Does A Biblical Historical Record Exist?

quote:

---

Well the "sandbar" can't be physical evidence because it doesn't exist. And the Nuweiba site fails to fit the Biblical evidence because it is in the wrong place. And there is other evidence that indicates that the Exodus account is unreliable, late, and almost certainly ahistorical. It is not even true that the Bible claims that Mt. Sinai is in Saudi Arabia - that is an inference drawn more from the alleged evidence, than from the Biblical account itself

---

Aside from you totally missing Buzsaw's point in referring to the Biblical historical record, you are severely tempting me to divert this conversation into another Exodus debate.All I will say is that a sandbar DOES exist (yes, we have recent geological surveys that have just come out and now prove it), and the Nuweiba beach is the only place the crossing could have been, because, it IS in the right place according to the Biblical record. And yes The reason why you disagree that there is no sandbar is because your definition of "sandbar", and our definition of "sandbar" are two different things. There is no "definable" sandbar across the Nuweiba Beach. Only the Saudi Geological Surveys show the gradual gradients...and believe me, it is super deep (900+ meters) on the north side of Nuweiba Beach, and reaching up to 1300+ meters deep on the SOUTH side of Nuweiba Beach. These are actual, physical geological maps. Across Nuweiba itself the depth of the sea ranges from 100 to 300 meters deep. There is a GRADUAL slope, allowing for a peaceful crossing. And yes, Galations 4:25 tells us that Mount Sinai is in Arabia.Much of this has been documented by a Korean Doctor:
http://www.lifebookus.com/final/bookjumun.asp?gs_product=...This Korean doctor was the personal physician to the 4th in line to the Saudi throne and documents the doctor’s incredible story of living in Arabia for 20 yrs and his work around Mt. Sinai. His evidence is what postponed Lennart Moller's Exodus film. In his book he tells us what happens to the pillar Solomon put up on the Saudi side of the Red Sea crossing.I'm still waiting for your proof against all these things PaulK. Ever since I've known you, you deny evidence, yet you never have evidence to prove our evidence wrong. I'm still waiting, and I believe that I shall forever be waiting.Edited by Lysimachus, : No reason given.Edited by Lysimachus, : No reason given.

Perhaps I should jar, and I'd love to. Only problem is, the only days I have time to post in this forum are on Saturdays, and creating one would press me hard for time. Why don't you create one, and then I can respond to it as I can. I just don't want to start a thread and not be able to follow up with it like I would like to.

All you would have to do is create a thread about the Exodus.Subject: "Is there archaeological evidence for the Exodus?", for example. I never said you had to assert any "folk tales". Brian starts Biblical topics all the time, does that mean he believes in the bible?

I'll have to make a longer, more detailed response to you PaulK in the thread that Jar created. However, please bear in mind that it might be a while, so do not delete the thread. My work hours have started (I'm an online marketer), so it will be tough to find time.Just remember, however, that you will simply repeat your same arguments against what I believe to be evidence. You simply interpret what I believe to be "evidence" as "not evidence". Remember, "evidence" is all in the mind, and how you interpret it. Kind of like footage of the moon-walks. People intrepret the moon-walk footages as proof (evidence) that man did go to the moon (and rightfully so), yet another class of individuals use the same videos to supposedly "prove" (evidence) that man "didn't go to the moon". So you see, 2 different kinds of people are drawing 2 different conclusions off of the same "evidence". Edited by Lysimachus, : No reason given.Edited by Lysimachus, : No reason given.

---

~Lysimachus