Pharoah's army found on the bottom of the Red Sea.

by **john9blue** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:32 am

kudos to juan for being the only nonbeliever in this thread to actually take the time to refute brainalack

instead of saying "lol this is all dumb lol", laugh nervously, and walk away while trying to forget the evidence they just saw.

by **crispybits** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:38 am

Excuse me? Juan was the only person who did what?

by **john9blue** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 11:53 am

crispybits wrote:Excuse me? Juan was the only person who did what?

okay then... ATTEMPT to refute... i mean, you can judge for yourself whether his rebuttals are convincing or not.

by **crispybits** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 12:07 pm

I take it you missed the point where I showed it cannot be true (as in, not just refuted but totally debunked it) and they stopped even trying to argue then?

by **john9blue** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 12:22 pm

crispybits wrote:I take it you missed the point where I showed it cannot be true (as in, not just refuted but totally debunked it) and they stopped even trying to argue then?

nope, i caught that post. even if player hadn't addressed it, it still wouldn't amount to much of an argument since you were only refuting one sentence in the bible, and not the videos that he posted. it does raise some interesting questions, though.

by **crispybits** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 12:27 pm

The videos that he posted are supposedly of evidence of a biblical event, and a very important one. The one sentence in the bible doesn't exist in isloation, it has other sentences around it that all tie together to make the geography of the original post not make any sense at all.

And regardless of that, I was hardly saying "dur this is dumb lol" and walking away nervously, which is what you say everyone bar Juan did (Player57832 didn't either by the way). And Player didn't say that these "chariots" prove the crossing happened where the videos were made either, she's saying they're false, and she's "on your side" (as in a believer, rather than a skeptic)

Or is this your way of trying to imply that all the atheists run away when confronted with evidence of anything that might, if you squint really hard, twist your head 90 degrees and wish upon a star, make the bible provable?

by **john9blue** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 12:52 pm

crispybits wrote:The videos that he posted are supposedly of evidence of a biblical event, and a very important one. The one sentence in the bible doesn't exist in isloation, it has other sentences around it that all tie together to make the geography of the original post not make any sense at all.

And regardless of that, I was hardly saying "dur this is dumb lol" and walking away nervously, which is what you say everyone bar Juan did (Player57832 didn't either by the way). And Player didn't say that these "chariots" prove the crossing happened where the videos were made either, she's saying they're false, and she's "on your side" (as in a believer, rather than a skeptic)

Or is this your way of trying to imply that all the atheists run away when confronted with evidence of anything that might, if you squint really hard, twist your head 90 degrees and wish upon a star, make the bible provable?

yes

by **crispybits** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:02 pm

Well, must be tough being you then, especially if you're relying on something that even christian theologians agree is a parable (with a possible historically true root in a much earlier, smaller event) rather than any kind of accurate historical recount and support "evidence" that despite not really proving anything, being in the wrong place, and attempting to take it's historical validity from completely flawed assumptions as a means to "prove" any sort of accuracy in the bible.

But each to their own I guess. I just don't think you're in much of a position to insult people like you just tried to do, and beyond that, it's not exactly Christian behaviour is it, I mean what would Jesus say if he could see you now? Tut tut tut.

by **john9blue** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:05 pm

crispybits wrote:Well, must be tough being you then, especially if you're relying on something that even christian theologians agree is a parable (with a possible historically true root in a much earlier, smaller event) rather than any kind of accurate historical recount and support "evidence" that despite not really proving anything, being in the wrong place, and attempting to take it's historical validity from completely flawed assumptions as a means to "prove" any sort of accuracy in the bible.

But each to their own I guess. I just don't think you're in much of a position to insult people like you just tried to do, and beyond that, it's not exactly Christian behaviour is it, I mean what would Jesus say if he could see you now? Tut tut tut.

why are you assuming that i agree with the videos that brainalack posted? is it because i didn't mock them?

by **crispybits** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:10 pm

Well, you called the OP's videos "evidence" for one thing, that implies you think they have validity, and therefore agree.

by **john9blue** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:47 pm

crispybits wrote:Well, you called the OP's videos "evidence" for one thing, that implies you think they have validity, and therefore agree.

right after i praised juan for posting evidence AGAINST the videos?

by **crispybits** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:58 pm

Not really, you praised Juan for being "the only nonbeliever in this thread to actually take the time to refute brainalack"

What if I was to praise Player in the Evidence for God thread for being "the only believer in this thread to actually take the time to construct a reasonable argument". You, and every other believer posting in that thread is being insulted with that statement.

Then, to make sure you made your point:

"instead of saying "lol this is all dumb lol", laugh nervously, and walk away while trying to forget the evidence they just saw"

Which isn't even implying anything, it's flat out saying that every other non-believer is burying their head in the sand and ignoring evidence. Just to make sure it's really really clear the insult you're throwing at us.

And now you act all innocent, like you were just trying to pay someone a compliment? Pull the other one...

Edit - note that a few people may have deserved the insult if the claim itself actually had any substance, but it's been refuted so many times and by so many people (including the leaders of the church of the guy who made the claim in the first place) that it's like you expect a proper debate to originate from someone claiming that Santa Claus really does fly around the world once a year on a reindeer-pulled flying sleigh delivering presents...

by **zimmah** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 3:08 pm

crispybits wrote:If the Bible is of importance to your understanding of the Israelite Exodus, then this theory has to be dismissed as impossible.

Exodus 15:22 reads, "Then Moses led Israel from the Red Sea, and they went out into the wilderness of Shur; and they went three days in the wilderness and found no water"

But the wilderness of Shur is east of the Red Sea and in the western area of the Sinai. (This location is also attested in Egyptian sources). To cross the Red Sea and be in the wilderness of Shur one could only be crossing the western most arm of the Red Sea and not the Gulf of Aqaba.

So... either the Bible is wrong in any one of several different ways, or this is not the remains of Egyptian pursuit of the Israelite crossing led by Moses. You choose which.

Zimmah and Brainalack I'm very interested to hear which you think it is? Biblical error? Human error? I'm waiting with baited breath....

Also, howcome I, a mere skeptic, with access only to what google gives me, can find this out, when the guys finding this, who are educated Christians who must have done a lot of research on the subject can't? Surely they've read the stories of the exodus to give them clues and hints about where they should be looking?

these cards were drawn long after the bible was written, and most of the locations were speculated. so the maps aren't accurate.

by **crispybits** on Sun Aug 19, 2012 4:23 pm

So the Wilderness of Shur is nothing to do with the Shur Desert, which is pretty much in the same location? And the respected and accepted biblical atlases, that all put it where that map puts it, they're all wrong yeah?

Also, can you explain why ancient Egtyptian records also locate the Wilderness of Shur where it is on my map?

Finally, this is not the only time the Bible mentions Shur, and the location in the map above is consistent with these other times too, whereas the only other location I've seen (that all happen to be on websites promoting the theories in the OP videos, I can't find any independent websites that give Shur as in the location they say it's in) is not consistent with all of these other mentions. For example the Philistines lived just south of modern day Israel on the Meditteranean coast, and their territory didn't extend far inland. When David fled from Saul he went through their territory, and between that territory and Egypt was Shur:

Samuel 27:1-8
7 And the time that David dwelt in the country of the Philistines was a full year and four months. 8 And David and his men went up , and invaded the Geshurites, and the Gezrites, and the Amalekites: for those nations were of old the inhabitants of the land, as thou goest to Shur, even unto the land of Egypt.

If Shur was in Arabia as an Aqaba crossing necessitates, then you wouldn't go to Shur to get anywhere near Egypt. It would be a few hundred miles in the wrong direction.

This is what I mean about the Bible would have to be incorrect in more than one place for the crossing to have been here. Or, all of current theology and archeaology is wrong about locations for which there are multiple references to from multiple different contemporary cultures which all narrow down locations for various different ancient sites with a remarkable degree of accuracy, many of which have been confirmed by archaeologists actually going out there and excavating them.

Nope, having thought about it it's far more reasonable to believe a fame-hunting amateur "archaeologist", who has never produced confirmed evidence of his finds (just one wheel, that mysteriously went missing), and who has never attempted to publish a peer reviewed scientific record of his "findings", over hundreds of archaeologists, many of them devoutly christian, who have produced and recorded findings, and who have produced peer reviewed scientific papers detailing their findings and relating them to biblical references about relative locations.

I suggest you go and read that St Augustine passage in the Evolution thread again Zimmah and have a long moment of honest self-reflection. Are you qualified to verify these claims yourself? Have you checked the information that you're trusting (possibly purely because it fits your world view) is valid? Whether it's been cross checked and verified by any one of the numerous independent scientific and historical authorities? Whether there is other information out there which detracts from the crediibility of the people making these claims? Whether there is other information out there which seriously contradicts these claims, and what supporting evidence there is for the alternative information?

Because all that is all I'm doing. I'm looking at multiple different sources, from multiple different organisations both theological, archaeological and historical, and I'm presenting you with the fact that on the back of the many hundreds of years of bible related study that's been done, these guys are officially recognised as complete crackpots and charlatans pretty much by every current theological, archaeological and historical authority. And all I'm saying is check your sources, or you'll end up being put into the same "deluded" pigeonhole by anyone that does check their facts because you're being deceived into promoting the lies these guys told to get their 5 minutes of fame.

by **PLAYER57832** on Mon Aug 20, 2012 4:50 pm

crispybits wrote:The videos that he posted are supposedly of evidence of a biblical event, and a very important one. The one sentence in the bible doesn't exist in isloation, it has other sentences around it that all tie together to make the geography of the original post not make any sense at all.

And regardless of that, I was hardly saying "dur this is dumb lol" and walking away nervously, which is what you say everyone bar Juan did (Player57832 didn't either by the way). And Player didn't say that these "chariots" prove the crossing happened where the videos were made either, she's saying they're false, and she's "on your side" (as in a believer, rather than a skeptic)

Or is this your way of trying to imply that all the atheists run away when confronted with evidence of anything that might, if you squint really hard, twist your head 90 degrees and wish upon a star, make the bible provable?

For the record, I don't believe any credible proof of the crossing have been made. When I last spent significant time on this, which was admittedly several years ago, I came to believe the Sea of Reeds was more likely than the Red Sea idea. However, that was a while ago and I cannot remember all the details of why I thought that. The exact location is not terribly important to me, either. It would be if I were looking for evidence, but I am not. I believe Exodus because it is in the Bible and its significance is of a record of how God has dealt with people.