Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did the Biblical Exodus ever happen?
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 166 of 657 (599301)
01-06-2011 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Buzsaw
01-06-2011 12:46 PM


Re: Wyatt Only The Pioneer Explorer
quote:
But Lennart Moller, Swedish marine biologist scientist deemed Wyatt's evidence credible enough to spend his time and resources with his marine exploratory marine vessel equipped with suitable cameras etc for researching the site. He is the one who featured the Exodus Video and wrote the Exodus Case book.
Moller's speciality is, IIRC, Environmental Medicine. And didn't come up with any significant evidence. Nor, it seems, did he recruit any marine archaeologists - or if he did, their reports have somehow eluded even the Wyatt supporters such as yourself.
quote:
Some of the dates have been questioned and debated due to the tendency of Pharaohs to skew the dates and obliterate info which might damage their own reputation.
This brings us on to the treatment of Egyptian history in Moller's book. I confess that I believe it to be due to Wyatt since it is clear that the originator of the ideas was hopelessly ignorant and incapable of even reading a popular level book. If so then we have no choice but to believe that Moller foolishly trusted Ron Wyatt. But bad as that is for your case it would be worse still if Moller made it up himself.
Clearly Moller was gullible and foolish at best, and his example is a warning against trusting Wyatt.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 12:46 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 167 of 657 (599302)
01-06-2011 1:05 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Buzsaw
01-06-2011 12:46 PM


Re: Wyatt Only The Pioneer Explorer
But Lennart Moller, Swedish marine biologist scientist
Bullshit. Dr. Moller has no training or expertise in archaeology or anything marine related.
quote:
He is a research scientist in the field of medicine and DNA-research. Dr. Mller has studied a number of subjects (limnology, marine biology, toxicology, chemistry) at the Universities of Uppsala and Stockholm and has a doctors degree in medicine from the Karolinska Institutet (KI).
Info from the website for Exodus Case
We have debunked Moller and his crap before. Do you want to rehash this? I can certainly dig everything up again.
Moller's purpose was not to self promote and make spectacular announcements.
And you know this how? Because he is a good Christian? Do you ever provide evidence for assertions?
It is amazing how you fundies and creos are so willing to push this guys crap just be cause he has Dr. in front of his name. He is a Dr of medicine. That makes him no more qualified to write a book about archaeology than I am.
There was also a woman scientist named in the Video (forgot name) who did some research on the Saudi side of the crossing, also considering the discovery to be valid.
Oh yeah that cinches it. What field is she a scientist in? Botany?
Some of the dates have been questioned and debated due to the tendency of Pharaohs to skew the dates and obliterate info which might damage their own reputation. It also behooved Egypt to conceal, as much as possible, the devastation of Egypt's defense military so as not to embolden enemy nations to attack.
How about looking up these words.
Assertion.
Evidence.
Do you truly not know what evidence is?

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 12:46 PM Buzsaw has not replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 168 of 657 (599316)
01-06-2011 2:33 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Buzsaw
01-06-2011 12:46 PM


Re: Wyatt Only The Pioneer Explorer
Some of the dates have been questioned and debated due to the tendency of Pharaohs to skew the dates and obliterate info which might damage their own reputation. It also behooved Egypt to conceal, as much as possible, the devastation of Egypt's defense military so as not to embolden enemy nations to attack.
It might have helped if the compiler of Exodus had been nice enough to name the Pharoah.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 12:46 PM Buzsaw has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 169 of 657 (599318)
01-06-2011 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Buzsaw
01-06-2011 12:46 PM


Re: Wyatt Only The Pioneer Explorer
Hi Buz,
It's great that you saw a video and read a book. Please post again when you have some evidence to report.
Some of the dates have been questioned and debated due to the tendency of Pharaohs to skew the dates and obliterate info which might damage their own reputation. It also behooved Egypt to conceal, as much as possible, the devastation of Egypt's defense military so as not to embolden enemy nations to attack.
You need to stop finding excuses for why there's no evidence and instead find some positive evidence. Ask yourself what kind of evidence you would need to tell the difference between an event that never happened and one that was flawlessly covered up.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 12:46 PM Buzsaw has not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 170 of 657 (599319)
01-06-2011 2:52 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by Percy
01-06-2011 12:22 PM


Re: Reviewing The Evidence
Percy writes:
But if Egyptian chariot wheels were actually discovered in a plausible location for the Exodus, and if they were dated to the proper period, then it would be positive and intriguing evidence consistent with the Exodus story.
We need evidence which is more than just "consistent" with the Exodus story. We need evidence that actually supports the Exodus story. A hubcap from a '56 Chevy is consistent with a conspiracy to assassinate JFK but it adds no credence to a conspiracy theory.

