For those who want proof of the exodus

[Brian37]

Drich,

I know you truly want that book to be true, we get that. But it really is nothing but a book of myth. Humans wrote that book because they didn't know any better. In the same way the Ancient Romans created their gods and the same way Mayans created theirs and the same way Native Americans made up their spirit gods.

Humans gap fill based on false perceptions.

if that were true then it would stand to reason that their would be no evidence for the exodus as described by the bible right?

Then what say you of just the three point I make mention of from the movie in the above post?

An apologists movie is not evidence, it is simply a circle jerk. Muslims and Hindus make movies about their social norms too.

[Minimalist]

An apologists movie is not evidence

As the Egyptian guy says in the beginning..."there is NO evidence."  He then reminds Mahoney that the only place this shit exists is in the holy books...and Mahoney forgot that it is in the koran, too.

[Aractus]

Guy's it's not a want to be true. it about finding the truth and honoring it no matter where it leads. That is how I shaped my life, and what I most respect about this film/film maker!

A documentary film is not an academic standard of evidence. You can use it to point you to the academic evidence that it cites and then show us that, as we've asked you to do. But you've failed to do so.

[Minimalist]

I am watching the movie although not because of drippy.  An email buddy sent me the file on youtube which means I can watch it for free which is the only way I'd ever watch this thing.  I find I can only watch this drivel in small segments....my hand gets tired from taking notes!  I had the same problem with Caesar's Messiah.

As a gift to any who'd like:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olkmi6knlmo

The film goes completely off the rails at the 18:35 mark.  At that point, Mahoney evaluates all the evidence which has told him that the story is bullshit and says roughly " if it wasn't Ramesses II then who was it?"  Right there he reveals that he is a believer not a scholar.  He has decided that there HAD to be a pharaoh of the Exodus and if it wasn't Ramesses II then it HAD to be someone else.

No.  It doesn't.

[Drich]

if that were true then it would stand to reason that their would be no evidence for the exodus as described by the bible right?

Then what say you of just the three point I make mention of from the movie in the above post?

An apologists movie is not evidence, it is simply a circle jerk. Muslims and Hindus make movies about their social norms too.

Watch the movie sport, it has nothing to do with apologetics. It's about egyptian history and uses refuted artifacts, recorded egyptian history and archaeological evidence to show the biblical account to be historically accurate.

[Drich]

Guy's it's not a want to be true. it about finding the truth and honoring it no matter where it leads. That is how I shaped my life, and what I most respect about this film/film maker!

A documentary film is not an academic standard of evidence. You can use it to point you to the academic evidence that it cites and then show us that, as we've asked you to do. But you've failed to do so.

The movie is not the evidence, it is a contemplation or a simple report which pools all of the evidence in one place.

[Drich]

no he didn't he gave me some d-bag commentary. do you really think just because he claims to quote something or some one he is actually presenting evidence dry sand?

When people do that it's called cherry picking and that is a logical fallacy. that's old school/old Catholic school propaganda. where someone by his 'authority' pretends to quote someone of greater authority and you can't challenge it because your authority will never match the other two egg heads..

Do you not see the irony here? Minnie and the d-bag he is quoting are using the same technique that the church used in the dark ages! to push what they think/want to be true.

When I quote someone or some thing it is usally the source. then i place a link for on-line verfication. So it is not my word you have to take. for instance minnie pretended to quote the papryus that contains the recorded plagues. then he select a quote/ cherry picks out something that makes the whole papyrus seem to be saying that it is the barbarians being the cause to all of egypts troubles. meaning it was not the Jews. So i took a quote from the first page that it was wandering semites who were not over throwing/populating natural egyptians, and then I provided a link to the whole document so people like you can make up your own mind.

The problem with 'higher education' is places weak minds in a position to receive and accept data/'truthiness' into a specific format. if and when people like minnie learn this format he then has the key to manipulate 'educated minds.' all one has to do is follow the formula of this format then he controls or can manipulate how people think.

I actually agree with you on this.  One of my proffessors who was going on about his lecture about how this and this author has bias, so what is his bias regarding the subject...and I then said "Can't we all say we have biases", he made a joke in the reply that in that "all proffessors are evil" (ie. they aren't there with a sincere agenda to teach you to be unbiased towards certain things and won't teach you all sides, and often hide away the stongest views that contradict theirs, in short they are there to teach you to think like them"). I don't agree with him, but of course, he didn't mean all, but is exaggerating the truth of majority and exaggerating the motive of their intention. Over all what he said, holds some weight however even the words themselves weren't much and are false if taken literally and don't mean anything literally.

We do not teach critical thinking and how to determine or decern truth/fact any more. We teach truth that suits us. The one who teaches truth is the one who provides primary or even secondary source material along with their take on what the source material means, but leaves said material for you to make up your own mind. Which is very counter the academic culture. The Academic culture has become a secret club that demand total and complete obedience, or you risk being ostracized.. (by the others in said club which at best is like having starbucks canceling a free coffee for life gift card you have. Yeah, it kinda sucks but at the same time they did not/can not bann you from drinking coffee.)

[robvalue]

What entertains me about the bible stories is the way the narrative jumps between two points of view, and we hear conversations between several groups of people like in a TV program. Obviously whoever actually wrote it was making up at least most of the dialogue and events as they couldn't possibly have witnessed them all. Especially when all of one side ended up dead.

[dyresand]

The STORY of exodus was written around the 7th or 8th BCE and possibly 13th century BCE.
There is no proof that it happened the Egyptians like the Romans kept records they would have written something
down about the people in the exodus story, but there isn't. Not to mention the cities mentioned in
exodus never existed such as Pithom it wasn't a major settlement before the 26th Century. But it was
called by another name Tckenu to be exact. Edom wasn't a nation yet, it turned into a nation in 800 bce.
The fortress of Nuweiba is Ottoman not Pharonic. Parting the red sea... come on Dirch.. i respect you
as a human but come on.. buddy.... even if such a thing where possible they would be walking through a
765m trench to their deaths, simply put they wouldn't make it far before the wave comes and kills them all.

[robvalue]

The Bible Reloaded chaps view these stories as after-the-fact explanations of why events occured, why a load of people died, and why a new king suddenly took power etc.