Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: psstein vs Mikeenders -Did the Exodus take place as described in the Bible

  1. #1
    Professor and Chaplain Littlejoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    North Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,568
    Amen (Given)
    1384
    Amen (Received)
    1487

    psstein vs Mikeenders -Did the Exodus take place as described in the Bible

    Moderated By: Littlejoe

    Attention - This is the Debate thread and is for the Participants only. psstein will argue that: "It is blatantly obvious that the Exodus as described in the OT did not take place." Mikeenders will: "dissent to that view with reasons and data". psstein will open on (or about) Oct. 31, 2015. The debate will be for 4 rounds. Observers wishing to comment on the debate can do so in the commentary thread found HERE.

    ***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.

    Last edited by Littlejoe; 10-26-2015 at 02:14 AM.
    "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

  2. #2
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Faith
    Roman Catholic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,558
    Amen (Given)
    231
    Amen (Received)
    610
    First, I want to thank Mike for having this debate as well as TheologyWeb for hosting it. The question before us is "Did the Exodus take place as described in the Bible?" The answer is no, and there are compelling reasons that make it, as I've said, "blatantly obvious" that no such event took place.

    Moreover, there is convincing evidence that no Exodus ever took place, period. The Jews were not slaves in Egypt, nor did they escape said bondage. The Exodus, as the Old Testament tells it, is a theological narrative with little basis in historical truth. That does not mean it is worthless. It does mean, however, that attempts to read it in a strictly literal way fail.

    The first issue the Exodus has to overcome is dating. The Bible suggests the Exodus took place 486 years prior to the construction of Solomon's Temple. This suggests a date of 1486 BC. However, such a date would fail. The route of the Exodus does not suggest a date in the 15th century BC. Rather, it suggests a date in the 7th or 8th centuries BC. However, based on both archaeological data and the Bible itself, a date later than roughly 1210 BC is too late. Moreover, if the Exodus were to happen in 1486, it would happen at the apex of Egyptian power. Both the Sinai and what is now Israel were heavily fortified. Indeed, the Amarna letters recount the capture of two escaped slaves, but are completely silent as to the 2-3 million Jews wandering the desert.

    However, such issues have not dissuaded some scholars. The American scholar W.F. Albright suggested a date from 1250-1200 BC. However, such a date runs into the same problems. First and foremost, according to the Merneptah Stele, the Israelites are present in the land by 1208 BC. Albright's thesis also fails due to archaeological considerations, namely, if the Israelites enter the land at that time, the Book of Joshua's description of the conquest (which Albright strongly supported) cannot be true, as, while there are destruction layers at sites such as Bethel, there is a conspicuously missing one at Jericho.

    Second, the tradition is almost assuredly a late one. The vast majority of the references in the Bible appear to be post-exilic. Moreover, anachronisms in the text suggest it is being written later. For example, the city of Pithom was not named as such until the 6th century BC. Prior to that, it seems to have been called Tel el-Maskhuta, which was not occupied from the 16th to the 7th centuries. The other option, the nearby site of Tel el-Rahbata, was not occupied until 1200 BC, which is at least 8 years too late for the Israelites to have built the city. Moreover, as I have stated above, the route of the Exodus in the Bible shows signs of being a 7th or 8th century construction, with the text showing little knowledge of the area either in the 15th century BC or in the 7th century BC.

    Third, the Egyptian texts are mysteriously silent regarding the escape of the Israelite nation as well as a series of plagues and the death of their Pharaoh. A typical response to this is that ANE cultures often did not record defeats. This is demonstrably untrue. ANE cultures would often take their defeats and record them as though they had offended their gods. This is particularly on display in the Books of Kings, where the Deuteronomistic historian does not blame Judah's defeats on its vast military inferiority, but on its offending YHWH through its worship of Baal/other heathen gods.

    Fourth, there is a complete lack of archaeological evidence for any prolonged sojourn in the wilderness. For example, the text recounts the Israelites spending 38 years at Kadesh. Mike has brought up a recent BAR article claiming that Kadesh was inhabited in one of the times the Exodus could have occurred. This would be a strong refutation of my position, if it weren't misguided. The pottery found at Kadesh was Egyptian, not Israelite/Canaanite. Archaeologists, most notable Finklestein, have found, time and again, that early Israelite pottery is very similar to Canaanite pottery; there is little if any difference between the two material cultures. If the Exodus truly occurred in the way the Bible suggests, we would have evidence. We do not have evidence, and, when a place is supposedly occupied for 38 years, evidence should appear.

