jump to last post 1-42 of 42 discussions (410 posts)

The bible has now been proven worthless

  1. Mark Knowles profile image60
    Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago

    So - it appears that the lie of the Hebrews enslaved by Egypt has now been proven wrong. This makes the entire bible story rather worthless.

    http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/the … h-1.420844
    http://waywrong.wordpress.com/2008/09/1 … them-free/
    http://www.ourweekly.com/spiritual-livi … y-enslaved

    So - no Moses, no wandering through the desert - nothing. Makes the entire religion somewhat of a sham.

    Thoughts?

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Good point. If there is no evidence for the OT and if it even the history turns out to be fiction, then that completely nullifies the NT and the Quran for that matter.

    2. 0
      Motown2Chitownposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Maybe useless in terms of proving anything religion-wise, but still helpful for those of us who don't use it as a weapon and simply refer to parts of it for inspiration to become better people.  smile

      1. habee profile image90
        habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I agree! How can trying to emulate the life of Christ be a bad thing?

        1. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Jesus was a Lib. lol

          You hate Libs.

          1. habee profile image90
            habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I don't hate libs! Socially, I'm pretty much a lib. Fiscally, I'm more conservative.

            How ya been, Mark?

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Horrible, but mending. big_smile You?

          2. 0
            Motown2Chitownposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            He was indeed.  smile

            And habee's like me.  She doesn't hate anyone/anything.

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Well - she has a low opinion of them far as I can tell from her political posts. wink

              1. 0
                Motown2Chitownposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I think she gets discouraged with the crazy ones...lol  And, she is southern, you know.  Even the liberal southerner is more conservative than your average liberal. 

                BUT, she's a great lady and a lot of fun.

                big_smile

                1. habee profile image90
                  habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  What a sweet comment. Thanks!

              2. habee profile image90
                habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                lol  Nah, just the unreasonable ones.

        2. 0
          Motown2Chitownposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Thanks, habee.  You and I agree a lot...lol  That must mean you're a wise and compassionate woman; kind and refined.  Need I go on?  lol

          smile

          1. habee profile image90
            habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Mo, you described me (us!) perfectly! lol

            Mark, were you injured/ill? Things have been crazy here, but I'm still kickin'!

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Yeah - bike crash. 2 busted ribs and 2 busted teeth. I am getting there. big_smile

              1. habee profile image90
                habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Wow. Hubby had one years ago - broken collar bone, punctured lung, dislocated hip, and lots of friction burns. Get better soon!

        3. 0
          Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Well, I guess as long as your emulating the loving, caring and kind aspect of Jesus your good, but it's the "If your not with me your against me" part that causes trouble.

      2. jonnycomelately profile image87
        jonnycomelatelyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Good point Mo.

        1. 0
          Motown2Chitownposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Thanks, johnny.  Good to see you, btw.  smile

    3. Onusonus profile image85
      Onusonusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Nice to see some purely unbiased reporting. lol

    4. GA Anderson profile image85
      GA Andersonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Nope, no thoughts on the matter.

      But.... I would not have a problem being skeptical of your linked sources.

      The first one gets off to a bad start when its lead picture of a man on a camel is captioned as a man on a donkey. From there, it goes on as an opinion piece, no facts, just suppositions - which is the same basis used by proponents of the Bible

      The next two links are also opinion pieces. The validity and strength of those opinions is up to the reader to decide. They may be right, or they may be wrong - there are no facts to offer the reader a firm foundation for a right or wrong decision.

      Since I have already stated I have no thoughts on the issue, I'm certainly not activating either way on your presumption. Just tossing out a crumb of doubt about the legitimacy of your sources.

      GA

      1. wilderness profile image96
        wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Hadn't caught the caption.  That's funny!

    5. aguasilver profile image86
      aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      This lot are even more laughable than the holocaust deniers....

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJXUv_btg60

      1. Castlepaloma profile image22
        Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        The holocaust have living witnesses today for real facts checking.

        The christian borrow OT from the Jews, why  research the facts when Christian are controlled by the fear of their God as every word is truth..

        Just cherry pick the magical parts you like, and reject the rest of the
        World 's thinking. How will the world ever get along?

        1. aguasilver profile image86
          aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          So you missed the video huh!

          Talking of cherry picking.......

          1. Castlepaloma profile image22
            Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Watched parts of it, way too one sided, and he is a fake.

            1. aguasilver profile image86
              aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Like I said cherry picking, Oh sorry, it's you that said cherry picking!

              Then you go pick cherries... but stop before you get even half a bowl 'cos it's too much for you to carry.

              Understood, factual evidence that upsets your concepts can be distressing.

              OK guys, carry on with the mutual mass debating about how clever you all are.

              1. Castlepaloma profile image22
                Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                If carring a cross and holes in my wrists means the greatest gift to man. All I have in life is what I give away, I know of so many other enlighten gifts to give away.

                I stop when there is too many holes to be had in a story

      2. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Sorry - your point is what exactly? That there are a bunch of religious people who deny proven history (the holocaust - Hitler doing God's work) , therefore the utter lack of historical evidence for the bible is.... Oh wait. Confused at your misdirection - was that the plan?

    6. Quilligrapher profile image90
      Quilligrapherposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Greetings Mark. I see you have not abandoned your crusade.

      “- it appears that the lie of the Hebrews enslaved by Egypt has now been proven wrong.”

      Wrong again, Mark.  It is your statement that is a lie. Your three sources do not prove a thing. They contain no new evidence of any kind. In fact, the first sign of a bogus conclusion is when it is framed as a question! The Haaretz article begins with a question it never answers: “Were Jews ever really slaves in Egypt, or is Passover a myth?” The Our Weekly piece has the title Were the Israelites really enslaved? All three sources present unanswered question that have been around for a long time. Two of your links are two years old! Sham [sic] on you!

      I am surprised that you would offer us a blog post as a proof. Tsk! Tsk! Imagine your sarcastic reaction if a Christian offered a blog like this one as proof God existed. But you seem comfortable offering it to prove bible accounts are not accurate.   

      Finally, one of your sources does contain a rebuttal that may or may not withstand scrutiny. You should check it out. It just might poke holes in all three of your sources.

      “In the Brooklyn Museum there is a papyrus scroll (numbered 35:1446) dated to the reign of Sobekhotep III (the pharaoh one generation prior to Moses). This document decrees the transfer of 95 slaves by name; half of which are Semitic. It lists the names both in the original Semitic language as well as the Egyptian names assigned to each. Seeing as more than half of the list are Israelite one can infer that a large group of Semites resided in the Egyptian Delta of that time.

      In the past, archeologist have been searching in the strata of the Nineteenth Dynasty. Various recent recalculations have revealed that the timeline equates more with the Twelfth and Thirteenth Dynasty of Egypt. More and more artifacts have begun to emerge that date the Israelites in Egypt since this correction.

      The Pharaoh of the Exodus was Dudimose. You can find writings by Manetho (the Egyptian historian who wrote an account on the collapse of Egypt during the reign of Dudimose). Some of his accounts are directly relevant to biblical accounts.” {1}

      Thanks for posting, Mark. I often find your comments entertaining.
      http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Why would I abandon my crusade? I would hardly compere it to a religious Crusade though - almost the opposite. Bringing knowledge instead of murdering those who seek it. wink

        Weird - there is no archeological evidence at all, and there was some solid points in there about why the Exodus never happened. This is the evidence presented - that despite massive searches - there has been no evidence uncovered.  After many years of searching - nothing has been found and our understanding of the way cultures intermix definitely suggests that the bible is completely false. Not just all the majikal stuff, but the very basis of the entire story. We already know the Jesus myth is false and not borne out by historical evidence. Now we are fairly certain the rest is also in dispute. Before now - it did not matter, because we had not the understanding to do a proper search. Now we can - and have.

        Weird also that you did not provide any evidence or links, because a few Semitic slaves mixed in with a general list of slaves is nothing. You would surely expect that in any list of people anywhere there are Jews - yes? All we can surmise from that is that there were 40 Semite slaves there at that time. If the entire nation had been enslaved - I would have expected all 95 to be Hebrew - wouldn't you?

        You can "recalculate," all you want - I understand this is what happens to the bible as we slowly disprove all of it - "Oh wait - a day is not a day." lol

        Thanks for posting - I do find religious commenters to be very, very funny - especially when faced with evidence that their beliefs are based on nothing.

        Having said that - I would be perturbed if I believed in this stuff - yet one Papyrus works as proof for you. I mean - doesn't it bother you that there is almost no historical evidence backing up your beliefs? One piece of papyrus is all it takes?

        1. Quilligrapher profile image90
          Quilligrapherposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          G’day Mark. Your comments are appreciated.

          Once again, however, you assume more than you actually know. Not one word in your statement above applies to me.

          You choose to ignore the fact that this thread opens with a false statement. The three sources offered in support do not prove anything. They merely raise questions, very old questions. Would the title of fact filled articles containing solid proofs be a question or a declarative sentence? The unanswered questions in your three sources are far from being “proofs.” Scholars and scientists often debate whether research results are evidence of absence, or whether they are just the absence of evidence (e.g. the research could have missed what it was looking for). In addition, you seem comfortable using a blog post as one of your “proofs” and you openly dismiss the rebuttal from within your own source without testing its validity. I think we all get the picture. 

          As for participating in useless attacks on the windmills of your mind, I decline.
          http://s1.hubimg.com/u/7197184.jpg
          http://s2.hubimg.com/u/6919429.jpg

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Yes - they raise questions. The fact that there is no historical evidence. And - using modern archeological techniques - we have not been able to find any.

            Solid proofs have been given. There is solid proof that there is no evidence. I have no proof - just a lack of. Sorry you don't understand what that means.

            Of course - if you have some that no one else is aware of - I am open to it. What validity can there be? This is a negative situation. Still - why would you care - you are secure without evidence. Faith. smile

        2. mythbuster profile image85
          mythbusterposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Mr. Knowles - is it not true that documents from as far back as we are speaking about are dated much differently than in systems common to us and that archaeologists, historians and such are still doing calculations to figure out the various yearly systems used according to reigns of Pharoahs of ancient Egypt? Would this not mean that, so far, we cannot know if dates/time spans match up yet?

          Didn't Herodotus manage to record some details that align with some of the Biblical documents?

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I don't believe that is the case - no. Archeologists - as far as I am aware - have been unable to find anything at all that bears out the biblical account.

            And - interesting that all the religious people have ignored this - the first article I linked to was a request from the writer to drop the unnecessary hatred of Egypt by Israelis which is rooted in the belief that the Hebrews were enslaved. sad

            "So, as we come to Passover 2012 when, thanks to the “Arab Spring,” our relations with Egypt are at a nearly 40 year low, let us enjoy our Seder and read the story by all means, but also remind those at the table who may forget that it is just a metaphor, and that there is no ancient animosity between Israelites and Egyptians. Because, if we want to re-establish that elusive peace with Egypt that so many worked so hard to build, we're all going to have to let go of our prejudices. "

            It is - in effect - a call for peace.

            1. aguasilver profile image86
              aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              They have been at peace for 30 years, since the Israelis returned the Sinai to them.

              Why would that Jewish writer call for compromise over the Passover, when (according to them) the Exodus never happened.

              No Exodus, no Passover.. try selling that concept to any Jewish person of faith!

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I agree - it appears like most religionists - they prefer to hang on to the hatred, division and animosity. You are correct though - this "faith" that something that did not happen happened is very important to you guys - isn't it.

                No Exodus, no Passover. Yup - you got that right.

                See my first post. wink

      2. BrahmaEgg profile image60
        BrahmaEggposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I now think Mark Knowles has now been proven full of worth.

    7. BrahmaEgg profile image60
      BrahmaEggposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      My thought is that a bum can only bring such issues here on the table. Go to the market and bring some onions, slacker!

      1. jonnycomelately profile image87
        jonnycomelatelyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Do we have a moron, or an oxymoron here? mad

    8. Paul Wingert profile image79
      Paul Wingertposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      There's enough overwhelming physical evidence to disprove all the Biblical stories in the OT and NT. There was no Adam and Eve or talking snake, there was no worldwide flood, no Moses, etc. The Jewish people started accepting that as far back as the 12th century. The Catholic Church dismissed those stories 50+ years ago. There’s no way of knowing if the original Jewish writers, at the time, meant these stories to be true historical fact or serve as metaphors to promote hope. This goes for the NT. Paul, the founding father of Christianity, never met Jesus and did not put anything into writing until 30 years after Jesus died. Too many people, to this day, take the NT is historical fact when there’s too many indications that it was all written for the purpose of promoting faith. So it’s completely ridiculous for creationists to challenge scientific discoveries and facts by throwing a Bible at it. Modern science didn’t start coming about in the late 1600’s and the Bible was compiled in the 3rd century, so how can these Biblical stories contain anything to challenge modern science? to

    9. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
      TheLoanConsultantposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Mark! You haven't changed a bit. The bible is a plagiarization of other ancient texts.  Many of the accounts in the bible are prophecies that were mis-recorded as historical events.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Maybe. Either way - no historical or archaeological evidence for many of the key points this is based on tend to make one question it. Unless they have a "relationship," of course which over rides reason and facts.

