Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Challenge to Mikeenders on the historicity of the Exodus

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Sorry, I haven't been paying attention.

    Yes, I will defend the premise "it is blatantly obvious the Exodus as described in the OT did not happen," though I'd probably not phrase it exactly like that for a debate.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by psstein View Post
      Sorry, I haven't been paying attention.

      Yes, I will defend the premise "it is blatantly obvious the Exodus as described in the OT did not happen," though I'd probably not phrase it exactly like that for a debate.
      Well with less than three days to go we will have to postpone this and hammer that phrase out because as it presently stands the ambiguity I expressed before hasn't been addressed so it seems the phrase suits neither of us perhaps for different reasons. My apologies to Joe again though. I misread and failed to note that issue wasn't in agreement. I should have reviewed it again earlier as well but hadn't seen an answer here from you (easy - I guess there are settings you can set to be notified of posts here but I never have) so wan't even sure this was still on.

      Comment


      • #18
        I can fix the thread if you two will agree on the parameters and make them clear. Chop Chop!
        "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

        "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

        Comment


        • #19
          The premise I'll defend is "the Exodus as described in the OT did not happen."

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by psstein View Post
            The premise I'll defend is "the Exodus as described in the OT did not happen."
            and what exodus does that describe? Plus you are backtracking away from the level of certainty issue again which we should both know is our main point of contention.

            Anyway Waaaaay too ambiguous - theres no way to get around "as described" leads to as I interpret the text which is why I said weeks ago it was better to phrase that in concrete terms.

            Still open to discussing it but theres no way we will be starting a debate in less than two days at this point - not where we are at the moment.

            i again apologize to the mods for my part in the misunderstanding which given how I answered that question above was pretty big.

            Comment


            • #21
              The Exodus meaning:

              1. The Jewish nation is enslaved in Egypt
              2. A series of plagues occur.
              3. The Jewish nation leaves Egypt.
              4. It then wanders in the wilderness for 40 years.

              I think this is essentially the bare minimum for a historical Exodus. I am not including the Conquest, as that is a different problem. My position is that no such events took place:

              1. The Jews were never enslaved in Egypt
              2. The plagues never occurred
              3. The Jews, never having been enslaved, didn't need to leave.
              4. The wilderness narrative is not historical

              Conclusion: The Exodus, as described in the OT, can be shown not to have happened.

              Again, we can go with "blatantly obvious," and I feel as though that essentially is my position, but I wouldn't word it exactly like that. However, in the interest of having the debate, we can go with the wording "blatantly obvious."
              Last edited by psstein; 10-30-2015, 01:15 AM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Moderated By: Littlejoe

                Debate has begun. This challenge thread is closed!

                ***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
                Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

                "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

                "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

                Comment

                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                Working...
                X