Is a literal reading of the Bible an insult to its authors?

What provokes you to disbelief?Is it mathamatically impossible?Is it that you just don't want to believe anything about the Bible?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Back to this matter for a moment.You should know, Brian, that there were a great many of things recorded in the New Testamant which should have been potentially embaressing to a propogandist had they been trying to only select positive things to recount.There are many many negative things that are included which one would expect to be excluded in order to spin the story in the best light.This candidness and frankness of the New Testament suggests to many readers authenticity.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Every singlepiece of research that has looked at this problem has concluded that this population growth for the time and place is impossible.There have been a few dates proposed for the Exodus, but it normally boils down to either the mid 15th century BCE or the mid 13th century BCE, as far as the numbers go it is irrelevant which date we use.We are told that the Exodus group contained 600 000 men of fighting age (Exod. 12:37), and '' counting women, children and old men there would be 2-3 million Israelites in the Exodus group'' (Bright, J. (1972). A history of Israel. London, SCM Press: p.130).Now, to anyone familiar with the history of the Ancient Near East (ANE), this is an impossibly high figure to take as being historically accurate. Leading scholar George Mendenhall is bemused when he writes: ''Such a number would have, indeed, caused Egypt's Pharaoh consternation, for not only would there have been very little room for them in Egypt, but a group of this size could likely have taken over Egypt with or without weapons they would hardly have to fear Pharaoh’s army, which was probably at most about 20,000 men'' (Mendenhall, G.E. (1958) ”The Census lists of Numbers 1 and 26 Journal of Biblical Literature 77, pp.64-65.The number involved in the Exodus group is even more unbelievable when we have to consider that this huge group all descended from a clan of seventy who entered Egypt just 430 years earlier (some texts, for example the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint both give the length of stay in Egypt as 215 years, making this growth rate beyond the realms of reason. (Hughes, J. (1990). Secrets of the times : myth and history in Biblical chronology. Sheffield, JSOT , p.17)There are more problems with this figure. The growth rate needing to be sustained over a 430 year period is beyond the realms of possibility in the 2nd millenium BCE.Massimo Livi-Bacci tells us that the population growth rate is calculated from the remains of cities, villages, other settlements, and the extension of cultivated land'' (Livi-Bacci, M. (1992). A concise history of world population. Cambridge, Mass ; Oxford, Blackwell, p.16)He continues on page 32:In the 10,000 years prior to the birth of Christ, during which Neolithic civilisation spread from the Near East and Upper Egypt, the rate increased to 0.4 per 1,000 (which implies a doubling in less than 2,000 years) and population grew from several million to about 0.25 billion. This rate of ncrease, in spite of important cycles of growth and decline, was reinforced during the subsequent 17 and a half centuries. The population tripled to about 0.75 billion on the eve of the industrial revolution (an overall growth rate of 0.6 per 1000). To give this some perspective, we can look at the research of A. Lucas who used population figures from the Annuaire Statistique 1937-38 and discovered that the average population growth for the years 1907-1937 was just 11.69 per thousand. Even although this is clearly much higher than the growth of 0.4 per thousand that Livi-Bacci mentions, the 11.69 per thousand still casts a large shadow of doubt over the growth rate of the Exodus group. When Lucas applied the 11.69 per 1000 to the 70 of Jacob's clan over a 430 year period he arrived at the number 10,363, much lower than the 2-3 million that the Bible would have us believe.The impossibility of the growth rate required over a 430 year period for a group to grow from 70 up to 2-3 million is supported from every source I have looked at, here are another couple to prove the point. The New Encyclopaedia Britannica: Volume 25, Macropaedia, 1993.Entry PopulationPage 1041 "Before considering modern population trends separately for developing and industrialized countries, it is useful to present an overview of older trends. It is generally agreed that only 5,000,000-10,000,000 humans (i.e., one onethousandth of the present world population) were supportable before the agricultural revolution of about 10,000 years ago.

​

By the beginning of the Christian era, 8,000 years later, the' human population approximated 300,000,000, and there was apparently little increase in the ensuing millennium up to the year AD 1000.

​

Subsequent population growth was slow and fitful, especially given
the plague epidemics and other catastrophes of the Middle Ages.
By 1750, conventionally the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in Britain, world population may have been as high as 800,000,000. This means that in the 750 years from 1000 to 1750, the annual population growth rate averaged only about one-tenth of 1 percent.

​

The reasons for such slow growth are well known. In the absence of what is now considered basic knowledge of sanitation and health (the role of bacteria in disease, for example, was unknown until the 19th century), mortality rates were very high, especially for infants and children. Only about half of newborn babies survived to the age of five years. Fertility was also very high, as it had to be to sustain the existence of any population under such conditions of mortality.
Modest population growth might occur for a time in these circumstances, but recurring famines, epidemics, and wars kept long-term growth close to zero. From 1750 onward population growth accelerated. In some measure this was a consequence of rising standards of living, coupled with improved transport and communication, which mitigated the effects of localized crop failures that previously would have resulted in catastrophic mortality. Occasional famines did occur, however, and it was not until the 19th century that a sustained decline in mortality took place, stimulated by the improving economic conditions of the Industrial Revolution and the growing understanding of the need for sanitation and public health measures." Also:The World Book Encyclopedia, World Book Inc, Chicago, 1999.Page 673."Causes: For thousands of years, birth rates were high. However, the population increased slowly and sometimes declined because death rates also were high. Then, during the 1700's and 1800's, advances in agriculture, communication, and transportation improved living conditions in parts of the world and reduced the occurrence of many diseases. As a result, the death rate began to drop, and the population grew rapidly." page 674"In the industrial countries of Europe and North America, many people flocked to the cities and took jobs in factories. In cities and in many rural areas, it was difficult to support a large family. People began to see reasons for having smaller families. As a result, birth rates in these countries began to fall. In the agricultural countries of Africa, Asia, and Latin America, declines in death rates plunged quickly without corresponding declines in birth rates. As a result, the population of low-income nations and the world increased rapidly."It is not just the external data that suggests the population of 2-3 million for the Exodus group is ridiculously high, some internal information verges on the laughable.In the Book of Numbers 3:42-43 we are told: So Moses counted all the firstborn of the Israelites, as the LORD commanded him. The total number of firstborn males a month old or more, listed by name, was 22,273. How can we take this seriously when, Gray ((1903) A critical and exegetical commentary on Numbers, Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark) informs us that: The unreality of the numbers is independently proved by comparing them with one another. Thus: the number of male firstborn is 22 273, allowing the number of female firstborn to be equal, the total number of firstborn is 44 546, and, therefore, the total number of Israelites being between 2,000,000 and 2,500,000, the average number of children to a family is about 50! Again, if, as is probable, the firstborn of the mother is intended (cp3:12), then, since the number of firstborn and of mothers must have been identical, there were 44,456 mothers: but the number of women being approximately the same as of men, the women over 20 numbered something over 600,000, and therefore only about 1 in 14 or 15 women over twenty were mothers! (page:13)There’s more internal evidence to suggest that the 2-3 million of the Exodus group is artificial. Current estimates of the population of Canaan at the time of the Exodus are well below three million. Exod. 23:29 and Deut. 7:7, 17, 22 indicate that the Israelites were far fewer in number than the Canaanite population that they were to conquer ( Ashley, T. R. (1993). The book of Numbers. Grand Rapids, Mich., William B. Eerdmans. pp.60-61)So the entire ANE must have been overflowing with people, which is not what the evidence suggests.We really need to reinterpret the numbers (and there are ways to do it) suggested for the Exodus group because 2-3 million is an unrealistic number.

Jay,Could you give a couple of examples of this please?Thanks.

I did not ask about everybody's conclusions, I ask you a point blank question.Is it mathematically impossible? Yes/No is all that is required.That is the question.One of your quotes mentioned: I thought it did to the point he order all male children killed by the midwives.I notice so far you have totally ignored my Message 4 which was a direct address to your questions you raised in your OP. As you and jaywill scattered a covey of quail and began trying to chase them all down.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

I am constructing a reply to message 4, take a chill pill, it's a discussion board not a chat room. Mathematically impossible: No.But you also asked: What provokes you to disbelief? That was the first question you asked, and the information I provided gave you some of my reasons for disbelief.So you asked two questions, and the info I provided demonstrates the impossibility of the historical accuracy of the numbers involved.Edited by Brian, : forgot to answer icant's first question.

That is correct because it is mathematically possible for there to have been 19 million people 26 years of age and under. I went back and reread my post and you are correct I did ask two questions.The information you provided demonstrates the reason you have come to the conclusion that it is impossible.Does that mean it is impossible? Yes/NoGod Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

It's mathematically possible for there to have been any number you care to name. But, as Brian showed you above, your own infallible holy book makes this sort of inflated number ridiculous! Fifty kids per family? The Hebrews outnumbering their captors by a huge margin? Silly stuff!

---

"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD

Yes.

Impossible is a very strong word.What you are saying is that for it to be possible to have occurred a long list of extremely unlikely conditions have to have applied.We have good reason for saying that some of the conditions did not apply therefore, under this situation, it is impossible. But now we have to argue the particular conditions.

I don't think so. At least, it desn't necessarily call Jesus a liar.

quote:

---

Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

---

Jesus could just have easily been referring to the Jonas story while knowing that it was an allegory.For example, if Jesus had said something like: Just like Tom Sawyer whitewashed the fence, so shall the Son of man paint the temple white.... Or something like that, he wouldn't necessarily be saying that Tom Sawyer was a real person who really whitewashed a fence. Just because he referenced the story, doesn't mean that he is saying that the story is literally true.Make sense?

I will accept that you believe your answer.I will not ask you to provide me with the facts that would back up your answer as life is too short.But I don't want you to think I will accept your position without those facts.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Well if he was referring to an event that never happened as an allegory.Would that not mean that He was referring to something He was going to do but it would be nothing just like the fish story.Either the fish story was an actual fact that Jesus was referring to or He was lying when He said He was going to be in the heart of the earth 72 hrs like Jonas and then come forth from the grave.That puts me and presumably you down the creek without a paddle to get back upstream.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

In any academic writing I do I really avoid using absolutes because we never know what discoveries there will be in the future.However, these conditions I mentioned are by no means all of the problems, the logistical problems havent even been looked at. For example, as we have seen before, an old fashioned column of 4 abreast would mean that the column of people in the Exodus group would stretch right across the Sinai desert to Palestine and back again.Plus there is the huge problem of this 2-3 million population being completely invisible in the archaeological record of Egypt, the Sinai, and Palestine.But, you are correct, in historical research the word 'impossible' should be avoided, 'implausible' or 'unlikely' would be better words.

Jonah wasn't in the heart of the earth, and Jonah wasn't dead when he entered the fish, so Jesus' adventure is really nothing like Jonah's at all, apart from the 3 day reference.