Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've never heard six million, I have heard three. Nevertheless, you make an excellent post. There would be archaeological evidence in the Sinai of this exodus; as it is, there is none.
In The Bible from Exodus 12: 37...says ..``And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth , about six hundred thousand on foot that were men besides children``........See 600,000 men are not reported at 6 million men.., but the six is right ..... also there is archaeological evidence of the tabernacle in the wilderness of a mountain Not from modern Egypt lands , but from Saudi Arabia from a restricted burned on the top from with in the Rock. on a mountains which is called `Kabal Al Lawz.... which has the stone altar and ancient boundary markers and has pictograph of bulls which is Egyptian ideas , and has the 12 pillars .......do a internet search on ``Kabal Al Lawz` the real Mount Sinai
The Children of Israel who went with Moses in their Exodus numbered 600 thousand men other than the children.
400 years before, they came to Egypt in the time of Joseph and they numbered 60 men.
It might be less than that!?
They might be 60 thousands!?
God is the All-Knowing; in the Quran they numbered and counted as "thousands"
Still twaddle. Just multiply the count by 2 litres of water per person per day and that is only for minimum consumption to survive, no washing, no water for animals etc. You have to haul this water so you are left with probably more camels than actually existed at the time seeing I calculated a 13.2km convoy of 20kl trucks. Even at 2M this is still 200 trucks worth (only for drinking)
Under desert conditions you perspire more meaning you need more than 2l to stay hydrated (probably more like 5l per day). Imagine the stench of 2M unwashed folk for 40 years. Hell they did not even get to swim in the Red sea.
The Egyptians record no mass revolt of slaves nor a drowning Pharaoh or an entire army being lost at sea. There are no real archaeological records found and this event is dismissed as ever happening.
This of course leads to the question of a host of other stuff like Moses existing, the laws, the temple, the conquests, the ark of the covenant, the stone tablets. Yet we have found 12 CLAY tablets dating ±10kBCE relatively intact(Epic of Gilgamesh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
Just like christianity, the judaic faith borrowed extensively from other earlier myths and that would include your beloved qu'ran too which came some 700 years after xianity.
In all likelihood, none of the events reported actually happened and are best folklore and highly embellished accounts.
We know that the earth is not 6k years old and we have many histories dating further back than the alleged Hebrew traditions. Nomadic folk would have exchanged stories of their deities and IMO the Hebrew and Xian versions are conglomerates of all these stories.
Much of the modern evidence carried out scientifically render most of the biblical claims moot or at best unreliable.
Still twaddle. Just multiply the count by 2 litres of water per person per day and that is only for minimum consumption to survive, no washing, no water for animals etc. You have to haul this water so you are left with probably more camels than actually existed at the time seeing I calculated a 13.2km convoy of 20kl trucks. Even at 2M this is still 200 trucks worth (only for drinking)
Under desert conditions you perspire more meaning you need more than 2l to stay hydrated (probably more like 5l per day). Imagine the stench of 2M unwashed folk for 40 years. Hell they did not even get to swim in the Red sea.
The bible openly answers this question (now you might not like the answer but to criticize the bible for your ignorance is idiotic)
as a side point on your not funny joke during the middle ages many people went there whole lives with out a bath. If you know nothing about history you also have no right to form a opinion on historical subjects. (one that could be taken seriously)
If you know nothing about even Roman jewish history Baitar or Alexandria (you obviously know nothing about Jewish life which certain attributes are true for as long as there is historical records) you are a ignoramus posing as a a scholar there is zero evidence that majority of jews were ever illiterate and plenty of evidence even in Roman Times that they were. The fact the you didn't know that shows you know nothing.
In regards to assuming the past is like the present a logical assumption (which is going to be a problem for you ) would be that if we have evidence of something for more then 2000 years and we have zero (non biblical) evidence before that point and none to the contrary then it would be logical to assume that it doesn't pre date the last point we have proof for. (there are almost no real records from before the greek era in any civilization)
I'm an "ignoramus posing as ascholar"? That's a polite way of backing up your claim concerning Jewish literacy throughout history. I ask for evidence to substanitate your claim, and you reply with an insult.
I am trying to make sense out of your post (with it's lack of punctuation and lower literacy-level): "you are a ignoramus posing as a scholar there is zero evidence that majority of jews were ever illiterate and plenty of evidence even in Roman Times that they were. The fact the you didn't know that shows you know nothing". I hope you aren't using yourself as evidence for high levels of Jewish literacy.
Let's see now. With a little judicious editing, we can get "[T]here is zero evidence that [the] majority of jews [in antiquity] were ever illiterate[,] and plenty of evidence[,] even in Roman [t]imes[,] that they were [illiterate]." So is this true? Is there a lack of evidence that "the majority of jews in antiquity were illiterate"? To the contrary, we have evidence to the exact opposite.
Meir Bar-Ilan, in "Illiteracy in the Land of Israel in the First Centuries C.E.", points out that there was (and is) a correlation between urban settings and literacy, and agrarian settings and illiteracy. Even with the Jewish population becoming more urbanized, the vast majority remained agrarian. He uses statistical information to show that farmers were generally illiterate, writing that "the more agricultural the society, the higher the percentage of illiterate people" (ibid, p. 268, Essays in the Social Scientific Study of Judaism and Jewish Society, New York: Ktav, 1992). The converse is also the case when urbanization increases. He sums up by writing that such data is a "worldwide rule" (ibid, p. 50). Even taking into consideration the effects of the Roman Empire on Jewish literacy, he writes that "it is no exaggeration to say that the total literacy rate in the Land of Israel at that time (of Jews only, of course) was probably less than 3%" (ibid, p. 55).
Albert Baumgarten, in The Flourishing of Jewish Sects in the Maccabean Era: An Interpretation (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism), writes that "literacy often goes hand in hand with urbanization" (p. 137, Society of Biblical Literature, 1997) and further comments on the sectarian nature of the elite and how they considered themselves separate from the "people of the land" (ibid, 50-51) - the unlearned people.
"Less than 3%" - that's quite a figure, but not entirely surprising - except perhaps to some people who assume that the level of literacy in modern times is the exact same as in ancient times (which is entirely false). Life was much different back then. Catherine Hezser, in Jewish Literacy in Roman Palestine (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism, 2001) , gives a good summation of previous work on the subject and reaches her own further conclusions on the subject.
Besides these specific studies concerning Jewish literacy in antiquity, there are many excellent works detailing the level of overall literacy/illiteracy in the ancient world which are easily found. It's a pretty standard subject when studying history nowadays, and reveals some very interesting things. It's not needed to go into a detailed account of this.
The comment "The fact the you didn't know that shows you know nothing" (better: "The fact [that] you didn't know [these things] shows [that] you know nothing [about the subject]") you made is just plain incorrect, and enormously incorrect. To generalize a conclusion such as "you know nothing" is ridiculous, not to mention that you assume that I "know nothing" about the subject. To the contrary - I do know "something" about the subject, and am able to back up my claims; though so far, you have not been able to back up any of your claims, except by insult.
"In regards to assuming the past is like the present a logical assumption (which is going to be a problem for you ) would be that if we have evidence of something for more then 2000 years and we have zero (non biblical) evidence before that point and none to the contrary then it would be logical to assume that it doesn't pre date the last point we have proof for. (there are almost no real records from before the greek era in any civilization)" is your next foray.
Firts you claim that "logic....is going to be a problem for you", without giving any reason why this should be so, and in reaction to my very detailed post in which I pointed out the illogicality of your assumption concerning the comparison of Modern Jewish History and Ancient Jewish History. Then you claim that "we have evidence of something for more than 2000 years" without realizing that Judaism has changed drastically over this 2000 years - it would be the same as claiming that Christianity is the very same Christianity as it was in the 1st Century, since we have 2000 years of "evidence" for it's existence. Having "evidence" for a groups' existence does not provide "evidence" for that group's ideologies and practices remaining static for that amount of time. The Christians were just as illiterate as other people, but comparing them to modern Christians would give a false impression of their literacy level - as one important example. I've already stated why this position is false, and you have provided absolutely no compelling evidence to the contrary.
Another claim you make is that "there are no real records from before the [G]reek era in any civilization". I'm not sure what you mean by the term "real records", but this is another false claim. There a tons of "real records" from many different countries - royal records, administrative records, economic records, etc, etc. This claim of yours is easily proven to be false by merely looking at the records which we do have from the past, both archaeologically and textually, from traditio and traditum.
To sum up: my original reply still stands, and stands even firmer (in my opinion) in light of this post of yours. It would serve you well to not get into the practice of calling people names when you have nothing else to say or add - it does nothing but make you look bad (opposite of what you were trying to accomplish, no doubt) and casts aspersions on the points you are trying to get across. I haven't called you any names, have I? It IS possible to have a discussion without resorting to Ad Hominem attacks. I suppose that the scholars I quoted are also [insert name-calling here], since they disagree with your unsubstantiated claims - even though they are experts in their field.
Now - if you can refrain from name-calling, perhaps this thread can move on politely and productively. Remember: if you claim something, you must provide evidence - not insults.
The bible openly answers this question (now you might not like the answer but to criticize the bible for your ignorance is idiotic)
as a side point on your not funny joke during the middle ages many people went there whole lives with out a bath. If you know nothing about history you also have no right to form a opinion on historical subjects. (one that could be taken seriously)
How does the Bible openly answer this, since you're assuming people are "ignorant" again? Back up your claim, please - rather than making a passing reference to something. "The Bible" is a pretty wide field to use as a proof, without being specific.
Seriously - still using that "you know nothing about history" argument? I think it's pretty clear that he has a better grasp of history than you do, and I don't mean that rudely - I'm basing that on your posts so far in this thread, and you tactic of insults as evidence, without once providing a historical reference beyond generalizations.
The bible openly answers this question (now you might not like the answer but to criticize the bible for your ignorance is idiotic)
Perhaps you could give a citation then?
Quote:
as a side point on your not funny joke during the middle ages many people went there whole lives with out a bath. If you know nothing about history you also have no right to form a opinion on historical subjects. (one that could be taken seriously)
really? Who made you god of C-D? Pretty lame deflection to the middle ages and not countering the water claims unless you claim the rock of Horeb. That was not a mobile device, perhaps you hold the christian view the rock of Horeb was actually jesus in rock form and as such amounts to no more than special pleading.
BTW my opinion is based on 50 years cognitive exposure to the bible and my own research. Perhaps if you had one tenth of what I know, you could then offer an opinion of worth but it seems you take the old adage of Jews that call folk like me anti Semite. If so, that boat does not float in my ocean
Hey guys, go easy on NYJew - he might be a bit outmatched in this discussion. I'm sure he means well, as of course you two do, too.
Oooh, that was fun to write: "you two do, too."
1. they don't mean well (and you should never speak that way about a bunch a kofriem)
2. unlike them I can read original sources therefore I'm not really interested what a am harezt like Kugel or 90% of the other "Scholars" have to say.
in regards to being out of their league (which if you mean (English) grammatically I agree, if not they're out of my league)
3. while I can sight numerous jewish sources for mass literacy, contra apion (8) makes very little sense with out a mass literacy.
4. a few points on the work of the so called scholar Meir Bar-Ilan (now his great grandfathers were real scholars) who i was "disproved" with
1. also like me compares to recent times and worked backwards (but unlike him I used Jewish populations and he used non jewish) and 2 he made a very big assumptions in his theory (for example it seems that usually the Tannaim did not speak of rare cases) that are easily disprooven and statements that should be explained in other ways. (when it says "knowing how to read" it means how to punctuate with out punctuation notes which would have to be known through tradition even if the person was 100% literate)
a perfect reason why I don't care what "scholars" have to say
5. the rock at Horeb was movable (see mesechtas Tanis)
Quote:
BTW my opinion is based on 50 years cognitive exposure to the bible and my own research. Perhaps if you had one tenth of what I know, you could then offer an opinion of worth but it seems you take the old adage of Jews that call folk like me anti Semite. If so, that boat does not float in my ocean
unless you (also goes for my other critique) can read the original you're opinion is completely worthless. So I ask can you understand Hebrew?
Firts you claim that "logic....is going to be a problem for you", without giving any reason why this should be so, and in reaction to my very detailed post in which I pointed out the illogicality of your assumption concerning the comparison of Modern Jewish History and Ancient Jewish History. Then you claim that "we have evidence of something for more than 2000 years" without realizing that Judaism has changed drastically over this 2000 years - it would be the same as claiming that Christianity is the very same Christianity as it was in the 1st Century, since we have 2000 years of "evidence" for it's existence. Having "evidence" for a groups' existence does not provide "evidence" for that group's ideologies and practices remaining static for that amount of time. The Christians were just as illiterate as other people, but comparing them to modern Christians would give a false impression of their literacy level - as one important example. I've already stated why this position is false, and you have provided absolutely no compelling evidence to the contrary.
I'll explain my point again because you clearly didn't get it.
Despite many changes Jewish culture in the past 2000 years 1 constant has been that there has always been a majority of male jews who could read. To assume things were different before that with out any evidence to support that theory would be illogical.
1. they don't mean well (and you should never speak that way about a bunch a kofriem)
2. unlike them I can read original sources therefore I'm not really interested what a am harezt like Kugel or 90% of the other "Scholars" have to say.
NY Jew, I sort of agree with your point #1 above. But I've had a back and forth with these two for the last several weeks, and I've found them both to be respectful in their communication style. I don't agree with them on almost anything, but they do keep it above the line.
On your point #2, I too can read the original source material, and I too am little interested in what Kugel or other similar "scholars" have to say. I take my "cues" from the meforshim, not a bunch of secular scholars i can't relate with. And when Whoppers pulls out an Orthodox Jewish scholar who supports one of his points, even though I've never heard of these "scholars," I can assure you their ideas would not be welcome in any mainstream shul in America. Nobody calling themself a religious Jew would ever say the Torah was authored by multiple people and ideas we're "retrojected backwards" into the timeline. It's just a terribly terribly un-Jewish viewpoint to hold. My guess is the scholars Whoppers refers to are some kind of hybrid Jews (like Karaites) or non-Jews altogether (like messianic). And it's trickery to wave these scholars in the faces of the uneducated, impressionable masses who frequent this website.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
just snipped to give you a 