"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 162 by Percy, posted 01-06-2011 12:22 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Percy, posted 01-06-2011 3:09 PM ringo has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 171 of 657 (599324)
01-06-2011 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by ringo
01-06-2011 2:52 PM


Re: Reviewing The Evidence
ringo writes:
We need evidence which is more than just "consistent" with the Exodus story. We need evidence that actually supports the Exodus story. A hubcap from a '56 Chevy is consistent with a conspiracy to assassinate JFK but it adds no credence to a conspiracy theory.
For the sake of discussion let's say that the Exodus really happened and that there are chariot wheels from Pharaoh's army lying at the bottom of the Red Sea. If we eventually discovered these chariot wheels and through analysis discovered that they were at a plausible location and date for the Exodus, then you need a method that doesn't ignore this evidence.
It's interesting to watch both creationists and evolutionists employing the identical tactic from opposite sides. ICANT is presented a progression of skulls and says they do nothing more than "prove that a creature existed at one time that had that particular skull" (Message 350). Evolutionists in this thread are saying that, in effect, "all that proves is that Egyptian chariot wheels existed at the time of the Exodus."
Both sides are trying to connect the dots between pieces of evidence. The creationists are at somewhat of a disadvantage in that their evidence is either non-existent or made up, but to the extent they do have evidence we have to carefully and honestly consider its implications.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by ringo, posted 01-06-2011 2:52 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by PaulK, posted 01-06-2011 3:35 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 174 by ringo, posted 01-06-2011 3:47 PM Percy has replied
 Message 175 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 8:48 PM Percy has replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 172 of 657 (599331)
01-06-2011 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by Buzsaw
01-06-2011 8:46 AM


Re: Reviewing The Evidence
To save you the work Buz, I'm going to review the "evidence" in this thread myself.
The first of your posts to claim evidence is Message 35
THe claim is that the split rock was eroded by water. However it is not made clear why this should be concluded, presumably it is simply based on superficial appearance, without even the benefit of a knowledge of geology.
As Jar noted the rock fragments in the "channel" show no sign of being shaped by running water. And if the miraculous water created the split and the "channel" (neither mentioned in the Bible) is supposed to have cause the erosion it seems odd that it is so narrow - not if it is supposed to supply sufficient water for millions of people and their livestock as you insist.
It seems likely that this is simply an example of wind erosion - unsurprising in a desert.
In Message 35 you attempt to use the petroglyphs at Jebel-al-Lawz again. However, the bible mentions no petroglyphs and the cherry-picking of a single image while ignoring the rest seems less than honest. Even if there had been only a single picture of a cow this would be weak. Since there is much, much more which has no special fit with the Bible it is worthless.
In Message 48 you introduce the red herring that the NT refers to Mount Sinai as being in Arabia. As you know from previous discussion in NT times "Arabia" included the traditional location thus this is no evidence against that location at all. We'll get on to your other assertion later...
In Message 62 you claim that the Bible locates Mount Sinai in Midian. This is false, and therefore is not evidence for your case.
And then we get into your claims about the location, for instance Message 75 :
In Exodus 14:1-4 Jehovah instructs Moses into a region where they will be entrapped by the wilderness and the sea, leaving no escape route.
I doubt that anyone who knows you will be surprised when they read Exodus 14:1-4 and find that there is no mention of any such instruction.
To get into the details the size is irrelevant to identifying the "real" crossing site. because if there was any Exodus event it is almost certain that the number of people was far lower than the Bible says. Without confirmation of the numbers we can't use that.
The mountains and wadi are pure invention. he Bible neither mentions nor implies any such thing. It does clearly indicate that the chariot's mobility and speed were a threat to the Israelites, implying flat level terrain (Exodus 14:25)
And that is it. Your "best" evidence in this thread is a rock which you THINK was eroded by water, but likely wasn't. The next best is a bovine petroglyph which in all likelihood has nothing to do with the Bible or the Exodus story at all. The rest all relies on falsehoods and cannot be considered evidence for your claims at all.
Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 8:46 AM Buzsaw has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17822
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 173 of 657 (599336)
01-06-2011 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Percy
01-06-2011 3:09 PM


