The Bible is 100% true and to be read literally

firecoins said:
did my 70,ooo year old keylime pie evolve or was their an intelligent designer? Cause I have met many culinary shef and they don't seem to bright.
Click to expand...

This coming from someone who has yet to figure out a spellchecker.

I know someone in this thread wasn't intelligently designed... let's guess who!
 
firecoins said:
probably. slavery was pretty common than.
Click to expand...

OK, snarkyness aside.

Do you have any evidence to substantiate your claim? Let's try answering a few questions:

1. During which period did said enslavement of the Israelites occur?
1a. Under which Pharoah?
2. What benefit would this have afforded the economy of the region at that time?
3. How could, an "exodus", if you will, of so many people, leave absolutely no evidence in the archaeological record?
 
kurious_kathy said:
Jesus is very much alive and wants very much for you to accept him. He is the way, truth and the life. You just don't see what you have been missing by rejecting him.
Click to expand...
Well, it's not the cunnilingus, that's for sure.
 
fowlsound said:
I would like to see that evidence.
Click to expand...
As I recall from my far-off history lessons, the Egyptians DID trade in slaves most of the time, including the peoples of the lands they conquered.

However slaves were not usually maltreated or kept in bonds, etc, as shown in movies. They costed to buy and maintain, so they were really "an investment". Slaves could own property to a certain extent, and had some rights. Foreign slaves were expected to become "Egyptian" in their ways of thinking. Indebted Egyptians could voluntarily put themselves into slavery to pay a debt off. If slaves built the pyramids, they were well paid...in onions and salt!

Think of it more as an indentured worker status - workers tied by law to one employer. The nearest modern-day equivalent I can think of is the Japanese "salaryman" in a zaibutsu.
 
Zep said:
As I recall from my far-off history lessons, the Egyptians DID trade in slaves most of the time, including the peoples of the lands they conquered.

However slaves were not usually maltreated or kept in bonds, etc, as shown in movies. They costed to buy and maintain, so they were really "an investment". Slaves could own property to a certain extent, and had some rights. Foreign slaves were expected to become "Egyptian" in their ways of thinking. Indebted Egyptians could voluntarily put themselves into slavery to pay a debt off. If slaves built the pyramids, they were well paid...in onions and salt!

Think of it more as an indentured worker status - workers tied by law to one employer. The nearest modern-day equivalent I can think of is the Japanese "salaryman" in a zaibutsu.
Click to expand...


Which is not evidence outside the bible of the biblical account of jews enslaved en masse.
 
Zep said:
As I recall from my far-off history lessons, the Egyptians DID trade in slaves most of the time, including the peoples of the lands they conquered.

However slaves were not usually maltreated or kept in bonds, etc, as shown in movies. They costed to buy and maintain, so they were really "an investment". Slaves could own property to a certain extent, and had some rights. Foreign slaves were expected to become "Egyptian" in their ways of thinking. Indebted Egyptians could voluntarily put themselves into slavery to pay a debt off. If slaves built the pyramids, they were well paid...in onions and salt!

Think of it more as an indentured worker status - workers tied by law to one employer. The nearest modern-day equivalent I can think of is the Japanese "salaryman" in a zaibutsu.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, yeah.

But being able to trade labour in lieu of, oh, taxes, and having a couple slaves brought in from a foreign land is entirely different than enslaving an entire nation.

From what I recall, they were paid in onions and beer, but obviously, there could be differences in time periods and individual regions.
 
I read the first few pages thinking "wow, I have somehing to say that's relevant and insightful". Now I know that the argments are all there, they are simply not read by some. And then not read again. And then ignored. And then not read.

my question(I apologize if it has been discussed) is what was Jesus implying by saying that the repentant thief was going to sit that day with Jesus at his father's table? Jesus went to HELL that day.
 
fowlsound said:
Which is not evidence outside the bible of the biblical account of jews enslaved en masse.
Click to expand...
I didn't say they did, just described what I recalled of what "slavery" meant in ancient Egyptian times.

Given I'm sorta right, it would suggest that there MAY have been a large number of people from the conquered region of Canaan and Assyria (who might qualify as "Jews") whom the Egyptians would indeed have taken into slavery. There are two problems, however: (1) It's a very complex situation - at that time roughly, the whole Middle East was in turmoil anyway, so refugees and armies and traders and slavers and so on were going hither and yon all the time, and (2) the historical record is both thin and confusing.

As far as I know, there's not a document or evidence that confirms with absolute certainty that the majority of people-known-as-Jews were indeed in slavery in Egypt at that time. But nor would we expect that. Modern equivalent contention: Are all the Jews in the world today currently in Israel? No, but a good number are.

Wiki to start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_ancient_Israel_and_Judah#Ancient_Egyptian_domination
 
Last edited:
Jas said:
Pretty much, yeah.

But being able to trade labour in lieu of, oh, taxes, and having a couple slaves brought in from a foreign land is entirely different than enslaving an entire nation.

From what I recall, they were paid in onions and beer, but obviously, there could be differences in time periods and individual regions.
Click to expand...
Agreed, the point I made above.

Mrs Zep knows a lot more about ancient Egypt than me, so I'll ask her. I vaguely recall that slaves were paid in onions and salt (salt was currency), but given beer rations when working. Cool! Why didn't THAT carry over to today?!
 
Zep said:
Agreed, the point I made above.

Mrs Zep knows a lot more about ancient Egypt than me, so I'll ask her. I vaguely recall that slaves were paid in onions and salt (salt was currency), but given beer rations when working. Cool! Why didn't THAT carry over to today?!
Click to expand...

Oh, being hung over was a valid excuse for missing work. :)

Of course, it's been a while since I did Nile Valley arky. I should go through my notes. Which are here. Somewhere. :confused:
 
Yes, the evidence that the Hebrews were enslaved by the Egyptians is mostly accepted due to biblical evidence. My point is in regard to the pi issue. If we are accepting that the biblical figure for pi has historical relevance, we must ask why it is so innaccurate compared to existing cultures the authors of the bible claim the Hebrews were closely involved with.
 
autumn1971 said:
Yes, the evidence that the Hebrews were enslaved by the Egyptians is mostly accepted due to biblical evidence.
Click to expand...

Um, what's Biblical evidence?

Is that like, walking on water is an accepted phenomenon, due to Biblical evidence?
 
Sorry to do this, but if I might drag this thread back on topic?

I've had a look at some of the entries in www.skepticwiki.org relating to bibles.

There's a great section about Bible misprints - here's a selection, so that you can choose which inerrant bit you want - in the usual Christian cherry-picking way....

The Fool Bible (1763)
Psalms 14:1. "The fool hath said in his heart there is a God".

I think that’s clear enough, isn't it?

The Forgotten Sins Bible (1638)
Luke 7:47 "Her sins which are many, are forgotten" (rather than "forgiven").

Well – after 6000 years your memory won’t be as good as it was, huh?

The Lions Bible(1804)
Numbers 25:18 "The murderer shall surely be put together" instead of "to death"

Build your own murderer?

Kings 8:19 "…but thy son that shall come forth out of thy lions…" instead of "out of thy loins"

Now there’s a perversion I never thought about! Not sure how this fits in with the "after their own kind" thing, though.

Galatians 5:17. "For the flesh lusteth after the Spirit," instead of "against the Spirit"

Hmmm – well it was the Spirit that knocked Mary up wasn’t it?

The Murderers Bible (1801)
Jude 1:16 Has "murderers" for "murmurers"

Do murmurers become murderers when they get annoyed that nobody can hear them?

The Printers Bible
Psalm 119:161 says "Printers have persecuted me without a cause", instead of "princes”

Ah, those printers – can’t trust ‘em an inch!

The Rebekah's Camels Bible (1823)
Genesis 24:61 as "Rebekah arose, and her camels", instead of "her damsels".

Actually, I’ve never called a woman a camel – other things, yes, but never a camel. I wonder what this teaches us?

The Sin On Bible (1716)
John 5:13 is given as "Go and sin on more" instead of "sin no more."

Good advice?

The Religious Bible (1637)
Jeremiah 4:17 - God complains that Jerusalem has been "religious" rather than "rebellious"

See – even God gets confused!

The Unrighteous Bible (1653) In
1 Corinthians 6:9 "the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of god"

Way to go, unrighteous!

Romans 6:13 "Neither yield ye your members as instruments of righteousness".

Hmmm.

The Wicked Bible (1632)
The word "not" is missing from the Seventh Commandment -
(Exodus 20:14), so we’re ordered to commit adultery.

Now remember – Thou shalt commit adultery is an order!

:)

There are more in Skepticwiki - I just picked out a few that caught my eye.

Maybe we could put together all of the mistakes to provide a new, definitive Bible?

:)

YBW
 
autumn1971 said:
Yes, the evidence that the Hebrews were enslaved by the Egyptians is mostly accepted due to biblical evidence. My point is in regard to the pi issue. If we are accepting that the biblical figure for pi has historical relevance, we must ask why it is so innaccurate compared to existing cultures the authors of the bible claim the Hebrews were closely involved with.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's a good point, which has been completely ignored.

I think it was brought up a while back - the Egyptians had a pretty good handle on pi, yet their workers don't - but as you noted, most of the actual questions have been ignored because the answers aren't quite as palatable as some of the biblical passages which get quoted.

And welcome aboard! Another heathen's always welcome.
 
Davidjayjordan said:
Ahh the groupies are grouping together because they have nothing intelligent to say...
Click to expand...

Speculation. Do you have any argument, or are you just here to whine ?

but then again with a FAITH of nothingness, one would expect nothing from what they write.
Click to expand...

A faith of nothingness ? I have no faith, and there is no nothingness, so your statement is nonsense.

But when in their group packs they will name call like the churchies and scribes and pharisees because they are not use to using their brains nor their individuality to do anything. They need each others support.
Click to expand...

"Individuality" ? This, coming from a fundie. Strange.

In person they would never call me a boy, so only in their safe havens in cyberspace would they dare call me names.
Click to expand...

I'll call you boy in your face if you want me to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom