For those who want proof of the exodus

[Crossless2.0]

Hmm, I just realized that if Drich really does think the Exodus happened as written, it exposes yet another contradiction. Drich says there is no free will, yet the stories clearly state God "hardens the heart" of the Pharoah. He does this to make him refuse to free the slaves, so he can continue to justify to himself sending down more cruel plagues.

This clearly implies that the Pharoah would normally have had at least some other choice he could have made.

God knows ( ) I am not happy about carrying Drich's water, but I think that when he denies that we have free will it is within the Pauline tradition of saying that we are not free to not sin -- not that we are entirely determined and have no range of choice.

I assume Drich will correct me if I've misrepresented his position.

[Minimalist]

You can prove that the Exodus never occurred?

How?

There is no evidence that it ever happened, shithead.

If you find some, let us know and we'll consider it.... just as we have considered Rohl and Mahoney and found them to be assclowns.

Like you.

[athrock]

Ath, no one's "ignorant of the material" in this thread, by now.  The presenter the documentary, like the OP author and yourself, is a charlatan.

But there are idiots like yourself who don't actually look at the material because it doesn't fit your pre-determined views.

[athrock]

Then you are ignorant of the material which is the subject of this thread.

There is no fool like a willing fool, assrock.  Tell me....do you believe Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs really happened, too?

Do you believe that every Catholic priest abuses children, Min?

Or just the one that abused you?

[athrock]

Then you are ignorant of the material which is the subject of this thread. 

However, I do understand why asserting this over and over makes life simpler for you...kinda like simply saying that Jesus never even existed is the easiest way to avoid actual thought.

You have to the most ignorant and uneducated person along with OP and presenter. Seriously go to to google 
no theistic sources but chances are they are  lying like the presenter. The Egyptians like the Romans kept records 
they would have kept records of jews and the other religious cults at the time near and around the city. The Romans 
would have had a document on jesus so what the hell does this all say you may wonder. Christianity it's all bullshit 
there is no evidence to prove any of it happening but everyone would gladly follow a lie that has no evidence rather
the reality of it being it's just a goddamn ancient fairy tale.

Of course it is, dyresand.

Now, since there's no need for you to actually think about anything that might be to the contrary, why trouble yourself by posting anything more?

Nighty-night.

[dyresand]

Ath, no one's "ignorant of the material" in this thread, by now.  The presenter the documentary, like the OP author and yourself, is a charlatan.

But there are idiots like yourself who don't actually look at the material because it doesn't fit your pre-determined views.

There is no fucking evidence you fucking shit for brains.... 
I even looked over it and i even used google and various resources to see if what the presenter was fact
and it was not.

[dyresand]

You have to the most ignorant and uneducated person along with OP and presenter. Seriously go to to google 
no theistic sources but chances are they are  lying like the presenter. The Egyptians like the Romans kept records 
they would have kept records of jews and the other religious cults at the time near and around the city. The Romans 
would have had a document on jesus so what the hell does this all say you may wonder. Christianity it's all bullshit 
there is no evidence to prove any of it happening but everyone would gladly follow a lie that has no evidence rather
the reality of it being it's just a goddamn ancient fairy tale.

Of course it is, dyresand.

Now, since there's no need for you to actually think about anything that might be to the contrary, why trouble yourself by posting anything more?

Nighty-night.

I will say this religion is bullshit and based on bronze age lies and people fall for it like it is truth
when in reality history says otherwise.

[The Grand Nudger]

Ath, no one's "ignorant of the material" in this thread, by now.  The presenter the documentary, like the OP author and yourself, is a charlatan.

But there are idiots like yourself who don't actually look at the material because it doesn't fit your pre-determined views.

I've dismissed you and your fellow liars-for-christ for having failed to provide evidence that would and -must- be present for the story to have been anything other than fiction....and that's even if we ignore the hex laden sea splitting "mana" bits which immediately relegate the whole sorry affair to the dustbin in the first place.

[athrock]

You can prove that the Exodus never occurred?

How?

There is no evidence that it ever happened, shithead.

If you find some, let us know and we'll consider it.... just as we have considered Rohl and Mahoney and found them to be assclowns.

Like you.

Hoo-boy, Minimalist. You are one piece of work. A bitter, angry, dried-up, has-been...but a piece of work nonetheless. Maybe that Arizona sun has given you heatstroke 'cause your brain is fried.

I listed the six sequential markers of the Exodus that HAVE been archaeologically supported and dated appropriately in an earlier period of Egyptian history...but don't let that stop you from trying to convince yourself that the Catholic faith of your youth is all a fairy tale. You were an altar boy, weren't you? In Massachusetts by chance? Whatever.

Just keep repeating, "There's no evidence. There's no evidence. Please God, don't let there be...I mean...well, there's no evidence."

[Drich]

No disrespect intended kevin but your trying to keep your thinking inside the box your morality currently resides. What I was trying to do is to place you in a similar position that most Christians find themselves in. In that pop culture changes the definition of morality based on a stronger allegiance to 'science' than to God, or even tradition.

what you did was simply try and return to what you know/think your morality is currently based on. The whole point of this discussion is to ask what would you do if 'science' is used to prove that your/this generation's current system of morality is wrong/viewed as primitive as dark age church values.. If this is the case then Do you agree with the new science and condemn the current morality that says you can not have sex with children? and do you follow the trend to up hold pedophiles as the homosexuals currently are, (as being unfairly oppressed by society) or do you say like stimbo says that 'morality' is an absolute and what is right today was right yesterday and will be right tomorrow?

Drich, a physiological reaction != giving consent.  A person being raped may experience an orgasm, but it doesn't mean that they actually consented/liked what was happening to them.

Non sequitur

An animal will identify and go after what it considers to be a mate, especially if it was trained to do so.

the word your looking for is pheromones. no training needed. They are 'hardwired' for sex if certain elements are present, it is not a matter of consent. As you pointed out consent is a higher brain function they do not possess.

 That doesn't mean it has the ability to make higher functioning decisions.

Then consent is a non issue. If all a dog or donkey needs to want to engage in intercourse are the proper pheromones/triggers and higher brain function is not a consideration then all is needed is to supply the animal what he wants and the decision is made. no training needed. the animal will earnestly want to have sex.

Regarding children, it's not pop culture but a combination of psychology and physiology.  A child's brain isn't as developed as an adult's.  They also lack experience.  Combine the two, and no, they cannot give informed consent.

Again the point I was making is that you got the info you just parroted back through extensive studies, and you do not even question it. Why? because the information came to you through the proper channels people with 'higher learning' have been trained to trust.

I was asking What if 100 different reports/papers reversed what you currently quote, opening the door to sex with children? Would that be considered moral today (as stimbo put it) , simply because it is found to be 'moral' tomorrow? (meaning we are currently, unjustly oppressing pedophiles now by putting them in prison to be treated more harshly and raped because we today believe this crime is beyond immoral? but again believe so in error because what could be found in further study?)

In short, what if it becomes a proven scientific fact that children, or lets say certain children can indeed make an informed decision on sex, if.. lets say some area of the brain goes active.. let us then say it can physically and psychologically be proven that in 'Some' 10 year olds brains, that they have reached some trivial percentage/capacity needed that has been judged for this future society to be enough to consent to sex..

Given stimbo's claim that their is nothing immoral about ANY consensual sex. (given consent and context) it would be wrong to say sex with children is immoral, because as with Homosexuality their maybe a gene found that puts their pedophilic desire out of their sexual control.

Verse my original claim that pop culture defines morality, and what is immoral today will not always be moral tomorrow, and vise versa. which means morality will eventually spiral down out of control and at some point will include sex with children if society simply wants it bad enough. Without an absolute standard to keep it anchored. Like the bible.

which is correct?

If there is a pedophile gene, then the way to deal with pedophiles will change, and likely involve gene therapy.  That kind of therapy may be proactive if the gene can be detected with a normal blood test.  I don't see how that is controversial.

didn't think that one through huh?
You didn't draw any parallels between my set up and argument about pedophiles and the current homosexual 'revolution?' What if a gay gene is found some day, should pedophiles be treated any different than those who are programmed to genetically desire to have sex with members of the same sex?

What do you base your answer on? what is moral today?? what studies say today? again what happens when those studies say something different? How is that any different than what a pedophile would say or do if that behavior became legal?

Regarding the rest of your rant, you're a hypocrite.  What have you done to abolish modern day slavery?  

I am not a hypocrite because I never said or pretended that society does not need slaves.
I whole heartly except my role in slavery and ask others do the same so we can collectively stand up and demand better treatment.

You're certainly not living off-grid in a hippie commune.  And, like you said just a few posts ago, it's impossible to determine where everything you buy - all the nuts, bolts, and widgets - come from, so even if you buy only American, chances are part of the connective tissue of those items come from someplace else.

Again you assume too much. I know slavery is needed. However I also see it is not regulated and that is the greater evil. You also wrongly assume that all modern slaves do not want their jobs. You have to grow up past white guilt and see what and how proper slavery not only benfits people in 3rd world countries but pushes society as a whole.

Or do you really buy the propaganda that all (world wide) slavery ended in the AMERICAN CIVIAL WAR?
ALL Societies have been and currently are built on slaves, we all live in a giant pyramid scheme. We do not know how to structure society any differently, and somehow freeing the black man in America fixed all slavery, in all society to that point in history? Grow up, nothing changed as far as the rest of the world was concerned except once 'paid labor' products became too expensive a cheaper source was found some place else.

Moreover, you yourself just said it would take a collective effort.  Which I agree with.  Which also means that individuals working individually won't be able to change things.  Plus, we're talking about changing the entire economic structure of the West.  That's not something that can be done easily or in a timely manner, and attempting to do so will only result in more harm being done.

Why does anything have to change?
Don't you get with out these jobs we send the slaves back 300 years in their living conditions?
Can't you consider the idea that slavery is not always the bad thing you have been programed to believe?

That is the reason for it in the bible. because God knew our societal structure built on 'money' can never support everyone. Money only has value when not everyone has it. If everyone were a billionare then the money we all share becomes litter. Why do you think the dollar is worth about 1/2 of a british pound when our economy is larger stronger? It's because we have way way more dollars out there than they have..

For money to work their must be a separation of the haves and have nots in society. That said the have nots must be taken care of somehow. Ensuring that all basic needs are met and the best quality life be provided that is equal to their product production. this can only be done in a free market society where consumers demand better treatment, through awareness and willingness to pay more.

And how am I not acknowledging that I'm living on the back of slaves?

Regarding biblical slavery, your entire "It still happens today and you condone it!" show is merely a transparent way to equivocate. If we condone slavery in the 21st century, then we have no right to criticize the slavery mentioned in the bible. Except, we don't actively condone it. It's a fact of life that, given how globalized capitalism works, individual people cannot do much about it because, as you say, our entire culture is built upon cheaply produced goods. And we have no viable second option.

Your afluenza defense is the reason I think this.

 I acknowledged it in the very post you quoted.  But there's not much that I can do about it.  I'm not an investigative reporter.  I don't have access to these places.  I can't shine a light on them.  All I can do is vote with both my pen in the ballot box and with my wallet, which doesn't actually amount to much given that politicians on both sides of the aisle are largely bought and paid for, and like you said it's impossible to determine exactly where the totality of these goods come from.

but you can do what I am doing here, a take some flack from d-bags who want to pretend all slavery is bad all the time and they themselves would never support it. You risk being labled 'immoral' infront of your peers and do what is right to the extent you are capable. Not argue 'we don't have any other choice.' Educate yourself, learn what slavery really means and stop looking at the word through the lens of white guilt. Without modern slavery billions would die. then you force feed this truth to anyone who will argue differently. Make people open their eyes and if enough people do this then someone who will eventually make a difference will hear this message and do something about it.

Without bad press - which I am in no position to deliver - or international pressure - which is largely derived from bad press - nothing changes.  So I'm stuck.  Just like you.  That doesn't mean I like it, or, again, approve of it.  It's just that without a collective effort, nothing will change.

This is 'im not going to vote because what will one vote do' attitude. If you do not do anything/what you can do then you will always be apart of the problem.

Want to try making a change?  Vote Bernie Sanders.  At least he acknowledges how unfair the economy is, which is the first step in actually addressing all of the issues tied to it.

Socialism is not the answer. it still requires the same products as any other social structure would. it's answer is to put everyone in the lower tier who has limited access to money, and like a slave we will be provided with basic living needs by our masters. Except instead of being owned by a citizen we are all wards of the state.

It is so ironic that you can not see the slave master relationship here. You say you hate slavery and that it is wrong yet you want to sign up to be a slave to the state... Which is what the people who work for nike or any other slave owning corporation wants. which can not be possible if the government owns everything. Look at North Korea for a good example of that, This was the way china was till they went capitalist. (to the degree that they did)

 You certainly won't get that from a GOP candidate.  Otherwise, you're just trying to equivocate between your bible claiming that slavery is moral, and the rest of us saying no, it's not, but acknowledging that short of living in a cave or commune, we're tied to the system.  Which is terrible.

Why? isn't this what you want with sanders? why is it ok for All of America but no ok for someone is Myanmar?
---

What I find really funny is that you seem to think I'm some sort of rich, ivory tower liberal type.  I'm not.  I live in rural NH in a house.  I don't own much - my wheelchair, my accessible van, my computer, and various electronics (which I use to try to keep from going insane due to the crushing boredom and loneliness living with a permanent physical disability provides).  I own some books.  I'm certainly not swimming in cash.  Shit, I don't even own a suit.  I have one dress shirt and no ties.  I'm not poor, which I'm thankful for, but I'm not well off.  I certainly do have some privilege, due to being a white, straight male living in the US and in a certain socio-economic position, but I always acknowledge it. 

Again this does not change anything. I'm not white (all the way) and I can tell you white 'privilege' is propaganda and a bad joke. I have made something of myself and I will not be ashamed or apologize for any of it. We have a large latino population in Fl and when ever I'm in a latino heavy community people just start speaking Spanish to me assuming I am one of them. So appearently I don't look 'white enough' to pass. Even so I have built a strong well founded business and I get no quarter nor give no quarter to white people. I hire and fire based on ability and individual personalities. I also bid a lot of jobs and sell stuff on line and over the phone, 9 times out of 10 we never meet. I don't sell or give breaks to white people because they are white, nor do my products get judged on whether white or black or yellow hands build them. It's all about playing the game, the way people expect you to play it.

Stupid people say it's a white man's game gear toward white strengths.. Which may have been true 100 years ago, but we live in a global market and all the societies of the world lend and set attributes to this game, and for one to make it in business one needs to be flexible to meet the needs/To Serve the man with the money as if you were a slave. That's the key to rocket up the ladder. Not being of one color or race. Don't get me wrong I see businesses still around based on the good olde' boy network, but all of that is falling fast, and is all but gone.

The point is, being white has nothing to do with slavery any more. It about being born in the right place at the right time. You've got to get past the idea of slave meaning a white man beating a black man in a field somewhere.

the social structure is more based on opportunity and ability now. (got to be in the right place with the right knowledge)

Indeed, I'm well aware that privilege manifests in different ways.  I'd do just about anything to have a 'normal' body, for instance.  To be able to actually visit others in their homes, to go to the bathroom on my own, to bathe, dress, and feed myself, to actually give hugs to the people I love, etc.  So, you're really barking up the wrong tree if you don't think I understand at least some difficulty in life.  Being a prisoner in your own body and having to endure all the surgeries and physical therapy to even get an inkling of physical ability, all while missing holidays, birthdays, important events, etc. puts what's really important into crystal clear focus.  Also note that since I can't walk, Nike certainly isn't my favorite brand of shoe.  I don't wear shoes.

Nike is just one example. Understand EVERYTHING you do own comes from similar origins at one point in it's production or another. even the food you eat.
More so if you do not buy 'wholistic'/micro grown foods. or even if you enjoy fruit/veggies out of it's natural seasons you are apart of the societal structure that demands slavery.

Everything you do not grow yourself wheel chair car medicine food EVERYTHING at some point in it production has passed through the hands of a slave.

If money is involved in a society at all, and it has value then know it's because the large majority of people do not have it in quantity, and if you go far enough down the totem you will find people without any, and yet they still need to work and eat/care for their families.

Which we in a non-socialist society can demand better care for these people far better. IF we all do our parts. This starts with our acknowledgement and role in modern day slavery.

So, having a vague notion of always having a chaperone hovering overhead, of pain, both physical and emotional, and of a frustrating lack of freedom makes me more sympathetic to their plight than most, likely even you.  So, please do us both a favor and quit with the crocodile tears.

I eagerly await you purposely mischaracterizing what I said in between insulting and/or dumb comments about my disability since that's your MO.

all good things...