    Fifth, and finally, there is no reason to suppose an Exodus to understand the origins of Israel. All evidence suggests that the ancient Israelites were merely a different form of Canaanite, believing in a similar religious system, with the large difference centering on the position of YHWH.

    Overall, the Exodus can conclusively shown to not have happened in the way described in the Bible. I do not rule out some memory of an escape from bondage, nor do I rule out some sort of much smaller exodus, but the Biblical one did not take place.

  3. Amen Boxing Pythagoras, Duragizer, Aractus amen'd this post.
  4. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,042
    Amen (Given)
    41
    Amen (Received)
    103
    My Apologies did not realize this debate was still on for last weekend.
    Since I see a lot of assertions without data I am taking it that opening posts are meant for introduction so I will treat my opening post accordingly-

    History is not like the canvas of a fine painting where you can look at every stroke and detail of pigment. The nature of it is that we have lost several magnitudes more of it
    than we will ever have. Holes, gaps and chasms abound in our knowledge and always will. In the last hundred years we have seen stunning advances in the ability to copy and save data on durable media. We are accustomed now to the smallest story from half way around the globe being conveyed to us within minutes. Our world has shrunk so that local news is no different from international in coverage. Those advances have shifted our perspective and allow us gloss over the reality that much of history has been recorded on materials that fade as the years themselves do and from a time when people rarely knew what was going on even 200 miles away. Stein has challenged me to a debate on the issue of Exodus because I do not feel as he does that an absence of evidence equals evidence of absence argument works well in regard to history or is even logical. He claims certainty. I claim his reasoning is fallacious. I intend to show that at the minimum there is more than enough real life facts to doubt the issue of the Exodus is a settled fact. He wishes to claim that the Exodus is mythology and I will show that the claims upon which his thesis is built are mythical in themselves.

    To hear some tell it the idea that we can't tell all that we have lost in history and relating it to Biblical narratives is an apologetic rather than the certain nature of ancient history. Surely they argue huge events in the history of the earth and of a nation are in fact preserved and the absence of written documents and recollections means the events never happened. They are wrong and demonstrably wrong. Surely they say if the sky became black, the waves became high and the land was rocked by calamity from cataclysmic events we would have multiple people within a nation recording its effect on them so much so that the evidence would still be with us thousands of years later even with the fading of documentation. We know this isn't true because the above descriptions of dark skies and cataclysmic events is not a reference made to the exodus but to Thera's eruption. Science now tells us that almost assuredly (blatantly obvious) Egypt would have been affected by the magnitude of that eruption - one of the world's greatest geological events - but consensus has indicated for years we have little record of Egypt's inhabitants writing about it (but are Stein and consensus to be believed?). Here we have a non biblical historical event that we KNOW happened that faded in Egyptian document attestation over the years. Thats hardly the only case. Truth is we have little comparatively that has survived to us from 1,000 BC and beyond and even the Egyptian chronologies of the rule of kings has resulted in severe problems with our dating system because of the fading of historical documentation.

    If not for Thera's eruption being the kind of event that could leave geological marks it wold be considered mythical to ever have affected Egypt but we know it did by the nature of the eruption. Did Egyptians miss out on talking and writing about such events. That seems unlikely. Rather than no one ever recording anything much of that event, the silence is more likely to be due to the nature of the recording materials. They have faded and dissolved with time or still await for someone to come upon them deep in the earth or Somewhere removed from the modern world. How rational then would it be to claim that Thera's eruption never impacted Egypt simply on the basis that that which can and has faded is missing from Egypt's ancient narratives? Not very. To be clear when someone makes the claim that surely someone would have recorded the events - they are in fact in invoking a strawman - the contention is not that no one wrote or recorded the things in relation to the exodus, but that they did but much of it went the way of almost all history that far back.