Re: Reviewing The Evidence
I think that you are being a little unfair. The context and the strength of the links does matter. There is plenty of evidence against the Exodus story as we have it and the simple existence of a few chariot wheels in the Red Sea wouldn't change that. If we had a good date for the Exodus and the wheels could be dated to that time then it would be much, much better. But, of course, we don't even have a good reason to think that the coral formations contain chariot wheels in the first place.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Percy, posted 01-06-2011 3:09 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

ringo
Member (Idle past 412 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 174 of 657 (599338)
01-06-2011 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Percy
01-06-2011 3:09 PM


Re: Reviewing The Evidence
Percy writes:
If we eventually discovered these chariot wheels and through analysis discovered that they were at a plausible location and date for the Exodus, then you need a method that doesn't ignore this evidence.
I'm not proposing that we ignore the evidence. I'm saying that even if the evidence is authenticated, it still needs to be connected to the actual events in question.
We know there were '56 Chevys at the time of the JFK assassination but no, finding a hubcap in Texas is not corroborating evidence for a conspiracy theory. We know that there were Egyptian chariots at the time of the Exodus but no, finding a wheel is not corroborating evidence for the Exodus. There are a thousand and one ways that it could have gotten there and it's up to the claimant to draw a positive connection to his claim.
Since the creationists are already at a disadvantage, it does no good to encourage them to pursue lines of evidence that don't even strengthen their case.

"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 171 by Percy, posted 01-06-2011 3:09 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by Percy, posted 01-07-2011 7:51 AM ringo has seen this message but not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 175 of 657 (599374)
01-06-2011 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Percy
01-06-2011 3:09 PM


Re: Reviewing The Evidence
Percy writes:
The creationists are at somewhat of a disadvantage in that their evidence is either non-existent or made up,
Non-existent or made up?
Not only do these ducks exist, but they're all lined up in the order that they need to be to support the Biblical record.
There was mention of an Oasis in the wilderness which there is. There is also a column which may or may not be evidence. on the beach. The record mentions Moses erecting something of that nature.
Now, Percy, whether or not you want to acknowledge that evidence, how can you alleged that creationist supportive evidence is either non-existent or made up?
One problem with research in the region is that the Islamic Saudi Arabia has a vested interest in undermining the Biblical record. Researchers are forbidden access to the mountain and the region near it. I understand that areas are fenced off allowing no access.
I believe it would not be legal to remove artifacts from the sea floor due to the Egyptians and Saudis but am not sure how that works or who has sovereignty over the sea borders.
One problem with removing the wheel evidence would be keeping it intact for removal and analysis.
Jar is questioning the waterflow evidence at the split rock. I will be addressing this objection.
Edited by Buzsaw, : Neatly line up ducks.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Time Relates To What Is Temperal. What Is Eternal Is Timeless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Percy, posted 01-06-2011 3:09 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by jar, posted 01-06-2011 9:08 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 180 by Theodoric, posted 01-06-2011 10:00 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 190 by PaulK, posted 01-07-2011 1:52 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 193 by Percy, posted 01-07-2011 9:08 AM Buzsaw has not replied
 Message 195 by Percy, posted 01-07-2011 10:24 AM Buzsaw has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 176 of 657 (599376)
01-06-2011 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Buzsaw
01-06-2011 8:48 PM


Duck one is dead.
Buz writes:
The Biblical record of the Exodus said that when they reached the sea they were entrapped with the pursuing Egyptians pursuing via the only route in, implying a wadi in a narrow passage through rugged terrain.
Again Buz, I have to wonder if you have ever read the Bible or even this thread.
That was dealt with way back in Message 77 where I included the passage from the Exodus 14.
quote:
1 Then the LORD said to Moses, 2 "Tell the Israelites to turn back and encamp near Pi Hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea. They are to encamp by the sea, directly opposite Baal Zephon. 3 Pharaoh will think, 'The Israelites are wandering around the land in confusion, hemmed in by the desert.' 4 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and he will pursue them. But I will gain glory for myself through Pharaoh and all his army, and the Egyptians will know that I am the LORD." So the Israelites did this.
5 When the king of Egypt was told that the people had fled, Pharaoh and his officials changed their minds about them and said, "What have we done? We have let the Israelites go and have lost their services!" 6 So he had his chariot made ready and took his army with him. 7 He took six hundred of the best chariots, along with all the other chariots of Egypt, with officers over all of them. 8 The LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh king of Egypt, so that he pursued the Israelites, who were marching out boldly. 9 The Egyptiansall Pharaoh's horses and chariots, horsemen and troops pursued the Israelites and overtook them as they camped by the sea near Pi Hahiroth, opposite Baal Zephon.
There is NOTHING in it that suggests there are geological features holding the Israelites up. In fact it totally refutes the idea that it was geography slowing them down, rather it is God that steps in and tells them to stop and wait for Pharaoh. There is no mention of some wadi or any geographic restrictions.
Let's finally deal with this and then address all the rest of your so called ducks in order.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 8:48 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 9:58 PM jar has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 177 of 657 (599377)
01-06-2011 9:28 PM


