Proof of the Torah

[Jayhawker Soule]

There is absolutely no evidence it was actually base do any such exodus from Egypt of any proportions or nature as described in the the Old Testament.

What are your three favorite books on Syro-Palestinian Archaeology?

And what does any of this have to do with the specious claim that "it seems that the exodus may have been based on an actual exodus from Babylon"?

(I get so tired of people pretending that they are qualified to speak on area in which they are maximally ignorant.)

 

[shunyadragon]

What are your three favorite books on Syro-Palestinian Archaeology?

And what does any of this have to do with the specious claim that "it seems that the exodus may have been based on an actual exodus from Babylon"?

(I get so tired of people pretending that they are qualified to speak on area in which they are maximally ignorant.)

Air ball!?!?!? no answer

 

[shunyadragon]

Can you give me an example of a story that doesn't involve or relate to Jews in there?


From Genesis it seems like G-d expects people to seek Him rather than Him seeking people.

From the Jewish perspective finding God is only the God exclusively of the Old Testament. A rather unrealistic view of the relationship to God Creation and humanity.

 

[Nakosis]

Can you give me an example of a story that doesn't involve or relate to Jews in there?

Or Muslims or Christians. Genesis pretty much relates to everyone doesn't it. I don't know why you're singling out Jews.

From Genesis it seems like G-d expects people to seek Him rather than Him seeking people.

Seems to me like God wants folks to obey him. Kind of hard to do if only a few know the rules.

I've looked into other parts of the Bible. Since the Torah is the basis of Christianity, Islam and Judaism I thought it important to examine it as well.

 

[Tumah]

Or Muslims or Christians. Genesis pretty much relates to everyone doesn't it. I don't know why you're singling out Jews.

No it doesn't. Genesis records Jewish ancestry from Adam to the 12 tribes. Anyone not related to that subject is only mentioned by their relationship to these people. Ishmael presents as a foil for Isaac, Esau for Jacob. Once that's done they're not mentioned again.

How much does Genesis tell you about Ishmael's grandchildren and how much does it tell you about Isaac's? According to internal recording, Genesis was given as part of th5 Books of Moses by G-d to the Jews and it records Jewish ancestry stories of interest, and commandments of the Jewish people.

Why wouldn't I single out Jews?

Seems to me like God wants folks to obey him. Kind of hard to do if only a few know the rules.

Seems to me like the Torah repeatedly specifies the Jews as the subject G-d commands. Nowhere are the Jews commanded to spread the word.

I've looked into other parts of the Bible. Since the Torah is the basis of Christianity, Islam and Judaism I thought it important to examine it as well.

If I claim that I'm the spiritual descendant of whales, that doesn't make it true, nor does it make Moby Dick into a book about my ancestors.

 

[Nakosis]

No it doesn't. Genesis records Jewish ancestry from Adam to the 12 tribes. Anyone not related to that subject is only mentioned by their relationship to these people. Ishmael presents as a foil for Isaac, Esau for Jacob. Once that's done they're not mentioned again.

How much does Genesis tell you about Ishmael's grandchildren and how much does it tell you about Isaac's? According to internal recording, Genesis was given as part of th5 Books of Moses by G-d to the Jews and it records Jewish ancestry stories of interest, and commandments of the Jewish people.

Why wouldn't I single out Jews?

Because the Torah doesn't belong only to the Jews. As a Christian I was raised on stories of the Torah. Though honestly I was often surprised coming across other Christian who didn't know who didn't for example know the story of Noah and the Ark.

Seems to me like the Torah repeatedly specifies the Jews as the subject G-d commands. Nowhere are the Jews commanded to spread the word.

Yet the Quran references the Torah many times and Christians claim salvation would come through the Jews.

If I claim that I'm the spiritual descendant of whales, that doesn't make it true, nor does it make Moby Dick into a book about my ancestors.