        Perhaps you can tell me why the ones claiming a "relationship," feel the need to claim masses of proof and evidence, but then claim a "relationship," instead.

        1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          The religious institutions create an atmosphere in which people are not able to think rationally; and when they do then they get ousted. So, that being said, you're going to be confronted with patterns of thought that just don't make since. However, you will come across Christian's who are rational. I think you'll have a better time trying to understand that religion from these individuals as opposed to those who just don't have the training or wherewithal to answer you logically.

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            True enough. What I find interesting is the responses from people who are other-wise logical and rational in their actions and words.

            Except where it comes to religion.

            1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
              TheLoanConsultantposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              hahhahahahha yeah that's true. I think if people are honest with themselves, they will come to a point when they begin to question their beliefs and subject them to the crucible of reason. Whatever survives they should keep and whatever does not they should discard. It is this discarding part that most people seem to have a problem with. If you ask me, I say, if it's not true then to hell with it. I don't see why people want to hold on to beliefs that cannot be verified either logically or empirically other than the fact of their ego's.

              1. aguasilver profile image86
                aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Which is why believers eventually find that the one thing they cannot discard is the relationship with Christ, and the Holy Spirit, whereas all else can be set aside for later consideration, the relationship cannot.

                1. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
                  TheLoanConsultantposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Aguasilver! How are you?! In regards to the relationship I agree with you. However, there are many other people who do not profess Christianity who make the same claims about relationship and also demonstrate it. It appears that the goal is "relationship". If Christianity is the means and the relationship is the end, then what do we say about others who have achieved the end through another means?

                  1. aguasilver profile image86
                    aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I normally just enjoy their company!

                    Living where I do, I meet stacks of 'cool' folk who are 'Christlike' in their existences, and why not, after all Christ was carrying an anointing that comes from God, if someone is able to live as God intended, they will get anointed.

                    But MY relationship is with Christ, and I no longer let myself be concerned if other folk chose a different way to go (their god, my God, it's our choice who we believe in).

                    Ultimately, we stand before God and are judged on our lives, and if John 3:16-19, John 6:44, and John 14:6 turn out to be THE criterion's, then some will be disappointed, no doubt that would include many who were professing Christians. smile

                2. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Strange this need to keep trying to get other people to believe you have this relationship in that case. It appears you are not being truthful when you say all else can be out aside for later consideration. Almost liek you need this validation. Odd.

                  Since I Came to Reason, I stopped imagining that the personal relationships I had with people in my imagination were actually real.

                  You should try it some time. wink

    10. jacobkuttyta profile image46
      jacobkuttytaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The Bible was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit by over 40 different authors from all walks of life: shepherds, farmers, tent-makers, physicians, fishermen, priests, philosophers and kings. Despite these differences in occupation and the span of years it took to write it, the Bible is an extremely cohesive and unified book.

      It was written over a period of some 1,500 years, from around 1450 B.C. (the time of Moses) to about 100 A.D. (following the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ).

      Many scholars agree that Job is the oldest book in the Bible, written by an unknown Israelite about 1500 B.C. Others hold that the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) are the oldest books in the Bible, written between 1446 and 1406 B.C.

      The youngest book in the Old Testament: The book of Malachi, written about 400 B.C.

      The oldest book of the New Testament: Probably the book of James, written as early as A.D. 45.

      The youngest book in the New Testament: The Book of Revelation is the youngest book of the New Testament, written about 95 A.D.

      The Bible was written in three languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek.

      The entire New Testament as we know it today, was canonized before the year 375 A.D. The Old Testament had previously been canonized long before the advent of Christ.

      "Canon" is derived front the Greek word "Kanon," signifying a measuring rod. Thus, to have the Bible "canonized" meant that it had been measured by the standard or test of divine inspiration and authority. It became the collection of books or writings accepted by the apostles and leadership of the early Christian church as a basis for Christian belief. It is the standard by which all Christians throughout the ages live and worship.

      The first translation of the Bible made into English: 1382 A.D., by John Wycliffe.

      The Bible was printed in 1454 A.D. by Johannes Gutenberg who invented the "type mold" for the printing press. It was the first book ever printed.

      The Codex Vaticanus, which dates from the first half of the fourth Century. It is located in the library of the Vatican in Rome. There are older fragments of the Bible that are still preserved however-- the oldest being a tiny scrap of the Gospel of John was found in Egypt, dating back to the beginning of the second century. (It is currently in the Rayland's Library in Manchester, England).

      The Holy Bible has been translated into 2,018 languages, with countless more partial translations, and audio translations (for unwritten languages). (This is an enormous amount of translations. In comparison, Shakespeare, considered by many to be the master writer of the English language, has only been translated into 50 languages.)

      Bible still the best-selling book in the world.

      The Old Testament was written mostly in Hebrew with some parts being composed in Aramaic - a language similar to Hebrew. The New Testament was originally written in Greek.

      The oldest surviving bible manuscripts (dating about 100 B.C.), the Dead Sea Scrolls, represent every book of the Old Testament except one (Esther). Finding these scrolls was significant, because they were compared to other copies of the Old Testament to test for validity. These scrolls helped validate the correctness of the Old Testament Hebrew writings we have now.

      The New Testament is the best attested to piece of historical writing ever. There are over 30,000 manuscripts of parts of the bible, which is more than 30 times the number of manuscripts of any other historical book (the next closest is Homer's Iliad with less than 700). The manuscripts are compared to each other and compiled to make one complete document. The New Testament writings that are used include some dating from the first century, very close to the time Jesus was on earth.

      Moreover all the writers of the bible validates the events happened in the previous books. New testament validates the old testament.  Bible is the only book which is preserved religiously by the people lived on the earth.

      Jewish scribes solidified the following process for creating copies of the Torah and eventually other books in the Old Testament.

         1. They could only use clean animal skins, both to write on, and even to bind manuscripts.
         2. Each column of writing could have no less than forty-eight, and no more than sixty lines.
         3. The ink must be black, and of a special recipe.
         4. They must verbalize each word aloud while they were writing.
         5. They must wipe the pen and wash their entire bodies before writing the word "Jehovah," every time they wrote it.
         6. There must be a review within thirty days, and if as many as three pages required corrections, the entire manuscript had to be redone.
         7. The letters, words, and paragraphs had to be counted, and the document became invalid if two letters touched each other. The middle paragraph, word and letter must correspond to those of the original document.
         8. The documents could be stored only in sacred places (synagogues, etc).
         9. As no document containing God's Word could be destroyed, they were stored, or buried, in a genizah - a Hebrew term meaning "hiding place." These were usually kept in a synagogue or sometimes in a Jewish cemetery.

      From the above facts any simple person can understand that Bible is the only authentic historic book available on this earth which overcome many hardships for centuries.  Many of the books are mentions the ruler of the time of the events happened as it was the custom to write history.

      If you cannot believe such an historic book like Bible, then how do you expect us to believe few internet links which are not more than 2 years old?

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Sorry. I suspect you did not bother reading the links - did you?

        Because your response bears no relation to the actual facts I posted.

        No doubt your ridiculous claims will satisfy any simple person. I am not a simple person.

      2. twosheds1 profile image60
        twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        "Moreover all the writers of the bible validates the events happened in the previous books. New testament validates the old testament.  Bible is the only book which is preserved religiously by the people lived on the earth. "

        Um, no. Muslims don't preserve the Quran? Hindus don't preserve the Rig Veda? I suspect I may be misunderstanding you.

        All of what you said is interesting, but doesn't make the content true. It's not especially impressive that the NT references events in the OT. Again, that doesn't validate it. The Bible mentions historical events, but so does Gone With the Wind. That doesn't make it true.

      3. kellyteam profile image60
        kellyteamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        @ jacobkuttyta Amen Brother. Reading the remark that followed your facts I thought about  John 12:40 "He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with [their] eyes, nor understand with [their] heart, and be converted".  All we can do is pray that God has mercy.

    11. twosheds1 profile image60
      twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      And this is news how? big_smile

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I was more interested in how this information affected the believers among us.

        "Makes them more aggressive," is the best I can come up with. sad

        1. aka-dj profile image78
          aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Which is just the reaction you are trying to elicit!

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Is that what the truth does to Christians then? Not one of you has offered any proof to dispute the claim I made.

            1. aka-dj profile image78
              aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              You don't listen to any "proof"!

              You are biased to the eyeballs!!!

              If you really sought truth, you would be open to it, even if it was contrary to your personal beliefs.
              But, alas, you have shown yourself to be a man with a mind that is more closed than the proverbial steel trap. But, as I have often said, I still like you! big_smile

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I am open to it dj. Show me the archeological proof. Attacking me as being close minded for not believing in majik is not really helping.

                Come on - I am asking for it - show me the proof.

                1. aka-dj profile image78
                  aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I started another thread for you.

                  Enjoy!

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                    Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Why would I bother? You can show me the archeological proof of the Exodus right here.

                    Or not......... wink

              2. Castlepaloma profile image22
                Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                He likes you for your closed mind toward christians ego's. Then he  opens up onesided christian minds hub.

                I am always open, try me, if all esle fails.

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  See - the weird thing is - I am completely open to any proof or evidence. None has ever been forthcoming. But - to a religionist - that means I am simply denying the proof. No win with these guys. I say - "show me the archaeological evidence that there is,' they say, "biology,"?

                  1. twosheds1 profile image60
                    twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    One of the points I've made elsewhere frequently is that Biblical archaeology is usually incredibly biased; it's basically believers seeking evidence that events in the Bible took place. It is almost never undertaken by neutral researchers, ones that don't have a compelling interest in a positive outcome. Therefore, many, if not all, of their claims are questionable.

                    I'm reminded of a conversation I heard at work about "chariot wheels" being found in the Red Sea and how this proves the parting of the Red Sea and the Pharoh's army being destroyed. My co-worker cited a Youtube video about it. Sure enough, it was Biblical archaeologists, overcome by confirmation bias (Google it - it will rock your world) and not bothering to find out what they had really discovered. What they claim were chariot wheels were actually a type of coral that forms into shapes that look like wagon wheels. It's native to the Red and Med seas.

              3. twosheds1 profile image60
                twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                So you're attacking him for being biased, but it's OK for you to be biased in the opposite direction?

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  He speaks for Jesus.

                  That is different.

                  1. aka-dj profile image78
                    aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Why thank you! I take that as a complement. (Even knowing you are being facetious). Not really. Others say the same things as I, in principle.

                    But, (if we) speak for Jesus, who do you speak for, "old hairy legs". Noooo. Of course not. He's just another fabricated myth to control the masses, or something like that.

                2. aka-dj profile image78
                  aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Of course it's ok!
                  Especially if you are biased in the truth.

                  You are, of course, free to be biased in lies, fantasies and fairy tales.
                  It looks rather ridiculous, though, when truth has been revealed, but, hey, stay deluded. It's ok.

                  I'm just trying to help you "out of the dark room".

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                    Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Odd you don't realize that it is this "holier than thou," attitude that causes all the conflicts.

                    Like Jesus told you to do. wink

                  2. 0
                    Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Let me get this straight. You feel it's Mark how believes in fantasies and fairy tales or do you not like his attitude towards your fantasies and fairy tales? I suspect it's the later.

    12. Chip6 profile image60
      Chip6posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Those links to some blogs prove nothing, dear Mark Knowles. Bait the unsuspected? Well, there are plenty of fish here. Even my sister Maita can manage a little pond!!  lol

      It's pleasing to hit people with emotional blathering, isn't it?

    13. Chris Neal profile image84
      Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Waywrong was interesting. I always find those who think that since there 'aren't any sources' they then don't need to produce any scholarly work. It's the ultimate in circular reasoning, and those who employ it are usually among the most contemptuous and arrogant people I've dealt with.

      OurWeekly was better. It did a better job of presenting a balanced view and asking good questions.

      Haaretz had a great quote; "So, as we come to Passover 2012 when, thanks to the “Arab Spring,” our relations with Egypt are at a nearly 40 year low," Again, a much better piece.

      I don't know. I would point out that for literally centuries people thought the Trojan War was a myth. Then they found Troy.

      And remember that I am not a 'typical' Christian. I was not brought up in a religious household (no 'inoctrination' or 'brainwashing'.) Nor was I on some big (or even very little) spiritual quest (therefore not open to being recruited.) I once flummoxed a Moonie and turned down an invitation to come to a Scientologist coffeehouse (and she was cute, too.) So although I do acknowledge that I don't have all the answers, I don't dismiss things just because there's 'no physical evidence.'

