the inscription is mainly about this. The final lines deal with an apparently separate campaign in the East, where it seems that some of the Canaanite cities had revolted. Traditionally the Egyptians had concerned themselves only with cities, so the problem presented by Israel must have been something new – possibly attacks on Egypt’s vassals in Canaan. Merneptah and Ramesses III fought off their enemies, but it was the beginning of the end of Egypt’s control over Canaan – the last evidence of an Egyptian presence in the area is the name of Ramesses VI (1141–33) inscribed on a statue base from Megiddo."
As you can see, the stele is within a generation of the final loss of Egypt’s hegemony over Canaan. Jon, you want to combine the information from the Stele with the information from Exodus to create a linear story. But how is this possible? Read this from Exodus:
Exo 13:17 “And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God led them NOT through the Way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt…”
If anything, this text reinforces the idea that the Hebrew - - if they are the same people known as Israel - - were ON THE MOVE during the combative establishment of the Philistines in Canaan !!!
Returning again to non-biblical history, we read the perfect discussion of about Merneptah’s successor, Ramesses III - -
“During his long tenure in the midst of the surrounding political chaos of the Greek Dark Ages, Egypt was beset by foreign invaders (including the so-called Sea Peoples and the Libyans) and experienced the beginnings of increasing economic difficulties and internal strife which would eventually lead to the collapse of the Twentieth Dynasty. In Year 8 of his reign, the Sea Peoples, including Peleset, Denyen, Shardana, Meshwesh of the sea, and Tjekker, invaded Egypt by land and sea.” <<< Beginning of the Peleset / Philistines !
“Ramesses III defeated them in two great land and sea battles. . . . The Harris Papyrus states: As for those who reached my frontier, their seed is not, their heart and their soul are finished forever and ever.”
“Ramesses III claims that he incorporated the Sea Peoples as subject peoples and settled them in Southern Canaan, although there is no clear evidence to this effect; the pharaoh, unable to prevent their gradual arrival in Canaan, may have claimed that it was his idea to let them reside in this territory.” << All too likely !!!
“Their presence in Canaan may have contributed to the formation of new states in this region such as Philistia after the collapse of the Egyptian Empire in Asia.”
[END OF CLIP]
So, Jon, what part of the bible do you think Merneptah’s “Israelite Campaign” should be most closely associated?
Maybe I will agree with some of your logic if you can give me a “literary anchor” for this Egyptian intrusion into the legendary past of Canaan?
gbrooks9, can the Exodus story as written in my NIV Bible be taken seriously then? What does this mean for the Bible and faith in God?
@Find_My_Way… for a Theist, you sure sound like someone raised in Evangelical logic
Why should you reject the whole Bible because one part fails the acid test. This same objection would apply to the 6 Days of Creation and Noah’s Ark as well.
You think resurrection is FAR MORE FANTASTICAL than six days of creation? I would have to disagree with you there… there have been any number of strange “revivals” of people once thought dead. And even “virgin births” are relatively more frequent than 6-day creations … anyone who knows about the motile qualities of sperm would hardly be shocked to consider a very small number of couples becoming parents without the benefit of literal intercourse.
The limits of medical science are quite notorious… I know of NO PHYSICS that would allow a planet to form and bring forth life in 6 days…
These things I can explain by alternate interpretation. Noah’s flood was local, six days of creation idea is born from God stating time doesn’t affect Him, that a Thousand years is as one day and one day as a Thousand years… Poetic language and mis-interpretation.
But something claiming to be history, something that cannot be interpreted any other way? If that fails the acid test then the Bible has become a book of myths.
No, my dear sir. It is simply a book that INCLUDES myths…
You are waging a “fancier war” of Atheism here in the BioLogos boards…
If that is the case, then rising from the dead and miracles would surely be among those myths. Look, I don’t want it to be the case, but if the Exodus never happened then that would destroy my view of the Bible and my faith would become non-existent.
You obviously ignored my comment touching on the reality that “medical miracles” is practically a human REALITY … the New Testament is not in the same category as the stories off the Old Testament.
The entire New Testament is based off of the Old though. Jesus Himself quotes it all the time. If the OT is bogus then the New Testament is also bogus, what with being based on the OT.
It says it is … but it really isn’t.
- The Early Church promotes drinking blood and eating human flesh;
- The Successful early followers are NON-JEWS… with Jewish followers quickly becoming a minority.
- The theological principles of Christianity are only tangentially Jewish.
Tell us about your PRO-EVOLUTION stance, Thomas. You DO favor the idea that God influenced human evolution, right?
This is not true! It was metaphorical. I assume you are talking about Jesus’ teaching about His blood and flesh?
There is nothing figurative about it … the early Church was quite convinced of the miracle.
A Jewish sect would NOT have even used the figurative expression … Christianity is a pagan expression of miraculous theology … not a Jewish one.