Claiming anything doesn't make it true. If Exodus didn't happen, if Moses never existed then the Torah isn't even about the Jews. If it is folklore then Christian and Muslims claims to the Torah are as good as any other. It's part of their religious history as much as the Jews. If the biblical God exists, then it's history belongs to everybody.

If there's not, then one fictional account about God is as good as any other.

 

[viole]

Is there proof that any event that is claimed to have happened in the Torah having actually happened?

So, what is more likely?

That God's chosen people and center of interest are only in that circle?

Or that the people in that circle made up a God who chose them, and has them as the main center of interest?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Is there proof that any event that is claimed to have happened in the Torah having actually happened?

What's sad is that if that wasn't "holy land," then nobody would be fighting over it, because it's basically a wasteland covered with rocks and tumbleweeds. Sort of like Detroit without the good music.

 

[Akivah]

What's sad is that if that wasn't "holy land," then nobody would be fighting over it, because it's basically a wasteland covered with rocks and tumbleweeds.

Nope, when the Arabs had control of it, it was a desolation. Mark Twain in 1867 was very descriptive of it.

A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds… a silent mournful expanse…. a desolation…. we never saw a human being on the whole route…. hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country.”

The Arabs only wanted to re-assert control after the Israelis made it bloom.

 

[Tumah]

Because the Torah doesn't belong only to the Jews.

If by that you mean because it was stolen ny other religions, than yes, I agree. Otherwise, the Torah makes it quite clear that it was intended for Jews. See Deut. 33:4 for instance.

As a Christian I was raised on stories of the Torah. Though honestly I was often surprised coming across other Christian who didn't know who didn't for example know the story of Noah and the Ark.

Yeah, and?

Yet the Quran references the Torah many times and Christians claim salvation would come through the Jews.

And yet they can't both be right, right? That means theTorah was only intended to teach one of these religions and the other appropriated it as a basis for itself. Alternatively, they both did that and the Torah's real owners are the people it was actually given to.

Claiming anything doesn't make it true. If Exodus didn't happen, if Moses never existed then the Torah isn't even about the Jews. If it is folklore then Christian and Muslims claims to the Torah are as good as any other. It's part of their religious history as much as the Jews. If the biblical God exists, then it's history belongs to everybody.

If there's not, then one fictional account about God is as good as any other.

If I fabricate a mythology for my family claiming to be the New Sioux or Cherokee, does that mean their folklore becomes mine too now? That's apropriation. It might not get you anything in court, but its not nice.

 

[Nakosis]

So, what is more likely?

That God's chosen people and center of interest are only in that circle?

Or that the people in that circle made up a God who chose them, and has them as the main center of interest?

Ciao

- viole

Well... Unless there is evidence to show otherwise. Kind of sorry I put that in there. I thought it was an interesting point. Didn't really expect it to become the focus of the thread.

 

[Nakosis]

If by that you mean because it was stolen ny other religions, than yes, I agree. Otherwise, the Torah makes it quite clear that it was intended for Jews. See Deut. 33:4 for instance.

You do realize Muslims also see Jacob as a patriarch of their religion as well. You want to claim the Torah as well as the Muslims and Christians. Religious claims, you remember what you said about claims.

Yeah, and?

And the Torah belongs to the heritage of these others religions as much as the Jews. I understand, you feel there's something special about the Jews. Muslims feel there is something special about Muslims, Christians feel there is something special about Christians. Good fer all you. Personally I don't care. None of this gives any religion any special credibility.

And yet they can't both be right, right? That means the Torah was only intended to teach one of these religions and the other appropriated it as a basis for itself. Alternatively, they both did that and the Torah's real owners are the people it was actually given to.

The people it was given to no longer exist. It's just a heritage different religions lay claim to. You personally feel your claim is better? Well so do they. Your personal religious identity really affords you no greater credibility then theirs. But, you are free to believe otherwise.

If I fabricate a mythology for my family claiming to be the New Sioux or Cherokee, does that mean their folklore becomes mine too now? That's apropriation. It might not get you anything in court, but its not nice.

No but your kids may grow up believing it and feel they have all the rights to the folklore as anyone else laying claim to it. And without proof otherwise, who's to say they don't?

 

[Tumah]

You do realize Muslims also see Jacob as a patriarch of their religion as well. You want to claim the Torah as well as the Muslims and Christians. Religious claims, you remember what you said about claims.

I don't wanttoclaim the Muslims and Christians. They can have themselves.

My claim to the Torah is based on lineage. It was given to us. This is recorded in the Torah and explicitly stated. Whether G-d gave it to us or human authors wrote it, they made it clear who the intended recipients are.

And the Torah belongs to the heritage of these others religions as much as the Jews. I understand, you feel there's something special about the Jews. Muslims feel there is something special about Muslims, Christians feel there is something special about Christians. Good fer all you. Personally I don't care. None of this gives any religion any special credibility.

This has nothing to do with any special feelings. Our claim is consistent with what is internally claimed by the Author or authors. None of the other religions can make that claim.

The people it was given to no longer exist. It's just a heritage different religions lay claim to. You personally feel your claim is better? Well so do they. Your personal religious identity really affords you no greater credibility then theirs. But, you are free to believe otherwise.

Sure it does. It was given to my nation, my ancestors with the command to form my religion.

No but your kids may grow up believing it and feel they have all the rights to the folklore as anyone else laying claim to it. And without proof otherwise, who's to say they don't?

Because they don't have proof that their claim is valid. My lids are Caucasian without any Native American ancestry. If I were to raise them with that mythology, they should rightfully stop claiming it when they learn that it was appropriated.

 

[Nakosis]

I don't wanttoclaim the Muslims and Christians. They can have themselves.

My claim to the Torah is based on lineage. It was given to us. This is recorded in the Torah and explicitly stated. Whether G-d gave it to us or human authors wrote it, they made it clear who the intended recipients are.

What lineage? The only evidence of this lineage at best is you share DNA with all the other folks who had ancestry from the middle-east. Anyone who has this ancestry from the middle east can make this claim and it may even be true. However, somehow because of your religious identity you feel you have the better claim.

This has nothing to do with any special feelings. Our claim is consistent with what is internally claimed by the Author or authors. None of the other religions can make that claim.

Look, sorry, your the one making this about your religious identity and your religion. So your religious history is better than everyone else's religious history because you feel your religious identity gives your narrative greater credibility. It doesn't. It just doesn't. I don't know what else to tell you.

Sure it does. It was given to my nation, my ancestors with the command to form my religion.

According to you and your religious belief. Great

Because they don't have proof that their claim is valid. My lids are Caucasian without any Native American ancestry. If I were to raise them with that mythology, they should rightfully stop claiming it when they learn that it was appropriated.

Guess what, neither do you.

 

[shunyadragon]

What are your three favorite books on Syro-Palestinian Archaeology?

Let us start with Bart Ehrman's questioning the historicity of Exodus. I believe his question concerning the lack of evidence and conflicting archeological evidence for a historical evidence. The first question is the inflated number of Hebrews involved. I will post a series of references for his analysis of the historical evidence:

[cite=[URL="https://ehrmanblog.org/historical-problems-with-the-hebrew-bible-the-exodus-narrative-for-members/"]Historical Problems with the Hebrew Bible: The Exodus Narrative[/URL]]
Exodus from a Historical Perspective

It has proved difficult for biblical scholars to establish when these events are to have taken place. The most common dating of the exodus event places it around 1250 BCE, both because the text indicates that the Israelites had been in Egypt for 430 years (which would coincide roughly with the narrative of Genesis, when Joseph would have gone to Egypt at the beginning of the 17th century BCE, according to the chronology we adopted there) and because of two other considerations.

The first is a hint provided in Exod. 1:11, that the Hebrew slaves were forced to build the cities of Pi-Ramses and Pithon; both cities actually were rebuilt or reoccupied in the mid-13th century BCE. The second is an archaeological discovery of a stele (a stone pillar) erected at the end of the 13th century by the Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah (who ruled 1213-1203 BCE). On this stele is an inscription in which the Pharaoh boasts that he has conquered various other nations, including the land of Israel: “Israel is laid waste, its seed is not.” This is the earliest reference from outside the Bible to anything having to do with Israel or the Bible itself, and so is very valuable. What it shows beyond reasonable dispute is that Israel existed, as a recognizable people, in the land, sometime in the late 13th century. If the events celebrated in the book of Exodus happened sometime soon before this, then they are probably to be dated to the mid 13th century. If that is the case, then it was Menerptah’s grandfather, Pharaoh Seti I (1294-1279) who would have first enslaved the Israelites, and his son Seti’s son, Ramses II (1279-1213) who would have been the Pharaoh at the time of the exodus.

But you may well be wondering: if according to the book of Exodus Pharaoh and his the “entire army” (see 14:6, 9, 23) were destroyed in the Sea of Reeds, how is it that Egypt was still such a major military power afterwards and that Pharaoh Merneptah could have conquered so many lands, as attested on the Merneptah stele?

That is in fact a problem with this narrative. And it is not the only one. Biblical scholars have long identified a number of difficulties that the exodus account presents– making it hard to think that everything happened as it is described in the book. As was the case with the ancestral narratives of Genesis, we may be dealing with legends, not with objective historical facts. Consider the following issues: [/cite]

The problem of these issues will follow.

And what does any of this have to do with the specious claim that "it seems that the exodus may have been based on an actual exodus from Babylon"?

The parallel is possible, because the exodus from Babylon is historically reasonably documented, and the exodus has no consistent evidence to support it, and there are too many contradictions with the archeological evidence and the account.

In the region of the Hills of Judah and Palestine there is no evidence of an invasion that corresponds to the claim of exodus.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What are your three favorite books on Syro-Palestinian Archaeology?

Let us start with Bart Ehrman's questioning the historicity of Exodus.

No, let's start with your three favorite books on Syro-Palestinian Archaeology? You've yet to list one. Rather, you try to impress us with your your web browsing in the service of selection bias.

 

[wizanda]

Can you give me an example of a story that doesn't involve or relate to Jews in there?

Isaiah 24, Isaiah 34 are talking about Judgement on the whole world for not understanding the things in Isaiah.

It is a good job YHVH wasn't going to ask the Jews to share this information, and be priests to the world (Isaiah 61:6, Zechariah 8:23).

 

[shunyadragon]

No, let's start with your three favorite books on Syro-Palestinian Archaeology? You've yet to list one. Rather, you try to impress us with your your web browsing in the service of selection bias.

I consider this a failure to respond. I may cite books in the future. Put you answers as responses and not mouthing off!!!!!

There is no archeological evidence for the existence of Moses, datable exodus, nor and invasion of Palestine. There is evidence of Egypt's conquest of the Canaanite 's and Hebrews of the Hills of Judah and taking slaves, but that is all folks!!

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I consider this a failure to respond.

OK.

I may cite books in the future.

I'll happily give you time to read one.

Put you answers as responses and not mouthing off!!!!!

You forgot an exclamation point.

(Parenthetically, don't presume to give orders here and expect anything other than warranted derision in return.)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

@shunyadragon, let's review and reset this discussion.

1. It seems that the exodus may have been based on an actual exodus from Babylon.

2. 

3. Yes, a very real option.

4. There is absolutely no evidence it was actually base do any such exodus from Egypt of any proportions or nature as described in the the Old Testament.

Now listen very carefully: even assuming that quote #4 approximated a coherent sentence, deprecating the Exodus narrative in no way serves as evidence "that the exodus may have been based on an actual exodus from Babylon," nor does it elevate such nonsense to the status of "a very real option."

If you can offer any peer-reviewed work suggesting such a basis please feel free to reference it.