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Chris - your ignorance of History and willingness to repeat any nonsense as fact of it in some way attacks reality and defends your beliefs never ceases to amaze me. The Trojan war is still a myth and the excavation of Troy has not offered any proof that it was not.

        Not sure what that has to do with Majikal Super Beings parting the Red Sea by Majik.

        Yes - you are a typical Christian. I almost know what you are going to parrot before you parrot it. Any rational person dismisses majikal events with no physical evidence - but not a typical Christian. Hard for you to be more typical actually. You even think you are special. wink

        Do you now believe Helen's mother was raped by Zeus in the guise of a Swan because there is some evidence of a city that may have been Troy? Somehow I suspect your faith in majik stops at this line - yes? Works for the Christian myth, but not for the Greek one? How is that exactly? Parting of the Red Sea? Sure - here is a Chariot wheel to prove it. Zeus rapes Leda while in the guise of a Swan? Sounds a bit far fetched.... lol

        1. Chris Neal profile image84
          Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          So much packed in one tiny little sentence.

    14. Davidsonofjesie profile image59
      Davidsonofjesieposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      how come all of the chariot parts at the bottom of the gulf of aquba,mt.sinia,the split rock and much much more

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        False. How come you can't be bothered to read?

        1. Davidsonofjesie profile image59
          Davidsonofjesieposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          you can find mt. sinia on google earth,in saudi arabia it has everything talked about in the Bible

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Really? What does it have exactly?

            1. Davidsonofjesie profile image59
              Davidsonofjesieposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              your a smart man look it up

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                All I found was lies and fake claims from religious liars. Sorry.

    15. Davidsonofjesie profile image59
      Davidsonofjesieposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      check out stuff from Ron Wyatt

      1. 0
        Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Perhaps you should check out Ron Wyatt.

        http://www.noahsarksearch.com/ronwyatt.htm

        Note the part where he failed the polygraph.

    16. That Grrl profile image77
      That Grrlposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I don't believe in god but I would not say the bible is worthless. Certainly not based on one story in it. People who put a lot of faith in the bible find comfort and solace in it. That makes it far from worthless.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        One story in it? The crux of the matter. Hebrew enslavement; Jews wandering the desert, God giving Moses Ten commandments; finding teh promised land?

        This is just one story in it?
        Have you read the bible?

        1. That Grrl profile image77
          That Grrlposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          You're pretty quick to snap out a judgement. I wrote that the bible should not be judged based on one story. People shouldn't be judged that way either. Perhaps you need to do some more reading.

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            But the entire basis of the bible is this particular story. And it has been proven to be false. Without this story - the rest means nothing.

            Speaking of doing more reading - I take it you have not read the bible?

  2. WriteAngled profile image91
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    As all three cited articles point out, Ancient Egyptian sources show absolutely no record of Jewish slaves and their leaving Egypt.

    The Ancient Egyptians were obsessive record keepers so an event of this magnitude, had it occurred on Egyptian territory, would undoubtedly have been recorded.

    Moreover, slavery played a fairly minor part in Egyptian society. Much of the work in building temples, pyramids, as well as other temple work, was performed by free men, who gave several months of the year in service, while keeping up with their normal profession and family life the remainder of the time.

    1. boyatdelhi profile image42
      boyatdelhiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Yes there is a reason for not finding the record of the slavery of Israelites, because Bible says that all the Egyptians with their king drowned in the Sea.

      All those who were supposed to record the slavery drowned in the Sea that is why there is no record of slavery.  See what bible says about it...


      "Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and all that night the Lord drove the sea back with a strong east wind and turned it into dry land. The waters were divided, and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left.

      The Egyptians pursued them, and all Pharaoh’s horses and chariots and horsemen followed them into the sea. During the last watch of the night the Lord looked down from the pillar of fire and cloud at the Egyptian army and threw it into confusion. He jammed the wheels of their chariots so that they had difficulty driving. And the Egyptians said, “Let’s get away from the Israelites! The Lord is fighting for them against Egypt.”

      Then the Lord said to Moses, “Stretch out your hand over the sea so that the waters may flow back over the Egyptians and their chariots and horsemen.” Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and at daybreak the sea went back to its place. The Egyptians were fleeing toward it, and the Lord swept them into the sea. The water flowed back and covered the chariots and horsemen—the entire army of Pharaoh that had followed the Israelites into the sea. Not one of them survived."

      See... not one of them survived, that is why there is no record of it.
      Thanks for your understanding.

      1. WriteAngled profile image91
        WriteAngledposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Then there would be a massive gap in the historical records of Egypt! There are indeed gaps, as in any history of any nation, but not on that scale.

        Besides, even if a pharaoh and army was totally wiped out, there would be priests and scribes,who had been left behind to administer the state and run the temples. These educated and intelligent people would certainly have left some record of an army going out and never returning.

        1. pisean282311 profile image57
          pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          @write true...

        2. TheLoanConsultant profile image60
          TheLoanConsultantposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Absolutely! How come nobody ever mentions this?

      2. 0
        Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Ha, so for 400 years they were taking detailed records, but when the Jews were freed they all followed with all the records and drowned. "Look there getting away. Grab the books and lets chase them" ha ha ha ha

    2. Davidsonofjesie profile image59
      Davidsonofjesieposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      yes they kelp records but not accurete,one pharoh went up against the hittites to take a city that his father lost and was ambushed and made a peace treaty and went back home and called it a victory,the writings are their the one's that have not been destroyed

  3. janderson99 profile image84
    janderson99posted 4 years ago

    Never let facts get in the way of beliefs

    1. 0
      Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Sure don't let the fact get in your way. hmm hmm hmm

  4. 0
    Emile Rposted 4 years ago

    Wow. The end of all monotheistic religions. Thanks to ingenious research by Mark Knowles.

    You heard the naked truth here on Hub Pages first. We can all say we knew him before he became famous and won the Nobel Prize. I hope it doesn't go to your head Mr. Knowles.

    1. janderson99 profile image84
      janderson99posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      He Knowles it all

      1. 0
        Emile Rposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        lol

        1. pisean282311 profile image57
          pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          @emile it wont end anytime soon...it would become irrelevant in future....this is my opinion ..

  5. pisean282311 profile image57
    pisean282311posted 4 years ago

    @mark best part is that even israel archeology is doubting exodus...noah too is sumerian myth...ya bible is work of fiction...great work if we consider in that category...it would be learnt  by future generation as literature ...

  6. BrahmaEgg profile image60
    BrahmaEggposted 4 years ago

    What is ridiculous is that people actually take science so seriously? Or is it a forum thread on hubpages? Funny stuff. Mark Knows well how to untroll the forums here, he likes the gig.

    1. Paul Wingert profile image79
      Paul Wingertposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      What is ridiculous is that people actually take the Bible as historical fact. People that down play science come across as mentally lazy and rather go with the path of least resistance, like the fairy stories found in the Bible, rather than actually use brain cells.

  7. boyatdelhi profile image42
    boyatdelhiposted 4 years ago

    If they search the sea, they could find some evidence of Egyptians under the water with weapons and chariots.  In that way they can prove Bible is True.

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @boy that wont prove anything.....if somebody writes novel from time of Shakespeare and describes england in it , it doesnot mean novel is true...
      secondly now Israel which has more reasons to defend exodus are themselves acknowledging that exodus is doubtful...their own archaeology department...

      more importantly the core of bible itself is turning out to be myth...bible has real gems of life in it but it is work of humans...it must be read as mere literature...

    2. Castlepaloma profile image22
      Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Floods are the largest natural killers of humans and animal ever, throughout earth's history. I don't think Moses cause a whole army to vanish by a wave of water, anymore than Pirate's being eaten up by sea monster next to the coral reefs.

      Was it an act of nature, God or Satan?  I pick nature and caveman trying to figure out the meaning of life, and we still have some people who have not evoled much.

      1. Pearldiver profile image85
        Pearldiverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        + 1

        Hell yeah.... it must have been so hard for them to figure out the meaning of life, without Monty Python and Brian being on that surfing safari!  lol

  8. youcanwin profile image37
    youcanwinposted 4 years ago

    I remember the words of Paul "For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @you ya...all 500 billion who dont believe in paul's fanacies r saved from it...he was right...on serious notes it doesnot matter what 2k yr old man thought...what matters is what evidence r coming up...

    2. WriteAngled profile image91
      WriteAngledposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      "As for him who knows this book, nothing evil shall have power over him, he shall not be turned away at the Gates of the West; he shall go in and out, and bread and beer and all good things shall be given to him in the presence of those who are in the Duat".

      Another view from Egypt, concerning another set of scriptural writings (from the Faulkner translation of "Pert Em Hru" (The Book of Coming Forth by Day, erroneously called Egyptian Book of the Dead by many).

  9. youcanwin profile image37
    youcanwinposted 4 years ago

    Bible says "Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong."

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Then why are you following the crowd in doing wrong?

      1. pisean282311 profile image57
        pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        lol bulls eye...

  10. Gail Meyers profile image60
    Gail Meyersposted 4 years ago

    I do hope this was meant to be comical!  LOL  There is a LOT of archeological evidence supporting the Bible, as well as other historical documents.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Show me 100 examples please. No religious liar sites though please - historical facts only.

      1. Paul Wingert profile image79
        Paul Wingertposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Of course there are places in the Bible that actually existed. Sherwood Forest exist, does that mean Robin Hood actually existed? Greece, Crete, and Troy exists(ed) and there's are plenty of ruins found there, but that doesn't mean the characters in Homer's Odyssey existed.

      2. Gail Meyers profile image60
        Gail Meyersposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Mark, there are entire books written on the topic based on historical facts.  If you were truly interested you could do the research yourself.  Instead you have chosen to sit online and make lame attempts to publicly disparage the Holy Bible and Christianity.   

        I have had this debate many times over the years.  Interestingly, it is often one who claims not to believe the Bible who never stops talking about the Bible.  It generally turns out that the person raging against or ridiculing the Bible was deeply hurt by a "religious" person or organization.  I am not going to assume that is the case with you.  However, there is a distinct difference between "religion" and "relationship." In the Bible itself Jesus came down the hardest on the "religious" people of his day.

        1. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          So - no proof then? You just took it on faith that there is a lot and never bothered looking for yourself. I have done the research - there is nothing.

          Show it to me. Please.

          Not sure what this "relationship" has to do with this - surely nothing? If you have that - why do you need proof?

          1. Gail Meyers profile image60
            Gail Meyersposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            While I did not make assumptions about you, your response is full of your assumptions about me.  I did look into it very deeply more than two decades ago.  I wish I had all day to spend posting the 100 links you requested, especially ones as authoritative as the blog post you found...lol...but I have other responsibilities to take care of at the moment.

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Right. So nothing then? Thank you very much. Pretty much as i expected. Weird how difficult it is for you to find those "lots of evidence," isn't it? Not surprising though. This is the response I get every time I challenge some one who makes these sort of claims.

              ciao

        2. aka-dj profile image78
          aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Touche" !

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Hey there aka - what say you now that your bible has been proven meaningless? No Moses - none of that stuff.

            "Lack of transitional evidence," I think they call it. I know you are a big fan of that. wink

  11. youcanwin profile image37
    youcanwinposted 4 years ago

    Evidence found of Noah's ark flood victims
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2000/ … rchaeology

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      did u read it ? We really cannot say in any way, shape or form that this is the biblical flood. All we can say is that there has been a major flood, that people were living here when it happened. We prefer to stick with the facts -and who knows where those facts will lead us." ...

      legend of great flood is in every faith...hindu scriptures has manu instead of noah...summerians too have had that from where jews picked up...so this verfies summerians than bible...go for original why copied version?

    2. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      But he does not claim to have found the landscape of Noah. " We really cannot say in any way, shape or form that this is the biblical flood. All we can say is that there has been a major flood, that people were living here when it happened. We prefer to stick with the facts -and who knows where those facts will lead us."

      lol lol

      That was 12 years ago - still no news.

    3. WriteAngled profile image91
      WriteAngledposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      The newspaper article you cite quotes Robert Ballard, who made this discovery, as saying

      " We really cannot say in any way, shape or form that this is the biblical flood. All we can say is that there has been a major flood, that people were living here when it happened. We prefer to stick with the facts -and who knows where those facts will lead us."

      And yes, there have been major floods in many places at many times in history, however, there does not seem to be any evidence of one flood, which killed everything on the planet except for a family of humans and lots of animals...

  12. WriteAngled profile image91
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    Ooops, I was beaten to it!

  13. WriteAngled profile image91
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    I believe there was also a lot of hoohah at one point about the remains of Noah;s ark being found on the summit of Mount Ararat....

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      That one is even funnier than this 12 year old drivel. I wonder if these guys bother reading anything. wink

  14. WriteAngled profile image91
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    Ballard responds :

    Reggie Williams asks:
    I would like to know how you concluded this event would have taken place 7,500 years ago and what other evidence you found for you to determine without a doubt this was Noah's Ark.

    Ballard's response:
    Our research has nothing to do with Noah's Ark. It has a lot to do with whether there was a great flood in this area that could have lead to the story of the Great Flood. You should read Walter Pitman and William Ryan's Book "Noah's Flood" to understand how they arrived at a date of 7,500 years ago. But in short, it was when salt water mollusks replaced fresh water mollusks."
    http://www.pbs.org/saf/1207/hotline/hballard.htm

    1. Castlepaloma profile image22
      Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      According to the world's largest Creation Museum who aim  to open up more Museum and get funded by the Gov. around the planet earth. They claim Adam and Eve, dinosaurs, cavemen, 969 year old man, jellyfish, dragons and were all created within  6014  years ago.

      If Noah Ark was dated 7500 years ago, was the World Born again?

      Show one bible school, or natural history museum or any sound person who ever checks the facts about Human history.

      1. 0
        Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I have to say I think the Catholics have come around. They at least acknowledge evolution.

        1. Pearldiver profile image85
          Pearldiverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          lol  Can't wait to see how they really handle the Mrs Jesus evolutionary stories then!!  big_smile

          1. 0
            Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I think they will wait for proof, then they would have to be beaten of the head with it for about a hundred years. Kind of like what happened with evolution.

            1. Castlepaloma profile image22
              Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              According to them Adam was the most perfect man who ever live, since then mankind has been de-evoluting. That mean's we will never figure it out. Us human are very very stupid and doom for 2012 flood, we deserve it for being soooo stupid.

        2. Castlepaloma profile image22
          Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Just as many people on earth think or believe in evolution as they do in God.

          More people have have been killed over God than any other reason, Gee, I wonder what group kills the most? Better cross that out, before someone comes after me.

  15. youcanwin profile image37
    youcanwinposted 4 years ago

    Biblical Archeology:
    Evidence of the Exodus from Egypt
    http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm

    1. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Here are some interesting conclusions from that link...

      "A look at all the archaeological evidence shows that the best fit of the data is to identify the Exodus with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt around 1570-50 BC

      Therefore the best explanation for all of the archaeological evidence seems to be that Israel is a confederation of Hapiru tribes in the hill country of Canaan, that formed the nation of Israel in the Iron Age.

      This paper has shown that most of the ancient writers equated the Exodus with the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt around 1570-50 BC Most ancient writers put the Jews in Egypt for 215 years or less."

      smile

      1. aguasilver profile image86
        aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Interesting indeed, it establishes that the articles refuting it were just opinion, and give credence to the Jews actually originating from where God said they did:

        Genesis 11:31
        And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.

        Thanks smile

        1. Castlepaloma profile image22
          Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          History of Babylonian Cities: Ur, Sodom, Gomorrah
          Canaan is a historical Semitic-speaking region roughly corresponding to the Levant (modern-day Israel, Palestinian territories, Lebanon, and the western parts ...

          Your way off...

          From my studies of nature history- Adam and Eve came from Africa, and  what country do Jews come from?, hell do I know, there have been kicked around for so long by everybody.

        2. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          No, it doesn't.

          1. Castlepaloma profile image22
            Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Canaan included the area that now includes Israel, the Palestinian territorities, Lebanon and western Syria

            What part are you saying no to?

            1. Castlepaloma profile image22
              Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              ATM- On the other site, you were right about that Woman of God
              I dumped her
              Good thing I'm not a cannibal, or I would be wiping my backside

    2. twosheds1 profile image60
      twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Were any of those data reviewed by neutral observers? In order to be considered scientifically valid, it has to be confirmed by several independent, neutral parties.

      1. pisean282311 profile image57
        pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        @two yes ...the data is verified by Islamic Society and Jew Society...so we have two neutral sources...

        1. twosheds1 profile image60
          twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but neither of those sources could be considered neutral. It should be a secular observer.

          1. pisean282311 profile image57
            pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            @two thats not fair...u want to have everything on ur terms...u wanted two different sources and now u want ur own source only...now thats convenience...

            1. twosheds1 profile image60
              twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              No, I want a source that's reliable. If you have a vested interest in a positive outcome (or a negative one) then your conclusions are unreliable. For example, if a scientist working for Pfizer did a study on the efficacy of Viagra, it wouldn't be very reliable, because he or she would have a vested interest in a positive outcome.

              Notice I said a secular observer, not an atheist. An atheist would have a vested interest in a negative outcome.

      2. aguasilver profile image86
        aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        One might ask WHY the secular world has not visited the site and examined the evidence, if it is so easily disputed by the 'secular observer' (who of course would be unbiased.... smile

        1. pisean282311 profile image57
          pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          @agua no need for that because  israel's archeology dept has conceded that exodus might be a myth...we need people who r open to facts , it can be religious or non religious

          1. aguasilver profile image86
            aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            They have?

            Happen to have any sources I can check that against, they must have announced it I guess?

            ...and knowing how much you like to amuse yourself with satire, I would need some sources before I took whatever you said as creditable. smile

            1. pisean282311 profile image57
              pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              @agua 100 yrs of research and no result...how much they can announce...their actions announced it since 100 yrs...coming to announce it......what is best way to counter a book?...write another book...

              Israel Finkelstein, chairman of the Archaeology Department at Tel Aviv University, with archaeology historian Neil Asher Silberman, has just published a book called "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Text."

              "The Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander in the desert, did not conquer the land [of Canaan] in a military campaign and did not pass it on to the twelve tribes of Israel. Perhaps even harder to swallow is the fact that the united kingdom of David and Solomon, described in the Bible as a regional power, was at most a small tribal kingdom."

              m glad quran is proven wrong...smile

              1. aguasilver profile image86
                aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                http://www.jewishmag.com/166mag/khirbet … eiyafa.htm

                You pick your archaeological treatise and there you go, we can all agree!

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  At least they both agree there was no evidence of enslavement and Exodus.

                  So - as I said - worthless. wink

                2. pisean282311 profile image57
                  pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  @agua interestingly he speaks nothing about exodus which none could find...he speaks about david and soloman, both understood to be real figures which i agree...david/soloman where small kings or emperors is debate , no body doubts their existence.. ...but what about moses...no proof , no clue in history...why?...again i am not worried about bible /torah , i am glad that quran is proven wrong..

  16. youcanwin profile image37
    youcanwinposted 4 years ago

    A horrible odor filled the air. Jesus said to me, "In the left leg of hell are many pits. This tunnel branches off into other parts of hell, but we will spend some time in the left leg first."These things you are about to see will always be with you. The world must know about the reality of hell. Many sinners and even some of My people do not believe that hell is real. You have been chosen by Me to reveal these truths to them. Everything I will show you about hell and all the other things I will show you are true."

    Jesus had shown Himself to me in the form of a bright light, brighter than the sun. The form of a man was in the center of that light. Sometimes I saw Jesus as a man, but at other times He was in the form of a spirit.

    He spoke again, "Child, when I speak, the Father has spoken. The Father and I are one. Remember to love above all else and to forgive one another. Come now, follow Me." As we walked, evil spirits fled from the presence of the Lord. "O God, O God," I cried. "What is next?"

    As I said previously, I had all my senses in hell. All those in hell have all their senses. Mine were working now in full force. Fear was on every side, and inexpressible dangers lurked everywhere. Each step I took was more horrible than the one before.

    There were doorways about the size of small windows, opening and shutting very fast at the top of the tunnel. Screams filled the air as many evil creatures flew by us, up and out of the gateways of hell. Soon we were at the end of the tunnel. I was trembling with fright because of the danger and fear around us.

    I was so thankful for the protection of Jesus. I thank God for His almighty power to protect us, even in the pits of hell. Even with that protecting shield, I kept thinking, Not my will, Father, but Yours be done. I looked at my body. For the first time I noticed that I was in a spirit form, and my form was
    in the shape of myself. I wondered what was next.

    Jesus and I stepped from the tunnel onto a path with wide swaths of land on each side of it.
    There were pits of fire everywhere as far as the eye could see. The pits were four feet across and three feet deep and shaped like a bowl. Jesus said, "There are many pits like this in the left leg of hell. Come, I will show you some of them. "

    I stood beside Jesus on the path and looked into one of the pits. Brimstone was embedded in the side of the pit and glowed red like hot coals of fire. In the center of the pit was a lost soul who had died and gone to hell. Fire began at the bottom of the pit, swept upward and clothed the lost soul in flames. In a moment the fire would die down to embers, then with a rushing sound would sweep back over the tormented soul in the pit. I looked and saw that the lost soul in the pit was caged inside a skeleton form. "My Lord," I cried at the sight, "Can't you let them out?" How awful was the sight! I thought, This could be me. I said, "Lord, how sad it is to see and know that a living soul is in there." I heard a cry from the center of the first pit. I saw a soul in the form of a skeleton, crying, "Jesus, have mercy!"
    "O, Lord!" I said. It was the voice of a woman. I looked at her and wanted to pull her out of the fire. The sight of her broke my heart. The skeleton form of a woman with a dirty-grey mist inside was talking to Jesus. In shock, I listened to her. Decayed flesh hung by shreds from her bones, and, as it burned, it fell off into the bottom of the pit. Where her eyes had once been were now only empty sockets. She had no hair.

    The fire started at her feet in small flames and grew as it climbed up and over her body. The woman seemed to be constantly burning, even when the flames were only embers. From deep down inside her came cries and groans of despair, "Lord, Lord, I want out of here!" She kept reaching out to Jesus. I looked at Jesus, and there was great sorrow on His face. Jesus said to me, "My child, you are here with Me to let the world know that sin results in death, that hell is real.

    I looked at the woman again, and worms were crawling out of the bones of her skeleton. They were not harmed by the fire. Jesus said, "She knows and feels those worms inside." "God, have mercy!" I cried as the fire reached its peak and the horrible burning started all over again. Great cries and deep sobs shook the form of this woman-soul. She was lost. There was no way out. "Jesus, why is she here?" I said in a small voice, for I was very scared.
    Jesus said, "Come."
    The path we were on was a circuitous one, twisting in and out between these pits of fire as far as I could see. The cries of the living dead, mixed with moans and hideous screams, came to my ears from all directions. There were no quiet times in hell. The smell of dead and decaying flesh hung thickly in the air. We came to the next pit. Inside this pit, which was the same size as the  other one, was another skeleton form. A man's voice cried from the pit, saying, "Lord, have mercy on me!" Only when they spoke could I tell whether the soul was a man or woman. Great wailing sobs came from this man. "I'm so sorry, Jesus. Forgive me. Take me out of here. I have been in this place of torment for years. I beg You, let me out!" Great sobs shook his skeletal frame as he begged, "Please, Jesus, let me out!" I looked at Jesus and saw that He too was crying.

    "Lord Jesus," the man cried out from the burning pit, "haven't I suffered enough for my sins? It has been forty years since my death." Jesus said, "It is written, The just shall live by faith!' All mockers and unbelievers shall have their part in the lake of fire. You would not believe the truth. Many times My people were sent to you to show you the way, but you would not listen to them. You laughed at them and refused the gospel. Even though I died on a cross for you, you mocked Me and would not repent of your sins. My Father gave you many opportunities to be saved. If only you had listened!" Jesus wept.
    "I know, Lord, I know!" the man cried. "But I repent now."
    "It is too late," said Jesus. "Judgment is set."

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      l mockers and unbelievers shall have their part in the lake of fire....lol i thought only fanatic islamist threatened...i change my mind...

    2. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Wonderful stuff - thank you very much.

      "Please Jesus, let me out!"
      "It is too late," said Jesus. "Judgment is set." lol

      Great pathos.

      1. Pearldiver profile image85
        Pearldiverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        "I know, Lord, I know!" the man cried. "But I still want to repent now.... and am more than happy to bathe your toes in my tears of gratitude!"  (Umm.. interesting act!)  lol

        1. Castlepaloma profile image22
          Castlepalomaposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Oh brother, more fear mongering

  17. Gail Meyers profile image60
    Gail Meyersposted 4 years ago

    Mark (or self proclaimed "righteous atheist" as you say on your profile), I would appreciate it if you would stop presenting your ramblings as fact, as well as twisting the words of others who respond.  YOU are the one who stated "relationship" overrides reason and fact.  You completely missed the point of what was typed, because you see what you have made up your mind to see.  There are numerous books in print strictly on the topic of archeology as it relates to validating the Bible.

    If you can look at creation, nature or even you own biology and come to the conclusion there is no Creator, who are you do talk about logic?  If the mountains of evidence surrounding you every day  lead you to the conclusion that there is no God, 100 links is not going to change your mind.  It might give you a good laugh or an ego boost that you were able to bait someone, but that's about it.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Sorry - what does that have to do with the matter at hand?

      Now the "evidence," is "existence," rather than actual facts? 100 links for actual evidence that the bible has some historical basis is not unreasonable is it? Because this is what you said:



      So - show me instead of attacking my ability to think logically because I don't see "my own biology," as archaeological evidence for the biblical claim of enslaved Hebrews (that confused me I must admit), not the existence of a god.

      You seem to have gone off track. We were speaking of archeological evidence - not the fact that you think there must be a Creator because of biology. All that shows is your complete lack of knowledge regarding biology.

      Come on - you made the claim - show me. There must be thousands of reputable resources online if your claims are true.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus

      A century of research by archaeologists and Egyptologists has found no evidence which can be directly related to the Exodus captivity and the escape and travels through the wilderness, and most archaeologists have abandoned the archaeological investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit".

  18. aka-dj profile image78
    aka-djposted 4 years ago
    1. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      There is no evidence on that site, only empty claims.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I guess it is a step up from YouTube Creation videos. big_smile

        1. 0
          writeronlineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          This was always going to be a debate and I'm sorry, I tried hard to read and learn. But all I see is the usual circular logic (oxmoronic as that is) on the part of those who just KNOW they're right in their religious beliefs despite so much evidence to the contrary. And lack of evidence in support. That's fine, because faith is the central tenet of all religions - no need for proof. I just wish believers would get on with believing and back off the 'proof is out there, and It's my job to make sure everyone else respects that' routine. It's not.  Go away. However, I have no desire to jump on that merry go round, so I'll just comment on one contribution from all that precedes this. I've repeated it below, in case anyone missed it; anyone only here for a laugh. Seriously, this is side-splitting stuff:

          "Jewish scribes solidified the following process for creating copies of the Torah and eventually other books in the Old Testament.

             1. They could only use clean animal skins, both to write on, and even to bind manuscripts.
             2. Each column of writing could have no less than forty-eight, and no more than sixty lines.
             3. The ink must be black, and of a special recipe.
             4. They must verbalize each word aloud while they were writing.
             5. They must wipe the pen and wash their entire bodies before writing the word "Jehovah," every time they wrote it.
             6. There must be a review within thirty days, and if as many as three pages required corrections, the entire manuscript had to be redone.
             7. The letters, words, and paragraphs had to be counted, and the document became invalid if two letters touched each other. The middle paragraph, word and letter must correspond to those of the original document.
             8. The documents could be stored only in sacred places (synagogues, etc).
             9. As no document containing God's Word could be destroyed, they were stored, or buried, in a genizah - a Hebrew term meaning "hiding place." These were usually kept in a synagogue or sometimes in a Jewish cemetery.

          From the above facts any simple person can understand that Bible is the only authentic historic book available on this earth which overcome many hardships for centuries.  Many of the books are mentions the ruler of the time of the events happened as it was the custom to write history.
          If you cannot believe such an historic book like Bible, then how do you expect us to believe few internet links which are not more than 2 years old?

          At the risk of seeming blasphemous; For God's sake, what kind of 'circular logic' is that? Boil it down to its essence and we're left with, 1: The Bible must be true, because it's a really really old book, and really really well made, as witnessed (sorry, couldn't help it)  by all that attention to detail in the production process. And 2; anything that's 'not more than 2 years old' must by said circular logic, be untrue.
          I'm one of those 'simple persons' referred to above,but even I can see that's wat too simplistic to qualify as any kind of argument, whether rational or theological. It's got snake oil salesman / corporate lawyer technique written all over it; "If you can't win on topic, obfuscate the crap out of it, and shift the focus." Reminds me of that old British TV show, 'Never Mind the Quality, Feel the Width'. That used to make me laugh out loud too.

        2. twosheds1 profile image60
          twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I got it! They were practicing Leave No Trace! It makes perfect sense now!
          http://lnt.org/

      2. Simone1984 profile image60
        Simone1984posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        @Trouble - What evidence is there for Evolution?

        1. 0
          Rad Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Oh, I don't know... how about we start with skin colour? Why has skin colour evolved for different climates? Then there are the fossil records and then of course genetic records.

        2. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I found no less than 1.4 million papers on researching the evidence of evolution in Google Scholar.

          Want more?

        3. twosheds1 profile image60
          twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this
  19. Shadesbreath profile image91
    Shadesbreathposted 4 years ago

    It's religion. Why does anyone even argue about whether it's factual or not.

    Look at scientology, which everyone knows Hubbard made up, from his own mouth. Nobody cares. People like to have religion, and "truth" or "facts" or "evidence" don't mean squat. If someone decides they need that stuff, they'll eat whatever some smiling preacher-type feeds them.

  20. He Who Triumphs profile image60
    He Who Triumphsposted 4 years ago

    Mark Knowles, I understand your theory about the Bible being proven worthless. While I do not agree, there are facts that can contribute to both sides of the argument. But that isn't really the issue here, and not what I want to focus on; you seem, like many people, to want to make people understand that Christianity itself is worthless. Honestly, you're not far off. The Church really sucks right now, and its testimony has been tainted by all kinds of fights and arguments, resulting from every end of the spectrum:  from extreme hatred to extreme tolerance. No other religion is so divided, so filled with negative impact. We could go ahead and say Christianity is not acknowledged for all the good it's done, but why should it when we see all the pain? Honestly, I myself am a pastor's kid. I love my father; he's a great man of God. But the body of Christ as a whole, it's very lost, and caused so many others to be as well. You're line of thinking is right: why SHOULD you believe in something that--historical accuracy not an issue--is proven false already by the way innumerable "Christians" live? I wish so much it could be fixed, that you and all others who believe these things could be proved to that Christianity does work, it just needs to be sat down and talked to about everything that needs to be addressed.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Or - you could accept that after 2,000 years of conflicts - it simply doesn't work and we need to look at alternatives?

      1. He Who Triumphs profile image60
        He Who Triumphsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Haha it is a sound reasoning, except that Thomas Edison could have done the same thing with the light bulb. While I always liked Tesla better, Edison failed many, many times--I believe it was actually almost a thousand--but refused to give up. He tried to find all the alternative ways to convert electricity into light, but his persistence finally invented the world-changing light bulb. I am aware you could have many ways to refute my statement, but like I said, that's not the issue. What did the Church do to you or someone you know, Mark, to make you not WANT to believe? Of course, it simply could be its history, but if so, say so.

        1. Jerami profile image78
          Jeramiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          You have touched upon a point of interest.  Technology has gone down one path. It could have gone down a different path and we would be living in a totaly different kind of reality.

          1. He Who Triumphs profile image60
            He Who Triumphsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Very true indeed; one of the reasons I liked Tesla better. One of his ideas--once established and improved--was free, infinite energy for all based on special electrical towers. Unfortunately my understanding of it is a little rusty, so I apologize for any possible errors, but the theory is brilliant. I think technology would be equally different yet similar if that had happened instead, just like Christianity.

        2. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Common sense in the first place. It simply makes completely no sense at all. Original sin? Believe or burn? Plus the 2,000 year history behind it.

          And on further reflection - people such as yourself. Despite the fact that you admit it doesn't work, and that my reasoning is sound - you then insist on reaching for nonsensical comparisons such as Edison and assuming that it must be that the Church did something to me. Why the need to defend it.? You already made some bold statements that are completely incorrect. You are probably an otherwise logical, reasonable chap - why the change for this one area?

          Why would I simply not use my brain to reject this irrational belief system? What need to be addressed is that this is a baseless beliefs system that is impractical, makes no sense and relies on superstitious fear of punishment and life after death.

          1. He Who Triumphs profile image60
            He Who Triumphsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Yet doesn't atheism make no sense until you explain and prove all of your reasoning behind it? That's what I'm talking about; it's not about proving anything with words. I said it doesn't work AS IT STANDS today. That's why you improve, you rebuild. Nothing would be the way it is today in terms of society, technology, etc., if no one improved or rebuilt. The same should go for Christianity.

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Lost me. Atheism makes perfect sense. It is simply a lack of a belief in a god. Prove my reasoning? OK - no evidence of any such thing. None.

              Why would any one rebuild this? How many times has that been tried? Why do you think there is 40,000 different denominations?

              You think 40,001 is the majik bullet? lol

              There is something very, very wrong at the heart of this philosophy.

              1. He Who Triumphs profile image60
                He Who Triumphsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Not 40,001. Just 1 denomination. One reconcilled, whole, unified denomination. And I didn't say it didn't make perfect sense to you. It doesn't make perfect sense to other people, just like Christianity makes sense to Christians and not to atheists. Christians have their own "proof" that atheists refuse to believe, just like athesits have their own "proof" Christians choose not to believe. Too few people win anything at all that way. That's why I'm saying Christianity has been all talk and no walk; its easy for atheists to live what they believe; that's why it's increasingly popular. Christians suck at living what they believe. Once they actually do what they believe, people notice. That's what the goal should be:  one unified body of Christ living what they believe as best as they can, in one accord as best they can. People can choose to believe or not, but the goal isn't supposed to be making people believe. That's why we lose, because we focus on proving ourselves right so much. Once we live right with our mouths shut most of the time, that is what will make all the difference.

                1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                  A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Such as...?

                  1. He Who Triumphs profile image60
                    He Who Triumphsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    If you go to the Creation Museum, that is full of proof to Christians that creationism is real, yet atheists will not believe it. I really don't want to post any of that here, because that's not what I'm trying to do.

                2. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  So what is your purpose here?

                  In any case - you seriously think you can reconcile 40,000 denominations into 1?

                  1. He Who Triumphs profile image60
                    He Who Triumphsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Actually most Christians are in favor of the Creation Museum. My purpose on this thread? Honestly I was trying to make the Christians think more than I was anyone else. Because I was hoping they'd see they were getting nowhere with words and links. Purpose with this period? Honestly. To start a revolution of the Church--a peaceful one--however corny and impossible it sounds.

    2. Shadesbreath profile image91
      Shadesbreathposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      "Christianity" doesn't work. Some of the things that are credited to Jesus work:  Forgiveness, kindness, tolerance, patience, generosity, moderation, humility, etc.... those work. But the Bible isn't the only place you hear about that stuff. Most of the world religions have that stuff in them, mixed amongst the justifications for why you don't need those if someone stole your goat or drew a picture of your prophet, at which point you can toss that other stuff out and go for the jihad, the inquisition or the crusade, start throwing stones or burning at the stake or strap-on bombing... or whatever else you like.

      The bronze age versions of how the universe works don't hold up. It doesn't mean they don't have redeeming qualities, but the sooner the world can scrap them and get something in keeping with OUR times rather than those times the better off we'll all be.

      Frankly, the problem is, we live in a time with a huge global population, and all of them with cell phone video cameras, so it's going to be a lot harder to convince people that the bushes are talking, the oceans are splitting, or the golden tablets were cool but I don't remember where they are just now.

      1. He Who Triumphs profile image60
        He Who Triumphsposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        You are right, Christianity AS IT IS doesn't work; that's what I'm saying. It needs to be addressed on what its issues are, and I plan to do that in a video series to be hopefully distributed very soon. The defining issues are: Ignorance, Hatred, Cowardice, and Prejudice. Once those are addressed and apologized for, forgiveness, love, mercy, self-control, etc., can be the replacements as they were always meant to be, and not only that but show the world how it works in not just the modern world, but in the future as well. For all the faith lost in Christianity, I understand the skepticism that will follow. But many world-changers have those things in common, and I fully intend for TRUE Christianity to accomplish that in the best senses of that phrase.

        1. Shadesbreath profile image91
          Shadesbreathposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Why do you cling to the thing that doesn't work? It's like you have this old car that is totally broken and completely failed, and rather than looking forward for new ideas, new concepts, you are bound and determined to fix that old wreck despite how many other wrecks from the same era are also failing miserably.

          Why MUST it be "Christianity" that saves the world. Why can't we, in OUR time, devise a NEW vehicle for teaching, spreading and rewarding all those things like mercy, generosity, forgiveness,etc. Why must you so vehemently insist that the ONE set of myths, out of literally hundreds of thousands of myth sets that have come and gone in the last 50 to 100 thousand years, why do you require that one to work?

          In my opinion, I believe you have sentimental attachment to it because it's the "car" you drove around in as a kid. But there is no reason to keep it. It already failed, horribly, and has failed horribly throughout its history. It's been corrupted and perverted time and again because of its horrible failings and shortcomings.

          So stop trying to restore the dang thing, stop looking into the goat herding cultures of one tiny part of the world and in one tiny pocket of time, and join THIS time, THIS world, THIS place in history. Help solve the problem with fresh, informed, contemporary thinking guided by those right things (mercy, forgiveness, moderation etc.) instead of clinging to a set of stories, a mechanism of language, that is clearly passed its time, no matter how good some of the stories in it are as metaphors for decent human behavior.

  21. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 4 years ago

    I think we can agree that Mankinds translations and interpretations of the ancient scripture have been proven false.  For there are so many different ones and they all can't be correct.

    So lets use only the ones that we know to be incorect and use these to prove that no one must have written the text from which they were mis translated and interpreted.

    Can we prove that it never actually began and we are not really here to argue the point?

  22. secularist10 profile image91
    secularist10posted 4 years ago

    To go off on a tangent, I noticed this from the Haaretz piece:

    "...but also remind those at the table who may forget that it is just a metaphor, and that there is no ancient animosity between Israelites and Egyptians"

    Are there Jews who actually have animosity toward the modern Egyptians because of this story? Lol. Don't they realize the population of modern Egypt is overwhelmingly Arab, whereas the people of ancient Egypt were a totally different group (the Arabs came in around the 600s)?

  23. pisean282311 profile image57
    pisean282311posted 4 years ago

    @mark bible is not historically true...i agree to that ...it is bunch of copied folk tales like noah's flood and some original tales like moses ...but is it worthless?...it is work of literature...it is important creation..

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Well - I think so yes. I think it is based on a false premise and actually creates followers who do the opposite of what they claim - so - yes - I think it is worthless. History and the spoken words of the religious people on this thread bear me out in this.

      If Christians were widely regarded as the most loving, peaceful group of people around - I could be persuaded other wise. As it is........

      1. pisean282311 profile image57
        pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        @mark i agree to that point...my point is that instead of promoting it as divine doc which obviously it is not , it must be studied as literature..

  24. 0
    SirDentposted 4 years ago

    I wonder if anyone has checked this out.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipuwer_Pap … _of_Exodus

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Of course.

      The association of the Ipuwer Papyrus with the Exodus as describing the same event is generally rejected by Egyptologists. Roland Enmarch, author of a new translation of the papyrus, notes: "The broadest modern reception of Ipuwer amongst non-Egyptological readers has probably been as a result of the use of the poem as evidence supporting the Biblical account of the Exodus."[26] While Enmarch himself rejects synchronizing the texts of the Ipuwer Papyrus and The Book of Exodus on grounds of historicity, in The reception of a Middle Egyptian poem: The Dialogue of Ipuwer.. he acknowledges that there are some textual parallels "particularly the striking statement that ‘the river is blood and one drinks from it’ (Ipuwer 2.10), and the frequent references to servants abandoning their subordinate status (e.g. Ipuwer 3.14–4.1; 6.7–8; 10.2–3). On a literal reading, these are similar to aspects of the Exodus account."

      Commenting on such attempts to draw parallels, he writes that "all these approaches read Ipuwer hyper-literally and selectively" and points out that there are also conflicts between Ipuwer and the biblical account. He suggests that "it is more likely that Ipuwer is not a piece of historical reportage and that historicising interpretations of it fail to account for the ahistorical, schematic literary nature of some of the poem’s laments," but other Egyptologists disagree. Examining what Enmarch calls "the most extensively posited parallel", the river becoming blood, he notes that it should not be taken "absolutely literally" as a description of an event but that both Ipuwer and Exodus might be metaphorically describing what happens at times of catastrophic Nile floods when the river is carrying large quantities of red earth, mentioning that Kitchen has also discussed this phenomenon.

      Too bad. wink

  25. Greek One profile image80
    Greek Oneposted 4 years ago

    One would wonder if a Pharaoh would choose to highlight and mark for historical reference the successful flight of his slaves.

    I seldom, when I recall the achievements of my youth, recall the (few thousand) ladies whom I failed to seduce...

    1. pisean282311 profile image57
      pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      @greek but in moses's cases it seems nature chosed not to highlight...thats why there is no clue about moses in earth barring in imaginary minds of authors of bible...

      1. Greek One profile image80
        Greek Oneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I dont know about that,.. i have seen a number of programs that highlight the possibility of great floods centuries ago..

        1. pisean282311 profile image57
          pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

          @greek yup...great floods are part of all flock tales and so it should have happened...in all old civilizations including greece we would find that tale...jews r pretty young society in comparison to others and it is suggested that they borrowed the tale from summerians

          1. Greek One profile image80
            Greek Oneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            well it has been suggested that all the major religions have borrowed from those previous...

            Jesus was Hercules or Isis... 

            Mark Knowles was Ganish,

            Pisean was the large-endowed figure of Greek mythology, Sexacles, etc...
            .

            1. pisean282311 profile image57
              pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              @dont know about mark and me but u r sure avtaar of Vātsyāyana

              1. Greek One profile image80
                Greek Oneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                well... i do very much like illustrated books and 'how to' guides

                smile

                1. pisean282311 profile image57
                  pisean282311posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  and i would encourage u to write some...it would be real fun to read them...it would be best sellers....

                  1. Greek One profile image80
                    Greek Oneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    I'm an old man with two young kids and bills...

                    my ink is dried up

    2. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      This Pharaoh would be drownded lol. But - pretty sure he would have recorded the original enslavement of an entire HUGE people. wink

      1. Greek One profile image80
        Greek Oneposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Drowned by what, the parting of the seas?  I am not as well versed in the Bible to know if the Old Testament says the Pharaoh perished.

        As far as recording the enslavement..  I'm not sure how 'huge' the numbers were, or the overall effect the slaves departure had on Egypt as a whole... but I do believe that there have been many cases of leaders 'erasing' evidence of historical occurrences they don't wish to highlight.

        It's not like there were newspapers being published daily.

  26. GodTalk profile image85
    GodTalkposted 4 years ago
    1. aguasilver profile image86
      aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      +1 Thank you.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Certainly good for a laugh.

        "Modern Biblical Chronology," huh? lol lol

        1. aka-dj profile image78
          aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I see you don't (really) want ANY information that is opposed to your bias.

          Typical hypocrisy. lol lol lol

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Dear me. I am always open dj - show me something other than lies and made up nonsense - and I will listen. I wouldn't call, "making up a new time line," information though. I take it from your comment that you did not even bother reading that stuff - did you? Just saw something that purported to support your irrational faith and assumed it must be some good stuff?

            Calling me names is not helping to convince me that your religion has any value either. 

            Funny stuff coming from some one who rejects all scientific knowledge. wink

            1. aka-dj profile image78
              aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              So, this sums up your "credible" sources, taken from the second on your list of links.

              "And please note that The Bible is NOT a credible source. As far as I am concerned it is purely a work of fiction that maybe 5% of the time is based loosely around actual historical events."
              (Italics mine).

              As far as I'm concerned, this is way less credible that the timeline one. lol

              But, hey, don't sweat it. I'm still happy with my delusions. lol lol lol

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I know you are happy with your delusions. What I find odd is your need to try force everyone else to follow them, and then attacking anyone who has come to reason and rejected them. I see you have not managed to find any information at all. So - my opening statement is actually correct then?

                1. aka-dj profile image78
                  aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  What's wrong with the evidence you have been given, other than you closed mind?

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                    Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    It is false. Made up by religious people trying to defend an irrational belief. More name calling huh? Like Jesus told you to do? lol

          2. jonnycomelately profile image87
            jonnycomelatelyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            When you look at "God Talk" 's profile and see the hubs he has put up, he has a one-track mind..... and obviously sees himself as having a duty to convert us all.
            Drink this medicine if you choose to, but I have no need of such rubbish and fanaticism.  It is poisonous non-sense, drunk by inadequate people.
            IMHO

            1. GodTalk profile image85
              GodTalkposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              My duty is not to convert anyone. I simply speak what the Bible says. The Holy Spirit does the converting. And I didn't say a word. I simply pointed out sites that were opposed to your point of view. I'm glad you at least got a chance to see that there is an explaination for everything if someone is willing to see that we don't know all the facts yet about history.
                Many people before you have underestimated the Bible's hitorical accuracy and have been proven wrong. I have no doubt that you will be as well.  Call me whatever names you want. This is my final word on the subject.  May the God you don't believe in bless you.

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Hey there. Can you please list 50 or so proofs of the Bible's Historical accuracy - I would like that and it will be entertaining to say the least. Can we start with the proof of Jesus' crucifixion, and maybe do some of the other majikal events, like the Tower of Babel and Noah's Ark. Can we avoid the religious liars sites that you linked to before though - we all know there are people who will make stuff up to support their beliefs. I feel certain the Holy Spirit will direct you to some secular, reputable sites. Right?

                Although, it is widely accepted - even amongst Israeli and Religious groups that there is no evidence for the Exodus, so I think the Holy Spirit might be in trouble here........

                Speak what the bible says all you wish - I am capable of reading and I do not think we should murder people for working on the Sabbath - but - that is just me. wink

              2. jonnycomelately profile image87
                jonnycomelatelyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Classical quote, of course.  When you want to squirm out of any embarrassing question, just throw everything into the lap of the Holy Spirit.   There is no way of proving or disproving  it, so you are safe.

                1. aguasilver profile image86
                  aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  There are ways to prove or disprove it... but many will not seek them.

                  Psalm 51:17
                  .....a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.

                  But those who refuse to find out do not have a broken and contrite heart I guess.

                  1. jonnycomelately profile image87
                    jonnycomelatelyposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Another classical quote...... throw the onus of proof back on the "unbelievers," because you know there is no proof or disproof.    There is no point in arguing with you, it's a waste of time and effort.

                    But I give you a point for trying.

  27. GodTalk profile image85
    GodTalkposted 4 years ago
  28. Rina Pinto profile image60
    Rina Pintoposted 4 years ago

    When the rapture takes place .. then this generation will know .. but then will they be able to tolerate all that Satan has in store for them here on earth.. ? i wonder what their state will be .. The there wont be even Bibles .. even if you want to know the truth.. You better heed to warnings from the Bible .. and stop yelling and saying that The Bible is worthless .. or do we see the fear of Satan in these forum .. sad!

  29. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image95
    Wesman Todd Shawposted 4 years ago

    Congratulation, Mark Knowles, you raging Anti Semite - Hitler would be proud.

  30. WryLilt profile image88
    WryLiltposted 4 years ago

    I really don't care whether it's true or not either way, being far too busy trying to change the world WITHOUT religion.

    However I would like to say that there is no proof EITHER way. The Catholic church destroyed thousands of records and changed history books in just the last few hundred years, so in the thousands of years in between now and when the Jews were said to have left Egypt, there would have been plenty of opportunities to change or destroy things. That said, the story could have grown with time too - they may have only wandered for 40 days!

  31. aka-dj profile image78
    aka-djposted 4 years ago

    Oh, ok, I think I finally get it.

    ALL Christians are liars, and therefore, unreliable.

    So, by contrast, all non-believers (aka atheists) are totally truthful, and therefore absolutely reliable.

    I think I have now been successfully re-programmed and truly educated.
    Thank you!

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      No - that is not what I said aka. Although you are - unwittingly - proving that to be the case. I said those sites are not being truthful and the information contained on them has been rejected by reputable archaeologists - including religious and Israeli ones.

      I am truthful aka - I know you like to call me a liar and hypocrite and close minded, but - that does not make it so. lol Repeating the same thing over and over and over - as those sites do - will not make it true either.

      So - on top of biology, geology, plate tectonics, anthropology, paleontology, carbon and radio dating, most physics and chemistry - you now add archaeology to your list of atheist conspiracies? You will have nothing left soon. wink

  32. thisisoli profile image65
    thisisoliposted 4 years ago

    I am not religious, but I do agree with Chris in some of what he says - Although religion has caused a lot of issues, and still does, it is also often the scapegoat and used to vilify and dehumanize people.

    However, religion also does cause a lot of problems in todays modern world.  Recent example would be the millions of dollars spent in Texas recently because the state board of education didn't like Thomas Jefferson's views on God, so decided to cut any detailed discussion of him from the history books.

    Not only a grossly negligent waste of public funds, but also horrifying that people placed there by Rick Perry for their Christian values are actively trying to change historical emphasis in the education system because of religion.

    Using Hitler in any internet argument is kind of cliche by the way.

    1. Chris Neal profile image84
      Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      You got a link on the Thomas Jefferson thing? I'm not disbelieving you, I've just been out of the world for a while and this is the first I've heard of it.

      I completely agree about the Hitler thing.

  33. 60
    tosaveposted 4 years ago

    Atheists claim that they reject the idea of God and they they also claim that the Bible is non-credible. Then they come up with such links saying that recent evidence proves that the Israelites were never slaves in Egypt. We see them doing this all the time.

    But weather they agree or not one thing is clear. It is purely a matter of will and not evidences. They just don't want to accept the idea of a God, especially a Christian God. The reason they want to be free. They do not want the tag of sin on anything they do. They want to continue in their sinful nature.

    I want to ask them  a question. It is a common and accepted fact that science is changing. It may say something today and tomorrow when further studies are done the new ideas would be accepted. My question is this. If science finds that Bible claims are true and if science finds evidences for a Christian God would you all become believes?

