Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 4:58:18 GMT -5
And off you go down the same road you travel ad nauseum on here - I don't "run their church down" - their clergy do a fine job of doing that themselves - and no 'good 2x2' who keeps the 2x2 clergys' rules would be sneaking a peek on this board (cept a few of its clergy). In fact I have lifted their church high for its prime positive point - that being its use of God's word and its rule that 2x2s read it even in preference to any entertainment, which led me out of 2x2ism before I could paddle me own canoe. Perhaps you have not yet seen the "/" between "2x2" and "visitors" yet? Goodness me you must have a short memory !! Maybe we need to find some of the older threats where you had plenty to say @gratu !!! I don't recall ever making any "threats," but I assume that was a typo for "threads." But be my guest on "threats" if I'm wrong in my assumption. And be my guest on your search for any goodies you think you got if my assumption is correct. This thread is so far off topic already that the demonstration of avoiding the topic of the thread is pretty clear for 2x2/visitors even if their eyes are full of tears from their 2x2 experiences. And they are invited again to click the link below if they want help because they sure won't get any help from the TMB demolition crew on this thread. professing.proboards.com/thread/28969/reliability-bible-2x2-visitors-page
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 28, 2020 9:13:03 GMT -5
"You didn't read it so you don't know what it was about. Why did you bother to comment since you know nothing about it?" Oh, ya - my search was for "Exodus" (first letter capitalized) as contained in the video title and the result is 0 Two of the three instances of 'exodus' did start with a capitol 'e'. Yet you found 0. So you searched a text file of the transcript of the video pointing out the errors in the video you are promoting and thought that the words capitalized in your subject line would also be capitalized in the transcript? That was your thought process? This would be like like claiming that the words in the title of Onward, Christian Soldiers do not show up in the hymn because the lyrics are: Onward Christian soldiers Marching as to war With.... The topic was the Exodus story. That was the subject of my post. So far your ability to analyze almost anything has been underwhelming. It just depends if what readers are looking for is a video without verifiable supporting evidence of a video based on verifiable data. There is a place for both. Everyone likes to read a good bit of fiction. Especially if it is presented as fact and supports your preconceived beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 28, 2020 9:50:15 GMT -5
And off you go down the same road you travel ad nauseum on here - I don't "run their church down" - their clergy do a fine job of doing that themselves - and no 'good 2x2' who keeps the 2x2 clergys' rules would be sneaking a peek on this board (cept a few of its clergy). In fact I have lifted their church high for its prime positive point - that being its use of God's word and its rule that 2x2s read it even in preference to any entertainment, which led me out of 2x2ism before I could paddle me own canoe. Perhaps you have not yet seen the "/" between "2x2" and "visitors" yet? In this case, what exact meaning do you give to the virgule ? Suppose the 2x2s are visitors?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 28, 2020 10:22:24 GMT -5
I don't need YOUR advice on how my word processor's search function is used - it came with its own op manual, and I have posted the complete search results it gave me on your posted stuff TWICE already. You posted: Oh, ya - my search was for "Exodus" (first letter capitalized) as contained in the video title and the result is 0 Two of the three mentions of 'exodus' in the transcript did have the first letter capitalized yet your search returned 0. Just a guess, but I do think you need help on the functioning of the search function of your word processor since looking for exodus should have returned results in either case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 10:24:51 GMT -5
“.... exodus did not take place in Egypt....” Still gotta split your hair to winnnnnn somehow I see – are you sure you are not just a 2x2atheist. Good thing you quit searching for all the other words past "Exodus" and or "exodus" because they too count 0 with any regard to the topic video. In fact your "exodus" at a contextual glance is a "tale" that is a "tale" -- just as brilliant as your "exodus did not take place in Egypt" -- of course an exodus in Egypt would be no exodus unless it was an exodus out of one Egyptian enclosure into another Egyptian enclosure still in Egypt - du. But having said a page ago, "But I think I'm gonna let the demo team do their think (intended "thing" here) because I have brought this thread back on topic frequently enough right from the opening post to let them show that they are determined to take it off topic asap -- it just took em 8 pages to bore me to death on the idea that board rules should be kept" I will not bother to put this thread on topic again BECAUSE you are boring me to death with your constant string of biased stuff and you demonstrated unwillingness to even look at the evidence - oh, let me not forget that bitty detail, "within the topic video". And just in case you wanna split hairs some more to bore any 2x2/visitors to death with that common-2x2 practice, your posting of "Exodus yes I doubt ----.... " did not need more than a contextual glance in the search results to see that it had NOTHING to do with the Evidence within the topic video (was and remains OFF TOPIC). 2x2/visitors do not need to read or listen to THAT stuff to know that it has NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread. I did not read any of it. Instead I copied it all, pasted into my word processor and did an electronic search for “Exodus” -- the result was 0 – then I searched For “Revealed” - result 0, then "hard" - result 0, then "evidence" - result 0 - then "red" - results 0, - then "sea" - results - 0 -– the whole post is off topic – ho hum – I suspect that ANY 2x2/visitor who has read this thread to page 8 by now knows that the TMB demolition crew is determined to destroy any faith you still have by posting anything at all that is on any other topic at all. Their posts obviously insist upon leading this thread off topic come hell or high water - ho hum. So if you have any faith in the Bible (God's word) and are looking for help to build from where you are presently in that regard, by now you would have a pretty good understanding of who on this board is and who on this board is not trying to help you – if you are looking for uplifting help click the following link and begin reading the first half dozen posts on The reliability of the Bible thread - there is lots of uplifting and Biblical material there for you, most of which you can sit back and listen to - in peace - without a bunch of off topic posts to try to sort through to find the links; professing.proboards.com/thread/28969/reliability-bible-2x2-visitors-page
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 28, 2020 11:25:17 GMT -5
“.... exodus did not take place in Egypt....” Still gotta split your hair to winnnnnn somehow I see – are you sure you are not just a 2x2atheist. Good thing you quit searching for all the other words past "Exodus" and or "exodus" because they too count 0 with any regard to the topic video. In fact your "exodus" at a contextual glance is a "tale" that is a "tale" -- just as brilliant as your "exodus did not take place in Egypt" -- of course an exodus in Egypt would be no exodus unless it was an exodus out of one Egyptian enclosure into another Egyptian enclosure still in Egypt - du. Are you really clueless? You are presenting all of these videos regarding the exodus of the Israelites and how they support the biblical story when you clearly do not know even the meaning of the word exodus. How do you think this will increase the faith of your readers? Will they be comforted by the blind leading the blind? An exodus is a departure. It is the going out. The leaving. You posted: ...of course an exodus in Egypt would be no exodus unless it was an exodus out of one Egyptian enclosure into another Egyptian enclosure still in Egypt - du. and then denigrated the phrase "exodus did not take place in Egypt" because of your own ignorance of the term and what was claimed. In addition to your Gish gallop style you add the fact that you are not even familiar with the topics you are posting. At least Gish had something upon which to base some of his claims - an education. This brings up another unanswered question. You posted: “Of course in that case the review would be by a single person based on their interpretation of the scripture.” Oh really – what about the scientists who expound science from a Biblical perspective right in the videos/articles? And I am trained in Biblical exegesis myself, so there are at least two reviewing every bit of it by Scripture, andn several other skilled Bible believers involved with each viseo production/presentation as well as the presentation of every written article I have linked. (emphasis added)Where was this Biblical exegesis training administered? How would it work when you are unfamiliar with some of the basic terms in the bible? I have asked a number of times. Do you have an answer?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 11:37:09 GMT -5
guess your "gish gallop" has run its course since you are beginning to ask your ancient questions all over again - those questions must have slipped down your wall and just maybe got cleaned up so you couldn't remember the answer you got before. "An exodus is a departure. It is the going out. The leaving." Right again and if the exodus out of Egypt is "in Egypt" then no exodus happened - right. So all you gotta do to deny the Exodus is try to put an exodus "in" Egypt and there would be no exodus - makes exodus sense because to open one's mouth and drop his brains on the floor, a brain exodus must occur, but to open ones mouth and keep his brains "in" his head means that no exodus occurred. Now - now I get it - I think - um, maybe, ah, yeah I think I get it ---... but if I'm as dum as rational is trying to make me out to be, then mabe it is me who doesn't know what "exodus" means affer al, 2x2/visitors do not need to read or listen to THAT stuff to know that it has NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread. I did not read any of it. Instead I copied it all, pasted into my word processor and did an electronic search for “Exodus” -- the result was 0 – then I searched For “Revealed” - result 0, then "hard" - result 0, then "evidence" - result 0 - then "red" - results 0, - then "sea" - results - 0 -– the whole post is off topic – ho hum – I suspect that ANY 2x2/visitor who has read this thread to page 8 by now knows that the TMB demolition crew is determined to destroy any faith you still have by posting anything at all that is on any other topic at all. Their posts obviously insist upon leading this thread off topic come hell or high water - ho hum. So if you have any faith in the Bible (God's word) and are looking for help to build from where you are presently in that regard, by now you would have a pretty good understanding of who on this board is and who on this board is not trying to help you – if you are looking for uplifting help click the following link and begin reading the first half dozen posts on The reliability of the Bible thread - there is lots of uplifting and Biblical material there for you, most of which you can sit back and listen to - in peace - without a bunch of off topic posts to try to sort through to find the links; professing.proboards.com/thread/28969/reliability-bible-2x2-visitors-page
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 28, 2020 15:37:27 GMT -5
guess your "gish gallop" has run its course since you are beginning to ask your ancient questions all over again - those questions must have slipped down your wall and just maybe got cleaned up so you couldn't remember the answer you got before. You made the claim and there is no record of an answer. The fact you deleted the post does not make it go away. Just point to the URL of the post where you answered the question. Exodus, the liberation of the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt in the 13th century bce. www.britannica.comIf you were standing in Egypt and departed from where did you depart? If 2,000,000 people were in Egypt and departed from where did they depart? When 2,000,000 were said to depart Egypt it is termed an Exodus. The exodus was from Egypt. It is as difficult for the exodus from Egypt not to have happened while the Israelites were in Egypt Egypt as it would be for you to leave a room without having been in the room at the time you left. The departure is the action. The exodus is the action. If you are going to depart from Egypt you have to be in Egypt when you depart. The Israelites were in Egypt at the time of the exodus. 2x2/visitors do not need to read or listen to THAT stuff to know that it has NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread.[/quote]Other than it disputes the information provided in the original video. And, for whatever reason, failed to find two instances of 'Exodus'. But you can trust the judgment of @gratu since he has admitted he did not read/listen to the video. Caveat emptor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 18:35:19 GMT -5
“And, for whatever reason, failed to find two instances of 'Exodus'. “
Your “gish gallop” was worn out several posts ago – now it's just boring.
2x2/visitors do not need to read or listen to THAT stuff to know that it has NOTHING to do with the topic of this thread.
"[/quote]Other than it disputes the information provided in the original video. “
By electronic searches, it doesn't even mention the topic video – and if THAT "disputes " anything in the topic video for YOU - Ho hum. As another matter of electronic searching, Google returned NO negative reviews of EXODUS REVEALED! Hard Evidence in Red Sea of Israel's Escape From Egypt in its whole first page of links for the video.
Another presentation of the same topic vid:
"National Geographic Exodus Revealed"
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jan 28, 2020 22:45:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 29, 2020 1:06:51 GMT -5
“And, for whatever reason, failed to find two instances of 'Exodus'. “ Your “gish gallop” was worn out several posts ago – now it's just boring. You keep galloping. I am just taking note of it. So you might think. Given that you could not successfully find the word 'Exodus' in a simple text search your lack of negative reviews does not come as a surprise. But a quick search did find this: Summary: The Exodus Revealed video, directed by Lad Allen and funded by Discovery Media Productions, is based on The Exodus Case book by Lennart Moller, which is based on the "discoveries" of Ron Wyatt. Both the video and the book include photos of a gold wheel supposedly found in the Gulf of Aqaba, presented as proof that the Bible's Red Sea crossing story is true. But a TV producer's wife "was told by one of Ron Wyatt's sons that the chariot wheels that Ron supposedly discovered in the Gulf of Aqaba were planted there by Ron." Also, John Baumgardner, who is a Christian and initially believed Wyatt and inspected Wyatt's Noah's ark "discovery", later wrote that "I am almost 100% certain that Ron 'planted' them [rivets on the Ark]." Despite this and much more evidence that Ron Wyatt was a crazy liar, both Lennart Moller and Lad Allen were insidiously dishonest in promoting Wyatt's "findings" without disclosing Wyatt's history of fraud.
Since the video is based on the book by Moller and Moller's book was based on discoveries claimed by Ron Wyatt information about Wyatt is right on topic for this thread. A Great Christian Scam,Interesting that this negative review is from a christian publication. Ron Wyatt Archaeological Research Fraud Documentation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2020 12:35:38 GMT -5
That vid posted by curlywurlysammagee is correct (although I have seen far better presentations of its claims) as long as the long-widely-accepted Exodus date wherein Moses and Ramses 11 are believed to be contemporaries, indeed there is no archaeological evidence of any Exodus of Israel out of Egypt during the time of Ramses 11 -- and no evidence of Israel in Goshen during Ramses 11 when Israel was an established nation in Canaan during Ramses 11. The Pharoah Ramses 11 ruled during the "New Kingdom" of Egypt (between about 1450 BC and 1000 BC) followed by a 'dark period'. Prior to the New Kingdom the "Middle Kingdom of Egypt (about 1800 BC to 1400 BC) was followed by another 'dark period.' And prior to the Middle Kingdom is an earlier Kingdom of Egypt (from about 2800 BC to 2000 BC followed by a 'dark period'. And during the Middle Kingdom is found "Avaris" in The Land of Goshen, where a large Semitic community lived - and during period of the Middle Kingdom there has been discoveries of quite a bit of evidence of an Exodus of that Semitic community including evidence that Avaris was suddenly abandoned by those Semites, quickly followed by the takeover of Egypt by the Hyksos who are said to have taken over Egypt "without a blow" (showing that Egypt's whole powerful army was either sleeping or dead). This evidence is contained within an award-winning documentary released AUGUST 4, 2015 called "Patterns of Evidence Exodus". Being that it is not available yet on Youtube I cannot provide a link for 2x2/visitors to watch it, but a search for that title will locate the movie. I have received and watched it and another of the same quality released in 2019 called "The Moses Controversy". But what is available on Youtube to watch is four videos detailing the lead up to the production of Patterns of Evidence Exodus. And a third Ducumentary will be released in Feb. 2020 called "The Red Sea Miracle." 2x2/visitors do not need to have their faith in the Bible destroyed by what looks like long held error of Archaeology looking for evidence of the Exodus in a time when there was no such evidence because the newest Archaeological discoveries supply plenty of evidence supporting the Biblical account of the Exodus of Israel out of Egypt during the Middle Kingdom of Egypt. And for any who want to hang onto the older conclusions of no Exodus, the newest discoveries are the same as the older discoveries - i.e., they are just man's Archaeological EVIDENCE, not "proof." There is good EVIDENCE upon which faith (belief and trust) in the Bible is now supported very well, and which EVIDENCE has a growing academic acceptance. And so that the reader does not need to think these discoveries are 'fringy' fantasies of only Bible believers, one of the Egyptologists featured in the Patterns of Evidence series (David Rohl) is a self-acclaimed "agnostic." All four Youtube videos are linked under Biblical Archaeology in The Reliability of the Bible thread at professing.proboards.com/thread/28969/reliability-bible-2x2-visitors-pageand in The Patterns of Evidence Exodus thread at professing.proboards.com/thread/29336/patterns-evidence-exodus-2x2-visitors
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2020 15:24:32 GMT -5
rational - Since the video is based on the book by Moller and Moller's book was based on discoveries claimed by Ron Wyatt information about Wyatt is right on topic for this thread. A Great Christian Scam, Interesting that this negative review is from a christian publication. Ron Wyatt Archaeological Research Fraud Documentation. For 2x2/visitors: So believe your old and outdated junk in self support for your atheist religion - what's new in that act. The thread topic video, as I have said repeatedly on this thread, is NOT based on, and in fact does not even mention "Ron Wyatt" and this attempt of yours to raise YOUR Ron Wyatt ad hominem AGAIN on this thread just shows your CONTINUED ad hominem against "Ron Wyatt." - evidently you have nothing better than OLD ad hominem (that good old 2x2 practice you learned as a former 2x2), even parroted ad hominem to TRY to defend your atheist religion. And now the title Video is older than the newer Archaeological discoveries upon which the Patters of Evidence videos and movie are based - and you evidently WILL not look at the evidence contained within even the older topic video - ho hum. The thread TOPIC is the aging video: EXODUS REVEALED! Hard Evidence in Red Sea of Israel's Escape From Egypt www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM7njJuarrgNewer Archaeological research - Patterns of Evidence series patternsofevidence.com/
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 29, 2020 16:59:02 GMT -5
rational - Since the video is based on the book by Moller and Moller's book was based on discoveries claimed by Ron Wyatt information about Wyatt is right on topic for this thread. A Great Christian Scam, Interesting that this negative review is from a christian publication. Ron Wyatt Archaeological Research Fraud Documentation. For 2x2/visitors: So believe your old and outdated junk in self support for your atheist religion - what's new in that act. The thread topic video, as I have said repeatedly on this thread, is NOT based on, and in fact does not even mention "Ron Wyatt" and this attempt of yours to raise YOUR Ron Wyatt ad hominem AGAIN on this thread just shows your CONTINUED ad hominem against "Ron Wyatt." - evidently you have nothing better than OLD ad hominem (that good old 2x2 practice you learned as a former 2x2), even parroted ad hominem to TRY to defend your atheist religion. The reason it doesn't mention Ron Wyatt is because permission was withdrawn and the Wyatt organization produced it's own video. They did give credit to Mary Nell Wyatt in the credits. You can see they did have permission to use some of the photos but others are marked as reconstructions. It is not an ad hominem attack at all. It is the data that Ron is presenting. There are few facts supporting his claims, many of the 'facts' presented are false/wrong, and there is evidence that Ron created some of the artifacts he claimed to 'discover'. According to those who knew him he was a very kind and religious person. Just corrupted by greed and perhaps a little delusional. Unlike you, I do look at the content of the videos on which I comment. If there was any evidence contained I would have commented on than as well. But the videos are devoid of any supporting data, as is the book they were based on. And the evidence of the 'discoveries' that the book is based on are so far fetched that even Answers in Genesis, the Discovery Institute, as well as several christian publications have denounced them. Newer Archaeological research - Patterns of Evidence series patternsofevidence.com/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2020 22:08:29 GMT -5
'The reason it doesn't mention Ron Wyatt is because permission was withdrawn and the Wyatt organization produced it's own video. They did give credit to Mary Nell Wyatt in the credits. You can see they did have permission to use some of the photos but others are marked as reconstructions." For 2x2/visitors: Once AGAIN - the topic video presented evidence that had nothing to do with Ron Wyatt - Once AGAIN - the topic video presented evidence that had nothing to do with Ron Wyatt - Once AGAIN - the topic video presented evidence that had nothing to do with Ron Wyatt - Once AGAIN - the topic video presented evidence that had nothing to do with Ron Wyatt. Now you are welcome to reference ANY formal charges or convictions with links - otherwise all you are doing is public ad hominem, just as your sources are doing without charges or convictions. Scams are a dime a dozen and your former clergy have been portrayed publicly for similar, but all such implications are just ad hominem until formal charges, trial and conviction of them as well as anyone else. Where I live, non-profit missions outnumber scams, and I find myself wondering why an atheist thinks it his mission to destroy whatever faith in the Bible a vulerable 2x2 has left, much less why an atheist gives two hoots about what believers do with THEIR funds. I don't see you playing your ad hominem on your former clergy, who have long preached they 'have no home' while they live off the backs of the common 2x2s in their homes and more recently have TAXPAYERS funding their final years in fine 'assisted living HOMES.' So it appears that you are only concerned about ANY belief of the Bible and those you call "Christians" ; bent all outta shape (lop-sided) to turn them into atheists. Are there any atheist scammers that you know of, like Richard Dawkins perhaps, and if so why are you not playing your good old 2x2 type ad hominem on those atheists - that is not a question. So do go ahead and crank up your already worn out ad hominem against Ron or Mary Wyatt all over again, ad nauseum - you might bury the thread topic now that I have decided to let you succeed at it since about half way down page 8. The thread TOPIC is: EXODUS REVEALED! Hard Evidence in Red Sea of Israel's Escape From Egypt www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM7njJuarrg
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 29, 2020 22:51:09 GMT -5
'The reason it doesn't mention Ron Wyatt is because permission was withdrawn and the Wyatt organization produced it's own video. They did give credit to Mary Nell Wyatt in the credits. You can see they did have permission to use some of the photos but others are marked as reconstructions." For 2x2/visitors: Once AGAIN - the topic video presented evidence that had nothing to do with Ron Wyatt - Once AGAIN - the topic video presented evidence that had nothing to do with Ron Wyatt - Once AGAIN - the topic video presented evidence that had nothing to do with Ron Wyatt - Once AGAIN - the topic video presented evidence that had nothing to do with Ron Wyatt. OK Dorothy. It might not have worked because you forgot to click your heels together when you repeat the phrase. You keep saying it has nothing to do with Wyatt but the writer of the video, Lennart Möller, wrote The Exodus Case which was based on the 'discoveries' of Wyatt. The video is based on Lennart Möller's book. The last comment under the video on YouTube says: Cheryl Smith 6 months ago Wow! Have you ever watched Ron Wyatt's documentaries! Exactly what he says! How is it that Cheryl Smith can see the truth yet you are oblivious? You should cling to your 'prediction(s)' - it seems to be all you have. Once you realize that all of my comments have been correcting the information being presenting, pointing out inconsistencies, or providing verifiable data that contradict what is being claimed and not attacking the person delivering the material you learn you have been misusing the phrase ad hominem. You can continue to make the claims but to date you have been unable to bring any evidence that supports your claim nor have you answered most of the questions that have been asked. You make claims and then when questioned simply ignore the question. I am guessing you have no answers. This is not a new practice for you. You did it when you were posting the the disproved claims about the blue stars, the completely refuted anisotropic synchrony convention promoted by Jason Lisle (and independently by you, according to your claim), or even questions regarding the claim that you were trained in biblical exegesis. No evidence - just more creationist site produced unsupported videos.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2020 23:16:15 GMT -5
“You keep saying it has nothing to do with Wyatt but the writer of the video, Lennart Möller, wrote The Exodus Case which was based on the 'discoveries' of Wyatt. The video is based on Lennart Möller's book. “ Just more ad hominem according to the topic video's credits: - and so what if the video is “based on Lennart Moller's book" (I have not seen that in the credits yet - now I finally rolled the whole credits and it says nothing about the film being based upon Lennard Moller's book), that's Lennart Moller's book, not Ron or Mary Wyatt's book – and Lennart Moller is in the topic video at that. He was the film's Program Consultant. And since the route seems to outstrip all other formerly proposed routes, eventually many more scholars will accept that route above other routes – a growing number already do accept it as best option – are they all “based upon” Wyatt's work just because they don't disagree with that route. I thought you named yourself "rational." Credits, EXODUS REVEALED! Hard Evidence in Red Sea of Israel's Escape From Egypt www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM7njJuarrgWritten by W. Perter Allen Stephen C. Meyer Program Consultant Lennart Moller Oh, and Mary Wyatt appears under the credits "Grateful acknowledgements for cooperation" and nothing explains WHAT she is honored for - and her name appears nowhere else in the whole film or in its transcript. And so it looks like YOU are attacking the man - any man who holds the same view of the Exodus route - alone. Now I know you disregard the Bible, so in YOUR opinion there was no Exodus route at all, and apparently you will attack any man who thinks otherwise, especially if the route seen as most fitting with the Biblical account agrees with Ron or Mary Wyatt - and I see nothing rational in your performance - just plain and simple and stubborn anti-Bible BIAS.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 2:06:30 GMT -5
And now I am well on the way to study of a completely new investigation that began very recently. Tim Mahoney did not base his investigation on either the Wyatt investigation or the topic video of this thread. His investigation began out of his childhood Bible learning and belief being contradicted by current accepted Archaeological conclusions, effectively discarding the Bible. His story is detailed in an hour and 43 minute long video named Patterns of Evidence Exodus - the Journey. www.youtube.com/watch?v=RohPpQRKHSs&list=PLK2XTPJF5tvUJ5BB0Ubys3Z1Ubj6ygIaw&index=2So, in keeping with board rule I started a new thread where I began and continue to post what I am learning – named Patterns of Evidence Exodus - for 2x2/visitors. And I am no longer going to pay a lot of attention to this thread, which has avoided its title by the TMB posters since post 2 on page 1. professing.proboards.com/thread/29336/patterns-evidence-exodus-2x2-visitorsOn that new thread you will see the study continuing with video titles and their links. And so far three documentary films with two more to be released in February and May of 2020. These videos present the most recent archaeological evidence of the Bible account of the Exodus of Israel out of Egypt and establishment in Canaan where that land became known as Israel. And these videos and documentaries are in such detail that in seven hours of viewing alone, the topic of the Red Sea Crossing has not been more than mentioned. That is the topic of the next two documentaries soon to be released – I can hardly wait! But in the meantime, the thread needs some organizing, as some of the posting is in the form of study notes.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jan 30, 2020 3:01:32 GMT -5
And now I am well on the way to study of a completely new investigation that began very recently. Tim Mahoney did not base his investigation on either the Wyatt investigation or the topic video of this thread. His investigation began out of his childhood Bible learning and belief being contradicted by current accepted Archaeological conclusions, effectively discarding the Bible. His story is detailed in an hour and 43 minute long video named Patterns of Evidence Exodus - the Journey. www.youtube.com/watch?v=RohPpQRKHSs&list=PLK2XTPJF5tvUJ5BB0Ubys3Z1Ubj6ygIaw&index=2So, in keeping with board rule I started a new thread where I began and continue to post what I am learning – named Patterns of Evidence Exodus - for 2x2/visitors. And I am no longer going to pay a lot of attention to this thread, which has avoided its title by the TMB posters since post 2 on page 1. professing.proboards.com/thread/29336/patterns-evidence-exodus-2x2-visitorsOn that new thread you will see the study continuing with video titles and their links. And so far three documentary films with two more to be released in February and May of 2020. These videos present the most recent archaeological evidence of the Bible account of the Exodus of Israel out of Egypt and establishment in Canaan where that land became known as Israel. And these videos and documentaries are in such detail that in seven hours of viewing alone, the topic of the Red Sea Crossing has not been more than mentioned. That is the topic of the next two documentaries soon to be released – I can hardly wait! But in the meantime, the thread needs some organizing, as some of the posting is in the form of study notes. You study?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 31, 2020 8:25:41 GMT -5
“You keep saying it has nothing to do with Wyatt but the writer of the video, Lennart Möller, wrote The Exodus Case which was based on the 'discoveries' of Wyatt. The video is based on Lennart Möller's book. “ Just more ad hominem according to the topic video's credits: - and so what if the video is “based on Lennart Moller's book" (I have not seen that in the credits yet - now I finally rolled the whole credits and it says nothing about the film being based upon Lennard Moller's book), that's Lennart Moller's book, not Ron or Mary Wyatt's book – and Lennart Moller is in the topic video at that. He was the film's Program Consultant. And since the route seems to outstrip all other formerly proposed routes, eventually many more scholars will accept that route above other routes – a growing number already do accept it as best option – are they all “based upon” Wyatt's work just because they don't disagree with that route. I thought you named yourself "rational." Credits, EXODUS REVEALED! Hard Evidence in Red Sea of Israel's Escape From Egypt www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM7njJuarrgWritten by W. Perter Allen Stephen C. Meyer Program Consultant Lennart Moller Oh, and Mary Wyatt appears under the credits "Grateful acknowledgements for cooperation" and nothing explains WHAT she is honored for - and her name appears nowhere else in the whole film or in its transcript. And so it looks like YOU are attacking the man - any man who holds the same view of the Exodus route - alone. You failed to point out that Moller also provided additional footage. And was thanked for his contribution. I don't believe that A Tale of Two Cities is an accurate history of the times but it doesn't mean I don't believe that Paris and London are cities. “You keep saying it has nothing to do with Wyatt but the writer of the video, Lennart Möller, wrote The Exodus Case which was based on the 'discoveries' of Wyatt. The video is based on Lennart Möller's book. “ Just more ad hominem according to the topic video's credits: - and so what if the video is “based on Lennart Moller's book" (I have not seen that in the credits yet - now I finally rolled the whole credits and it says nothing about the film being based upon Lennard Moller's book), that's Lennart Moller's book, not Ron or Mary Wyatt's book – and Lennart Moller is in the topic video at that. He was the film's Program Consultant. And since the route seems to outstrip all other formerly proposed routes, eventually many more scholars will accept that route above other routes – a growing number already do accept it as best option – are they all “based upon” Wyatt's work just because they don't disagree with that route. I thought you named yourself "rational." Credits, EXODUS REVEALED! Hard Evidence in Red Sea of Israel's Escape From Egypt www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM7njJuaergWritten by W. Perter Allen Stephen C. Meyer Program Consultant Lennart Moller <SNIP> = repeated material<SNIP> It doesn't manner who delivers the information - it is the lack of verifiable proof that is at issue. You can keep repeating it is some type of personal attack but that does not change the facts any more that re-posting links over and over.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 14:04:22 GMT -5
This won't stay here long if I have that ability, BUT it is briefly posted for 2x2/visitors' consideration;
There is no “verifiable proof” on either side of these issues. The evidence presented within the topic video of this thread supports the account of the Exodus that is contained in the Bible – rational (and his like) has/have tossed the Bible aside on his/their acceptance of the secular OPINION that deems it 'myth' regardless of any evidence to the contrary, not “verifiable proof.”
If the viewer does not understand what a “paradigm' is, take a glance at 2x2ism, which claimed and continues to claim that it is “the only true church' by popular vote – in spite of its history of verifiable CSA, lies, hidden history etc. etc. Etc. And rational, who claims a background in 2x2ism would ether need to get rid of his former 2x2 paradigm, or just convert it to a non-2x2 paradigm. And I leave the reader of his posts to determine for themselves what his posts demonstrate in that regard.
With regard to the account of the Exodus contained in the Bible, it is no difficult thing to understand that when Moses was instructed on a mountain close enough in Midian for him to be keeping sheep there, seeing a burning bush there and being instructed to lead Israel out of Egypt to that mountain (not directly to Canaan), the route including a parting the depths of sea somewhere between Goshen and Midian, an ordinary map will show that THE ONLY such sea would have to be the Gulf of Aqaba, and that not in a direct line due East between Goshen and Midian. When Moses fled Egypt to Midian his route would have taken him around the noth tip of the Gulf of Aqaba then south into Midian. The Bible account details a God-directed change of course into rugged “wildreness.” And along the west side of the Gulf of Aqaba is a rugged wilderness. It is easily seen on a map that such a change of course leaves only one “sea” between Goshen and Midian – i.e., the Gulf of Aqaba. And due to the sea bottom of the Gulf of Aqaba, there is only one possible section of sea bottom that would be possible for the Israelites to cross the Gulf if the water was removed - i.e., at the Nuweibaa Beach, which is the shallowest 'level' path across the Gulf floor. It did not take rocket science to figure that out. So the only evidence the topic video leaves untouched is THE TIME period of Ramses 11 that the paradigm of rejection of the Bible is based upon. And Patterns of evidence on the other thread presents evidence of much detail showing that Ramses 11 was not a contemporary of Moses – Ramses 11 ruled Egypt a long time after Moses, during a time when Egyptian military campaigns “laid Israel waste” in Canaan (long after Israel was established in Canaan). Therefore the "Ramses" of the Bible's account CANNOT be "Ramses 11." It is the English translation of the Greek text in which the actual short Greek name is Shesa, not Soshenk. And the name of the Egyptian Pharoah of the time of Moses is painstakingly detailed in Patterns of Evidence Exodus posted on THAT thread.
So, rational continues to AVOID such evidence AND hang on to the old and common paradigm – no surprise - for one who started with a childhood 2x2 paradigm drummed into his head, the evidence of his posts suggest that rational just switched one Bible-rejecting paradigm for another Bible-rejecting paradigm - ho hum.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 31, 2020 14:23:29 GMT -5
There is no “verifiable proof” on either side of these issues. You are correct. There can be no verifiable proof of an event that never happened. As many of the reviewers and other posters have pointed out there was no evidence presented in the videos. It would be difficult to point to a denomination/sect that does not have a dark secret. In the late 1300 christians, for example, killed 4,000 Jews in Seville. No idea what this means. Telling a story is not evidence. Easily solved if you could just post one bit of verifiable evidence that is presented in the video.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 14:34:31 GMT -5
Well rational, for the eyes of 2x2/visitors you continue to AVOID the verified evidence presented in this video and the Patterns of Evidence Exodus series mentioned in my post on this thread - ho hum - it looks like I had best leave my post posted for 2x2/visitors because you have so chopped and snipped it that even I can no longer piece it back together in a single presentation of the original except by quoting my own post to post it in one piece again in reply to your latest knife act.
And with regard to the verified evidence presented in the Patterns of Evidence Exodus series, the verified evidence does not hesitate to present the verified evidence of the verified experts who share YOUR verified paradigm, and on that thread you pick only those verified evidences that agree with YOUR verified paradigm and AVOID those verified experts who disagree with YOUR verified paradigm. Ho hum
Quote There is no “verifiable proof” on either side of these issues. The evidence presented within the topic video of this thread supports the account of the Exodus that is contained in the Bible – rational (and his like) has/have tossed the Bible aside on his/their acceptance of the secular OPINION that deems it 'myth' regardless of any evidence to the contrary, not “verifiable proof.”
If the viewer does not understand what a “paradigm' is, take a glance at 2x2ism, which claimed and continues to claim that it is “the only true church' by popular vote – in spite of its history of verifiable CSA, lies, hidden history etc. etc. Etc. And rational, who claims a background in 2x2ism would ether need to get rid of his former 2x2 paradigm, or just convert it to a non-2x2 paradigm. And I leave the reader of his posts to determine for themselves what his posts demonstrate in that regard.
With regard to the account of the Exodus contained in the Bible, it is no difficult thing to understand that when Moses was instructed on a mountain close enough in Midian for him to be keeping sheep there, seeing a burning bush there and being instructed to lead Israel out of Egypt to that mountain (not directly to Canaan), the route including a parting the depths of sea somewhere between Goshen and Midian, an ordinary map will show that THE ONLY such sea would have to be the Gulf of Aqaba, and that not in a direct line due East between Goshen and Midian. When Moses fled Egypt to Midian his route would have taken him around the noth tip of the Gulf of Aqaba then south into Midian. The Bible account details a God-directed change of course into rugged “wildreness.” And along the west side of the Gulf of Aqaba is a rugged wilderness. It is easily seen on a map that such a change of course leaves only one “sea” between Goshen and Midian – i.e., the Gulf of Aqaba. And due to the sea bottom of the Gulf of Aqaba, there is only one possible section of sea bottom that would be possible for the Israelites to cross the Gulf if the water was removed - i.e., at the Nuweibaa Beach, which is the shallowest 'level' path across the Gulf floor. It did not take rocket science to figure that out. So the only evidence the topic video leaves untouched is THE TIME period of Ramses 11 that the paradigm of rejection of the Bible is based upon. And Patterns of evidence on the other thread presents evidence of much detail showing that Ramses 11 was not a contemporary of Moses – Ramses 11 ruled Egypt a long time after Moses, during a time when Egyptian military campaigns “laid Israel waste” in Canaan (long after Israel was established in Canaan). Therefore the "Ramses" of the Bible's account CANNOT be "Ramses 11." It is the English translation of the Greek text in which the actual short Greek name is Shesa, not Soshenk. And the name of the Egyptian Pharoah of the time of Moses is painstakingly detailed in Patterns of Evidence Exodus posted on THAT thread.
So, rational continues to AVOID such evidence AND hang on to the old and common paradigm – no surprise - for one who started with a childhood 2x2 paradigm drummed into his head, the evidence of his posts suggest that rational just switched one Bible-rejecting paradigm for another Bible-rejecting paradigm - ho hum. Unquote
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 31, 2020 17:41:17 GMT -5
<SNIP> - A lot of throwing of hands in the air but of little significance - <SHIP> This is speculation. A story, if you will. It is not evidence. No more than Shakespeare's Macbeth is evidence of a murder. I think the appearance of the quotes, indicating non-standard meanings of the enclosed word(s), raise the question of what meaning was being attached. seem to have little understanding of what constitutes evidence and therefore accept story telling as proof. I wonder if you really think there was evidence that the protagonist in Green Eggs and Ham could present to verify he did not like them in a box or with a fox? Nope. I am waiting for some sign of evidence. Did you note in the reviews I posted of this video that each complained about the lack of evidence. And you continue your Gish gallop, throwing anything you can against the wall to see what sticks. Maybe for a change you could switch it up for the Ham Hightail. The paragraph above is a close example.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 19:53:50 GMT -5
rational - quote <SNIP> - A lot of throwing of hands in the air but of little significance - <SHIP>
With regard to the account of the Exodus contained in the Bible, it is no difficult thing to understand that when Moses was instructed on a mountain close enough in Midian for him to be keeping sheep there, seeing a burning bush there and being instructed to lead Israel out of Egypt to that mountain (not directly to Canaan), the route including a parting the depths of sea somewhere between Goshen and Midian, an ordinary map will show that THE ONLY such sea would have to be the Gulf of Aqaba, and that not in a direct line due East between Goshen and Midian. When Moses fled Egypt to Midian his route would have taken him around the noth tip of the Gulf of Aqaba then south into Midian. The Bible account details a God-directed change of course into rugged “wildreness.” And along the west side of the Gulf of Aqaba is a rugged wilderness. It is easily seen on a map that such a change of course leaves only one “sea” between Goshen and Midian – i.e., the Gulf of Aqaba. And due to the sea bottom of the Gulf of Aqaba, there is only one possible section of sea bottom that would be possible for the Israelites to cross the Gulf if the water was removed - i.e., at the Nuweibaa Beach, which is the shallowest 'level' path across the Gulf floor. It did not take rocket science to figure that out. So the only evidence the topic video leaves untouched is THE TIME period of Ramses 11 that the paradigm of rejection of the Bible is based upon. And Patterns of evidence on the other thread presents evidence of much detail showing that Ramses 11 was not a contemporary of Moses – Ramses 11 ruled Egypt a long time after Moses, during a time when Egyptian military campaigns “laid Israel waste” in Canaan (long after Israel was established in Canaan). Therefore the "Ramses" of the Bible's account CANNOT be "Ramses 11." It is the English translation of the Greek text in which the actual short Greek name is Shesa, not Soshenk. And the name of the Egyptian Pharoah of the time of Moses is painstakingly detailed in Patterns of Evidence Exodus posted on THAT thread.
This is speculation. unquote
Awww I nowwww - verified maps are rational 'speculation' but that's ok because 2x2/visitors by now will see you demanding "verifiable proof" (oops there isn't ANY proof, not even that rational ate breakfast) then more demanding of "verifiable evidence" and AVOIDING every bit of verified evidence that has been provided. And if THAT act impresses them, I don't mind at all - they are the ones that might be searching for answers, and they can look at verified maps just as I did, read the verified story in their verified Bibles and draw their own verified conclusions - while rational provides no verified ANYTHING - ever.
"Did you note in the reviews I posted of this video...."
Nope - I did not "note" them, but while I did look at them all, they are not verified 'proof' or verified 'evidence', all they are is verified opinions of someone else who shares rational's verified Bible-toss paradigm.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Jan 31, 2020 20:09:38 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 20:21:24 GMT -5
Now there's the same idea that I have expressed, but in great humor that I'm sure 2x2/visitors will appreciate - thanks for it.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jan 31, 2020 23:23:09 GMT -5
rational - <SNIP> - A lot of throwing of hands in the air but of little significance - <SHIP> With regard to the account of the Exodus contained in the Bible, it is no difficult thing to understand that when Moses was instructed on a mountain close enough in Midian for him to be keeping sheep there, seeing a burning bush there and being instructed to lead Israel out of Egypt to that mountain (not directly to Canaan), the route including a parting the depths of sea somewhere between Goshen and Midian, an ordinary map will show that THE ONLY such sea would have to be the Gulf of Aqaba, and that not in a direct line due East between Goshen and Midian. I see what you mean. Going to and from his home to the city, Jay followed the road by the valley of ashes. Looking at any map one can see that the road and the train track follow the same path. And right under the brooding eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg. It was really the only route from the Eggs to the city. So when Jay, Daisy, Nick, Jordan, and Tom drive into the city they followed the road by the valley of ashes. And they went to the Plaza Hotel, a well built building that still stands on Central Park South. Perhaps because of the tale it has been designated a National Landmark! WOW! They must have driven to the Plaza. And when they returned to West Egg they followed the same route under the brooding eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg. And then there was that fateful moment next to the valley of ashes that changed their lives. Similar tales. One based on the story from the bible. One based on The Great Gatsby. Neither documented. Both stories happening in places that exist. Both with reasonable maps. Neither story with any supporting verifiable evidence. It is still speculation. Both are speculation. The veracity of the story in Exodus is on par with the story of Jay Gatsby. For those who would rather sit and watch instead of reading I am sure most of the readers can track his this film.I never claimed I ate breakfast so there is nothing to prove. Had I claimed that i had eaten breakfast I could easily deliver verifiable proof. I do hope any readers do notice the request for verifiable proof to support the claims made. Perhaps that will lead them to think about some of the nonsense you have posted as fact but have never provided proof. Here is a verified map: They were not presented as proof or verifiable evidence. They were asking, as were many posters here, for some evidence to support the myth/speculation presented in the video.
|
|