The Evisceration of the Exodus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-08-2015, 09:46 PM
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
(02-08-2015 04:57 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  All,

So I am on vacation for a week, the wife is out of town for three weeks, and I have all of my assigned college work done, sooooooo since I am nursing an injured shoulder, no gym time for me Weeping but the good news is I had time to finally break out my books and do a long promised tear-down of the Exodus myth. I posted it in my resource library, but since people can't reply there, and I would like to know your opinion, I made a post for discussion, support, or criticism....

The Evisceration of the Exodus

“The Exodus from Egypt is unknown to history save what is written in the Hebrew Bible. Outside of the most meager a circumstantial evidence we possess nothing to substantiate the text.”

-Dr. Michael D. Oblath. The Exodus Itinerary Sites (2004)

Michael D. Oblath received his Ph.D. in Near Eastern Religions from the University of California and the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley. Currently, he is Adjunct Professor at the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, California, and St. Mary’s College of California. His publications include articles on the patriarchal narratives and the Exodus from Egypt.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just one of a copious number of scholarly experts who have spent years studying and investigating the Exodus. I will endeavor to eviscerate the myth of the Exodus. To recap the fairytale; 600,000 Jewish slaves, their families, Egyptian booty, and a plethora of animals numbering between two and three million spent 40 years stomping around the Sinai desert which is only about 130 miles across, fleeing to the promised land, guided by God who tested them greatly.

Nonbiblical references



The earliest reference to the Exodus story can be found in the writings of the Greek historian Hecataeus of Abdera (fourth century BCE). It is surmised that he had a copy of the Pentateuch before him, based upon what appears to be a direct quote from Deuteronomy. Of course, there exists no contemporary literary record of any sort depicting the Exodus as a historical event, and this silence was maintained for many centuries, until the story started circulating after the Jewish Scriptures began to emerge publicly in the latter half of the first millennium BCE.

Logistic Implausibility

Exodus 1:5 - and all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were 70 souls…

Exodus 12:37 - and the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about 600,000 on foot that were men, beside children.

Exodus 12:38 - and a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even a very much cattle.

Exodus 12:39 - and they baked unleavened cakes of the dough which they brought forth out of Egypt, for it was not leavened; because they were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry, neither have they prepared for themselves any victual.

First is the amazing explosion of the Israelite population; they went from 70 to more than 1 million in about 400 years (Ex 12:37, 38:26, Num 1:45-46). They must have been very bad at mathematics back then. It is reminiscent of the great mythical global flood(2348 BCE) which posited that eight humans repopulated the earth in 350 years(2000 BCE) to 27 million people. The sheer impossibility of there even being 600,000 male descendants of Jacob during four generations of Hebrew existence in Egypt(Gen 46) should give a thinking person pause. Most calculations show that the most that could have been produced in four generations would be approximately 7000 males.

However, let’s wave the wand of magical belief, and pretend that there was 2 to 3 million Hebrews in the time since Jacob entered Egypt. Let’s break down the logistics of moving that many people… About 2000 people can fit comfortably into a mile, with no belongings and a little space between them. If 3 million people were lined up single file, the length of the column would require an estimated 1500 miles. In order to fit into the 130 mile broad Sinai, the Israelites would need to line up more than ten abreast, without belongings such as wagons and animals. The front row of the column would have been safely in the promised land and the last row would have still been in Egypt.

Animals and treasure

Let us not forget the hundreds of thousands of animals they must’ve had with them. How were these animals fed, and what plant matter did they eat? When you calculate the amount of lambs needed to fulfill the Passover decree at Exodus 12:21 would be something around the number of 240,000, slaughtered in one night. If these are only the lambs, how many other animals were there, including all the adult sheep, cattle, goats and horses, all spared miraculously during the plagues?

Exodus 3:22 and 12:35 state that the Israelites are to flee through the desert with the enormous wealth of Egypt, taking a massive amount of silver and gold. Why carry all this immense weight of worthless treasure into the desert for 40 years where it has no value? This ridiculous story would’ve left Egypt bankrupt and destitute, and the Israelites extremely wealthy. Oddly, this fairytale is not supported by the historical and archaeological record. Archaeologists have found zero evidence of such wealth among the hill settlers that became the Israelites.

Geography and archaeology

Sadly archeologists cannot find any clues to support the story of the Exodus as an actual historic event. They cannot identify Mount Sinai and many other place-names in the story; nor were there any remains from this found anywhere in the Sinai. An Exodus of such great size would’ve left a plethora of evidence as I will get into later.

The burning/talking bush

Surprisingly, this great universe and life creating deity deemed to speak to Moses through a burning bush. It is even more amusing that(Exodus 3:5) the great and powerful Oz was more concerned about Moses wearing shoes to walk on the patch of dirt in front of him: “do not come near, put off your shoes from your feet, for the place in which your standing is holy ground”… What is not surprising, is this same tale differs little from the Greek or Roman myths about Zeus and Jupiter, as well as a number of other gods and goddesses that manifested themselves to humans over the millennia. Then the great and powerful Oz (Exodus 3:19)tells Moses that the king of Egypt will not let you go unless compelled by a mighty hand. Then God hardened the Pharaoh’s heart. After all, the story needs a little spiking.

The 10 Plagues

The first plague - all the water was turned to blood and that he killed all the fish in Egypt. How in the world did this event escape the notice of all literate Egyptian writers, travelers, historians, Royal scribes, and any other literate person who witnessed this amazing event? The death of all the fish, as well as under the ability of water everywhere in Egypt, would’ve been something historical to say the least. To no surprise, there is not one scrap of contemporary, literary, or historical evidence to corroborate this ridiculous story. Fiction.

The second plague - frogs covered Egypt, again; there exists no historical account anywhere of such an extraordinary event. The economic cost of a pandemic frog invasion would have been enormous, as would the potential illness when hundreds of millions of frogs died and rotted away everywhere. Fiction.

The third plague - the supernatural invasion of lice or gnats which spread everywhere. Again, such a pestilence would be very costly to their economy, as did all of these plagues, and there exist no scientific, historical, or contemporary evidence for this claim. Fiction.

The fourth plague - and invasion of flies next attacks Egypt. At this point, it is difficult to comprehend much being left to plague at this point. I apply the same point as the third plague. Fiction.

The fifth plague - now it gets interesting, the all-powerful deity kills all the cattle, horses, camels, oxen, and sheep of Egypt, sparing only the cattle of Israel (Exodus 9:3-6). The economic cost would’ve been staggering, and the resulting epidemic of disease from all the rotting animals would’ve been extraordinary… Fiction. And again, no evidence exists to support this myth. But wait there’s more…

The sixth plague - the attack of the boils, the all-powerful deity had Moses sprinkle some ashes toward the heaven in the sight of the Pharaoh, and a dust spread across the land inflicting man and beasts with painful boils… Wait a minute, what beasts? In the previous plague, God had destroyed all the beasts, sparing only those owned by the Israelites. To no surprise, no evidence supports this.

The seventh plague - next the all-powerful deity rained hail down upon every man and beast that shall be found in the field, the hail shall come down upon them, and they shall die (Exodus 9:19). Hey, wait a minute… What beasts? Where these beasts come from? They were killed in plague five, and then again in plague six…. Something sounds suspicious here. Fiction.

The eighth plague - wait there’s more, the plague of the Locust since the previous plague of hail would have destroyed most of the foliage, what in the world were the Locusts going to destroy? Whatever, so now there is no foliage.

The ninth plague - the three days of darkness *key dramatic music* Dunh Dunh Dunh..the Pharaoh must’ve been quite the hearty individual, having survived eight plagues so far, having lived through bloody water, mosquitoes, boils, hiding inside during the great hailstorm that killed every living thing caught outdoors, and the famine that would’ve followed the locust plague, and now a three-day blackout. Curiously, there exists not one word written anywhere outside of the story in the Hebrew Bible, of three days of darkness. One would surmise that this would’ve been a great time for the Israelites to sneak away from their master as by this point everyone would’ve been hiding inside, and three days of darkness allows one a lot of time to leave. Fiction.

The tenth plague - this infamous plague (Exodus 12:12-29) is the event commemorated during Passover: the killing of all firstborn humans and other living things, except of course the Israelites putting the mark of Lamb’s blood upon their doors. One would question, why would an all-powerful God, all-knowing God, require a drop of lambs blood upon the doors of his chosen people to identify them? Are they suggesting that God did not know who his chosen people were? Truly? Logistically, how does one inform 2 million Israelites in one night, to mark their door with blood? Where did the Israelites immediately obtain an estimated 240,000 or so lambs necessary for this mass sacrifice? Why would the universe and life creating God require animal sacrifice?

Additionally, the Egyptian population itself throughout the entire nation is estimated to have been 3-3.5 million people. Is one to believe that the slaves equaled the Masters? After the utter decimation of the Egyptian population by God, why would the slaves need to flee in the first place? Surely the Egyptians, having gone through 10 levels of plague, had other things to worry about besides where the 3 million slaves went too. How could the few survivors have even tried to stop it? If Egypt was so devastated, with nearly every living thing killed, including most able-bodied men, it would be easy for the millions of spared Hebrews to overwhelm the remnants of the Egyptians and take over the entire country, rather than fleeing into the relatively poor and inhospitable wilderness.

Unleavened bread

Exodus 12:8 talks about the unleavened bread and bitter herbs to be eaten as Passover. As the story goes, they had to flee so quickly that they did not have time for the bread to rise. This is a simplistic and anachronistic story. The Bible (Gen 19:3) records the use of unleavened bread by Abrams nephew, Lot, centuries earlier, according to the story.

No formal organization

As per the story, the Israelites had no formal and centralized organization until after they were already settled in the desert. How could any of the Exodus events have been organized with millions wandering around aimlessly with no chain of command? Exodus 13:18 claims the Israelites left Egypt “equipped for battle.” Where did the slaves get the equipment? How could Moses have executed “brilliant” military tactics with these untrained fighters? Where did these slaves learn these military tactics? Such a massive force on the move would surely have left some mark in the desert. To no surprise, despite the wishful attempts by various devout researchers, not a single unambiguous and scientifically verified artifact has ever been found from such a vast and long-term migration.

Exodus encampments

Biblical literalist like to claim the existence of purported ancient encampments along the supposed Exodus route, now visible using technologies such as Google Earth, and that this evidence proves the biblical story to be true.

First, if these were the biblical sites, they would need to be enormous. Regarding the massive encampments of the Israelites and their animals, the latter that is estimated to be at least the same as the number of Israelites, over 2 million, consider the following:

Every one of the 42 times the camp was pitched (Num 33) there must be suitable space found for some 250,000 tents, laid out (Num 2) regularly four-square around the holy Tabernacle, after that was constructed, and with the necessary streets and passages, and proper spaces between the tents. A man in a coffin occupies about 12 ft.², 6’ x 2’. Living people would not be packed in their tents like corpses inside a sardine can; they must have at least, say, three times that space, 36 ft.² or 4 yds.² each. A tent to house ten persons with minimum decency must occupy an average of 40 yds.². If 241,420 such tents were set one against another, with no intervening space or separating streets, they would occupy 9,656,800 square yards, or over 1995 acres of ground, a little more than 3 mi.².

Second, where did all the tents come from? It is estimated that the amount of tents needed for this proposed 2 million refugees would be at least 200,000. Who would’ve owned so many tents inside Egypt, or how did the Hebrews construct them all in the desert wilderness? Exodus 12:39 says the Israelites fled in a hurry, without even their bread time the rise, yet they are depicted as hauling a huge amount of Egyptian gold and other precious artifacts, along with the massive animals and, apparently, an enormous quantity of tents.

Water Sources

Two to three million people and hundreds of thousands of animals would have required a huge amount of water. In Exodus 15:25 we find that the well was bitter, and God gave Moses direction to make it sweet. Calculations show that the Israelites and their livestock would’ve needed some 8000 m³ of water per day.

Heavenly manna

At Exodus 16:4 appears the magical story of “bread from heaven,” elsewhere known as manna. This magical and supernatural manifestation is described as made with honey, or taste like fresh oil, and described as a flake-like a thing, round thing, or coriander seed. Of course, there’s never been any evidence of this magical food raining from heaven, or any residue of it.

Bird sacrifice

In the book of Leviticus, we read about the numerous animal sacrifices, including thousands upon thousands of birds per day, but we are not told where these birds come from in the middle of the desert. Indeed, throughout the entire book appeared detailed instructions on how to sacrifice all these animals, repeated abundantly; yet the common people apparently were kept out of that feasting and were fed flake-like round things (manna)found on rocks instead.

Wait there’s more, while the Israelites were starving subsisting off manna and water, the great and powerful Oz required not only the sacrifice of thousands of animals but also heaps of “shewbread” (Exodus 25:30) made with fine wheat flour (exodus 29:2, 40). Now where did the Israelite priest obtain this “fine flour” out in the middle of the desert, where people were starving? It seems rather odd that 600,000 lawyers would subsist solely on manna while watching their wives and children go hungry, while thousands of food animals were being immolated, and expensive and difficult to procure fine wheat flour was given as bread to God.

29 trillion quails?

At Exodus 16:13, the great and powerful Oz brings forth a huge amount of quails from the sea to feed his chosen people. Let’s examine this, we read at Number 11:31 that these quails were “stacked up on the face of the earth” to a height of two cubits, equivalent to about 44 inches high, in a row the length of “a day’s journey around the camp.” Estimates show based on the settlements descriptions at Numbers 2 and 24, that the camps total mass would be 4,569.76 square miles or 452,404,727,808 cubic feet of birds. This equates to approximately 29 trillion individual birds. Let’s say this estimation was 99% inaccurate, we would still be discussing 290 million birds, to be picked up immediately, cleaned, cooked and consumed by couple million people, providing dozens or hundreds of quails per person. Where do they get all the wood to cook with, and what did they do with the birds remains?

I could go on at great length, but who truly wants to read all that? In conclusion, scholarly consensus asserts that there is no archeological evidence to support a late bronze age Exodus, and no historical proof for the Exodus can be placed within any specific period. Not a single shred of credible physical evidence has ever been discovered anywhere in over a century of scientific excavations, and scouring of the Sinai desert for any sign of the Israelites 40-year journey. The entire Exodus story appears unreal, even beyond supernatural miracles. The Pharaoh is never named, in dozens of pages of text, despite the fact that Egyptian kings were well-known and inscribed their names all over monuments.

Furthermore, the biblical text contains abundant anachronisms including the names of people’s such as the Philistines, Edomites and Midianites who did not exist as such at the purported time. The inclusion of these anachronisms fits in with political issues during the seventh century. Clearly, the Exodus account was written long after the purported events, revealed in its anachronisms and simplicity in many instances. The setting reflects an era centuries later and unfamiliarity with the milieu of the purported Exodus period.

The Exodus is not a historical event fictionalized but a mythical motif historicized. Again, the difference may seem subtle but is highly important. The archetypal myth existed first and was utilized as a framework upon which to build a national epic. The fact that anyone can purport to believe that this ridiculous tale has even a grain of truth to it, is disingenuous, and hubris in nature.

References:

Finkelstein, and Amihai Mazar. The quest for the historical Israel. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature. 2007. Print.

Frankee, William. The Exodus Epic: Universalization of History through Ritual Repetition.Lanham, Md: Association and University Press of America, 2012. Print.

Murdock, D. M. Did Moses exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver. Seattle. Stellar House Publishing. 2014. Print.

Redford, Donald. Aspects of Monotheism. Biblical Archaeology Review, 1996.

Tait, John. Never Had the Like Occurred: Egypt’s View of its Past. London: UCL Press, 2003. Print.

Wheless, Joseph. Is It God’s Word? New York: Cosimo, Inc. 2007. Print.

Smartass

Drooling

Thoughts? Opinions?

Thanks for putting all the work into this.

It is very unfortunate that most Christians won't bother reading it.

They are not interested in history, and not interested in facts. They have a "personal relationship" with God, and for them that is enough. Some of them even admit that the Bible is bullshit, yet still talk about this special relationship they think they have, without realising that their imaginary friend is sourced entirely from the Bible.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Mark Fulton's post
02-08-2015, 10:24 PM
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
(02-08-2015 09:46 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  They have a "personal relationship" with God, and for them that is enough.
Some of them even admit that the Bible is bullshit,
What kind of Christian would say such a thing?!
But when the Bible is full of human errors Christian needs personal relationship with God by the power of the Holy Ghost.
(02-08-2015 09:46 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  yet still talk about this special relationship they think they have, without realising that their imaginary friend is sourced entirely from the Bible.
Not true. We have Book of Mormon. We have Prophets and we have gift of the Holy Ghost.

Christians of the first century didn't have the Bible. They didn't base their faith on the Bible. They had Prophets and gift of the Holy Ghost.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-08-2015, 10:29 PM (This post was last modified: 02-08-2015 10:43 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
(02-08-2015 09:20 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  Great stuff. One thing that seemed odd to me, however, was your "2,000 people fitting comfortably in a mile," line. If that's true that 2K people fit comfortably from left to right for one mile, that would mean they would fit comfortably from front to back, too, yes? So, one square mile would fit 4 million people. That amount of space would fit comfortably in the desert and since we are talking about 2 million people max, that means it would be just a half square mile needed to accommodate them on a journey. Am I missing something?

I realize all of the other stuff you wrote makes perfect sense, I just want this to be correct for you since it is going into your archive. If I'm wrong then you'll know why I'm a journalist and not a mathematician.

Well first I admit this wasn't my brain child, this math has been bandied about from one expert to another. The logic that seemed to be used was 5,280 feet per mile, 2,000 people in a straight line front to back gives each 2.64 feet of room, so about 30 inches...think about being in a line, so as not to be touching, or entering someone else's personal space, and they were walking, not just standing there, and assuming no one back then was obese, 30 inches isn't much...but "comfortable." Then they would have most likely some sort of satchel, or dragging poles with belongings on them, tending to animals, small children, etc...It isn't like a sardine can full of 2 million people in a perfect square inched over into the middle of the desert and took up residence. I think that is the line of thinking behind the numbers.

Thinking about it logically, picturing 600,000 hebrews, their families, animals, belongings...is about 2.5 million people and a butt load of animals....straggling along chasing god across the sand....just doesn't add up. Then if you say line them up 5 across in a column, not even considering belongings, animals etc, just people in a column, that is about 250 miles long (dont quote me, I am going off of memory trying to remember and I am pretty sure the number was close to that when I was researching the numbers) which is about twice the width of the Sinai Desert, so the first row would have been in the promised land, and the last row would have still been in Egypt. Does any of that make sense? it is after midnight here and I should have been in bed already lol. Unsure

I may need to look at it again in the morning once I have sleep and caffeine, but the numbers were a direct quote from various published work including Murdock and it made sense when I verified it originally.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
02-08-2015, 10:41 PM (This post was last modified: 02-08-2015 10:56 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
(02-08-2015 10:24 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(02-08-2015 09:46 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  They have a "personal relationship" with God, and for them that is enough.
Some of them even admit that the Bible is bullshit,
What kind of Christian would say such a thing?!
But when the Bible is full of human errors Christian needs personal relationship with God by the power of the Holy Ghost.
(02-08-2015 09:46 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  yet still talk about this special relationship they think they have, without realising that their imaginary friend is sourced entirely from the Bible.
Not true. We have Book of Mormon. We have Prophets and we have gift of the Holy Ghost.

Christians of the first century didn't have the Bible. They didn't base their faith on the Bible. They had Prophets and gift of the Holy Ghost.

"What kind of Christian would say such a thing?!"....Educated christians would. An education in theology, like i have, teaches you there is no basis for the miracles, and anonymous authors wrote the gospels. You can not deny the truth, history and archaeology point to a different reality then that presented in the parable called the bible. Biblical scholars and historians know the facts, they just don't broadcast them so as not to shake up people' faith. The gullible and ignorant masses just need a spoonful of faith, and a cherry picked scripture or two to holler out an amen, and fill the offering plate.

BOM is riddled with even more outrageous lies than the bible.

Prophets don't exist.

The holy ghost was yet another creation of man. Man created god, and the triune concept, actually that was an agreed upon consensus established in the Council of Constantinople, and Council of Nicaea with Emperor Constantine presiding over it in the 4th century. Now look at you learning stuff.

Here, I pity your lack of knowledge so I will share some of my work on this subject below: The development of the christian doctrine of trinity...

For a church to be considered a New Testament church it shall accept the biblical New Testament as its sole authority for all matters of faith. A “true” biblical church shall not accept any authority for its faith and daily practice, outside of the New Testament Scriptures. This does not discard the importance of the Old Testament Scriptures by any means. The church is not based on the biblical Old Testament because that is the record of God’s dealing with Israel. In the New Testament you will find a specific pattern and instructions from God concerning the church. The followers of the New Testament church model believe in the irrefutable word of God, that the Bible is complete as written, and it is, “… Given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

New Testament church parishioners believe that any hierarchy outside of the local church, is unsupported by Scripture. They think that Christ is the head, and that the New Testament Scriptures are the “true” churches only sole authority. I always find it amusing that with all the religions in the world, multiple versions of God or gods, and various holy books and ideologies of creation, that the believer of each religion thinks the believers of other religions are wrong, and that their own belief is the truth, the will and the way of the one “true” God. Even within Christianity, if every Christian who ever called another Christian, not a “true” Christian was removed from earth, there would be no Christians.

The Congregational style of a New Testament church is basically a biblical form of church government. Final authority in a New Testament church rests with the delegation. Each member has an equal democratic vote. They believe that the Bible, specifically the New Testament teaches that churches are to be governed by their own congregation following strict biblical guidelines.

In Trinitarian theology, the father gives everything he has, his very being, as a free gift to his son. Since the Son has everything that the father has, then they are in fact equal (Albl 139). In the Old Testament, the Holy Spirit is closely associated with God’s gift of prophecy. For example, “the Lord took some of the spirit from Moses and gave it to the elders, and they were able to prophesy also (Num 11:25). In the New Testament, the Holy Spirit is closely associated with the creation of God’s son in human form. For example, Mary conceived Jesus not through ordinary human means, but “through the Holy Spirit” (Matt1:20). In essence, just as Jesus comes in the father’s name, so the Holy Spirit comes in Jesus’ name (Albl 150). I define the Holy Spirit as God’s breath, his very soul, that of which he can giveth away to create life itself.

The church understands such self-emptying on the part of God as simultaneously the fulfillment of human existence, whose transformative effects are extended in the church in the world through the work of the Holy Spirit (Mueller 44). As such, parishioners of the New Testament church believe that they can follow this example by sharing the Holy Spirit with others. This is “living through Christ” by spreading the good word, in line with strict interpretation of biblical reference.

In the New Testament, outside of the story of Christ in his teachings, is the insistent belief through Scripture that the end times or transition into the new world in the second coming of Christ to take his place as king of the world would occur at any moment. “That Christ would come soon is an expectation which appears even in the latter writings of the New Testament. It is present in almost every stratum” (Moule 141). A rationalist may posit that today things are going on exactly as they were before, and thus there will never be an end to the world. Believers in the New Testament think that the real mistake here is to make time the determining standard at all. A good analogy of this is that the Christian hope is not measured in terms of time, but in terms of the journey continuing to its completion; the incarnation. The question should not be when is the end of the world, but what can I do to be ready for it? (Moule 148).

Now let’s go back in time to the very formation, fabrication of the Christian faith, the Trinity concept and successful establishment of the Christian religion. We must begin with the immeasurable impact that Emperor Constantine had on the spread of Christianity, and successful suppression of incumbent Roman pagan beliefs. Legend has it that Emperor Constantine saw two stars cross in the sky, in which he took to be a sign from God that Christianity was the only true faith. While his conversion to Christianity in 312 was not truly the moment Christianity came to be the official religion of the Roman Empire, it definitely was one of the major contributing factors for its subsequent acceptance.

Emperor Constantine conducted a religious-based crusade against Licinius in a war to rescue Christians on the east from further persecution. In the years 312 to 313 Emperor Constantine began a systematic policy in which he gave honors, privileges and financial donations to the Christian church and their clergy. In 324, as the unchallenged controller of the East, he prohibited by Royal decree any cultic activities which until then fell under the traditional religions of the Roman Empire, and this is when the status of Christianity as the official religion of the state and its rulers was affirmed (Lieu 7).

Religious scholars concede that Emperor Constantine not only convened important council’s sessions, but also either presided over them, or appointed a Royal official to preside in his place. This reduced the very role of bishops and councils such as Nicaea and Tyre to utter insignificance by assimilating them to members of the Imperial consilium, whose advice was not binding on the Emperor. All decisions taken at the Nicene Council were made by Emperor Constantine alone, since he could completely disregard the advisory opinions of the bishops whom he had summoned to the Council (Lieu 8).

Some scholars contend that Emperor Constantine’s influence was minimal, and merely sat in on the councils out of personal interest. However, when we look at the Council of Nicaea of 359, we see that Emperor Constantine again took a prominent role of control in the theological debate. Once the foundation of Christianity as a predominant religion of the Empire had been successfully established, Emperor Constantine later relinquished some of his control and influence by putting a seal of approval on the rulings of bishops declared at councils. The governors of provinces were not even allowed to rescind what they had decided, for he said the priests of God were more trustworthy than any magistrate (Lieu 10).

We can trace back the very beginning of the entitlement mentality by church hierarchy to Emperor Constantine and his enabling policies. No matter what his crime, a bishop could only be deposed and exiled, not legally tortured and executed (Lieu 17). I am sure this was fundamental in developing the culture within the church of dealing with any indiscretions internally, and not invoking the authority of the legal system. This of course has led to much abuse throughout history. One has only to watch the news these days to see on a routine basis, some priest or other has been exposed for having performed a plethora of transgressions, hidden by the church by simply moving the clergy member to a new area. This mentality just exposes more people to being victimized.

On the basis of Christian faith and the Trinity concept; the father, the son and the Holy Spirit, the first Council of Nicaea in 325 called together by Emperor Constantine, worked to establish a settlement of the issue of the relationship between father and the son. The focus primarily was on defining Jesus Christ as a deity. Establishment of the Holy Spirit was largely unaddressed until after the father and son relationship was settled in 362. After Nicaea, some bishops continued to prefer a term which had been discussed and rejected by the Council: homoiousios, in the sense of the son ‘being of like substance’ with the father. There were other bishops who were antagonistic to the term homoiousios because it was not biblical (O’Collins 184). Seven years later, the Trinitarian terminology was officially adopted after first Council Constantinople.

In its letter to Pope Damascus, a post conciliar synod confessed ‘one divinity, power, or substance’ in ‘three most perfect hypostasesin’ (O’Collins 185). At the Trinitarian level, Constantinople I reaffirmed the Nicene Council confession of faith that the son was ’of one substance’ with the father, as well as teaching the divinity of the Holy Spirit (O’Collins 186). Thus, the official establishment of Christian doctrine regarding the Trinity of the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit was initiated.

Works Cited:

Mueller, J.J., Theological Foundations: Concepts and Methods for Understanding the Christian Faith. Winona: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2011. Print.

Albl, Martin C. Reason, Faith, and Tradition: Explorations in Catholic Theology. Winona: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2009. Print.

The Catholic Study Bible: The New American Bible 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University press, Inc., 2011. Print.

Moule, C. F. D., The birth of the New Testament. New York: Harper & Row, 1962. Print

Lieu, Samuel N. C., and Montserrat, Dominic, Constantine: History, Historiography, and Legend. London: Routledge, 2002. Print.

O'Collins, Gerald, Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.

And here is the impact Emperor Constantine had upon Christianity:

Any analysis of the impact of Emperor Constantine on the councils of Nicaea is bound to be one of controversy and debate. It is my position that Emperor Constantine had an inappropriately heavy and undue influence on the various councils that strived to answer various questions of Christianity. We must begin with the immeasurable impact that Emperor Constantine had on the spread of Christianity, and his successful suppression of incumbent Roman pagan beliefs. Legend has it that Emperor Constantine saw two stars cross in the sky, in which he took to be a sign from God that Christianity was the only true faith. Eusebius, in his written work Life of Constantine, claimed that Emperor Constantine had thought long and hard about which God to ask for help in the upcoming battles.

His decision rested on honoring his father’s God alone. He claimed that in his sleep the Christ of God appeared to him with the same symbol that he saw in the sky earlier in the day, and commanded him to make a likeness of that sign, and to use it as a safeguard for all future engagements with enemies (Stewart 67). While his conversion to Christianity in 312 CE was not truly the moment Christianity came to be the official religion of the Roman Empire, it definitely was one of the major contributing factors for its subsequent acceptance.

Emperor Constantine conducted a religious-based crusade against Licinius in a war to rescue Christians on the east from further persecution. In the years 312 CE to 313 CE, Emperor Constantine began a systematic policy in which he gave honors, privileges and financial donations to the Christian church and their clergy. In 324 CE, as the unchallenged controller of the East, he prohibited by Royal decree any cultic activities which until then fell under the traditional religions of the Roman Empire, and this is when the status of Christianity as the official religion of the state and its rulers was affirmed (Lieu 7).

Constantine used his imperial power to protect and support the Christian church. He was a sincere if somewhat simple believer. He knew portions of the Old Testament and perhaps the basic outline of biblical history, and he could summarize the story of the Gospels. For Constantine, God was a providential Judge who supports the righteous and destroys the wicked, and he believed that the church had to be unified if it was going to offer pleasing worship to God. Constantine expended an enormous amount of treasure on churches; it was used both on buildings and, with the emperor’s explicit encouragement, on establishing ministries of mercy to the poor, sick and the widows(Leithart 302).

Emperor Constantine also wanted to end the growing controversy between Arius, a priest in the church of Alexandria, and his Bishop Alexander. Bishop Alexander became concerned when he noticed a growing number of clergy members accepting and encouraging Arius’s views which went against the accepted teachings of the church in regards to the relationship between God and Jesus. Emperor Constantine called for the Council of Nicaea which was considered to be the first ecumenical Council of the church because bishops from both the eastern and western parts of the world would attend.

Emperor Constantine attempted to give the Council of Nicaea an inspiring opening speech designed to bring the 300 bishops in attendance to a focused unity. He even reminded them that Christ had instructed them to forgive one another. “… As soon as I heard that intelligence which I had least expected to receive, I mean the news of your dissension, I judged it to be of no secondary importance, but with the earnest desire that a remedy for this evil also might be found through my means, I immediately sent to require your presence. And now I rejoice in beholding your assembly; but I feel that my desires will be most completely fulfilled when I can see you all united in one judgment, and that common spirit of peace and concord prevailing amongst you all, which becomes you, as consecrated to the service of God, to commend to others” (Stewart 73).

Arius and his followers were in the minority against their counterparts from the West. Both groups presented arguments from Scripture, essentially canceling each other out. Part of the problem was that the scriptural terms used in the debate (such as father and son) were too ambiguous. The Arians exploited this ambiguity, insisting that it is only logical that he father must exist prior to his son. The Orthodox countered that the Arians were taking the analogy too literally (Albl 154). Then the debate began on the specific terminology for the Creed that they were trying to promulgate. They needed to be able to define the son’s relationship with the father in a philosophically precise term.

In the end however, the two sides refused to come to a common agreement over the term Homoousios, which means “of the same substance,” meaning that God the father and the son are not just alike in some way, but that they actually share the same divinity. The Arians wanted to make a small change by adding a letter to make the word homoiousios, which means “of similar substance”. When it was time to finish business and sign the Creed, 17 bishops remained opposed. Emperor Constantine threatened to depose these bishops and send them into exile. Two of the 17 bishops stood their ground and were subsequently deposed and exiled for their efforts (Stewart 73).

How is it possible to affirm that Jesus is somehow God while avoiding the undesirable conclusion that there are two gods? If they adopt John’s language, namely that Jesus is the logos become flesh, is this logos to be thought of as God properly speaking or some lesser divinity? How is it possible, if at all, for Christians to affirm that God “becomes” something when Christians also affirm that God is eternal and unchanging? These questions created conflict and confusion within the Christian movement as it spread across the Mediterranean world and increasingly interactive with Greco Roman culture and thought. Such confusion ultimately led to the need for Christian theologians and bishops to provide a conceptual framework in which to speak properly and consistently about Jesus’ identity (Mueller 121).
Some religious scholars concede that Emperor Constantine not only convened important council’s sessions, but also either presided over them, or appointed a Royal official to preside in his place. This reduced the very role of bishops and councils such as Nicaea and Tyre to utter insignificance by assimilating them to members of the Imperial consilium, whose advice was not binding on the Emperor. All decisions taken at the Nicene Council were made by Emperor Constantine alone, since he could completely disregard the advisory opinions of the bishops whom he had summoned to the Council (Lieu 8).

Other religious scholars contend that Emperor Constantine’s influence was minimal, and that he merely sat in on the councils out of personal interest. “He attended some of the councils and contributed to discussions but did not chair any council or determine the outcome” (Leithart 304). However, when we look at the Council of Nicaea of 359 CE, we see that Emperor Constantine again took a prominent role of control in the theological debate. Once the foundation of Christianity as a predominant religion of the Empire had been successfully established, Emperor Constantine later relinquished some of his control and influence by putting a seal of approval on the rulings of bishops declared at councils. The governors of provinces were not even allowed to rescind what they had decided, for he said the priests of God were more trustworthy than any magistrate (Lieu 10).

The first Council of Nicaea in 325 CE was called together by Emperor Constantine, and it worked to establish a settlement of the issue of the relationship between father and the son. The focus primarily was on defining Jesus Christ as a deity. Establishment of the Holy Spirit was largely unaddressed until after the father and son relationship was settled in 362 CE. After Nicaea, some bishops continued to prefer a term which had been discussed and rejected by the Council: homoiousios, in the sense of the son ‘being of like substance’ with the father. There were other bishops who were antagonistic to the term homoiousios because it was not biblical (O’Collins 184). Seven years later, the Trinitarian terminology was officially adopted after first Council Constantinople. Even Thomas Aquinas acknowledged that some words used in the churches official declarations are not biblical, but insisted that “the urgency of confuting heretics made it necessary to find new words to express the ancient faith about God” (Albl 155).

In its letter to Pope Damascus, a post conciliar synod confessed ‘one divinity, power, or substance’ in ‘three most perfect hypostasesin’ (O’Collins 185). At the Trinitarian level, Constantinople I reaffirmed the Nicene Council confession of faith that the son was ’of one substance’ with the father, as well as teaching the divinity of the Holy Spirit (O’Collins 186). Thus, the official establishment of Christian doctrine regarding the Trinity of the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit was initiated. If It was not for the overbearing presence of Emperor Constantine upon the proceedings, to include the threat of deposing any opposing bishops to what he considered to be the way forward, Christianity would not be what it is today.
The councils findings were that God’s very self is encountered in Christ, not just a creature of elevated status, not a proxy. Jesus is the personal manifestation of God in the world according to the Christian tradition. A good analogy would be that God is like the sun, and Jesus is like the sunlight emanating from the sun. The same substance, the same source, and yet different in form and function.

If it was not for the overwhelming presence of Emperor Constantine at the various councils, deposing of bishops with differing views, issuing of decrees banishing all other forms of religion except Christianity, and his political, military, royal and financial support of Christianity, there is a good chance that the world’s dominant religion today could’ve been Mithraism. It is hard to conceive that Christianity would be the worldwide influential religion that is today if it were not for the impact of Emperor Constantine.

Works Cited:

Leithart, Peter J., Defending Constantine. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2010. Print.

Lieu, Samuel N. C., and Montserrat, Dominic, Constantine: History, Historiography, and Legend. London: Routledge, 2002. Print.

O'Collins, Gerald, Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.

Mueller, J.J., Theological Foundations: Concepts and Methods for Understanding the Christian Faith. Winona: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2011. Print.

Albl, Martin C. Reason, Faith, and Tradition: Explorations in Catholic Theology. Winona: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2009. Print.

Stewart, Cynthia., The Catholic church: a brief popular history. Winona, Mn: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2008. Print.

So there you go Alla, now even though you will ignore the facts, and continue to embrace your delusion, at least you were exposed to the truth, but chose otherwise.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
02-08-2015, 10:42 PM
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
I was just thinking it wouldn't be too out of the ordinary for a sea of people to walk, say, 50 wide or whatever. When I go to a baseball game and we all get off the train and walk toward the stadium, which is about a half-mile away, by the time we get there we are a good 20-30 people wide. We don't walk single file, or even five wide. So if 2.5 million people were making a mass exodus at once, I wouldn't be shocked if they were a few hundred wide, etc., which cuts down on the stats a bit. Again, everything you wrote made sense, this number just stood out to me as unrealistic. Anyway, great work. Love this stuff.

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WillHopp's post
02-08-2015, 10:47 PM
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
(02-08-2015 10:42 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  I was just thinking it wouldn't be too out of the ordinary for a sea of people to walk, say, 50 wide or whatever. When I go to a baseball game and we all get off the train and walk toward the stadium, which is about a half-mile away, by the time we get there we are a good 20-30 people wide. We don't walk single file, or even five wide. So if 2.5 million people were making a mass exodus at once, I wouldn't be shocked if they were a few hundred wide, etc., which cuts down on the stats a bit. Again, everything you wrote made sense, this number just stood out to me as unrealistic. Anyway, great work. Love this stuff.

One of the apologists refutations for the numbers problem is the "stadium argument" or "concert argument", where they assert there are occasions now where literally a million people can be in an area....but what they miss is there is a big difference between standing together in a throng, and moving 2 million people, their belongings, food, and animals as a group across a desert, and all of the logistical nightmare that presents. I have more data on that as Murdock breaks that down in great detail, but I didn't want the OP to be bigger than it already is. Thumbsup

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2015, 02:29 AM
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
(02-08-2015 10:41 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(02-08-2015 10:24 PM)Alla Wrote:  What kind of Christian would say such a thing?!
But when the Bible is full of human errors Christian needs personal relationship with God by the power of the Holy Ghost.
Not true. We have Book of Mormon. We have Prophets and we have gift of the Holy Ghost.

Christians of the first century didn't have the Bible. They didn't base their faith on the Bible. They had Prophets and gift of the Holy Ghost.

"What kind of Christian would say such a thing?!"....Educated christians would. An education in theology, like i have, teaches you there is no basis for the miracles, and anonymous authors wrote the gospels. You can not deny the truth, history and archaeology point to a different reality then that presented in the parable called the bible. Biblical scholars and historians know the facts, they just don't broadcast them so as not to shake up people' faith. The gullible and ignorant masses just need a spoonful of faith, and a cherry picked scripture or two to holler out an amen, and fill the offering plate.

BOM is riddled with even more outrageous lies than the bible.

Prophets don't exist.

The holy ghost was yet another creation of man. Man created god, and the triune concept, actually that was an agreed upon consensus established in the Council of Constantinople, and Council of Nicaea with Emperor Constantine presiding over it in the 4th century. Now look at you learning stuff.

Here, I pity your lack of knowledge so I will share some of my work on this subject below: The development of the christian doctrine of trinity...

For a church to be considered a New Testament church it shall accept the biblical New Testament as its sole authority for all matters of faith. A “true” biblical church shall not accept any authority for its faith and daily practice, outside of the New Testament Scriptures. This does not discard the importance of the Old Testament Scriptures by any means. The church is not based on the biblical Old Testament because that is the record of God’s dealing with Israel. In the New Testament you will find a specific pattern and instructions from God concerning the church. The followers of the New Testament church model believe in the irrefutable word of God, that the Bible is complete as written, and it is, “… Given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

New Testament church parishioners believe that any hierarchy outside of the local church, is unsupported by Scripture. They think that Christ is the head, and that the New Testament Scriptures are the “true” churches only sole authority. I always find it amusing that with all the religions in the world, multiple versions of God or gods, and various holy books and ideologies of creation, that the believer of each religion thinks the believers of other religions are wrong, and that their own belief is the truth, the will and the way of the one “true” God. Even within Christianity, if every Christian who ever called another Christian, not a “true” Christian was removed from earth, there would be no Christians.

The Congregational style of a New Testament church is basically a biblical form of church government. Final authority in a New Testament church rests with the delegation. Each member has an equal democratic vote. They believe that the Bible, specifically the New Testament teaches that churches are to be governed by their own congregation following strict biblical guidelines.

In Trinitarian theology, the father gives everything he has, his very being, as a free gift to his son. Since the Son has everything that the father has, then they are in fact equal (Albl 139). In the Old Testament, the Holy Spirit is closely associated with God’s gift of prophecy. For example, “the Lord took some of the spirit from Moses and gave it to the elders, and they were able to prophesy also (Num 11:25). In the New Testament, the Holy Spirit is closely associated with the creation of God’s son in human form. For example, Mary conceived Jesus not through ordinary human means, but “through the Holy Spirit” (Matt1:20). In essence, just as Jesus comes in the father’s name, so the Holy Spirit comes in Jesus’ name (Albl 150). I define the Holy Spirit as God’s breath, his very soul, that of which he can giveth away to create life itself.

The church understands such self-emptying on the part of God as simultaneously the fulfillment of human existence, whose transformative effects are extended in the church in the world through the work of the Holy Spirit (Mueller 44). As such, parishioners of the New Testament church believe that they can follow this example by sharing the Holy Spirit with others. This is “living through Christ” by spreading the good word, in line with strict interpretation of biblical reference.

In the New Testament, outside of the story of Christ in his teachings, is the insistent belief through Scripture that the end times or transition into the new world in the second coming of Christ to take his place as king of the world would occur at any moment. “That Christ would come soon is an expectation which appears even in the latter writings of the New Testament. It is present in almost every stratum” (Moule 141). A rationalist may posit that today things are going on exactly as they were before, and thus there will never be an end to the world. Believers in the New Testament think that the real mistake here is to make time the determining standard at all. A good analogy of this is that the Christian hope is not measured in terms of time, but in terms of the journey continuing to its completion; the incarnation. The question should not be when is the end of the world, but what can I do to be ready for it? (Moule 148).

Now let’s go back in time to the very formation, fabrication of the Christian faith, the Trinity concept and successful establishment of the Christian religion. We must begin with the immeasurable impact that Emperor Constantine had on the spread of Christianity, and successful suppression of incumbent Roman pagan beliefs. Legend has it that Emperor Constantine saw two stars cross in the sky, in which he took to be a sign from God that Christianity was the only true faith. While his conversion to Christianity in 312 was not truly the moment Christianity came to be the official religion of the Roman Empire, it definitely was one of the major contributing factors for its subsequent acceptance.

Emperor Constantine conducted a religious-based crusade against Licinius in a war to rescue Christians on the east from further persecution. In the years 312 to 313 Emperor Constantine began a systematic policy in which he gave honors, privileges and financial donations to the Christian church and their clergy. In 324, as the unchallenged controller of the East, he prohibited by Royal decree any cultic activities which until then fell under the traditional religions of the Roman Empire, and this is when the status of Christianity as the official religion of the state and its rulers was affirmed (Lieu 7).

Religious scholars concede that Emperor Constantine not only convened important council’s sessions, but also either presided over them, or appointed a Royal official to preside in his place. This reduced the very role of bishops and councils such as Nicaea and Tyre to utter insignificance by assimilating them to members of the Imperial consilium, whose advice was not binding on the Emperor. All decisions taken at the Nicene Council were made by Emperor Constantine alone, since he could completely disregard the advisory opinions of the bishops whom he had summoned to the Council (Lieu 8).

Some scholars contend that Emperor Constantine’s influence was minimal, and merely sat in on the councils out of personal interest. However, when we look at the Council of Nicaea of 359, we see that Emperor Constantine again took a prominent role of control in the theological debate. Once the foundation of Christianity as a predominant religion of the Empire had been successfully established, Emperor Constantine later relinquished some of his control and influence by putting a seal of approval on the rulings of bishops declared at councils. The governors of provinces were not even allowed to rescind what they had decided, for he said the priests of God were more trustworthy than any magistrate (Lieu 10).

We can trace back the very beginning of the entitlement mentality by church hierarchy to Emperor Constantine and his enabling policies. No matter what his crime, a bishop could only be deposed and exiled, not legally tortured and executed (Lieu 17). I am sure this was fundamental in developing the culture within the church of dealing with any indiscretions internally, and not invoking the authority of the legal system. This of course has led to much abuse throughout history. One has only to watch the news these days to see on a routine basis, some priest or other has been exposed for having performed a plethora of transgressions, hidden by the church by simply moving the clergy member to a new area. This mentality just exposes more people to being victimized.

On the basis of Christian faith and the Trinity concept; the father, the son and the Holy Spirit, the first Council of Nicaea in 325 called together by Emperor Constantine, worked to establish a settlement of the issue of the relationship between father and the son. The focus primarily was on defining Jesus Christ as a deity. Establishment of the Holy Spirit was largely unaddressed until after the father and son relationship was settled in 362. After Nicaea, some bishops continued to prefer a term which had been discussed and rejected by the Council: homoiousios, in the sense of the son ‘being of like substance’ with the father. There were other bishops who were antagonistic to the term homoiousios because it was not biblical (O’Collins 184). Seven years later, the Trinitarian terminology was officially adopted after first Council Constantinople.

In its letter to Pope Damascus, a post conciliar synod confessed ‘one divinity, power, or substance’ in ‘three most perfect hypostasesin’ (O’Collins 185). At the Trinitarian level, Constantinople I reaffirmed the Nicene Council confession of faith that the son was ’of one substance’ with the father, as well as teaching the divinity of the Holy Spirit (O’Collins 186). Thus, the official establishment of Christian doctrine regarding the Trinity of the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit was initiated.

Works Cited:

Mueller, J.J., Theological Foundations: Concepts and Methods for Understanding the Christian Faith. Winona: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2011. Print.

Albl, Martin C. Reason, Faith, and Tradition: Explorations in Catholic Theology. Winona: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2009. Print.

The Catholic Study Bible: The New American Bible 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University press, Inc., 2011. Print.

Moule, C. F. D., The birth of the New Testament. New York: Harper & Row, 1962. Print

Lieu, Samuel N. C., and Montserrat, Dominic, Constantine: History, Historiography, and Legend. London: Routledge, 2002. Print.

O'Collins, Gerald, Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.

And here is the impact Emperor Constantine had upon Christianity:

Any analysis of the impact of Emperor Constantine on the councils of Nicaea is bound to be one of controversy and debate. It is my position that Emperor Constantine had an inappropriately heavy and undue influence on the various councils that strived to answer various questions of Christianity. We must begin with the immeasurable impact that Emperor Constantine had on the spread of Christianity, and his successful suppression of incumbent Roman pagan beliefs. Legend has it that Emperor Constantine saw two stars cross in the sky, in which he took to be a sign from God that Christianity was the only true faith. Eusebius, in his written work Life of Constantine, claimed that Emperor Constantine had thought long and hard about which God to ask for help in the upcoming battles.

His decision rested on honoring his father’s God alone. He claimed that in his sleep the Christ of God appeared to him with the same symbol that he saw in the sky earlier in the day, and commanded him to make a likeness of that sign, and to use it as a safeguard for all future engagements with enemies (Stewart 67). While his conversion to Christianity in 312 CE was not truly the moment Christianity came to be the official religion of the Roman Empire, it definitely was one of the major contributing factors for its subsequent acceptance.

Emperor Constantine conducted a religious-based crusade against Licinius in a war to rescue Christians on the east from further persecution. In the years 312 CE to 313 CE, Emperor Constantine began a systematic policy in which he gave honors, privileges and financial donations to the Christian church and their clergy. In 324 CE, as the unchallenged controller of the East, he prohibited by Royal decree any cultic activities which until then fell under the traditional religions of the Roman Empire, and this is when the status of Christianity as the official religion of the state and its rulers was affirmed (Lieu 7).

Constantine used his imperial power to protect and support the Christian church. He was a sincere if somewhat simple believer. He knew portions of the Old Testament and perhaps the basic outline of biblical history, and he could summarize the story of the Gospels. For Constantine, God was a providential Judge who supports the righteous and destroys the wicked, and he believed that the church had to be unified if it was going to offer pleasing worship to God. Constantine expended an enormous amount of treasure on churches; it was used both on buildings and, with the emperor’s explicit encouragement, on establishing ministries of mercy to the poor, sick and the widows(Leithart 302).

Emperor Constantine also wanted to end the growing controversy between Arius, a priest in the church of Alexandria, and his Bishop Alexander. Bishop Alexander became concerned when he noticed a growing number of clergy members accepting and encouraging Arius’s views which went against the accepted teachings of the church in regards to the relationship between God and Jesus. Emperor Constantine called for the Council of Nicaea which was considered to be the first ecumenical Council of the church because bishops from both the eastern and western parts of the world would attend.

Emperor Constantine attempted to give the Council of Nicaea an inspiring opening speech designed to bring the 300 bishops in attendance to a focused unity. He even reminded them that Christ had instructed them to forgive one another. “… As soon as I heard that intelligence which I had least expected to receive, I mean the news of your dissension, I judged it to be of no secondary importance, but with the earnest desire that a remedy for this evil also might be found through my means, I immediately sent to require your presence. And now I rejoice in beholding your assembly; but I feel that my desires will be most completely fulfilled when I can see you all united in one judgment, and that common spirit of peace and concord prevailing amongst you all, which becomes you, as consecrated to the service of God, to commend to others” (Stewart 73).

Arius and his followers were in the minority against their counterparts from the West. Both groups presented arguments from Scripture, essentially canceling each other out. Part of the problem was that the scriptural terms used in the debate (such as father and son) were too ambiguous. The Arians exploited this ambiguity, insisting that it is only logical that he father must exist prior to his son. The Orthodox countered that the Arians were taking the analogy too literally (Albl 154). Then the debate began on the specific terminology for the Creed that they were trying to promulgate. They needed to be able to define the son’s relationship with the father in a philosophically precise term.

In the end however, the two sides refused to come to a common agreement over the term Homoousios, which means “of the same substance,” meaning that God the father and the son are not just alike in some way, but that they actually share the same divinity. The Arians wanted to make a small change by adding a letter to make the word homoiousios, which means “of similar substance”. When it was time to finish business and sign the Creed, 17 bishops remained opposed. Emperor Constantine threatened to depose these bishops and send them into exile. Two of the 17 bishops stood their ground and were subsequently deposed and exiled for their efforts (Stewart 73).

How is it possible to affirm that Jesus is somehow God while avoiding the undesirable conclusion that there are two gods? If they adopt John’s language, namely that Jesus is the logos become flesh, is this logos to be thought of as God properly speaking or some lesser divinity? How is it possible, if at all, for Christians to affirm that God “becomes” something when Christians also affirm that God is eternal and unchanging? These questions created conflict and confusion within the Christian movement as it spread across the Mediterranean world and increasingly interactive with Greco Roman culture and thought. Such confusion ultimately led to the need for Christian theologians and bishops to provide a conceptual framework in which to speak properly and consistently about Jesus’ identity (Mueller 121).
Some religious scholars concede that Emperor Constantine not only convened important council’s sessions, but also either presided over them, or appointed a Royal official to preside in his place. This reduced the very role of bishops and councils such as Nicaea and Tyre to utter insignificance by assimilating them to members of the Imperial consilium, whose advice was not binding on the Emperor. All decisions taken at the Nicene Council were made by Emperor Constantine alone, since he could completely disregard the advisory opinions of the bishops whom he had summoned to the Council (Lieu 8).

Other religious scholars contend that Emperor Constantine’s influence was minimal, and that he merely sat in on the councils out of personal interest. “He attended some of the councils and contributed to discussions but did not chair any council or determine the outcome” (Leithart 304). However, when we look at the Council of Nicaea of 359 CE, we see that Emperor Constantine again took a prominent role of control in the theological debate. Once the foundation of Christianity as a predominant religion of the Empire had been successfully established, Emperor Constantine later relinquished some of his control and influence by putting a seal of approval on the rulings of bishops declared at councils. The governors of provinces were not even allowed to rescind what they had decided, for he said the priests of God were more trustworthy than any magistrate (Lieu 10).

The first Council of Nicaea in 325 CE was called together by Emperor Constantine, and it worked to establish a settlement of the issue of the relationship between father and the son. The focus primarily was on defining Jesus Christ as a deity. Establishment of the Holy Spirit was largely unaddressed until after the father and son relationship was settled in 362 CE. After Nicaea, some bishops continued to prefer a term which had been discussed and rejected by the Council: homoiousios, in the sense of the son ‘being of like substance’ with the father. There were other bishops who were antagonistic to the term homoiousios because it was not biblical (O’Collins 184). Seven years later, the Trinitarian terminology was officially adopted after first Council Constantinople. Even Thomas Aquinas acknowledged that some words used in the churches official declarations are not biblical, but insisted that “the urgency of confuting heretics made it necessary to find new words to express the ancient faith about God” (Albl 155).

In its letter to Pope Damascus, a post conciliar synod confessed ‘one divinity, power, or substance’ in ‘three most perfect hypostasesin’ (O’Collins 185). At the Trinitarian level, Constantinople I reaffirmed the Nicene Council confession of faith that the son was ’of one substance’ with the father, as well as teaching the divinity of the Holy Spirit (O’Collins 186). Thus, the official establishment of Christian doctrine regarding the Trinity of the father, the son, and the Holy Spirit was initiated. If It was not for the overbearing presence of Emperor Constantine upon the proceedings, to include the threat of deposing any opposing bishops to what he considered to be the way forward, Christianity would not be what it is today.
The councils findings were that God’s very self is encountered in Christ, not just a creature of elevated status, not a proxy. Jesus is the personal manifestation of God in the world according to the Christian tradition. A good analogy would be that God is like the sun, and Jesus is like the sunlight emanating from the sun. The same substance, the same source, and yet different in form and function.

If it was not for the overwhelming presence of Emperor Constantine at the various councils, deposing of bishops with differing views, issuing of decrees banishing all other forms of religion except Christianity, and his political, military, royal and financial support of Christianity, there is a good chance that the world’s dominant religion today could’ve been Mithraism. It is hard to conceive that Christianity would be the worldwide influential religion that is today if it were not for the impact of Emperor Constantine.

Works Cited:

Leithart, Peter J., Defending Constantine. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2010. Print.

Lieu, Samuel N. C., and Montserrat, Dominic, Constantine: History, Historiography, and Legend. London: Routledge, 2002. Print.