    I need some straight answers for this. I have question some atheists in a discussion on my website - <link snipped - no promotional links>  and they have just vanished since.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I would certainly become a believer if we find majik is true - yes.

      What recent evidence is this exactly?

    2. twosheds1 profile image60
      twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I would be a "believer" but not a follower. The god of the Bible I find capricious, cruel, and selfish. Not a fan.

  34. aguasilver profile image86
    aguasilverposted 4 years ago

    This broadcast is on in 45 minutes time, if you want to listen to it, visit the following link:

    http://www.italkfm.com/player.html

    Apparently the Jewish Kabbalists are about to announce that they now view Christ as the Messiah... should be interesting

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      If by "interesting," you mean "cause yet another religious fight." I suppose so. I Love it when you guys fight amongst yourselves. Is this all kabbalists or have they split themselves up again?

      1. aguasilver profile image86
        aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Do you get some special award for 20,000+ posts? - I would think you should get something for such diligence! smile

        1. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          No - I don't think so. I should do though. You could start a petition. big_smile

          1. Rina Pinto profile image60
            Rina Pintoposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Whether ppl promote Jesus as an outcast or the Son of God .. Jesus has already got the hearts of millions and you too with His message .. Hallelujah to the Soon & The Coming King Jesus .. fools keep on barging the WORD as worthless .. But Indeed it Reigns even in the mouth of the unbelievers So Powerful .. !

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Yup - worthless. Can you make a sensible response regarding the fact that there is no evidence to back up the basis for the biblical claim of Hebrew enslavement and Exodus instead please?

              Calling me a fool does not really help. wink

              1. 60
                tosaveposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                You asked for evidence for exodus. Though this question was not directed to me, I would like to reply.

                I would like you to watch this presentation.

                http://vimeo.com/39498729

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Oh gosh - yet another look at "coral encrusted remains of a chariot wheel that has been rejected by everyone," as anything.

                  Really - I asked for evidence of Exodus - this has already been offered by all the other religionists. Did you even bother looking at all the other religious offerings before posting exactly the same thing - yet again? Why would I sit through 1hour 22 minutes of religious nonsense? This was examined and rejected here:

                  http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/20 … coded.aspx

                  Really? You joined up here, just to post a link to that?

                  1. aka-dj profile image78
                    aka-djposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    The link you gave here is incorrect.
                    It debunks a tv documentary on the location of Mt Sinai.
                    Nothing to do whatever about chariot wheels.

                2. twosheds1 profile image60
                  twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I watched a good portion of the video, up through the "chariot wheel" part. Of course, Moeller didn't take that piece that looked like a chariot wheel and axle to it could be analyzed. He took it at face value: if it looks like a wheel, then it must be a wheel.

                  Also, he claims to have found the golden wheel, and photographed it. Where is the photo? Why didn't he retrieve it? If it was real, it would be a priceless artifact and very strong evidence. But alas, no pic, no artifact. Plus, if Pharoh's army numbered 250,000, there should be a buttload of stuff on the sea floor. Roman and Phoenician shipwrecks have survived a similar length of time on the sea floor, so where is Pharoh's wreckage?

                  I think what we have here is a case of confirmation bias run wild. He's starting with a premise, and seeking only evidence that confirms it. It's also not outside the realm of possibility that chariots got in the sea by other means.

                  I know I sound like a typical skeptic, but I'm trying to be as neutral as possible, and Moeller doesn't seem to make a good case.

  35. Michael-Milec profile image61
    Michael-Milecposted 4 years ago

    Congratulations, your party has won.
    The Bible has now been proven worthless ; makes the entire religion  somewhat  of fraud.
    Those of us who believe in the Living God, the master of the universe and rely on His Word, mainly have  ben humiliated , - nothing less expected of me. ( especially since my English is not been advanced .)
    Any evidences provided by the " opposition"  are denied as invalid, which is perfectly OK in this case .

    Mark you have my respect and high regard as a successful prosperous businessman .
    You are equally loved by the God as any other human being ever born. The redeemptive sacrifice of the Jesus Anointed was for everyone equally delivered. We are free to make choices..
    You know the eternal Truth better than me telling you...

    BTV, only wondering,what's next? Perhaps a petition by all seven billion plus sign that God is dethroned and no existing ?! While business going on as usual ...

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      No - "evidences" have turned out not to be evidences at all. Why the need to bear false witness?

      Sorry - I don't accept the need for a redemptive sacrifice. It does not make any sense.

      Still - now you know that the bible is based completely on a mythical (and false) claim - will you still keep on believing?

      1. Chris Neal profile image84
        Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Except that it's not completely based on a mythical and false claim. The slavery of the Jews is not the point of the New Testament. It's an important part of the history, but the redemptive sacrifice, which you are far from alone in claiming makes no sense, is the point.

        In fact, it's the point of the entire book.

        1. The Suburban Poet profile image81
          The Suburban Poetposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          It's interesting that you can dismiss the section on the slavery of the Jews so easily. So we are to ignore a historical claim (the Jews being slaves which does not require a belief in miracles) and the miracles associated with it (pillar of fire, parting of the Red Sea, Moses speaking directly to God, receiving the ten commandments etc) and instead believe in another miracle (the sacrifice of Jesus for our sins)? It is very confusing Chris..... very confusing...  that is why I wouldn't want to immerse my children into it. I can't explain it to them and I venture to say you can't either.

          1. Chris Neal profile image84
            Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Um, did I dismiss the slavery of the Jews so easily?

            No.

            Thank you though.

            1. The Suburban Poet profile image81
              The Suburban Poetposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              You are deflecting and redirecting.

              1. Chris Neal profile image84
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I was clarifying and correcting.

                If you wish to call it redirecting, that's your choice.

          2. twosheds1 profile image60
            twosheds1posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            If I may interject here, I think the point is that it's a more of a fable, rather than something to be taken literally. More of a work of literature than gospel truth (pun sort of intended). As such, it's a lot easier to take. It's like Aragorn raising the army of the dead in the Return of the King. We all know it's not true; it's an allegory about repaying old debts.

            That's an interesting proposition: what if an epic literary work (such as LotR) was taken as gospel by people in the future? Maybe I should write that novel!

            1. Chris Neal profile image84
              Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Well, I think it is supposed to be historical. I mean, you don't have to be a Biblical scholar to know  that much of Jewish culture is based around the Exodus and ceremonies meant to remind the Jews that their people were once slaves.

              I don't deny that the lack of solid evidence is a powerful point that people not given to believing the Bible have. I am also saying that many things once thought to be myths (like the very existence of the city of Troy) did turn out to be true. I don't deny that I am exercising faith.

              But I am also pointing out that Jesus (and I know that many, including Mark, don't think Jesus ever existed) fulfilled prophecies and performed wonders. The point of the New Testament is the fulfillment of prophecy and Jesus redemptive death. I know  that many don't accept that, and I totally understand how it doesn't make sense if you don't believe in God.

        2. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          So - an important part of the history has been proven false. At least you admit that.

          The redemptive sacrifice makes no sense at all and has also been proven worthless. The fact than man evolved disproves that one. wink

          1. Chris Neal profile image84
            Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I should clarify, just because the pottery hasn't been found isn't proof positive that it never happened. But I also believe in the literal creation of humans. Evolutionary theory, both Darwinian and post-Darwinian, has problems. I'm certainly open to education about it, I want to know what I'm talking about better than I do, but every time I bring that up I'm basically called an idiot. If that is supposed to show me how wrong I am, it only has gone to prove everything I've written about human nature.

            And the redemptive sacrifice is not worthless if you accept the gift.

            Maybe I should've been a preacher...wink

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Evolution is well proven. It appears your biology is as accurate as your history. Sorry - I don't believe that you are coming here looking for proof of evolution. Odd - you accept the biblical nonsense without a shred of evidence and even argue that the lack of evidence is not proof positive that it never happened. lol

              The redemptive sacrifice is ridiculous. wink

              1. Chris Neal profile image84
                Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                Okay, the "without a shred of evidence" you know is not a correct statement. It's not evidence that you accept, and I know that. But God has proven His existence to me.

                And you've just proved my point about Evolutionary Theory. You didn't send me to a source (preferably popular level. I can decipher some scientific latin but if it gets too deep, I'll admit I'm lost.) You said I wasn't looking for enlightenment and reiterate the statement without providing the proof. If you think I'm stupid, then please just say so.

                And you accuse me of insulting your intelligence...

                By the way, know anything about shank3?

                1. The Suburban Poet profile image81
                  The Suburban Poetposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  "God has proven his existence to me."

                  I would never allow you to talk to my children. You sound like David Koresh.

                  1. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    That gave me a laugh!

                    Thin-skinned, dogmatic people are absolutely my favorite targets!

                    I like you! You're fun!

                  2. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    By the way, do you know anything about Shank3?

                  3. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    By the way, I know you haven't read that many posts by me but you've proved much of what I've said in them...

                    You certainly didn't feel it worth your time to try to help me understand evolutionary theory any better. I know, easier to just attack the other person, much easier. Been there, done that, lived to regret it.

                2. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  You think there is some evidence - go ahead and show it. lol
                  If you want proof of evolution - you can read this thread:

                  http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/7572

                  But - as I said - I don't believe you actually want any information. Because - as we both seem to think - evolution adds fuel to prove your beliefs are false. I think you are being willfully ignorant.

                  1. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    From the hub "Ignorance is not an Excuse"

                    Boy, now there's an interesting line. Considering how often I get hit (figuratively speaking) by people who treat single lines or paragraphs as if that text were the entire Bible (which ironically works for both sides. There's been an ongoing debate in the forums where it's plain that both sides fail to appreciate the full context of what they're arguing about.)

                  2. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    My faith has never hinged on evolutionary theory being 'false.' But your faith in humanity in general and me in particular is touching...

                    However, that does not mean I don't think there are holes in the theory. I'll admit I'm no expert on the subject although I do find it fascinating to hear the latest theories (that homo sapien might have interbred with caveman I don't find that hard to believe.) Yeah, I do believe in a literal Creation. The Big Bang is not incompatible with the Genesis account. Adam and Eve are a different story, but again, my faith does not hinge on that belief. It hinges on the existence of God and Jesus and those have been proved to my satisfaction.

                    I've given the proof that I know. God reached out to me. I don't expect people to believe it if they're not inclined to. The irony is that the very people who so often accuse me and people like me of refusing ( or at least being unwilling) to look at evidence that we're wrong are the first to shut down anything we have to say. Let's just say that neither side seems to be willing to look much beyond statistics.

                    And yeah, my religion causes conflicts with people inclined to feel it causes conflict. The reasons for that are as many and varied as the groups who are in conflict with my religion. But as I've said many times, even if my religion were to go away, conflict would not cease.

                    Still, it was an interesting read and I thank you for the link.

                  3. Chris Neal profile image84
                    Chris Nealposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    The allele drift I found particularly interesting.

                    My question about Shank3 was not out of the blue. Sequenced genome is an interest of mine. I don't completely understand it, but it has bearing in my life.

  36. suzettenaples profile image90
    suzettenaplesposted 4 years ago

    I have always believed the Bible to be based on faith, not facts.  They are stories / allegories to explain the teachings of Christ and in the OT, the teachings of God.  They are parables / stories to teach us the faith of our religions, Christian or Jewish.  Never as a child did I believe the story of Moses parting the Red Sea.  That was just too fantastic for me to believe.  But, to those that have blind faith in God, perhaps they believe this Moses story.  I don't think these findings you have submitted on these websites make the Bible worthless.  It is a book of faith and to the faithful it is not worthless.

  37. Johnny2Balls profile image60
    Johnny2Ballsposted 4 years ago

    Don't feed the troll.

  38. 59
    passingthewordposted 4 years ago

    Have you ever heard of the hyksos expulsion?
    According to the Egyption Pharaoh Ahmose (Brother of Moses). He saids that "he drove" out Isrealites who were lead there by Jacob who's sons name was Joseph.
    It is said that Ahmose's son died young. And it is possible for water to turn blood red and for gases to come out of that water and kill those in the low land. It has happened in Lake Retba, in Senegal, west Africa and In August of 1986 Lake Nyos in Cameroon which released gases and killed hundreds

    http://wagoneers.com/BIBLE/ExodusDecodedNotes.txt

    http://www.exodusdecoded.com/index1.jsp

    You can't count out the exodus yet.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Yes we can. Thoroughly counted out, disproven and relegated to myth status - sorry. The exodus decoded has been thoroughly debunked - By a Christian organization no less.

      If you were not so busy posting links to religious garbage - you would know that because you would have followed this thread instead.

      "Oh wait - some one sez it is real therefore my beliefs are not nonsense - let's go with that." lol

      1. boyatdelhi profile image42
        boyatdelhiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Bible is proven True.  Jesus is alive and there are many proofs you can find at:
        http://www.spiritlessons.com/
        http://divinerevelations.info/Documents … /index.htm

        1. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          From the first link, first story...

          "Angelica was shown the Kingdoms of Heaven and Hell, and the Return of Christ.  She witnessed Jesus weeping over lost souls...

          We were fasting for 15 days, and crying out to God.  My daughter Angelica also joined us.  During those fifteen days of fasting, I was able to see beyond the natural, which I've never done before.  We were praying and fasting at the retreat, and even continued praying and crying out at home, waiting for God to speak to us."

          lol Sorry, but delirium brought on by lack of food was the result of their hysteria and delusions.

          And of course, the mother of this child should be arrested for child abuse.

      2. 59
        passingthewordposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Mark your an angry old man. You share what you want to share and I'll do the same. If you don't want to get feed back, don't post anything. Stop being so sensitive.

        1. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Ah - personal attacks from behind a fake user - you must be a real christian.

          Sorry you don't want the truth. It must be very frustrating to think you found some proof of the majik juju only to discover it is another Liar For Jesus talking out his behind. Still - now you know the Exodus is a lie - how do you feel? Still believe OK? Bet you do huh? No wonder you are so angry.

          Go attack a Mormon or something. They just make stuff up for their religion. Not like you guys with your facts, and proof and evidence 'n' stuff.

          Why - just yesterday - we had some one proving heaven was real because a doctor selling a book about it said so. It is true - he saw it while brain damaged and had scientific proof, plus he was qualified. Not like the evolution scientists who lie and make stuff up like the Mormons..  wink

          1. 59
            passingthewordposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            lol. sorry I didn't mean to hurt your feekings.  you must have been hurt by someone to be attacking so hard.
            Just like I have faith In God you have faith in these web site that are telling you that the bible is false. I think you may have more faith then me. You put your belief in the internet. i am going to call your faith, The Inter evolution on the corner of 4th street.

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              How funny. Archaeologists, and the Israelis agree the Exodus never happened. This is nothing to do with the internet telling me anything - this is accepted fact around the world. No genuine scholar - religious or other wise is disputing this now.

              I personally then claimed the bible is worthless and based on nothing. Did some one scare you as a small child to make you believe these things? It is OK - there is no invisible Super Daddy going to punish you if you don't have faith. You must have been very, very frightened. Did you go attack the Mormon faith to make yourself feel better? They do just make stuff up. Oh wait.........................

              Didn't answer my question. Now that you know the bible is pure myth with no basis in fact - does that affect your belief?

              It is correct that I expose false doctrine when I find it - yes?

              1. 59
                passingthewordposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                There are archaelogists that say the bible is true...no what?
                I grew up mormon, so I am not attacking I am sharing what i know about them. and of course I am not one right know.
                I like this...super big daddy. The bible is not scary....maybe for you be not for me.
                And the bible is true in my eyes.

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Please stop lying at me. No reputable archaeologists are claiming the bible is true. The Exodus has been relegated to myth status. If you can be bothered to actually read any of this thread, you will find the nonsense you posted has been thoroughly debunked - by Christians. They even claim the exodus decoded is harmful to the religion as it is so obviously lies.

                  I don't believe in the bible - it has been proven to be false, so I am not scared, but - I can see why you would be if you believe it. Ah - not scared because you get the free pass are you? OK then - you did wot god sed so you don't need to be scared - gotcha.

                  Still didn't answer my question. A few religious liars aside - now that you know the bible is based on a myth and not in reality - does that affect your belief?

                  Feel better for dissing the Mormons?

                  Should I not be pointing out the false doctrines?

                  1. 59
                    passingthewordposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                    Here's a astrophysicist
                    http://www.reasons.org/about/who-we-are/hugh-ross
                    not dissing just sharing what they believe.

            2. A Troubled Man profile image60
              A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              Contradict much? lol

  39. 0
    Apemaniaposted 4 years ago

    Those sites are not really proof in any way, they are more like recruitment sites for your religion. Even if Jesus existed, which no reliable non-bible sources confirm, the concept of God is impossible.

    That a perfect God would suddenly feel any reason to create the earth is flawed in itself, if God is perfect then he lacks nothing and desires nothing. That he experiences human emotions is also flawed, how can he be angry when he is omniscient and knows in advance that it will happen. Creating light on day 1 but the sun on day 4, sure God that works... not. It would have worked if God was a giant lamp or something, however he is not a giant lamp.

    Jesus is also not the Christ, because he wasn't from the right tribe/clan, he was not a descendant from King David due to the virgin birth that is probably a lie anyway. Mary and Joseph were never called to Bethlehem to pay taxes to the Romans because their tax system didn't work that way. Also, if they lived in Egypt, why would they need to pay Rome any tax, its not like Rome had any super advanced ways of tracking people. The entire thing with the three wise men is also fishy, why would you give a baby and its parents such gifts, even to symbolically represent something. Also, how could Mary just suddenly find someone to sell them to and get the money necessary.

    If I remember correctly, Rome may or have may not have been occupying Egypt during the correct time, if that't true then it made the trip unnecessary. If they even made the trip, would it be possible that they had relatives there since it was their home town ?
    If so, then why go through all the trouble of looking at Inns and the like when you could stay at a relatives home, no the whole flight to Egypt is just a cute cover up story to make Jesus become more plausible as being the Christ.

    Also, Jesus NEVER DIED FOR YOUR SINS. He cared only for the lost sheep of Israel, with other words the Jewish people. Its Paul that brought in all that gibberish that even the Gentiles could be saved, which is bull since he never met Jesus other than through his ''experience''. Jesus also said that ALL PARTS of the old testament are required to live by, that means all rules. How many of you Christians live by that, and don't bring up that bull that Paul said it was not required. I think Jesus words would trump his words in importance any day, so go sacrifice some goats or something, since you are required to do that to become forgiven.

    My final say is, if God really is God and he really loves us then why do we have to accept Jesus into our lives. If God created everything, then he must have created the laws and morals he abides by (sure, he takes them as whimsical as I take my pension saving). If he really loved humans, he would allow no one to be cast into hell, since no one deserves an eternal punishment for any form of crimes done in life. There is no justice in that, but God is god and probably doesn't care about people.

    No. man created God in his own image and not the other way around. God has little to no good qualities, and if he does he chooses to rarely show them. I chose not to believe, because I don't want to associate myself with such a pathetic, petty minded, selfish, narcissistic control freak that the Christian God is. If he cared, he would not have ''killed'' the millions of people that he kills during the course of the exaggerated story book known as the bible.

    If you chose to believe, that is your choice. Keep your choice to yourself, petty bickering over who's God is God and who's colouring book is the truth has costed humanity enough bloodshed and sorrow as it is.

  40. Mark Knowles profile image60
    Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago

    Proof? I don't need proof. In this case - a lack of is proof enough.

    Unless you are saying you can go back in time and test creation? wink

    In which case - I am all over it.

    1. aguasilver profile image86
      aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Oh, I see.... no real answer to that Mark, but I will remember your reply, when you ask for proof in your normal mocking fashion, next time you decide to attack some discussion between believers.


      "a lack of is proof enough"...... where does that leave you with your revered 'evulujion'?

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        There is plenty of proof of evolution. It has even been replicated in a lab. Would you like some proof?

        Sorry - how is that a non answer? But - as you are now claiming that there is "A biblical creation model that is testable, falsifiable, and predictive." the burden of proof belongs to you. Show me.

        1. aguasilver profile image86
          aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Ahhh the good old "burden of proof belongs to you" cop out!

          YOU stated that it was a lie, so the burden of proof belongs to you..... or does the burden of proof belongs to you, only work when atheists are calling it?

          Actually I am just enjoying the website, lot's of good stuff there, but of course you would not be bothered to examine the EVIDENCE and try to refute it, easier to pull one liners and glib sidetracking devices to 'prove' your point...

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Ah - Truth is a cop out now is it? EVIDENCE? lol What evidence is that?

            No - the burden of proof belongs to you. In the absence of - it is a lie.

            See how that works?

            This is why your religion causes so many conflicts. You propose nonsense and demand it be dis-proven without having first proven it. Used to work that way - not any more. The burden of proof is your. Sorry. That must be very frustrating for you.

            Why don't you try having faith instead? I understand that is how this is supposed to work.......

  41. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image95
    Wesman Todd Shawposted 4 years ago

    Mr. Knowles is a raging anti Semite.  The Bible was written entirely by Jews....Mr. Knowles thinks it all a manipulation, lies, etc - why is Mr. Knowles such a hate filled racist?

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Interesting. Israeli archeologist agree there is no evidence and that the Exodus is a myth. How does that make me a hate filled racist exactly? Is anyone who doesn't believe the bible is true a hate filled racist also?

    2. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Perhaps, he was one of Hitlers right hand men? Maybe Mark is actually Goebbels in disguise? lol

      1. aguasilver profile image86
        aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Talking of who Mark may be in disguise....

        http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_wgNpX-aOMxo/TBplK24PlRI/AAAAAAAAAYc/t76zFno5dvE/s1600/thinking.gif

        1. A Troubled Man profile image60
          A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Okay, I'll bite, who are you really?

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Funny - they claim to be following the rules of a book which expressly tells them that bearing false witness is a sin punishable by eternal damnation. And then feel free to bear false witness.

            Almost as though they don't actually believe what they preach. wink

            1. aguasilver profile image86
              aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I just leave it up to God to decide who's bearing false witness! wink

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                In that case you are in all sorts of trouble. Interesting that you feel no responsibility to those you may damage or insult by bearing false witness against them.

                Save me a seat by the fire. wink

  42. Wesley Meacham profile image93
    Wesley Meachamposted 4 years ago

    Wow...
    While I'm loath to contribute to an athiest vs. christian theological ping-pong battle, I have to disagree with the initial statement. The bible has not been proven worthless.

    It may or may not be factual.
    I'm not going to enter that arguement because I find it pointless and divise.

    However for the sake of discussion, lets assume that your other statements are correct; that the stories found within the bible have no evidence to support them and therefore should not be called facts. Okay.

    That does not mean that the bible is worthless. The stories of the bible still have a literary value. I wouldn't call the book worthless any more than War and Peace, To Kill a Mockingbird or A Dream of the Red Mansion.

    I'll grant that wars were never started over To Kill a Mockingbird, but that isn't the point. My point is that the book would still have value, relevance and worth.

    And that is only if we looked at it as a work of fiction. While there are portions of the bible that I personally find appalling there are also portions which I find poetic and even at times insightful.

    1. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I see - so it has worth as a work of fiction. OK - I can go with that. Much like any other fairy tale. Can't argue with that. I prefer "Star Wars," as a story but - to each his own. Not going to base my life in Star Wars though. roll

      1. Wesley Meacham profile image93
        Wesley Meachamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I don't know... there is some life changing stuff in Star Wars...

        Personally I wouldn't tell you to base your life on anything, though I am a bit partial to the writings of Emerson.

        I will agree with the one comment, "to each his own."

        It's pointless to argue partly because there is no way to prove anything absolutely. And also partly because people are going to believe what they're going to believe regardless of what you say. You think that you're being logical and as absurd as it may seem to you they feel that they are being logical and both sides simply feel frustraited that the other can't see the logic.

        The other problem with these arguements is that they boil everything down to two possibilities, completely ignoring the different faiths of millions of people across the world who aren't christian.

        Personally I say live and let live; pagan, christian, athiest, buhdist, Pastafarian, whatever. I've known good people in each group and I've known many in each group who were fairly annoying. It is what it is and in the end people are just going to believe what they choose to.

        1. aguasilver profile image86
          aguasilverposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          +1 smile

        2. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          There are plenty of ways to prove things absolutely. I can absolutely prove there is no evidence for the basis of the bible. My arguments do not boil down to anything - I reject all religious beliefs equally. I am a non-denominational anti-theist.

          But - you are right - that does not matter to some people. They will believe in the face of all teh facts and logic you offer. Oh well. Worth a try to reduce the conflicts caused.

    2. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Perhaps, but as we understand more, we find that the stories in the Bible may very well be rehashed stories from earlier religions, hence the Bible is more a "plagiarized" literary work, unlike those other books you referred.

      1. Wesley Meacham profile image93
        Wesley Meachamposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Certainly there are similarities to other works. The Noah flood (and much of the rest of Genises) is often compared to the Epic of Gilgamesh but I feel there is enough variation between the two to warrant having both. I've recently learned of a similar flood story in China. I don't really believe that there is any connection between these three stories. Other than the fact that in each of these societies there were periods of time in which a single flood which we would just think inconvenient could have ruined their whole year.

        Also, many of the stories initially came out of an oral tradition. Because of this they would have more in common probably with the Beowulf poem. I say this because while we think we know who wrote it there is a bit of uncertainty and because the story was retold orally for many years before anyone thought to write it down.

 
working