    One must ask how many times can we go to the well of certainty and be wrong before we are concerned the well has issues? How has Absence of evidence equals evidence of absence held up in the past? Is it even a logical argument? That test has been run and its been an abysmal failure not once or twice but SEVERAL times in relation to the Biblical narratives. We are reminded of this very recently where the monarchy of David as mythology has not only been challenged but all but defeated in less than five years. Absence of evidence arguments failed us yet again. Stein alludes to another lesser find directly related to the Exodus where Kadesh has been found in contradiction to earlier "blatantly obvious" claims it was not inhabited AT ALL in ANY traditional time for the exodus (but not my preferred date) it in fact was and by people coming out of Egypt. Shouldn't this give us pause? That a key argument made against the Exodus having no archaeological evidence is now dubious at best?

    Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on how you like your debates) I see the rhetoric has started out of the gate with Stein accusing me of being misguided :). The recent dating
    of pottery in Kadesh to the 1200s BC has never been presented to anyone as anything else but Egyptian. Rather than being misguided I have related the facts as they are in response to a claim that there was no settlement in Kadesh AT ALL in ANY time period accepted for the Exodus. I pointed it out to show precisely how research and discoveries continue to give us new light rather than his dogmatic assertion that the matter of the Exodus is settled. He is only half right that it WOULD be fatal to his claims because without a doubt it IS fatal to his claims of certainty. It represents a reversal to the previous claim no settlement was there whatsoever and instructs the wise to be more tentative. With all due respect to Finkelstein his expertise is irrelevant. The tie to the Hebrews is Midian in nature - where the pottery has been found to have been made and where the Israelites were coming from .

    As the Bar Article in Septembers issue states -
    Midian ware, later called Qurayyah Painted Ware - the same pottery found at Kadesh-Barnea and dated to the period when the Exodus is traditionally dated. If the israelites were in Midian, as the Bible says they were , there is no reason to doubt that they proceeded to Kadesh-barnea
    I have asked him to read a copy of it at a library since the article is pay walled. Further why stein even thinks thats an issue is dubious to me since the Biblical narratives indicated the Hebrews plundered the Egyptians. This highlights the problems of one of two mythologies the Exodus obviously did not happen claim rests on (no evidence at all exists for the exodus). The other mythology is that the areas where the path of the exodus intersects according to Biblical narratives have been extensively combed (by what incredible means has never been mentioned) and nothing has been found. This is a necessary fudging of the facts - after all its not as convincing to claim "we haven't looked even through half of the house but can tell you no proof is in the house".

    However rather than just dissent to the weak claim that absence of evidence proves histories didn't happen It will be my technique in this debate to highlight actual facts not argumentations. I have no doubt that there will be differences of opinion to those facts (mostly of the ancient writings category) and what they signify but the abundance of them will to a fair minded person I believe support my position that the Exodus is NOT a settled matter. Along the way I may answer Stein's theological arguments but will not dwell on them since I don't find them compelling. I think it is wishful thinking to see the Exodus as not representing itself as historical narrative since it provides the context for the giving of the law which almost the entire Bible affirms as historical. The idea that untruths can be a solid basis for THE truth is one of the most convoluted nonsensical arguments to be ever made by any part of the church. Anacronisms likewise have never been compelling to me because I have always felt scribes updating names and places are beneficial to the text.

    So lets now move forward with real facts (along those lines this may be a slower debate than some are used to since my schedule along with wanting to do more than argue points in this debate may make my response time as long as once per week or even slightly longer). I just can't see the point of making mere assertions. We could do that on normal threads. Lets get down to the details and the facts so at least in this debate none of the readers will have to ask like that old Burger King Ad - Wheres the beef?
    Last edited by Mikeenders; 11-04-2015 at 04:09 PM.

  5. Amen Cerebrum123 amen'd this post.
  6. #4
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Faith
    Roman Catholic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,558
    Amen (Given)
    231
    Amen (Received)
    610

