|
Author
|
Topic: Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen?
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 297 of 657 (602889)
02-01-2011 2:42 PM
|
Reply to: Message 296 by PaulK
02-01-2011 12:58 PM
|
|
Re: Arabia
PaulK writes: quote:
This map from Wiki designates Arabia Petraea as separate from Arabia proper. T
No, it doesn't. It has no labels so how can you say that any unmarked area is "Arabia proper". Arabia Petraea is a part of Arabia. What is relevant to the debate is that it designates it separate from Arabia proper. I can't show you, but my own person large Rand McNally Bible Atlas, Historical and Descriptive has a Roman Empire map which separates Arabia proper from Arabia Petraea, showing the exact red swath of nations including Sinai as Arabia Petraea. It names Arabia proper separate with a different color area than Arabia proper.
PaulK writes: quote:
When the NT referred to nations or provinces it specifies. Why should this be an exception?
Galatians does not say that Arabia is a nation OR a province. And I have no idea what rule this is supposed to be an exception to, Answer my question. Why should this be an exception?
PaulK writes: It's not MY problem if Exodus is wrong. Philistia was Egyptian territory until the early 12th Century BC, and the Philistines are identified with the "Sea Peoples" invading. around that time. (Of course "the land of the Philistines" is a geographical reference, and could be a simple anachronism - a reference that makes sense at the time of writing, if not at the time of the events. If you want to defend the Bible you could try that option - but I bet that you'd rather drag the Bible down with you). Your implication was that it did'nt exist as a threat to the Exodus Israelites. My point stands, that it was a threat for waring against the israelites and for that reason Jehovah directed them to go in a more southerly route so as to avoid the Philistines. The Biblical reacord was not in error as you are alleging. Score: PaulK= 0 Biblical record= Right on.  Edited by Buzsaw, : Fix quotes
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 296 by PaulK, posted 02-01-2011 12:58 PM | | PaulK has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 299 by PaulK, posted 02-01-2011 2:57 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 298 of 657 (602891)
02-01-2011 2:52 PM
|
Reply to: Message 295 by Huntard
02-01-2011 12:47 PM
|
|
Re: Arabia
Huntard writes: If you look at this map, you will see Texas designated as separate from the rest of America. Is Texas now not part of America any more? Your strawman does not cut the mustard.. A map of the US includes Texas as part and parcel of the US proper. Puerto Rico might be a more fitting example.
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 295 by Huntard, posted 02-01-2011 12:47 PM | | Huntard has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 301 by Huntard, posted 02-01-2011 3:25 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 300 of 657 (602895)
02-01-2011 3:17 PM
|
Reply to: Message 290 by jar
01-31-2011 4:24 PM
|
|
Re: Midian's Double Location Explained
jar writes: And "Midian" included both the Arabian and Suez peninsula, remember, your very own link supported that. I checked that out, Jar. From what I could research, it was the wrong traditional Mt Sinai which propagated the assumption that part of Media included Mt. Sinai. Who ever propagated the traditional Mt Sinai named both the mountain and the peninsula as "Sinai" and went from that to assume Midian was in the peninsula to accommodate their interpretation of the Biblical Exodus. Thus some of the maps showing Midian in two locations. This is how one falsehood leads to another.
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 290 by jar, posted 01-31-2011 4:24 PM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 302 by jar, posted 02-01-2011 3:34 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied | | | Message 314 by NoNukes, posted 02-01-2011 8:49 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 305 of 657 (602905)
02-01-2011 4:05 PM
|
Reply to: Message 304 by ringo
02-01-2011 3:59 PM
|
|
Re: Arabia
ringo writes: Remember that Moses made his first trip to Midian before the Exodus: LOL. What army is going to go after or even care about one man?
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 304 by ringo, posted 02-01-2011 3:59 PM | | ringo has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 306 by ringo, posted 02-01-2011 4:20 PM | | Buzsaw has seen this message but not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 307 of 657 (602913)
02-01-2011 4:48 PM
|
|
|
Wyatt's Sin: He Kicked Too Many Butts.
The reason Wyatt and Lennart Moller have been decried by Christian constituencies like our darling, ICR is that he kicked too many elitist ideological butts. Wyatt, the nobody non-professional anesthesia administrator for a hospital falsified the highly educated elitist professionals. He committed the ideological unpardonable sin. Years ago I exchanged some communication with Henry Morris. As much as I appreciate much of what ICR has done, I got no reasonable responses from Morris as to why he rejects the Nuweiba hypothesis. Henry Morris and ICR would have to re-tool a lot of their literature and courses etc. in the Institute, admitting to major past errors if they were to fully research the Nuweiba site. The same goes for ICR's lack of interest in researching Wyatt's alleged Noah's Ark site to attempt to falsify it. This is the case with other organizations and creationist entities who simply don't want to admit to error which as been so long propagated and published over the centuries.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 308 by jar, posted 02-01-2011 4:52 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 309 of 657 (602918)
02-01-2011 5:01 PM
|
|
|
Re: Which Map Do We Go With?
Some maps specify Arabia Petraea 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. 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.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 315 of 657 (602969)
02-01-2011 10:43 PM
|
Reply to: Message 313 by Theodoric
02-01-2011 8:05 PM
|
|
Re: Bump for Buz
Theodoric writes: Any chance you are going to answer this? Maybe provide some evidence for your claims?
Theodoric writes: Just a marine scientist's techy underwater photographs and videos of wheel and axle shaped corral crusted forms, again at the right place in the row of ducks. Who is this marine scientist? Can you show us these "techy" photos? 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.
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 313 by Theodoric, posted 02-01-2011 8:05 PM | | Theodoric has replied |
|
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 |
|
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 |
|
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 |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 332 of 657 (603205)
02-03-2011 11:20 AM
|
Reply to: Message 331 by jar
02-03-2011 9:21 AM
|
|
Re: Territories
jar writes: Buz, there is no nation of Arabia, never has been. At the time the mythological Exodus happened all of Canaan, the Sinai, both sides of the Gulf of Aqaba were Egyptian territory.
From Wiki. But that is still irrelevant to calling the area Arabia. Arabia is a geographic term just as Africa would be, not a nationality. The map does not show that Canaan and Syria etc were Egyptian, just because the colors imply that. They were separate and indigenous Kingdoms from Egypt. I understand that Arabia was then not a nation. You did not address my question. When did Sinai become a province of Arabia? All of this carries a relatively small role in the Nuweiba hypothesis, in that there is plenty of other corroborated evidence to support the Nuweiba Exodus event. Bottom line in all that has been debated in this and other Exodus threads: Nobody can henceforth truthfully allege that Buzsaw has cited no supportive I say supportive evidence for the Biblical Exodus. That is not to say that all should be expected to acknowledge that supportive evidence.
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 331 by jar, posted 02-03-2011 9:21 AM | | jar has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: More Than The Wheel
Catholic Scientist writes: Bottom line in all that has been debated in this and other Exodus threads: Nobody can henceforth truthfully allege that Buzsaw has cited no supportive I say supportive evidence for the Biblical Exodus. I don't think so, because you did it wrong. Message 283 Reading the Exodus, interpreting the story, guessing at the location, and then finding a wheel... The wheel is not supportive evidence that the Exodus happened. Its a post-hoc rationalization of something neat that you found. If you're not eliminating other possibilities for the wheel then you're not supporting anything. It's not the wheel. It's wheel and axle form S encased with coral. These forms are lying on an underwater field which is fairly void of much else such as rocks, etc. There is one which is notable in that it appears to be an upright axle with a wheel shaped form. The form resembles a pedestal table. This, corroborated by so much other evidence descriptive of the flood account is significant supportive scientific evidence of the Exodus event as described in the Biblical record. Imo, this makes every bit as much sense as some of the evidences scientists rely upon for some of their hypotheses and theories. It makes more sense than some of the people or animals which they construct from jaws or skulls etc. Edited by Buzsaw, : Overlooked spelling
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: The Scientific Method
Catholic Scientist writes: A hypothesis based on the observation of a phenomenon, i.e. evidence. In this case, the phenomenon is the Biblical Exodus account of an unusual event. The scientific method is being applied to falsify the Biblical record.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 345 by Coyote, posted 02-03-2011 8:39 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 344 of 657 (603327)
02-03-2011 8:13 PM
|
Reply to: Message 340 by PaulK
02-03-2011 2:40 PM
|
|
Re: where's the wheel?
Yes! Thank you Paul. And if you need a good look at the debris, take five minutes or so and watch Lennart Mollart's claimed evidence.
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 340 by PaulK, posted 02-03-2011 2:40 PM | | PaulK has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 347 by ringo, posted 02-03-2011 9:09 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 346 of 657 (603332)
02-03-2011 9:04 PM
|
Reply to: Message 345 by Coyote
02-03-2011 8:39 PM
|
|
Re: The Scientific Method
Coyote writes: The scientific method is being applied to falsify the Biblical record. So? What's wrong with that. You want a special exemption or something? The scientific method has already falsified the flood story. Even my own personal archaeological research has done that--it's so easy almost anyone can do it now! Any religious belief that can't stand up to scrutiny isn't worth much to start with, eh? Fair enough, Coyote. We're scrutinizing the Exodus here in this thread. How does the scientific method falsify the Exodus? The Exodus evidence corroborates the reliability of the Biblical record which alleges that Noah's flood happened.
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 345 by Coyote, posted 02-03-2011 8:39 PM | | Coyote has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 350 by Coyote, posted 02-03-2011 9:24 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2