O'Collins, Gerald, Christology: A Biblical, Historical, and Systematic Study of Jesus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.

Mueller, J.J., Theological Foundations: Concepts and Methods for Understanding the Christian Faith. Winona: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2011. Print.

Albl, Martin C. Reason, Faith, and Tradition: Explorations in Catholic Theology. Winona: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2009. Print.

Stewart, Cynthia., The Catholic church: a brief popular history. Winona, Mn: Anselm Academic, Christian Brothers Publications, 2008. Print.

So there you go Alla, now even though you will ignore the facts, and continue to embrace your delusion, at least you were exposed to the truth, but chose otherwise.

Great post.

I am amazed that otherwise ?intelligent men got so worked up with gobbledygook spiel about God, Jesus and a holy ghost.

And the nonsense is still being promoted to the sheeple!
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-08-2015, 03:03 AM
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
How about, let's accept that the numbers were greatly exaggerated by scribes, is there anything at all to suggest that the Hebrews were ever in Egypt? IIRC the Hyksos were a pastoral nation who were recorded (by the Egyptians) as having given the Egyptians a hard time back in the day? Where would the exodus myth have come from? Is there any reason to think it might have had even a grain of truth in it?

I mean, let's leave the God out of it. Let's say a smallish tribe had settled in Egypt and the Egyptians got the hell in with them and kicked them out into the desert. Now there's already a buncha guys hanging out e.g. in Canaan, so these fuckers aren't gonna have an easy time of it, so they spend the next few generations kicking about in the desert, and finally get lucky militarily and have a land grab. Then the legend of how they were chosen springs up... Sounds possible?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
03-08-2015, 03:11 AM
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
(02-08-2015 04:57 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  All,

So I am on vacation for a week, the wife is out of town for three weeks, and I have all of my assigned college work done, sooooooo since I am nursing an injured shoulder, no gym time for me Weeping but the good news is I had time to finally break out my books and do a long promised tear-down of the Exodus myth. I posted it in my resource library, but since people can't reply there, and I would like to know your opinion, I made a post for discussion, support, or criticism....

The Evisceration of the Exodus

“The Exodus from Egypt is unknown to history save what is written in the Hebrew Bible. Outside of the most meager a circumstantial evidence we possess nothing to substantiate the text.”

-Dr. Michael D. Oblath. The Exodus Itinerary Sites (2004)

Michael D. Oblath received his Ph.D. in Near Eastern Religions from the University of California and the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley. Currently, he is Adjunct Professor at the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, California, and St. Mary’s College of California. His publications include articles on the patriarchal narratives and the Exodus from Egypt.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is just one of a copious number of scholarly experts who have spent years studying and investigating the Exodus. I will endeavor to eviscerate the myth of the Exodus. To recap the fairytale; 600,000 Jewish slaves, their families, Egyptian booty, and a plethora of animals numbering between two and three million spent 40 years stomping around the Sinai desert which is only about 130 miles across, fleeing to the promised land, guided by God who tested them greatly.

Nonbiblical references

The earliest reference to the Exodus story can be found in the writings of the Greek historian Hecataeus of Abdera (fourth century BCE). It is surmised that he had a copy of the Pentateuch before him, based upon what appears to be a direct quote from Deuteronomy. Of course, there exists no contemporary literary record of any sort depicting the Exodus as a historical event, and this silence was maintained for many centuries, until the story started circulating after the Jewish Scriptures began to emerge publicly in the latter half of the first millennium BCE.

Logistic Implausibility

Exodus 1:5 - and all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were 70 souls…

Exodus 12:37 - and the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about 600,000 on foot that were men, beside children.

Exodus 12:38 - and a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even a very much cattle.

Exodus 12:39 - and they baked unleavened cakes of the dough which they brought forth out of Egypt, for it was not leavened; because they were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry, neither have they prepared for themselves any victual.

First is the amazing explosion of the Israelite population; they went from 70 to more than 1 million in about 400 years (Ex 12:37, 38:26, Num 1:45-46). They must have been very bad at mathematics back then. It is reminiscent of the great mythical global flood(2348 BCE) which posited that eight humans repopulated the earth in 350 years(2000 BCE) to 27 million people. The sheer impossibility of there even being 600,000 male descendants of Jacob during four generations of Hebrew existence in Egypt(Gen 46) should give a thinking person pause. Most calculations show that the most that could have been produced in four generations would be approximately 7000 males.

However, let’s wave the wand of magical belief, and pretend that there was 2 to 3 million Hebrews in the time since Jacob entered Egypt. Let’s break down the logistics of moving that many people… About 2000 people can fit comfortably into a mile, with no belongings and a little space between them. If 3 million people were lined up single file, the length of the column would require an estimated 1500 miles. In order to fit into the 130 mile broad Sinai, the Israelites would need to line up more than ten abreast, without belongings such as wagons and animals. The front row of the column would have been safely in the promised land and the last row would have still been in Egypt.

Animals and treasure

Let us not forget the hundreds of thousands of animals they must’ve had with them. How were these animals fed, and what plant matter did they eat? When you calculate the amount of lambs needed to fulfill the Passover decree at Exodus 12:21 would be something around the number of 240,000, slaughtered in one night. If these are only the lambs, how many other animals were there, including all the adult sheep, cattle, goats and horses, all spared miraculously during the plagues?

Exodus 3:22 and 12:35 state that the Israelites are to flee through the desert with the enormous wealth of Egypt, taking a massive amount of silver and gold. Why carry all this immense weight of worthless treasure into the desert for 40 years where it has no value? This ridiculous story would’ve left Egypt bankrupt and destitute, and the Israelites extremely wealthy. Oddly, this fairytale is not supported by the historical and archaeological record. Archaeologists have found zero evidence of such wealth among the hill settlers that became the Israelites.

Geography and archaeology

Sadly archeologists cannot find any clues to support the story of the Exodus as an actual historic event. They cannot identify Mount Sinai and many other place-names in the story; nor were there any remains from this found anywhere in the Sinai. An Exodus of such great size would’ve left a plethora of evidence as I will get into later.

The burning/talking bush

Surprisingly, this great universe and life creating deity deemed to speak to Moses through a burning bush. It is even more amusing that(Exodus 3:5) the great and powerful Oz was more concerned about Moses wearing shoes to walk on the patch of dirt in front of him: “do not come near, put off your shoes from your feet, for the place in which your standing is holy ground”… What is not surprising, is this same tale differs little from the Greek or Roman myths about Zeus and Jupiter, as well as a number of other gods and goddesses that manifested themselves to humans over the millennia. Then the great and powerful Oz (Exodus 3:19)tells Moses that the king of Egypt will not let you go unless compelled by a mighty hand. Then God hardened the Pharaoh’s heart. After all, the story needs a little spiking.

The 10 Plagues

The first plague - all the water was turned to blood and that he killed all the fish in Egypt. How in the world did this event escape the notice of all literate Egyptian writers, travelers, historians, Royal scribes, and any other literate person who witnessed this amazing event? The death of all the fish, as well as under the ability of water everywhere in Egypt, would’ve been something historical to say the least. To no surprise, there is not one scrap of contemporary, literary, or historical evidence to corroborate this ridiculous story. Fiction.

The second plague - frogs covered Egypt, again; there exists no historical account anywhere of such an extraordinary event. The economic cost of a pandemic frog invasion would have been enormous, as would the potential illness when hundreds of millions of frogs died and rotted away everywhere. Fiction.

The third plague - the supernatural invasion of lice or gnats which spread everywhere. Again, such a pestilence would be very costly to their economy, as did all of these plagues, and there exist no scientific, historical, or contemporary evidence for this claim. Fiction.

The fourth plague - and invasion of flies next attacks Egypt. At this point, it is difficult to comprehend much being left to plague at this point. I apply the same point as the third plague. Fiction.

The fifth plague - now it gets interesting, the all-powerful deity kills all the cattle, horses, camels, oxen, and sheep of Egypt, sparing only the cattle of Israel (Exodus 9:3-6). The economic cost would’ve been staggering, and the resulting epidemic of disease from all the rotting animals would’ve been extraordinary… Fiction. And again, no evidence exists to support this myth. But wait there’s more…

The sixth plague - the attack of the boils, the all-powerful deity had Moses sprinkle some ashes toward the heaven in the sight of the Pharaoh, and a dust spread across the land inflicting man and beasts with painful boils… Wait a minute, what beasts? In the previous plague, God had destroyed all the beasts, sparing only those owned by the Israelites. To no surprise, no evidence supports this.

The seventh plague - next the all-powerful deity rained hail down upon every man and beast that shall be found in the field, the hail shall come down upon them, and they shall die (Exodus 9:19). Hey, wait a minute… What beasts? Where these beasts come from? They were killed in plague five, and then again in plague six…. Something sounds suspicious here. Fiction.

The eighth plague - wait there’s more, the plague of the Locust since the previous plague of hail would have destroyed most of the foliage, what in the world were the Locusts going to destroy? Whatever, so now there is no foliage.

