|
Author
|
Topic: Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen?
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 316 of 657 (602970)
02-01-2011 10:50 PM
|
Reply to: Message 312 by jar
02-01-2011 6:40 PM
|
|
Re: Which Map Do We Go With?
jar writes: Third, you have presented NO corroborating evidence no matter how many times you claim it. Fourth, LoL. I would not expect an admission of it from any of you people, no matter how much evidence I cited for anything evidencing the supernatural.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 312 by jar, posted 02-01-2011 6:40 PM | | jar has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 321 by Admin, posted 02-02-2011 6:11 AM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9143 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 317 of 657 (602972)
02-01-2011 10:57 PM
|
Reply to: Message 315 by Buzsaw
02-01-2011 10:43 PM
|
|
Re: Bump for Buz
Lennart Moller of Sweden is all over the thread and there is some of his photography as well
He is not a marine scientist and he has produced no "techy" photos. Matter of fact there are no "techy" photos anywhere.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 315 by Buzsaw, posted 02-01-2011 10:43 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 318 by DrJones*, posted 02-01-2011 10:59 PM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
DrJones*
Member Posts: 2285 From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada Joined: 08-19-2004 Member Rating: 8.3
|
|
|
Message 318 of 657 (602973)
02-01-2011 10:59 PM
|
Reply to: Message 317 by Theodoric
02-01-2011 10:57 PM
|
|
Re: Bump for Buz
Matter of fact there are no "techy" photos anywhere.
I'd like to know: A: what a "techy" photo is? 2: why we should give a shit if a photo is "techy" or not?
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod MinistryLive every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On *not an actual doctor
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 317 by Theodoric, posted 02-01-2011 10:57 PM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2317 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: 09-02-2008
|
|
|
Message 319 of 657 (602989)
02-02-2011 1:50 AM
|
Reply to: Message 309 by Buzsaw
02-01-2011 5:01 PM
|
|
Re: Which Map Do We Go With?
Buzsaw writes: Some maps specify Arabia Petraea and others do not, depending on the purpose of the map.
Yes, just like some maps specify Texas, and others do not, depending on the purpose of the map.
I stand by the argument that the NT writers were aware of the province of Arabia Petraea not being part and parcel of Arabia proper.
So basically, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, and without any supporting evidence at all, you simply claim you are right, and moan when we say you never provide evidence. Right...
I maintain that the traditional Mt Sinai has no corroborating evidence for being the Biblical Mt Sinai, so regardless of the Arabia debate, Nuweiba trumps the Sinai Peninsula Hypothesis.
No, since that location hasn't got any corroborating evidence either.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 309 by Buzsaw, posted 02-01-2011 5:01 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Aurora
Junior Member (Idle past 4718 days) Posts: 13 From: India Joined: 12-09-2010
|
|
|
Message 320 of 657 (602996)
02-02-2011 6:06 AM
|
Reply to: Message 315 by Buzsaw
02-01-2011 10:43 PM
|
|
Re: Bump for Buz
Buzsaw writes:
Where have you been in this thread. The name of the scientist, Lennart Moller of Sweden is all over the thread and there is some of his photography as well. Google Exodus Video and you should get some excerpts of the video. There are other videos at Ron Wyatt's home site as well. Some of them have been embellished as I understand. Others have not. If you don't find what you're looking for, get back to me and I'll see what I can do for you. I am a christian but with so many false claims coming from the christian circles I think I have become a skeptical christian. Here also I googled and checked who Ron Wyatt was and got this:
Wikipedia writes: Ronald Eldon Wyatt (1933 — August 4, 1999) was an adventurer and former nurse anaesthetist noted for advocating the Durupınar site as the site of Noah's Ark, among other Bible-related pseudoarchaeology. His claims were dismissed by scientists, historians, biblical scholars, and even by leaders in his own Seventh-day Adventist Church, but his work continues to have a following among some fundamentalists and evangelicals. So, I simply decided not to take him or any one supporting his claim seriously. If there is Corroborating independent research findings which is reviewed and largely agreed upon by the scientific community, then I have no reason to reject. Edited by Aurora, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 315 by Buzsaw, posted 02-01-2011 10:43 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 322 by jar, posted 02-02-2011 11:56 AM | | Aurora has not replied |
|
Admin
Director Posts: 13020 From: EvC Forum Joined: 06-14-2002 Member Rating: 1.9
|
|
|
Message 321 of 657 (602997)
02-02-2011 6:11 AM
|
Reply to: Message 316 by Buzsaw
02-01-2011 10:50 PM
|
|
Re: Which Map Do We Go With?
Buzsaw writes: jar writes: Third, you have presented NO corroborating evidence no matter how many times you claim it.
Fourth, LoL. I would not expect an admission of it from any of you people, no matter how much evidence I cited for anything evidencing the supernatural. Buz, please reply to the substance of Jar's post, which argued that Arabia Petraea is one of three regions of Arabia, and therefore is part of Arabia. You argued in Message 207 that because, "The Biblical record says Sinai is in Arabia," and that because the Sinai Peninsula is not in Arabia, that therefore the identification of the Mt. Sinai on the Sinai Peninsula could not be correct. There are a lot of good arguments for locating Mt. Sinai outside the Sinai Peninsula and a good deal of scholarship agrees with you, but the argument that the Sinai Peninsula was not considered part of Arabia at the time appears to be seriously flawed and is the one being challenged. If you have evidence supporting your position in the form of maps or excerpts then please present it. Please, no replies to this message. Edited by Admin, : Clarify.
| -- | Percy | | | EvC Forum Director |
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 316 by Buzsaw, posted 02-01-2011 10:50 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 322 of 657 (603033)
02-02-2011 11:56 AM
|
Reply to: Message 320 by Aurora
02-02-2011 6:06 AM
|
|
Re: Bump for Buz
Aurora writes: Buzsaw writes:
Where have you been in this thread. The name of the scientist, Lennart Moller of Sweden is all over the thread and there is some of his photography as well. Google Exodus Video and you should get some excerpts of the video. There are other videos at Ron Wyatt's home site as well. Some of them have been embellished as I understand. Others have not. If you don't find what you're looking for, get back to me and I'll see what I can do for you. I am a christian but with so many false claims coming from the christian circles I think I have become a skeptical christian. Here also I googled and checked who Ron Wyatt was and got this:
Wikipedia writes: Ronald Eldon Wyatt (1933 — August 4, 1999) was an adventurer and former nurse anaesthetist noted for advocating the Durupınar site as the site of Noah's Ark, among other Bible-related pseudoarchaeology. His claims were dismissed by scientists, historians, biblical scholars, and even by leaders in his own Seventh-day Adventist Church, but his work continues to have a following among some fundamentalists and evangelicals. So, I simply decided not to take him or any one supporting his claim seriously. If there is Corroborating independent research findings which is reviewed and largely agreed upon by the scientific community, then I have no reason to reject. Also, as pointed out way back in Message 25, Ron Wyatt falsified and fudged the evidence on many, many occasions. He also purposefully excluded evidence that refuted his position.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 320 by Aurora, posted 02-02-2011 6:06 AM | | Aurora has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 323 of 657 (603038)
02-02-2011 12:33 PM
|
|
|
Re: Mt Sinai and Evidence.
In order to keep discussion focused on Mt. Sinai for now I have hidden content that addressed other issues. --Admin The apostle Paul, who said Mt Sinai was in Arabia was likely the most educated of all of the apostles. His statement about location referred to a specific mountain. If an author of a book were to would state where Mt Rainier was located, one would not answer by saying it is in the US. The author would specify that It is located in the state of Washington. If an author would state where the Matterhorn was, the author would not say it was in Europe. One would say it is in Switzerland. By the same token, Paul, the educated one would not likely have written to the Galations that Mt Sinai was in Arabia, if indeed it was in a province of Arabia or Arabia Petraea. When ever the apostle Paul referred to a church, a nation or the location of something specific located in Europe, he did not say that it was in Europe He would specify the location in Europe. When he or Jesus designated the location of something specific in Israel, they would say it was in Judea or Samaria, etc rather than saying it was in Israel perse. Why should it be argued that generalizing the location of the mountain, Mt Sinai should be an exception?
Of all of the participants in this debate, the one who has produced the most corroborating evidence is Buzsaw, yet it is Buzsaw who is the one among us all to be hounded and dogged for not having produced evidence. I can see it now. Down line, after this another Exodus thread is all said and done it will be deja vu. "Liar BS'saw has never ever cited any evidence for the Exodus." GOD BLESS MOOSE! At least he has stepped forward to acknowledge that I had cited evidence regardless of whether it conformed to his view. None of you my secularist counterparts or creationist skeptics have produced as much evidence to counter my ducks in a row of corroborated evidence for the Nuweiba crossing as I have cited. Jar's bogus split rock examples, none of which showed water flows and none of which were preceded and followed by anything pertaining to the Exodus, are the kind of responses which I've had to spend my time dealing with, all the while being singled out along the way about posting evidence. Admittedly, some of you have presented some debatable arguments. However, none of them have empirically falsified my own position. As for the creationists, none of you/them have offered any corroborative evidence for the traditional Mt Sinai. No other site fits the ticket like the Nuweiba site does. Ringo makes the blind assertion that Nuweiba was too far. Given the head start, robust condition of the formerly brick making Israelites and provision for night travel etc, Nuweiba would have been doable. Edited by Admin, : Comment coming... Edited by Admin, : Add explanation for hiding content.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 324 by jar, posted 02-02-2011 12:45 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied | | | Message 325 by ringo, posted 02-02-2011 12:54 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied | | | Message 326 by PaulK, posted 02-02-2011 1:27 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 324 of 657 (603041)
02-02-2011 12:45 PM
|
Reply to: Message 323 by Buzsaw
02-02-2011 12:33 PM
|
|
Re: Mt Sinai and Evidence.
Buzsaw writes: In order to keep discussion focused on Mt. Sinai for now I have hidden content that addressed other issues. --Admin The apostle Paul, who said Mt Sinai was in Arabia was likely the most educated of all of the apostles. His statement about location referred to a specific mountain. If an author of a book were to would state where Mt Rainier was located, one would not answer by saying it is in the US. The author would specify that It is located in the state of Washington. If an author would state where the Matterhorn was, the author would not say it was in Europe. One would say it is in Switzerland. By the same token, Paul, the educated one would not likely have written to the Galations that Mt Sinai was in Arabia, if indeed it was in a province of Arabia or Arabia Petraea. When ever the apostle Paul referred to a church, a nation or the location of something specific located in Europe, he did not say that it was in Europe He would specify the location in Europe. When he or Jesus designated the location of something specific in Israel, they would say it was in Judea or Samaria, etc rather than saying it was in Israel perse. Why should it be argued that generalizing the location of the mountain, Mt Sinai should be an exception?
Of all of the participants in this debate, the one who has produced the most corroborating evidence is Buzsaw, yet it is Buzsaw who is the one among us all to be hounded and dogged for not having produced evidence. I can see it now. Down line, after this another Exodus thread is all said and done it will be deja vu. "Liar BS'saw has never ever cited any evidence for the Exodus." GOD BLESS MOOSE! At least he has stepped forward to acknowledge that I had cited evidence regardless of whether it conformed to his view. None of you my secularist counterparts or creationist skeptics have produced as much evidence to counter my ducks in a row of corroborated evidence for the Nuweiba crossing as I have cited. Jar's bogus split rock examples, none of which showed water flows and none of which were preceded and followed by anything pertaining to the Exodus, are the kind of responses which I've had to spend my time dealing with, all the while being singled out along the way about posting evidence. Admittedly, some of you have presented some debatable arguments. However, none of them have empirically falsified my own position. As for the creationists, none of you/them have offered any corroborative evidence for the traditional Mt Sinai. No other site fits the ticket like the Nuweiba site does. Ringo makes the blind assertion that Nuweiba was too far. Given the head start, robust condition of the formerly brick making Israelites and provision for night travel etc, Nuweiba would have been doable. Chapter and verse please Buz supporting Paul's assertions that MT Sinai is not on the Sinai Peninsula. Edited by jar, : appalin spallin
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 323 by Buzsaw, posted 02-02-2011 12:33 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
ringo
Member (Idle past 434 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005
|
|
|
Message 325 of 657 (603043)
02-02-2011 12:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 323 by Buzsaw
02-02-2011 12:33 PM
|
|
Re: Mt Sinai and Evidence.
Buzsaw writes: If an author would state where the Matterhorn was, the author would not say it was in Europe. One would say it is in Switzerland.
On the contrary, there's a whole range of ways to describe a location, some more specific than others. I tell people all the time that I'm in Canada. Sometimes, I tell them more precisely that I'm in the province of Saskatchewan (if I think they might have a clue where that is). I'm almost never more specific than that. It's just silly to suggest that Paul "must" have meant the Arabian Peninsula just because he wasn't specific about which province. After all, he was writing to an audience that probably didn't know much about Arabia.
"I'm Rory Bellows, I tell you! And I got a lot of corroborating evidence... over here... by the throttle!"
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 323 by Buzsaw, posted 02-02-2011 12:33 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17825 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.2
|
|
|
Message 326 of 657 (603048)
02-02-2011 1:27 PM
|
Reply to: Message 323 by Buzsaw
02-02-2011 12:33 PM
|
|
Re: Mt Sinai and Evidence.
quote:
His statement about location referred to a specific mountain. If an author of a book were to would state where Mt Rainier was located, one would not answer by saying it is in the US. The author would specify that It is located in the state of Washington. If an author would state where the Matterhorn was, the author would not say it was in Europe. One would say it is in Switzerland. By the same token, Paul, the educated one would not likely have written to the Galations that Mt Sinai was in Arabia, if indeed it was in a province of Arabia or Arabia Petraea.
By this logic since "Arabia" is LESS specific than "Arabia Petraea" (since it INCLUDES Arabia Petraea) we must conclude that Paul could not give a more specific location. And if the educated Apostle Paul could not even narrow the location down so far as one of the parts of Arabia, the NT is of virtually no use at all in establishing the location - and thus your appeal to it is futile. Or alternatively, you are wrong to suppose that he cared about the exact location. Galatians 4 is not about geography. Either way Galations 4 offers no support to your claim and cannot be counted as "corrborating evidence."
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 323 by Buzsaw, posted 02-02-2011 12:33 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 327 by jar, posted 02-02-2011 1:36 PM | | PaulK has not replied |
|
jar
Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: 04-20-2004
|
|
|
Message 327 of 657 (603050)
02-02-2011 1:36 PM
|
Reply to: Message 326 by PaulK
02-02-2011 1:27 PM
|
|
Re: Mt Sinai and Evidence.
PaulK writes: quote:
His statement about location referred to a specific mountain. If an author of a book were to would state where Mt Rainier was located, one would not answer by saying it is in the US. The author would specify that It is located in the state of Washington. If an author would state where the Matterhorn was, the author would not say it was in Europe. One would say it is in Switzerland. By the same token, Paul, the educated one would not likely have written to the Galations that Mt Sinai was in Arabia, if indeed it was in a province of Arabia or Arabia Petraea.
By this logic since "Arabia" is LESS specific than "Arabia Petraea" (since it INCLUDES Arabia Petraea) we must conclude that Paul could not give a more specific location. And if the educated Apostle Paul could not even narrow the location down so far as one of the parts of Arabia, the NT is of virtually no use at all in establishing the location - and thus your appeal to it is futile. Or alternatively, you are wrong to suppose that he cared about the exact location. Galatians 4 is not about geography. Either way Galations 4 offers no support to your claim and cannot be counted as "corrborating evidence." Plus, as pointed out back in Message 312, the term Arabia Petraea includes both potential sites anyway. It also includes all of the Sinai Peninsula. Buz has nothing. If he wishes to say that the site is NOT in Arabia Petraea then he eliminates both sites and the real Mount Sinai must be in either Arabia Felix or Arabia Deserta, the former what today would be Lebanon and northern Syria, the latter the great Arabian Desert.
Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 326 by PaulK, posted 02-02-2011 1:27 PM | | PaulK has not replied |
|
Admin
Director Posts: 13020 From: EvC Forum Joined: 06-14-2002 Member Rating: 1.9
|
|
|
Message 328 of 657 (603051)
02-02-2011 1:52 PM
|
|
|
Possibly Useful Information
Back in Message 311 I quoted Wikipedia saying that the part of Arabia under the rule of Petra only became part of Arabia Petraea in 106 CE, which was considerably after Galatians was written.
| -- | Percy | | | EvC Forum Director |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 329 by PaulK, posted 02-02-2011 2:01 PM | | Admin has seen this message but not replied |
|
PaulK
Member Posts: 17825 Joined: 01-10-2003 Member Rating: 2.2
|
|
|
Message 329 of 657 (603053)
02-02-2011 2:01 PM
|
Reply to: Message 328 by Admin
02-02-2011 1:52 PM
|
|
Re: Possibly Useful Information
While the province of Arabia Petraea was only formed in the early 2nd Century AD we don't know if the term was in use before then. If it was not, then it hurts Buzsaw's argument a little since the term would not be available for Paul to use. Regardless, the argument that Paul should have designated a more specific region still fails because Paul did not.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 328 by Admin, posted 02-02-2011 1:52 PM | | Admin has seen this message but not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 330 by Buzsaw, posted 02-03-2011 8:24 AM | | PaulK has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 330 of 657 (603177)
02-03-2011 8:24 AM
|
Reply to: Message 329 by PaulK
02-02-2011 2:01 PM
|
|
Re: Possibly Useful Information
PaulK writes: While the province of Arabia Petraea was only formed in the early 2nd Century AD we don't know if the term was in use before then. If it was not, then it hurts Buzsaw's argument a little since the term would not be available for Paul to use. Regardless, the argument that Paul should have designated a more specific region still fails because Paul did not. Which begs the question: What evidence do we have as to when Sinai became a province of Arabia? I was not able to find definitive maps in this regard. When did Egypt loose possession of the Sinai? Is there a web site which shows the history of the Sinai relative to these questions?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 329 by PaulK, posted 02-02-2011 2:01 PM | | PaulK has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 331 by jar, posted 02-03-2011 9:21 AM | | Buzsaw has replied | | | Message 334 by PaulK, posted 02-03-2011 12:51 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2