    History is not like the canvas of a fine painting where you can look at every stroke and detail of pigment. The nature of it is that we have lost several magnitudes more of it
    than we will ever have. Holes, gaps and chasms abound in our knowledge and always will. In the last hundred years we have seen stunning advances in the ability to copy and save data on durable media. We are accustomed now to the smallest story from half way around the globe being conveyed to us within minutes. Our world has shrunk so that local news is no different from international in coverage. Those advances have shifted our perspective and allow us gloss over the reality that much of history has been recorded on materials that fade as the years themselves do and from a time when people rarely knew what was going on even 200 miles away. Stein has challenged me to a debate on the issue of Exodus because I do not feel as he does that an absence of evidence equals evidence of absence argument works well in regard to history or is even logical. He claims certainty. I claim his reasoning is fallacious. I intend to show that at the minimum there is more than enough real life facts to doubt the issue of the Exodus is a settled fact. He wishes to claim that the Exodus is mythology and I will show that the claims upon which his thesis is built are mythical in themselves.
    Yes, history is not an exact science. I've never disputed such a claim. Historical interpretation is a big part of any history, and it requires extrapolations beyond existing evidence. Yes, ancient people often did not travel outside 50 miles of where they were born. These are not facts in dispute. I am not expecting written sources detailing what exactly happened to the entirety of Israel. I would expect, however, some evidence outside of some extremely late (i.e. exilic or post exilic) Biblical passages. For example, the Exodus isn't even present in some of the older material in the OT. Most of the prophets do not mention it, with the exception of one possible mention in Amos, and another, somewhat clearer, passage in Hosea. Simply having an event recorded does not mean that event is historical, which was, at least in the beginning, the aim of minimalists like Thomas L. Thompson and Philip Davies.


    To hear some tell it the idea that we can't tell all that we have lost in history and relating it to Biblical narratives is an apologetic rather than the certain nature of ancient history. Surely they argue huge events in the history of the earth and of a nation are in fact preserved and the absence of written documents and recollections means the events never happened. They are wrong and demonstrably wrong. Surely they say if the sky became black, the waves became high and the land was rocked by calamity from cataclysmic events we would have multiple people within a nation recording its effect on them so much so that the evidence would still be with us t We know this isn't true because the above descriptions of dark skies and cataclysmic events is not a reference made to the exodus but to Thera's eruption. Here we have a non biblical historical event that we KNOW happened that faded in Egyptian document attestation over the years. Thats hardly the only case. Truth is we have little comparatively that has survived to us from 1,000 BC and beyond and even the Egyptian chronologies of the rule of kings has resulted in severe problems with our dating system because of the fading of historical documentation.
    The lack of Egyptian records fails to prove anything. As I've stated before, the question involves having some archaeological evidence of the Exodus. We do not have such evidence, and, as elucidated in my prior post, we have strong evidence for no Exodus having occurred. The anachronisms of the route as well as the setting of the story in general suggest a date later than 1200 BC, which is impossible. The Israelites are already in the land in 1200 BC, as per the Merneptah Stele.


    One must ask how many times can we go to the well of certainty and be wrong before we are concerned the well has issues? How has Absence of evidence equals evidence of absence held up in the past? Is it even a logical argument? That test has been run and its been an abysmal failure not once or twice but SEVERAL times in relation to the Biblical narratives. We are reminded of this very recently where the monarchy of David as mythology has not only been challenged but all but defeated in less than five years. Absence of evidence arguments failed us yet again. Stein alludes to another lesser find directly related to the Exodus where Kadesh has been found in contradiction to earlier "blatantly obvious" claims it was not inhabited AT ALL in ANY traditional time for the exodus (but not my preferred date) it in fact was and by people coming out of Egypt. Shouldn't this give us pause? That a key argument made against the Exodus having no archaeological evidence is now dubious at best?
    The Davidic monarchy, at least in the sense of Samuel and Kings, remains mythical. More evidence seems to suggest that a) the United Monarchy seems to be fictitious and b) there was no "mini-empire" in the style of the Davidic and Solomonic Empire. Not to go off-topic, but while absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, absence of evidence when you would expect evidence is indeed evidence of absence. The Sinai, which has been excavated for the better part of the last 150 years, continues to refuse to yield any evidence of nearly 3 million Jews wandering the desert for 40 years. Mike, what is your preferred date for the Exodus?

    Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on how you like your debates) I see the rhetoric has started out of the gate with Stein accusing me of being misguided :). The recent dating of pottery in Kadesh to the 1200s BC has never been presented to anyone as anything else but Egyptian. Rather than being misguided I have related the facts as they are in response to a claim that there was no settlement in Kadesh AT ALL in ANY time period accepted for the Exodus. I pointed it out to show precisely how research and discoveries continue to give us new light rather than his dogmatic assertion that the matter of the Exodus is settled. He is only half right that it WOULD be fatal to his claims because without a doubt it IS fatal to his claims of certainty. It represents a reversal to the previous claim no settlement was there whatsoever and instructs the wise to be more tentative. With all due respect to Finkelstein his expertise is irrelevant. The tie to the Hebrews is Midian in nature - where the pottery has been found to have been made and where the Israelites were coming from .
    Again, the discovery of pottery at a location often identified as Kadesh does not mean anything at all. The Midianite ties that you mention, by the way, only hurt the case for the Exodus. If the Israelite are coming from Midian, why do they need to cross the Sea of Reeds? If you wish to invoke Midian as the land of the Hebrews, fine, but you then have to determine what the route of the Exodus is, as the Biblical one ceases to be useful.

    Finklestein's expertise is completely relevant here. He is one of the leading Israelite archaeologists, and his excavations, along with those of Baruch Halpern, among others, have shown that early Israelite material culture is very similar to Caananite material culture. This is not what we would see if the Israelites in fact were coming from Egypt. Instead, we would see a proliferation of Egyptian material culture, which is conspicuously absent.

    I have no doubt that there will be differences of opinion to those facts (mostly of the ancient writings category) and what they signify but the abundance of them will to a fair minded person I believe support my position that the Exodus is NOT a settled matter. Along the way I may answer Stein's theological arguments but will not dwell on them since I don't find them compelling. I think it is wishful thinking to see the Exodus as not representing itself as historical narrative since it provides the context for the giving of the law which almost the entire Bible affirms as historical. The Anacronisms likewise have never been compelling to me because I have always felt scribes updating names and places are beneficial to the text.
    Having a story about a historical event does not make that event historical. Having an event that is attested by several sources, archaeological evidence, or preferably both, makes it far more likely the event is historical, but it still is not guaranteed. The Exodus story has to overcome rife inaccuracies, anachronisms, a total lack of evidence, and strong evidence against it. As Philip Davies put it in a 2010 Bible and Interpretation article, we are all minimalists now, at least with regard to the patriarchal, Exodus, and Conquest narratives.

    [

  7. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,042
    Amen (Given)
    41
    Amen (Received)
    103
    For example, the Exodus isn't even present in some of the older material in the OT. Most of the prophets do not mention it, with the exception of one possible mention in Amos, and another, somewhat clearer, passage in Hosea."
    Will this be the extent of the "backing up" promised to the claim the Exodus definitely did not happen? More absence as evidence? Why, even if they didn't, should prophets either minor or major be required to discuss the exodus?

    However what you have written there is false and wildly deceptive. Let the readers of this debate recognize to this point my opponent has offered ZERO evidence for any assertions he has made. None. He merely alludes to evidence and assumes facts to make his argument and this is an ample place to illustrate this failure of his to back up points with reality.

    The claim is that the prophets only mention the exodus in Hosea and Amos.

    It is outrageously false and can only be saved by making assumptive arguments against many passages in the prophets but my opponent made no such qualifications.

    Is Isaiah not among the prophets?

    Isaiah 63:11-12 (Darby)
    11 But he remembered the days of old, Moses [and] his people: Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherds of his flock? Where is he that put his holy Spirit within him,
    12 his glorious arm leading them by the right hand of Moses, dividing the waters before them, to make himself an everlasting name,

    What of Jeremiah?

    Jeremiah 32:20-23 (ASV)
    20 who didst set signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, even unto this day, both in Israel and among other men; and madest thee a name, as at this day;
    21 and didst bring forth thy people Israel out of the land of Egypt with signs, and with wonders, and with a strong hand, and with an outstretched arm, and with great terror;
    22 and gavest them this land, which thou didst swear to their fathers to give them, a land flowing with milk and honey;
    23 and they came in, and possessed it, but they obeyed not thy voice, neither walked in thy law; they have done nothing of all that thou commandedst them to do: therefore thou hast caused all this evil to come upon them.

    What of Ezekiel?
    Ezekiel 20:5-6 (ASV)
    5 and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah: In the day when I chose Israel, and sware unto the seed of the house of Jacob, and made myself known unto them in the land of Egypt, when I sware unto them, saying, I am Jehovah your God;
    6 in that day I sware unto them, to bring them forth out of the land of Egypt into a land that I had searched out for them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the glory of all lands.

    or Micah?
    Micah 6:4 (ASV)
    4 For I brought thee up out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed thee out of the house of bondage; and I sent before thee Moses, Aaron, and Miriam.

