On the study of Religions (Page 3)

ghostgeek: The one thing believers DON'T want to hear about is facts.

chronology: Ghost Old Chap you really prove little with these examples. In Texas they sometimes have hailstones as big as golf balls, in Washington State they sometimes have 'Blood Tides' where the surf appears like Blood, in New York City and Boston in the 19th century they had two days of total darkness (caused by massive forest fires in Canada) .

Really Old Chap, if Texas had all these events and more in the space of a few months the State Government would be ordering a top level enquiry.

You really have no argument at all saying this is just 'natural' events.

ghostgeek: And in Egypt they have these self same events each spring. Have been for thousands of years. Now, in a RATIONAL world, people would read that old Exodus story and say that folks back then mistook natural phenomenon for plagues sent by a deity. But we don't live in a rational world. Hence belief in God.

ghostgeek: There are three different kinds of manna mentioned in the Bible. Firstly, there is the ‘apochryphal’ manna, mentioned in Baruch, which was bought and sold and bartered. “Behold, we have sent you money to buy you burnt offerings, and sin offerings, and incense, and prepare ye manna, and offer upon the altar of the Lord our God” (Baruch 1:10) This referred to the resinous or gummy exudations of various desert trees, such as the manna tamarisk (Tamaria mannifera) and the spiny camelthorn (Alhagi camelorum). It was, to be more precise, the insects feeding on those trees or shrubs which produced this sweet resin. The resin exuded by day hardened at night and could be shaken from the leaves and stems in the early morning. This is still done by Bedouins who sell it to use instead of sugar.

[ http://www.biblefellowshipunion.co.uk/2017/Jan_Feb/Coriandr.htm ]

ghostgeek: This is how you know there was a real exodus from Egypt, even if it was only a few people. The things described in Exodus match events and things that occur each year in and around Egypt. Somebody saw them, and wrote them down. Same as you can do today.

ghostgeek: Natural phenomena, not manifestations of God.

ghostgeek: Don't believe me? Go to Egypt in the spring and check it out for yourself.

chronology: Ghost honestly you are being stubborn now. You want the fine folks of wireclub to believe that the Egyptian people were foolish enough to fall for a scam like that?

ghostgeek: If you're a believer, you MUSt go to Egypt in the spring. If you don't you're admitting that you're shit scared that the facts undermine your beliefs.

chronology: Ghost it is a must do to go and see the Sphinx. So much history there.

ghostgeek: We are not talking about history here. We are talking about what does, and does not, happen each year in Egypt in the spring. The Egyptians understood what was happening and weren't fooled. The Hebrews didn't and were suckered by Moses.

ghostgeek: If you was an Egyptian back then, in the time of Moses, whenever that was, frogs would be a normal part of the yearly cycle.

Zanjan: "The Hebrews didn't and were suckered by Moses. "

" What's the whether like, Iza? Find me an Egyptian to interpret". Right. The Hebrews had lived in Egypt for nigh on 400 plus years by the time this happened (some say only 200 plus years) . Do you think they never stuck their head out the window??

ghostgeek: Not the lot that were conned by Moses.

Zanjan: That was only during the Passover - one night.

Why would you take exception to Moses leading the Hebrews out of Egypt? Moses didn't bring the Egyptian gods with Him. Or, is it you're annoyed the Jews later became a successful nation, under this new religious rule?

If you follow history, Egypt tanked not long after that.

ghostgeek: What makes you think I take exception to Moses leading half a dozen brickmakers and their families out of Egypt?

As for when all this happened, I think people have got the date wrong. I reckon it happened around the middle of the first millennium BC, not the second.

Zanjan: Well, you keep saying Moses was a dastardly con man, yet you can't show how His Faith was an evil cult or how He harmed those people.

I take the date of the event with a grain of salt as well, not that a few hundred years difference would change the story.

Ancient historical records were simply not detailed enough - we're at the mercy of what THEY felt was important to document and why. Egyptian accuracy is definitely questionable, given the colour they added to their battles. No Pharaoh would commission a monument dedicated to a loss; no man was free to write/carve/distribute anything to the public without Pharaoh's permission. Egypt was a religious State.

Events in a religious Holy Book primarily have spiritual significance as root Cause and ultimate Effect. There isn't any other purpose of a Revelation; the literate could write their own travel journals.

ghostgeek: There have been thousands of years of bloodletting in the name of the Abrahamic God. What more proof do you need that Moses spawned an evil cult?

Zanjan: Proof that non-religious people stopped the blood-letting.

ghostgeek: Hard to do when so many people are running around shouting their heads off about their's is the only true religion.

Sage of Bryan: ghost. I'm beginning to think that you work for a Travel Agency on the side. You're always trying to get Posters to go to Egypt.

You are a great researcher and fact gatherer. But you only gather facts from like minded people as yourself.

I'm a fact gatherer also. But, I only have three facts.

Fact 1. I believe the bible is God's inspired word. Can't prove it, but I believe it.

Fact 2. The apostle Peter writes that all scripture is given by inspiration.

Fact 3. I believe and accept facts 1. and 2.

I do not try to get other's to accept or believe these facts. Should they do so, then that is their facts. I do not try to sway their beliefs, change their minds nor convert their souls.

I have never went to any of the web sites that you've posted. I'm not interested in reading anything written against the three facts I posted above.

Now I'm sure that you (and maybe others) think that I'm conned, duped, blind, brain-washed etc, etc Well, I'd rather be duped, conned, blind, brain-washed etc, etc, by the Great Creator God, than to be duped, conned, blind, brain-washed etc,etc, by Satan, the God of this world (age).

Zanjan: Why can't you prove the Word of God? I could see you having trouble with inspired individuals but the Word of God isn't inspired, and not everything in the Bible is the Word of God.

Therefore, if Peter wrote that "all" scripture is inspired, he used the wrong word. Take note that Peter was far from infallible and his knowledge was very limited. This is not to say he wasn't a virtuous man, only that he was a human, who occasionally annoyed Christ.

Sage of Bryan: I can only prove God's existence to myself. I cannot prove to another what they do not want to accept or believe. The word "inspired" that Peter used, comes from the Greek and means just that, inspired. Can also translated "breathed of God"

Zanjan: We don't speak ancient Greek; thus, I wouldn't trust how anyone says Peter saw it. His own language was small and rudimentary. No one knows what language he was speaking when he said this.

Whatever help a follower may be to another as they teach the Faith, at no point should anyone hold the follower's word as equal to the Lord's. When they both speak the same truth, the Source gets the credit. The Revelation, itself, is the well-spring of knowledge - it enlightens all humanity with its creative force.

Seems to me, if Peter used "breathed of God", then he was referring only to the Revelation (Voice of God, spoken by God)..........not the stuff followers, like himself, attached to it.

Sage of Bryan: Well, I feel you're gettin' picky. I assume Peter spoke Hebrew. The new testament was translated into English from the Greek.

Peter says that scripture is inspired by God. He says God is the source. So I don't know what your argument is there.