For those who want proof of the exodus

[Minimalist]

I saw that last guy in Walmart.  I think he was the store manager.

[robvalue]

Hah! Is that Matt D?

[Redbeard The Pink]

He must have forgotten to read the part of the Bible my signature is in.


Verbatim from the mouth of Jesus (retranslated from a retranslation of a copy of a copy):

"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you too will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. How can you see your brother's head up his ass when your own vision is darkened by your head being even further up your ass? How can you say to your brother, 'Get your head out of your ass,' when all the time your head is up your own ass? You hypocrite! First take your head out of your own ass, and then you will see clearly who has his head up his ass and who doesn't." Matthew 7:1-5 (also Luke 6: 41-42)

Your like the kid who didn't watch star wars, but still wants to speak in the group of those who did, as if you actually saw the movie. As bad as Minnie's efforts are, at least he CLAIMS to have watch the movie.

My what? I have no liking for kids who haven't seen Star Wars. What the fuck are you talking about?


Oh. I see what you're saying.


I mean, I could watch your stupid movie, but the movie isn't evidence, and unless you can point me to peer-reviewed sources for the "evidence" presented in your "documentary," I doubt there would be a reason for me to take it seriously even if I did watch it.


Really, though, you should pull your head out of your ass and get some fresh air.

[Drich]

The problem with 'murrica IS the constitution, asswipe.  Although you are far too stupid to understand why.

That xtian shithead ascribes...or tries to ascribe...the spelling difference to changes in the language over a couple of hundred years.  He conveniently ignores the fact that the inscription on the Berlin pedestal is broken which might be an even easier observation if he didn't have an agenda to push.  ( He's trying to push the exodus back to the mid 15th century BC c 1450), which is what fundies insist on, not your Rohl horseshit.

Ever notice how xtian asswipes...Drippy, I'm talking about you...seize on the Merneptah stele as ironclad "proof" of their precious fucking Israel but ignore the rest of the line which says they were utterly destroyed?  Talk about cherry picking!


Jorm, you may find the attached interesting. Unlike Drippy, you'll be able to understand it.

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

There is a translation of the hieroglyphs for the line in question.  People seem to use "y" and "i" interchangeably.  Remember, we are dealing with Egyptian, here.

This is all one big red herring Minnie... You yourself posted a link to a well known and respected Egyptologist, who refutes all the garbage you just posted. AND... If you were to simply read past the little bit you are wanting to hang yourself with the article clearly states: " Most scholars accept that the Stele refers to Israel, then the whole next section explains why!

This is why you never post source material! you are a dishonest cherry picker! you take articles and reference material and you cut and paste fragments to compile your insane thoughts from them. You wanted to pretend that your "Ysirir" was a word from the Stele and it was nothing more than a word you made up by adding an I that was not apart of the original translation. One could say this was a mistake, but again I googled this word yesterday, and it's only English usage is where you personally used this argument in the past on acouple separate occasions.. Now why would one do this dishonest deed? Because when you leave out this extra "I" you come across all sorts of articles explaining how/why THE VAST MAJORITY of Egyptologists believes this to be the glyph for Israel!

Youre a fraud..

Ask yourself... If you have to go to such lengths to protect your position from being harshly scrutinized (because you know it will fail) how can what you believe then your thoughts represent truth? or is 'truth' not your concern? Is your primary goal the preservation of the propaganda you believe to be true, even at the expense of the actual truth?

If this is the case what makes you any different than how you view certain sects of Christianity? All the bile, distain and hate you spew to those you deem 'closed minded' explain to me how that is not you.

[Drich]

the "Ysiris or Isiris" or whatever he referenced is a nonsense term he made up, or got from one of his nut bag bloggers he likes to quote. I googled it and the only reference english or egyptian reference I found in 10 pages to that word was his old posts claiming the same thing, being backed up by nothing.

It's right there in the Wikipedia article on the stele.

keep reading

[Drich]

Drippy should be an expert on nonsense with all that time he wastes reading that stupid fucking bible.

What he knows about archaeology could dance on the head of a pin.....along with his fucking angels.

Are you projecting? It amazes me on how much incite you have on me, but none of it has ever really applied.. I always assumed you were just blindly lashing out at the Christian stereotype.. Now I understand that you must be subconsciously talking about your own attributes. Everything you pretend to know can only be access through the lens of hard left extremists and closely guarded form of cherry picking. Because everything you have said to this point has been refuted in the completed context of your OWN reference material! You are a junk yard dog who barks and bites at the fence but when the fence is open you tuck tail and run

[Drich]

Your like the kid who didn't watch star wars, but still wants to speak in the group of those who did, as if you actually saw the movie. As bad as Minnie's efforts are, at least he CLAIMS to have watch the movie.

My what? I have no liking for kids who haven't seen Star Wars. What the fuck are you talking about?


Oh. I see what you're saying.


I mean, I could watch your stupid movie, but the movie isn't evidence, and unless you can point me to peer-reviewed sources for the "evidence" presented in your "documentary," I doubt there would be a reason for me to take it seriously even if I did watch it.


Really, though, you should pull your head out of your ass and get some fresh air.

the documentary is simply a compilation of "Peer-reviewed sources." The movie examines the evidence from both sides speaking to the archaeologists who are incharge of the dig sites, to museum curators to experts in their fields. What the movie does is has you examine the facts these people provide, and separate their doubts about Israel being in captivity in Egypt by introducing an alternative to the time line they all cling to...

In the end if you wish to maintain the time line mainstream Egyptology holds, you are still left with evidence for Joseph, the consolidation of power the bible describes under pharaoh, the semetic settlement as Goshen, the development for 25 villages and towns in that region large enough to house the numbers of the exodus, the evidence that that region was turned into a slave population, papyrus/Egyptian descriptions of the plagues, and a list of Jewish slaves/slave names.. Basically evidence for the major events leading up to during and after the exodus. All happening to 'another semetic people' because main stream Egyptology who says these things could not happen but if they did they happened 300 after the evidence says it happens.

[Redbeard The Pink]

the documentary is simply a compilation of "Peer-reviewed sources."

Oh, I'm sure it is, Ickle Drickle. I'm sure it is.

The movie examines the evidence from both sides speaking to the archaeologists who are incharge of the dig sites, to museum curators to experts in their fields. What the movie does is has you examine the facts these people provide, and separate their doubts about Israel being in captivity in Egypt by introducing an alternative to the time line they all cling to...

Ah. I see.


What part of "they interviewed some people" have you managed to conflate with "these are peer-reviewed sources of evidence"?


Also, am I reading that right? Are you suggesting that ALL of mainstream Egyptologists are clinging to an alternative timeline just because they don't want to believe in Jesus? Is that what you're saying, Drich? 'Cause that's some conspiracy theorist shit right there, dude.

In the end if you wish to maintain the time line mainstream Egyptology holds, you are still left with evidence for Joseph, the consolidation of power the bible describes under pharaoh, the semetic settlement as Goshen, the development for 25 villages and towns in that region large enough to house the numbers of the exodus, the evidence that that region was turned into a slave population, papyrus/Egyptian descriptions of the plagues, and a list of Jewish slaves/slave names.. Basically evidence for the major events leading up to during and after the exodus. All happening to 'another semetic people' because main stream Egyptology who says these things could not happen but if they did they happened 300 after the evidence says it happens.

We're still left with no evidence because you basically haven't shown us any. You managed to find a movie that pretends to present "both sides" but is clearly designed to create the illusion of a real debate while trotting out a laundry list of people who call themselves historians and scientists despite their persistent belief in magic.

[dyresand]

Hah! Is that Matt D?

I don't believe so

[Minimalist]

the documentary is simply a compilation of "Peer-reviewed sources."

Rohl has been roasted by those "peer-reviewed sources."  His peers think he is a fucking moron.  That's why he turns to shitheads like you, drippy.