The ninth plague - the three days of darkness *key dramatic music* Dunh Dunh Dunh..the Pharaoh must’ve been quite the hearty individual, having survived eight plagues so far, having lived through bloody water, mosquitoes, boils, hiding inside during the great hailstorm that killed every living thing caught outdoors, and the famine that would’ve followed the locust plague, and now a three-day blackout. Curiously, there exists not one word written anywhere outside of the story in the Hebrew Bible, of three days of darkness. One would surmise that this would’ve been a great time for the Israelites to sneak away from their master as by this point everyone would’ve been hiding inside, and three days of darkness allows one a lot of time to leave. Fiction.

The tenth plague - this infamous plague (Exodus 12:12-29) is the event commemorated during Passover: the killing of all firstborn humans and other living things, except of course the Israelites putting the mark of Lamb’s blood upon their doors. One would question, why would an all-powerful God, all-knowing God, require a drop of lambs blood upon the doors of his chosen people to identify them? Are they suggesting that God did not know who his chosen people were? Truly? Logistically, how does one inform 2 million Israelites in one night, to mark their door with blood? Where did the Israelites immediately obtain an estimated 240,000 or so lambs necessary for this mass sacrifice? Why would the universe and life creating God require animal sacrifice?

Additionally, the Egyptian population itself throughout the entire nation is estimated to have been 3-3.5 million people. Is one to believe that the slaves equaled the Masters? After the utter decimation of the Egyptian population by God, why would the slaves need to flee in the first place? Surely the Egyptians, having gone through 10 levels of plague, had other things to worry about besides where the 3 million slaves went too. How could the few survivors have even tried to stop it? If Egypt was so devastated, with nearly every living thing killed, including most able-bodied men, it would be easy for the millions of spared Hebrews to overwhelm the remnants of the Egyptians and take over the entire country, rather than fleeing into the relatively poor and inhospitable wilderness.

Unleavened bread

Exodus 12:8 talks about the unleavened bread and bitter herbs to be eaten as Passover. As the story goes, they had to flee so quickly that they did not have time for the bread to rise. This is a simplistic and anachronistic story. The Bible (Gen 19:3) records the use of unleavened bread by Abrams nephew, Lot, centuries earlier, according to the story.

No formal organization

As per the story, the Israelites had no formal and centralized organization until after they were already settled in the desert. How could any of the Exodus events have been organized with millions wandering around aimlessly with no chain of command? Exodus 13:18 claims the Israelites left Egypt “equipped for battle.” Where did the slaves get the equipment? How could Moses have executed “brilliant” military tactics with these untrained fighters? Where did these slaves learn these military tactics? Such a massive force on the move would surely have left some mark in the desert. To no surprise, despite the wishful attempts by various devout researchers, not a single unambiguous and scientifically verified artifact has ever been found from such a vast and long-term migration.

Exodus encampments

Biblical literalist like to claim the existence of purported ancient encampments along the supposed Exodus route, now visible using technologies such as Google Earth, and that this evidence proves the biblical story to be true.

First, if these were the biblical sites, they would need to be enormous. Regarding the massive encampments of the Israelites and their animals, the latter that is estimated to be at least the same as the number of Israelites, over 2 million, consider the following:

Every one of the 42 times the camp was pitched (Num 33) there must be suitable space found for some 250,000 tents, laid out (Num 2) regularly four-square around the holy Tabernacle, after that was constructed, and with the necessary streets and passages, and proper spaces between the tents. A man in a coffin occupies about 12 ft.², 6’ x 2’. Living people would not be packed in their tents like corpses inside a sardine can; they must have at least, say, three times that space, 36 ft.² or 4 yds.² each. A tent to house ten persons with minimum decency must occupy an average of 40 yds.². If 241,420 such tents were set one against another, with no intervening space or separating streets, they would occupy 9,656,800 square yards, or over 1995 acres of ground, a little more than 3 mi.².

Second, where did all the tents come from? It is estimated that the amount of tents needed for this proposed 2 million refugees would be at least 200,000. Who would’ve owned so many tents inside Egypt, or how did the Hebrews construct them all in the desert wilderness? Exodus 12:39 says the Israelites fled in a hurry, without even their bread time the rise, yet they are depicted as hauling a huge amount of Egyptian gold and other precious artifacts, along with the massive animals and, apparently, an enormous quantity of tents.

Water Sources

Two to three million people and hundreds of thousands of animals would have required a huge amount of water. In Exodus 15:25 we find that the well was bitter, and God gave Moses direction to make it sweet. Calculations show that the Israelites and their livestock would’ve needed some 8000 m³ of water per day.

Heavenly manna

At Exodus 16:4 appears the magical story of “bread from heaven,” elsewhere known as manna. This magical and supernatural manifestation is described as made with honey, or taste like fresh oil, and described as a flake-like a thing, round thing, or coriander seed. Of course, there’s never been any evidence of this magical food raining from heaven, or any residue of it.

Bird sacrifice

In the book of Leviticus, we read about the numerous animal sacrifices, including thousands upon thousands of birds per day, but we are not told where these birds come from in the middle of the desert. Indeed, throughout the entire book appeared detailed instructions on how to sacrifice all these animals, repeated abundantly; yet the common people apparently were kept out of that feasting and were fed flake-like round things (manna)found on rocks instead.

Wait there’s more, while the Israelites were starving subsisting off manna and water, the great and powerful Oz required not only the sacrifice of thousands of animals but also heaps of “shewbread” (Exodus 25:30) made with fine wheat flour (exodus 29:2, 40). Now where did the Israelite priest obtain this “fine flour” out in the middle of the desert, where people were starving? It seems rather odd that 600,000 lawyers would subsist solely on manna while watching their wives and children go hungry, while thousands of food animals were being immolated, and expensive and difficult to procure fine wheat flour was given as bread to God.

29 trillion quails?

At Exodus 16:13, the great and powerful Oz brings forth a huge amount of quails from the sea to feed his chosen people. Let’s examine this, we read at Number 11:31 that these quails were “stacked up on the face of the earth” to a height of two cubits, equivalent to about 44 inches high, in a row the length of “a day’s journey around the camp.” Estimates show based on the settlements descriptions at Numbers 2 and 24, that the camps total mass would be 4,569.76 square miles or 452,404,727,808 cubic feet of birds. This equates to approximately 29 trillion individual birds. Let’s say this estimation was 99% inaccurate, we would still be discussing 290 million birds, to be picked up immediately, cleaned, cooked and consumed by couple million people, providing dozens or hundreds of quails per person. Where do they get all the wood to cook with, and what did they do with the birds remains?

I could go on at great length, but who truly wants to read all that? In conclusion, scholarly consensus asserts that there is no archeological evidence to support a late bronze age Exodus, and no historical proof for the Exodus can be placed within any specific period. Not a single shred of credible physical evidence has ever been discovered anywhere in over a century of scientific excavations, and scouring of the Sinai desert for any sign of the Israelites 40-year journey. The entire Exodus story appears unreal, even beyond supernatural miracles. The Pharaoh is never named, in dozens of pages of text, despite the fact that Egyptian kings were well-known and inscribed their names all over monuments.

Furthermore, the biblical text contains abundant anachronisms including the names of people’s such as the Philistines, Edomites and Midianites who did not exist as such at the purported time. The inclusion of these anachronisms fits in with political issues during the seventh century. Clearly, the Exodus account was written long after the purported events, revealed in its anachronisms and simplicity in many instances. The setting reflects an era centuries later and unfamiliarity with the milieu of the purported Exodus period.

The Exodus is not a historical event fictionalized but a mythical motif historicized. Again, the difference may seem subtle but is highly important. The archetypal myth existed first and was utilized as a framework upon which to build a national epic. The fact that anyone can purport to believe that this ridiculous tale has even a grain of truth to it, is disingenuous, and hubris in nature.

References:

Finkelstein, and Amihai Mazar. The quest for the historical Israel. Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature. 2007. Print.

Frankee, William. The Exodus Epic: Universalization of History through Ritual Repetition.Lanham, Md: Association and University Press of America, 2012. Print.

Murdock, D. M. Did Moses exist? The Myth of the Israelite Lawgiver. Seattle. Stellar House Publishing. 2014. Print.

Redford, Donald. Aspects of Monotheism. Biblical Archaeology Review, 1996.

Tait, John. Never Had the Like Occurred: Egypt’s View of its Past. London: UCL Press, 2003. Print.

Wheless, Joseph. Is It God’s Word? New York: Cosimo, Inc. 2007. Print.

Smartass

Drooling

Thoughts? Opinions?

When it comes to the issue of there not being an existing contemporary record of any Exodus event by anybody, let alone a culture known for record-taking, I'll give you the Q'Contin Rebuttal to chew on:

"Do you think they would keep records of such a humiliation as all their slaves running off?"

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Free Thought's post
03-08-2015, 06:02 AM
RE: The Evisceration of the Exodus
(03-08-2015 02:29 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I am amazed that otherwise ?intelligent men got so worked up with gobbledygook spiel about God, Jesus and a holy ghost.

And the nonsense is still being promoted to the sheeple!

Nice claim, Mark. In the spirit of an evidence-based existance, please present some evidence that these people were intelligent. From the discussions they had and he time they devoted to it, they look kinda stupid.

"If we are honest—and scientists have to be—we must admit that religion is a jumble of false assertions, with no basis in reality.
The very idea of God is a product of the human imagination."
- Paul Dirac
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: