Exodus: fact or fiction?

Topic's posts
Posts in total: 52
This was RoderickSpoke's question. "Do you think the incidences recorded in the O.T. that specifically deal with the Exodus was fact, or fiction?"

I think the Exodus story is fiction. Millions of people wandering through a desert for 40 years would have left massive amounts of evidence. This evidence does not exist- thus, it did not happen as described.





Exodus is right, They are Egyptian Chariots sunk because in the Sea
--> @SkepticalOne
I think the Exodus story is fiction. Millions of people wandering through a desert for 40 years would have left massive amounts of evidence. This evidence does not exist- thus, it did not happen as described.

Does this effect your view of spirituality at all? all you seem to be concerned with is the errors of the Bible, when in fact it's completely irrelevant to you as an individual and your participation...

--> @EtrnlVw
I'm not concerned with errors in the Bible, but these questions have come up in another thread. Rather than running down these rabbit holes, I thought it would be better to provide a dedicated outlet for the inevitable.
--> @SkepticalOne
I would like to see you not only observe something different, but something relevant for Gods sake. Anything, please....
--> @SkepticalOne
I actually really like you, but the subjects you create are nauseating, I feel like maybe you could do much better, perhaps reach a little deeper in religious topics. What stops you from connecting at a deeper level??
--> @EtrnlVw
I actually really like you, but the subjects you create are nauseating, I feel like maybe you could do much better, perhaps reach a little deeper in religious topics. What stops you from connecting at a deeper level
A deeper level? Religion is a shallow topic with a broad footprint. It touches on most any subject that can be imagined, but it is nothing more than a veneer.
--> @SkepticalOne



.
SkepticalOne,

What is more embarrassing for me as a TRUE Christian, and barring that there is no real evidence of the Exodus, is the blatant fact that my Jesus, as Yahweh God incarnate, let the Israelites wander aimlessly FOR FORTY YEARS rather than letting them proceed directly to their destination of the "Promised Land!"  You would think that in fleeing from the enemy, in hot pursuit of freedom, they would want Jesus to allow them to reach safety as soon as possible!

Unfortunately like I have shown ad infinitum, my Jesus can truly be a real SOB at times!  :(


.
--> @BrotherDThomas

SkepticalOne,

What is more embarrassing for me as a TRUE Christian, and barring that there is no real evidence of the Exodus, is the blatant fact that my Jesus, as Yahweh God incarnate, let the Israelites wander aimlessly FOR FORTY YEARS rather than letting them proceed directly to their destination of the "Promised Land!"  You would think that in fleeing from the enemy, in hot pursuit of freedom, they would want Jesus to allow them to reach safety as soon as possible!

Unfortunately like I have shown ad infinitum, my Jesus can truly be a real SOB at times!  :(
Adam was a creature of creation. But Son of Man is a product of man and not an alien invisibke creator. For Jesus to recognize he is a Son of Man is to accept his humanity. But that changed when he found out he was also a Son of a Bitch as well. (Mary his mother being the bitch). That is when he changed his title to Son of God. Son of God means the son of the Almighty himself a very presumptious belief bordering on delusion.

Here is how scriptures confirms his mothers status as adulterous and bitch.

"Mary was betrothed to Joseph, which was a legally binding arrangement in the Jewish culture. All that awaited the couple was the wedding. If they engaged in sexual intercourse with each other, that was not seen as a violation of any cultural norm. Later rabbinic writings allowed that a future groom who had sexual relations with his bride-to-be at her father's house was not guilty of immoral behavior.

If pregnancy occurred before the wedding, this was not a problem because the parentage of the child was secured. What is shocking is that Mary is pregnant and Joseph knows he is not the father. The problem is not that a betrothed couple had sex, but that presumably Mary had sex with another man"she committed adultery."

The scriptures tell us Joseph wanted to keep it a secret so an not to expose Mary publicly.
Matthew 1:19 Because Joseph her husband was faithful to the law, and yet did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.

Jesus's earthly, legal father was Joseph. But Luke says that Joseph is the son of Heli (3:23), while Matthew says that he was the son of Jacob (1:16).
We know Mary is the daughter of Heli because Luke was giving the geneology of Mary thereby confirming evidence to show that Luke 3 was in fact the lineage of Jesus through Mary? I believe there is. Luke 3:23 states that Jesus was "the supposed" son of Joseph, the son of Heli. The phrase "the supposed" is from the Greek nomizo which means as was the custom in the sense of a legal custom. In other words, Joseph was the legal father of Jesus; not the literal father. As with the legal custom of that time, Mary"s name would not have been listed even though she was the person through whom the lineage passed. So in this case Joseph the "legal" father of Jesus represented his wife Mary in the lineage and Heli was in fact Mary"s father. Remarkably we have a historical source which confirm that Mary was the daughter of Heli.

We all know that Adam was created from dust and Eve from Adam's rib. But henceforth it required the union of a man and woman to create humans. We also know as flesh and blood Jesus was human (like Adam) and genetically traced back to Adam. (Matthew 1, Luke 3:23-38). In both the genealogies neither God or the HS was included in Jesus's lineage. Only Mary and Joseph claimed to be visited by angels. But no one actually heard their story. The Gospels were written after Jesus died.

We all know because of Adam and Eve all humans were cursed with sin. But we are told jesus was sinless. That was only possible if Jesus was born outside the womb. Being born of humans Jesus inherited Adam and Eve's sin. So here again the stories don't add up.

Here is how scriptures confirms jesus's mother was an adulterous bitch. Mary was bethroted to Joseph but was made pregnant by another man. She committed adultery. She had children after Jesus and they involved intercourse. Jesus was no exception. Luke makes that clear

--> @Harikrish


Harikrish,

Yes, your well detailed discourse regarding Mother Mary and Jesus is embarrassing.  You are preaching to the choir on this proposition, and what makes it more embarrassing for me as a TRUE Christian, is the following biblical facts:

Christians have to biblically accept that when Jesus is considered to be the Jewish Yahweh god incarnate, as many Trinitarians believe, then Jesus “Celestially Impregnated” his own mother in an “incestuous way,” not only to be her son, but his own father as well. This is barring the Hebrew Tradition that since Joseph was not the paternal father of Jesus, then Jesus would be considered to be a bastard child. This embarrassed poor ol’ Joseph so much, that he wanted to divorce Mary to save face. “Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly” (Matthew 1:19) 

GODDAMN IT, I HATE IT WHEN I READ ALL OF THE BIBLE AND RUN ACROSS EMBARRASSING STUFF LIKE THIS! AGAIN, BIBLE AXIOMS AND LOGIC 101 ARE TRULY TESTING MY FAITH!


.
--> @BrotherDThomas
Harikrish,

Yes, your well detailed discourse regarding Mother Mary and Jesus is embarrassing.  You are preaching to the choir on this proposition, and what makes it more embarrassing for me as a TRUE Christian, is the following biblical facts:

Christians have to biblically accept that when Jesus is considered to be the Jewish Yahweh god incarnate, as many Trinitarians believe, then Jesus “Celestially Impregnated” his own mother in an “incestuous way,” not only to be her son, but his own father as well. This is barring the Hebrew Tradition that since Joseph was not the paternal father of Jesus, then Jesus would be considered to be a bastard child. This embarrassed poor ol’ Joseph so much, that he wanted to divorce Mary to save face. “Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly” (Matthew 1:19)

GODDAMN IT, I HATE IT WHEN I READ ALL OF THE BIBLE AND RUN ACROSS EMBARRASSING STUFF LIKE THIS! AGAIN, BIBLE AXIOMS AND LOGIC 101 ARE TRULY TESTING MY FAITH!
Look on the bright side. Jesus died for your sins. If you had  to die for his sins, there wouldn't be anything left of you. 
Your commitment is real so is your conviction. Look on the bright side, remember!!
--> @Dr.Franklin
Exodus is right, They are Egyptian Chariots sunk because in the Sea
I doubt this claim. I have only ever seen psuedo-experts whose religious beliefs would benefit from this claim utter it. In reality, it is not clear what 'sea' the Bible is referring to, so finding chariot wheels in an unknown sea is quite a trick...


--> @SkepticalOne
Don't ever say pseudo-experts again, flashbacks from Iconoclast. 
--> @Dr.Franklin
...if the shoe fits.
--> @SkepticalOne
no, those scientists are credible and right
--> @Dr.Franklin
What scientists?
--> @SkepticalOne
Archelogists

--> @Dr.Franklin
What archeologists? (What are their names?)
--> @SkepticalOne
How dare you question Dr. Henry Jones Jr.?
--> @SkepticalOne
--> @Dr.Franklin
So, no names?
--> @SkepticalOne
Looka tthe article
--> @Dr.Franklin
I'm not going to work harder to address your claim than you are working to substantiate it. What are the names of the archeologists who found Egyptian chariot wheels at the bottom of a sea?

--> @SkepticalOne
Who cares?, the caring is the evidence
--> @Dr.Franklin
Presumably, you care about chariot wheels at the bottom of a sea or you wouldn't have brought it up...