rewriting the bible part 2 - exodus

[Drich]

The Jew while in egypt were not known as Jews. Why? Because they were known as Egyptians...

Nope. They were known as the "sons of Israel", the "Israelites" or the "people of Israel", a clear ethnic distinction from the Egyptians, which the Bible states both explicitly and implicitly. See Exodus 1.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=NLT

Exodus 1
1. These are the names of the sons of Israel (that is, Jacob) who moved to Egypt with their father,
... blah ... blah...
7 But their descendants, the Israelites, had many children and grandchildren. In fact, they multiplied so greatly that they became extremely powerful and filled the land.
8 Eventually, a new king came to power in Egypt who knew nothing about Joseph or what he had done.
9 He said to his people, “Look, the people of Israel now outnumber us and are stronger than we are.
...
11. So the Egyptians made the Israelites their slaves.

The Bible states in black and white that the Jews were in Egypt. Oh sorry, I've got that wrong - the People of Israel, the Sons of Israel, the Israelites. That means Jews, and you know it does.

Are you going to try to pretend that the Bible doesn't actually say this?

Whatever.

It doesn't really matter how hard you shout that black is white - it isn't.

This (your) whole mess/responce is one big Equivocation fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation


Let's say your name Smith, and you and your family were the first colonists to settle Virgina or Arkansas. You were the first 'Smith' to settle the new world. Then let's say a few hundred years go by and your family has produced 1000's if not 100's of thousands of Smiths, and all of them decided to at one point up and leave to settle in one of the un named territories out west essentially creating your own city/state, and declared independence from the US government. Now while you all are living in your eastern homes/state, does the US government have an obligation to identify you as a sovern nation while living with in their boarders? Or is the government's responsibility in identifying you end with your last name?

The Jew's were not Jews till they received the law. They were not Israelites till they received their land. the suffix lite finds it's origin in the greek word lithos, in suffix form meaning of stone or of rock. In essence the "people of Stone or rocky land."
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=-lite

Before they were -lites/lithos they were simply sons if Israel/Jacob.

So then if they were nothing more than a wandering tribe with no land of their own when they came, and simply identified as 'Sons of Israel' as per exodus 1 (which you pointed out) Why then would the Nation of Egypt recognize them as a nation of people if infact they were living on sovereign Egyptian soil?

Just in case your ability to 'reason' has left you (because it is now March and no longer February) Egypt would not identify their home grown slaves as a nation of people. They would look at them with disdain and have racially specific names for them, which is reflected in their writings. They were not recognized till centuries later (well after they were a legit nation) by one of the Ramses boys.

[The Grand Nudger]

It has nothing to do with multiple authors or single authors. It has to do with the fact that Myths are an unconscious creation, whereas Fiction is a conscious creation.

What an absurd suggestion fobbed off as fact.  The only manner in which this statement could even make -sense- is if you were suggesting that myths were akin to auto-writing, which I'm pretty sure you're not, and it wouldn't be a difference with regards to other types of fiction in any case. If you mean to say that the narratives presented in myth take form, to some extent, based upon the human subconscious.......then, again, that's not a difference with regards to any other subset of fiction (hell, even non-fiction in influenced by our subconscious, in the manner that we frame a story or, at a fundamental level, what we choose to tell stories about). If you mean to say that a myth is different than a NYT police procedural, well, no shit.....but they aren't different in -any- sense of their fictive natures, or that they both express and arise from the authors subconscious mind, or that the author consciously chose the details of one narrative but not the other.

Perhaps you could find some other way to express what you mean here?

[Drich]

The Jew while in egypt were not known as Jews. Why? Because they were known as egyptians. when Joseph's family was welcomed into egypt they were not a nation of people. they were one large family that was allowed to settled in the 'goshen' region of egypt. In this region several cities and hundreds of smaller villages were found and some have been excavated. In the rubble of these cities and in the graves Semitic items and Semitic burials prove these cities were not typical egyptian. All of this attributed to the late and the end of the middle kingdom. Even Egyptian documentation does indeed proove or show is a list of named slaves with specifically jewish names.

Where you like it or not whether you wish to continue believing and spreading this particular lie or not, know in the back of your mind not only do the jews in the bible confirm an egyptian captivity but their is period correct confirmed Egyptian papyrus that also show Jewish slaves along with, archaeological evidence.

And better yet for you someone has compiled all of this information and a whole heck of alot more into your favorite format explaining all of this in a documentary form. taking you to the dig sites, showing you the actual papyrus, having museum curators tell you what is on said papyrus and various monuments.

That would be the Ipuwer Papyrus, it doesn't prove the Exodus myth. It has nothing to do with that myth.

Oh noes!!! He has posted the name of the document I referenced which means his knowledge must be complete and we all now have to take him at his word!!!

If only, their was a web site that actually had the document translated, and then compares the Ipuwer Papyrus side by side to the bible to show where the two do indeed describe the same event...

http://ohr.edu/838

[drfuzzy]

That would be the Ipuwer Papyrus, it doesn't prove the Exodus myth. It has nothing to do with that myth.

Oh noes!!! He has posted the name of the document I referenced which means his knowledge must be complete and we all now have to take him at his word!!!

If only, their was a web site that actually had the document translated, and then compares the Ipuwer Papyrus side by side to the bible to show where the two do indeed describe the same event...

http://ohr.edu/838

Roland Enmarch . . . (1 among others) has published an extensive study of the Ipuwer Papyrus, which is available in it's entirety, with a translation, here:
http://www.rutherfordpress.co.uk/Enmarch...Ipuwer.pdf
He states "Even if a literal interpretation of Ipuwer as an eyewitness account of historical events were to be accepted, several of the its laments would contradict the Biblical account, and imply that they described different occasions. For example, the Egyptian poem actually laments the invasion of Asiatics (e.g. Ipuwer 1.9; 2.2; 3.1; 3.1–2; 4.6–7), rather than their large scale emigration." He believes that the reference to a red river points to the eruption of Thera.  
    Many actual scholars are in agreement.  I chose to believe people who are doing actual research, rather than people who grasp at straws desperately trying to prove that their pet myths are true.

[Drich]

Oh noes!!! He has posted the name of the document I referenced which means his knowledge must be complete and we all now have to take him at his word!!!

If only, their was a web site that actually had the document translated, and then compares the Ipuwer Papyrus side by side to the bible to show where the two do indeed describe the same event...

http://ohr.edu/838

Roland Enmarch . . . (1 among others) has published an extensive study of the Ipuwer Papyrus, which is available in it's entirety, with a translation, here:
http://www.rutherfordpress.co.uk/Enmarch...Ipuwer.pdf
He states "Even if a literal interpretation of Ipuwer as an eyewitness account of historical events were to be accepted, several of the its laments would contradict the Biblical account, and imply that they described different occasions. For example, the Egyptian poem actually laments the invasion of Asiatics (e.g. Ipuwer 1.9; 2.2; 3.1; 3.1–2; 4.6–7), rather than their large scale emigration." He believes that the reference to a red river points to the eruption of Thera.  
    Many actual scholars are in agreement.  I chose to believe people who are doing actual research, rather than people who grasp at straws desperately trying to prove that their pet myths are true.

You didn't look up who the Ancient Egyptians the "asiatics" to be did you?

http://www.britannica.com/topic/Hyksos-Egyptian-dynasty

[Drich]

Apparently you do not value truth and research as you pretend to..

[drfuzzy]

Apparently you do not value truth and research as you pretend to..

Your research always seems to come from religious sources.  They start with a belief, and then throw anything in there (mostly lies and misinterpretations) to fit their belief and then hold it up as proof.  They can be easily dismissed as anti-intellectual and not real research.  

Philosophy is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat.

Metaphysics is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there.

Theology is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat that isn't there, and shouting "I found it!"  --  after having thrown a flashlight in the trash.

Science is like being in a dark room and looking for a black cat using a flash light.

[Minimalist]

Drippy you dumb fuck, you have trotted out Ipuwer before and been smacked down before and will now be smacked down again.  Story of your fucking life, I imagine!

http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/ipuwer.htm

It is impossible to give a date for the composition of this document. The surviving papyrus (Papyrus Leiden 334) itself is a copy made during the New Kingdom. Ipuwer is generally supposed to have lived during the Middle Kingdom or the Second Intermediate Period, and the catastrophes he bewails to have taken place four centuries earlier during the First Intermediate Period.
    On the other hand, Miriam Lichtheim, following S. Luria, contends that

the 'Admonitions of Ipuwer' has not only no bearing whatever on the long past First Intermediate Period, it also does not derive from any other historical situation. It is the last, fullest, most exaggerated and hence least successful, composition on the theme "order versus chaos."

M. Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature, Volume I, p.150

    Fringe historians often compare the content of this papyrus with Exodus, the second book of the Bible [1]. Similarities between Egyptian texts and the Bible are easily found, and it is reasonable to assume Egyptian influence on the Hebrews, given their at times close contacts. But to conclude from such parallelisms that the Ipuwer Papyrus describes Egypt at the time of the Exodus, requires a leap of faith not everybody is willing to make.

You are even less than a "fringe" historian.  You are merely a bible-thumping shithead.  Still, it is this line from Part III which dismisses your madness.

Indeed, the desert is throughout the land, the nomes are laid waste, and barbarians from abroad have come to Egypt.
Indeed, men arrive [. . .] and indeed, there are no Egyptians anywhere.

The author is envisioning an INVASION, not an exodus.

Go sulk, moron.

[FebruaryOfReason]

It doesn't really matter how hard you shout that black is white - it isn't.

This (your) whole mess/responce is one big Equivocation fallacy.

...

[Pat Mustard]

Drippy you dumb fuck, you have trotted out Ipuwer before and been smacked down before and will now be smacked down again.  Story of your fucking life, I imagine!

http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/ipuwer.htm

It is impossible to give a date for the composition of this document. The surviving papyrus (Papyrus Leiden 334) itself is a copy made during the New Kingdom. Ipuwer is generally supposed to have lived during the Middle Kingdom or the Second Intermediate Period, and the catastrophes he bewails to have taken place four centuries earlier during the First Intermediate Period.
    On the other hand, Miriam Lichtheim, following S. Luria, contends that

    Fringe historians often compare the content of this papyrus with Exodus, the second book of the Bible [1]. Similarities between Egyptian texts and the Bible are easily found, and it is reasonable to assume Egyptian influence on the Hebrews, given their at times close contacts. But to conclude from such parallelisms that the Ipuwer Papyrus describes Egypt at the time of the Exodus, requires a leap of faith not everybody is willing to make.

You are even less than a "fringe" historian.  You are merely a bible-thumping shithead.  Still, it is this line from Part III which dismisses your madness.

Indeed, the desert is throughout the land, the nomes are laid waste, and barbarians from abroad have come to Egypt.
Indeed, men arrive [. . .] and indeed, there are no Egyptians anywhere.

The author is envisioning an INVASION, not an exodus.

Go sulk, moron.

Fecking barbarians, they always go after the gnomes! Poor defenceless statues.