Unique Waterflow Of The Exodus Rock
In Message 36 Jar linked an example of a water brook showing assorted smooth rocks. Then he linked a view of the what is acclaimed to be waterflow evidence at the base of the Midian split rock.
Jar alleges that the rocks at the base of the Midian rock should resemble those in his link.
Jar alleges that the Midian rock is not water flow evidence but eroded rock pieces which have fallen in place from the large formation.
Take a good look at the Midian waterflow. Notice how even and smoothed the bed of the flow is going from inside the split nice and evenly spread all of the length of what is visible in the photo. This is indicative of a stream which smothened out this stream bed.
Rock pieces falling from the large formation would have been piled up randomly where they fell.
Jar claims that the rocks should resemble his example of a brook bed. This is nonsense, for the reason the brook rocks would have been washed from the soil in the bed where the water flowed and washed them. They would have been assorted colors and types of rockes.
The water flow from the formation would have been fragments of the large formation that fell and gushed in place when Moses struck the rock and it was broken. The water would have smothened the bed along just as it appears. The rocks would have been of one color and type, having come from the once large single rock.
How long that flow lasted is unknown. Likely it was not long enough to smothen out the fragments as Jar alleges they should be, similar to his example.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Time Relates To What Is Temperal. What Is Eternal Is Timeless.

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by jar, posted 01-06-2011 9:37 PM Buzsaw has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 178 of 657 (599378)
01-06-2011 9:37 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by Buzsaw
01-06-2011 9:28 PM


Nudder dead duck.
Let's look at that evidence Buz, it was covered in Message 28 and in Message 36.
In Message 36 I provided a link to what water flow eroded rocks look like. They are rounded. They have been tumbled. There are no images of water eroded rocks at Horeb.
In addition, the rock claimed as the rock at Horeb is not at all unusual and I provided many links to similar split rock formations from all over the world.
The readers can judge on their own.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 9:28 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 10:16 PM jar has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 179 of 657 (599384)
01-06-2011 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by jar
01-06-2011 9:08 PM


Re: No Ducks Dead
jar writes:
There is NOTHING in it that suggests there are geological features holding the Israelites up. In fact it totally refutes the idea that it was geography slowing them down, rather it is God that steps in and tells them to stop and wait for Pharaoh. There is no mention of some wadi or any geographic restrictions
Jar, you continual allegement that ole man Buz who's been studiously into the Bible for 60 plus years is a Biblical novice is getting wearisome. Lay off it.
Obviously you're unaware of Exodus 14:2, 3. Jehovah is telling Moses what will happen after they follow his instructions.
Exodus 14:2, 3 (ASV)
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, that they turn back and encamp before Pihahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, before Baal-zephon: over against it shall ye encamp by the sea.
3 And Pharaoh will say of the children of Israel, They are entangled in the land, the wilderness hath shut them in.
Entangled is synonymous to entrapped. They are shut in, i.e. entrapped.
It is also logical to assume that they were entrapped in rugged terrain. Else they would have fled by an escape route. Go figure.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
Time Relates To What Is Temperal. What Is Eternal Is Timeless.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by jar, posted 01-06-2011 9:08 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by jar, posted 01-06-2011 10:08 PM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 187 by DrJones*, posted 01-07-2011 12:04 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 180 of 657 (599385)
01-06-2011 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Buzsaw
01-06-2011 8:48 PM


Re: Reviewing The Evidence
One problem with research in the region is that the Islamic Saudi Arabia has a vested interest in undermining the Biblical record.
Another assertion. Any evidence?
Why would the Saudi's have a vested interest in undermining the biblical record. Do you know anything about Islam?t Any idea how the Islamic religion feels about Moses? You might want to learn something about the subject.
I believe it would not be legal to remove artifacts from the sea floor due to the Egyptians and Saudis but am not sure how that works or who has sovereignty over the sea borders.
In other words you know nothing about the subject and you are talking out of your ass.
One problem with removing the wheel evidence would be keeping it intact for removal and analysis.
Ever hear of underwater archaeology? There are professionals that do this. Not scam artists like Wyatt and Moller.
I noticed you never responded to the posts showing you that your representation of Moller's qualifications was a lie.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 8:48 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Buzsaw, posted 01-06-2011 10:49 PM Theodoric has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024