    Malachi 4:4 (Darby)
    4 Remember the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, the statutes and ordinances.

    What is Moses doing in Horeb receiving laws of God if the prophet is unaware of the Exodus?

    There are only two answers to this OUTRAGEOUS fudge Sundae made by Stein

    A) he has no idea what the prophets said and has done none - NADA - ZILCH of his own research
    B) he will attempt to claim that all such passage must be assigned to be interpolations and his claim of evidence is in fact an assumption to get to a claim of evidence.

    At any rate as stated the claim made is demonstrably patently false

    That said Malachi's mention of Horeb is a nice transition to Stein's other claims

    As I've stated before, the question involves having some archaeological evidence of the Exodus. We do not have such evidence
    Let us now get to the meat of the matter - Stein and other minimalist's entire argument comes down to absence of evidence in two respects

    A) absence at the time of the exodus
    B) absence at the locations involved in the exodus

    Remarkably liberal consensus ignores biblical indications in both regards settling on a time that does not agree withe biblical dating and ignoring (but that is now changing) biblical indicators that could put significant events of the exodus story in Saudi Arabia - not limited to the Sinai

    it is not surprising then to read Stein write this pretty ignorant of the issues retort to recent findings of evidence at Kadesh

    Again, the discovery of pottery at a location often identified as Kadesh does not mean anything at all. The Midianite ties that you mention, by the way, only hurt the case for the Exodus. If the Israelite are coming from Midian, why do they need to cross the Sea of Reeds? If you wish to invoke Midian as the land of the Hebrews, fine, but you then have to determine what the route of the Exodus is, as the Biblical one ceases to be useful.
    He seems oblivious to research that takes the Jews into Saudi Arabia - Midian territory - and his handwave of it being meaningless that we find midian originated pottery at Kadesh is the only thing that is meaningless. Anyone that has studied the biblical text knows that Moses goes into midian territory when he flees egypt.

    Exodus 2:
    15 Now when Pharaoh heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses. But Moses fled from the face of Pharaoh, and dwelt in the land of Midian:

    this is important because this is where Moses meets God manifested in a burning bush on Mount Horeb - the same mountain which the Israelites are to travel to worship God. This potentially places the Mount of God in Saudi Arabia (questionable how widely the land of Midian was).


    So no Stein of course it makes ZERO hurt to my case because no one makes any claim whatsoever that the land of Midian was the land of the Hebrews. Thats a totally ridiculous strawman you have constructed. The actual thesis to which the BAR article relates is that the consensus location of Mount Sinai as the mount of God is false because it has almost no evidence to support it (but a tradition that arose in the CE) and that the Israelites went into present day Saudi arabia (ancient land of the Midians). What does this do to your absence of evidence argument? It leaves it on provisional grounds unresolved (defeating your debate claim of certainty)since much is still left to be researched in Saudi Arabia. Logically you can't claim because you search two thirds of a house (to the degree that you have ) that its a settled fact there is no evidence in the house

    When we come back into the Sinai area in the area of Kadesh whether you try to hand wave away from the facts or not we have Egyptian pottery originating in the land of Midian present at the site where it was previously claimed no settlement existed AT ALL. To claim that Jews in Israel escaping from Egypt would not have had Egyptian pottery when the text tells us they took goods from Egyptians and travelled and interacted with people in a land that produced Egyptian pottery is just begging and pleading on your part - not a good answer to a pretty clear demonstration of how findings can change perspectives and which renders your claim the exodus definitely did not happen as woefully prematurely illogical.

    So what do the recent findings as Kadesh and the reality that biblically the Jews entered the land of Midian for part of their trip leave us? With more to learn before we can make the determination that there is zero evidence - Totally defeating your claim the exodus not happening is a settled fact. We've been potentially way off as to the route of the exodus and we are almost certainly way off in regard to the time as well. I will get into that in my next post. However a request from my Debate opponent.

    PLEASE DESIST FROM ALLUDING TO EVIDENCE AND START PRESENTING SOME. This is an utterly false claim -

    as elucidated in my prior post, we have strong evidence for no Exodus having occurred.
    You have elucidated no such thing. You have alluded to anachronisms, but presented none to back your case they prove you conclusion. You have claimed the prophets do not mention the exodus but they have done so ABUNDANTLY. You have begged that we must accept as fact that the Torah was written in the exhilic period. but again produced no evidence that established that as settled fact. I had hoped at this point we would be discussing actual evidence not reading assertions as facts. I would have liked to get into the evidence in this post but hesitated because to be honest I sense at this point your strategy will be to do nothing but attempt to shoot down any evidence I present while presenting none of your own much like you have done with the redating of pottery at Kadesh

    Some quick clean ups

    Finklestein's expertise is completely relevant here.
    Its totally and obviously irrelevant. You said you wished to debate the biblical text of exodus and the biblical text of exodus states that the israelites took of the egyptians before leaving. Its safe to say that where slaves had the opportunity to carry superior Egyptian goods they would do so. There is no requirement that people having been in Egypt for hundreds of years must have leave non egyptian pottery at temporary settlements.

    Instead, we would see a proliferation of Egyptian material culture, which is conspicuously absent.
    Sorry does not follow at all . There's no reason we would see a proliferation of egytpian culture once the Jews established their own culture particularly if their entire culture was predicated on a law God had given them. This is just nonsensical. They were commanded to abandon the egyptian ways and follow a new path. You cannot cite a difference in culture based in part on obedience to the law as evidence against the exodus. Thats just begging.

    As Philip Davies put it in a 2010 Bible and Interpretation article, we are all minimalists now
    Speak for yourself. Since many of us are not minimalists Davies lied. I'd prefer if you stop dropping names and drop some evidence that we can discuss. That is what we agreed to - that you would back your claims not merely assert them. I will do so regardless in my next two posts.
    Last edited by Mikeenders; 11-19-2015 at 03:35 PM.

  8. Amen Cerebrum123, 37818 amen'd this post.
  9. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,042
    Amen (Given)
    41
    Amen (Received)
    103
    Guys its been about three weeks since my last post and Stein has failed to respond even though I have checked and he has been here several times posting in other threads. I consider this debate he challenged me to abandoned. Holiday season is a few weeks away and at this rate it would be clear into the new year and beyond which i have no interest dragging this into. Frankly I don't think Stein was ready for a debate where actual evidence would be presented not just claimed. its not the first time this has happened when I asked for his claims to be backed up. So as far as I am concerned this debate is over.
    Last edited by Mikeenders; 12-09-2015 at 05:25 AM.

  10. #7
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Faith
    Roman Catholic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,558
    Amen (Given)
    231
    Amen (Received)
    610
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikeenders View Post
    Guys its been about three weeks since my last post and Stein has failed to respond even though I have checked and he has been here several times posting in other threads. I consider this debate he challenged me to abandoned. Holiday season is a few weeks away and at this rate it would be clear into the new year and beyond which i have no interest dragging this into. Frankly I don't think Stein was ready for a debate where actual evidence would be presented not just claimed. its not the first time this has happened when I asked for his claims to be backed up. So as far as I am concerned this debate is over.
    I'm sorry, I've been ignoring this thread. I'm in the middle of a very busy period and don't have time for detailed response tonight. I'll post something tomorrow.

  11. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,042
    Amen (Given)
    41
    Amen (Received)
    103
    Not to worry stein. I really am calling an end to this one. We'd be pretty much close to wrapping this one up now and we are heading into the holiday season so I will have not have the time at this point and beginning this weekend am cutting down my online time. I know how time can get but thought you would have the time since you challenged me to this debate. No hard feelings it can happen

    So I am officially and irrevocably out on this one.
    Last edited by Mikeenders; 12-10-2015 at 09:43 PM.

  12. #9
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Faith
    Roman Catholic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,558
    Amen (Given)
    231
    Amen (Received)
    610
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikeenders View Post
    Not to worry stein. I really am calling an end to this one. We'd be pretty much close to wrapping this one up now and we are heading into the holiday season so I will have not have the time at this point and beginning this weekend am cutting down my online time. I know how time can get but thought you would have the time since you challenged me to this debate. No hard feelings it can happen

    So I am officially and irrevocably out on this one.
    Thanks for understanding. I thought I would have more time than I ended up having. Funny how life works that way.

  13. #10
    Professor and Chaplain Littlejoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    North Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    3,568
    Amen (Given)
    1384
    Amen (Received)
    1487
    Moderated By: Littlejoe

    Per mutual consent of the participants, this debate is now 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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •