(January 8, 2016 at 1:01 pm)Irrational Wrote:(January 8, 2016 at 12:33 pm)athrock Wrote: Baloney. I think you have missed Mahoney's point.
He asks, IF the Exodus really occurred, then WHY did it have to occur during the reign of Rameses?
Well, it didn't HAVE to occur then. So, what Mahoney does is to look for the six key elements of the Exodus story to see whether they (in sequence) could be documented from any other point in history. If not, then NO Exodus.
However, Mahoney DOES find these six sequential elements in Egyptian history, and they occurred during the Middle Kingdom.
So, you are simply wrong in your assertion that Mahoney ignored the evidence. Instead, Mahoney re-evaluated the evidence that he did find and realized that it fit an earlier time period.
You can't just look for selective evidence that fits your beliefs and then dismiss all the evidence to the contrary. That's not how it works.
One question: Have you watched the film in its entirety?