Re: The Holy Bible

On Sat, 15 Aug 2026 22:05:02 -0700, Samuel Spade <[email protected]>
wrote:

>[email protected] wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 Aug 2026 22:06:01 -0700, Samuel Spade <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>(much snippage throughout)
>
>> Professor of Egyptology J. A. Wilson stated, 
>> “Egyptian records were always positive, emphasizing the successes of
>
>No surprise.
>
>> Thus we shouldn't be the least bit surprised to not find any mention
>> of the Egyptians humiliating experience with the Israelites and their
>> exodus etc, in the ancient Egyptian writings remaining today. (Nor,
>> the highly involved Moses)
>
>The egyptians left a huge body of writing behind, not all on
>obelisks.  Plus, there's no archaelogical evidence for 2
>million hebrews in egypt.-

If you put together a government, and an enemy of yours came in and
took it over, would you write about your humiliating defeat? That is
what the self-righteous pharoes of Egypt contended with.

Also Professor of Egyptology J. A. Wilson stated, 

“Egyptian records were always positive, emphasizing the successes of
the pharaoh or the god, whereas failures and defeats were never
mentioned, except in some context of the distant past.” (The World
History of the Jewish People, 1964, Vol. I, pp. 338, 339)

The Egyptians even lied about their successes, such as one particular
Pharaoh (I can't remember his name) who claimed to have
single-handedly by himself, with his sword killed thousands of his
enemies on the battle field, down to the last one. And he had that
ludicrous information recorded on various monuments etc.

And if the Egyptians didn't like what was recorded on the monuments
and things in the past, they would get stone cutters to go around and
remove all the information they didn't want people to see. Thus even
if the accomplishment of the enslavement of the Hebrews was at one
time recorded for boasting, it could have been removed by later
Pharaoh's who didn't want to be reminded of the degrading experience
their predecessors had with the Hebrews and their God.

Thus we shouldn't be the least bit surprised to not find any mention
of the Egyptians humiliating experience with the Israelites and their
exodus etc, in the ancient Egyptian writings remaining today. 


>
>Biggest argument against exodus: After the 1967 war, Israeli
>archaeologists had 7 years to comb the Sinai for traces of
>millions of hebrews wandering in the desert.  They had every
>motivation to find something, even ashes from fire pits, or
>shards of pottery.  They found nothing.

That is likely because they looked in the wrong spot. As that
Egyptologist above said, their exact route is debated. 

So that's to be expected if they traced the route they took wrong.

"The exact path of the biblical Exodus is historically and
geographically debated, with no definitive archaeological consensus." 
(AI Overview)
>
>You can't have 2 million lost Jews wandering the little sinai
>peninsula for 40 years without leaving a trace.

Correct. So if they search the right spot, they will get their
evidence. 
>
>The exodus never happened.

Then there should be millions of Hebrews living in Egypt today.


>
>> >> >God appeared to Abraham (Gen 18)
>> >> >Jacob saw God (Gen 32)
>> >> >Moses spoke with God face to face, as to a 
>> >> >	friend (Ex 33:11)
>> >> >Moses, Aaron & 70 elders saw God (Ex 24)
>> >> >God shows Moses his butt (Ex 33:23)
>> >> >   As illustrated by Michelangelo on the ceiling 
>> >> >   of the Sistine Chapel:
>> >> ><https://www.dailyartmagazine.com/michelangelo-warrior-pope-and-gods-bottom/>
>> >> >
>> >>  
>> >> See above.
>
>God spoke to Moses face to face, or the scripture lies. Using
>angel intermediaries is not face to face.
>
>
>> >> >Who did Mary and Mary Magdalene see at Jesus's tomb?
>> >> 
>> >> Show me the Scriptures you are referring to.
>> >
>> >Matthew: They saw an angel.
>> >Mark: a man.
>> >Luke: two men.
>> >John: two angels.
>> 
>> When there is multiple Bible statements on a subject, it is the
>> differing writing style of the writer. If Matthew said 1 angel, and
>> John says 2, then just put them together. Then there was certainly 1
>> angel according to John plus a 2nd one. Thus there were 2 angels seen.
>
>No.  It's a matter of simple statements, not writing style.

Writing style is necessary to fully understand Scriptures. For example
the doctor called Luke. His style of writing shows that when he speaks
of medical things. 

>
>1 or 2 angels is not 1 or 2 men.  Forgivable confusion, but
>still a contradiction.

Angels are normally invisible to human eyes. To be seen and heard,
they had to materialize a human-looking person. Thus those angels
could be seen as men. So angels and those men, were one and the same. 

>
>> 
>> Luke 24:4:
>> 
>> -- King James
>> Luke 24:4  And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed
>> thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:
>> 
>> Those "two men" were angels. How do we know? They had glowing cloths.
>> Also the women recodnized them as not being ordinary male Jews,
>> because of verse 5:
>> 
>> "-- King James
>> Luke 24:5  And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the
>> earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?"
>> 
>> They wouldn't act that way if they were ordinary men. 
>> 
>> The Bible tells us to REASON on the Scriptures. (Acts 17:2) If a
>> person doesn't reason on them, they can end up in the dark. 
>
>If you reason on the scriptures, they become incredible.  Or,
>
>"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for
>atheism ever conceived."  - Isaac Asimov 
>
>> Here is the account in Luke: Luke 24:22-24 KJV:
>> 
>> 22.  Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished,
>> which were early at the sepulchre;
>>  23.  And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they
>> had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.
>>  24.  And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre,
>> and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.
>> 
>> So in Luke it wasn't 2 men but "angels", plural, which means at least
>> more than one. 
>
>This is Peter telling Jesus in disguise, what he had heard.
>
>Luke 24 1-4:
>On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the
>women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb.
>2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, 3 but when
>they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. 4
>While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in
>clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them.
>
>If you want to call this another contradiction within the
>same chapter, fine with me.

You read it, but failed to really read it. These men GLOWED like
lightening. They were obviously angels. 

>
>
>> Where ever was your source, don't fall for it. They tried to trick you
>> thinking you are some kind of moron that can't reason on the
>> Scriptures
>
>Lol.  My source was the bible.  Ok, I won't fall for it.
>
>
>> Thus in summary we have:
>> 
>> Matthew=  An angel (he talked to just one angel, when there were two
>> present)  (
>> Mark= Two angels (Luke said their cloths were glowing. Mark didn't
>> mention that and only recounts '1 glowing man' (angel) (Mark 15:46)
>
>Mark says there was 1 man in white clothes.  Why are you
>correcting this to match Luke's story?

Dr Luke gave more details than the others. 
And also, if the story was invented, they would have made every thing
not contradict anything. 
>
>Mark 16:5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man
>dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they
>were alarmed.
>
>It's not surprising that Mark 16 would be contradictory.
>There are various renditions of that chapter, and the last 12
>verses of Mark were added after the fact.

First of all, 
>
>> Luke= angels (Lu 24:23)
>> John= Two angels (John 20:12)
>> 
>> 
>> >
>> >> >How did Judas die?
>> >> 
>> >> Please show me the Scriptures you are referring to.
>> >> 
>> >> I did recall a couple of Scriptures was needed to get to the truth. 
>> >> Judas hanged himself over a cliff.  Then the rope broke and he fell
>> >> spilling his guts out. But show me what you think.
>> >
>> >Matthew 27:5 Judas hanged himself.
>> >Acts 1:18  Judas fell and his guts burst out.
>> >
>> >Two separate narratives.
>> 
>> Do you believe Judas just ran up to a cliff and jumped off?
>
>No, I don't believe any of it.  But why the discrepancy?

It was from the viewpoint of different men. If the whole thing was a
scam, then they would have made it read EXACTLY the same. 
>
>> When we reason on it, its what I said above. Matthew highligted the
>> hanging, but Luke (the writer of Acts and a doctor), focused more on
>> the physiology of the man.
>> 
>> You see, the gospels were not just copied. They each wrote what an
>> account meant to them. Thus there was no collusion going on here. 
>
>That doesn't explain why the accounts differed in facts.

They really don't, if you do your research.

>
>Face it, James, it's a contradiction.

Only looks that way on the surface. But dig under the surface, and you
may be surprised on what you find.
 
>
>
>> >> >Also from a previous post by Mitchell Holman:
>> >> >194 Contradictions in the New Testament
>> >> ><https://www.slideshare.net/salehusman585/194-contradiction-sin-the-new-testament-of-the-bible>
>> >> 
>> >> If you want to give them to me one at a time, I will comment on them.
>> >> I do recall a couple of Scriptures that Bible scholars say was copiest
>> >> errors in the OT. It had to do with quantaties. (like 1000 chariots,
>> >> or 10,000 chariots)
>> >
>> >You can see them for yourself.  How bout the first one,:
>> >"1.  Jesus' lineage was traced through David's son Solomon.
>> >Mt1:6.
>> >     Jesus' lineage was traced through David's son Nathan.
>> >Lk3:31"
>> 
>> Both Scriptures are correct. You might say, "How can they both be
>> correct when they are clearly a contradiction?"
>> 
>> Actually they are not a contradiction and here is why.
>> 
>> Matthew traces the geniology from Soloman to Joseph, Jesus step
>> father. This gave Jesus the LEGAL right to things.
>> 
>> Doctor Luke traces the geniology from Solomon to Mary's apparent
>> father, Heli. This gave Jesus the NATURAL right to things.
>
>Luke's geneology doesn't say anything about Mary's family. It
>may be Mary's lineage, as the geneologies are completely
>different, and I've heard also that one is Mary's lineage.
>But Luke certainly doesn't say that, it says this is Joseph's
>lineage.

Yes, one is through Joseph and the other through Mary. Showing Jesus
had double proof he was who he claimed. 

>Dubious at best.
>
>
>> >You are thinking God made physics.  I think Nature did. 
>> 
>> Yet 'nature', like evolution, has no brain! Yet it conjured up all the
>> forces to be used in a certain mathematical way to produce the
>> complicated laws of physics?? People put a lot of stock in random
>> chance. 
>
>So?
>
>Is it a surprise that a universe would have natural laws that
>function, well, universally?  That's not evidence for God,
>only evidence for (as far as we know) consistent natural
>laws.

All laws come from somewhere. They just didn't pop out of the vacuum
of space. 

>
>This is the fallacy of argument from ignorance; you don't
>understand how natural laws can exist without God, therefore
>they can't.

The laws of physics are mathmatically sound. How can something with no
brain, produce them?

>
>> And if that is true, you should be able to go into the woods and find
>> a log cabin completely furnished with furniture, all the plumbing, and
>> even electricity created by mindless nature. 
>
>Now you're being silly.

Look at yourself in the mirror. You are created much more complex that
a log cabin with furniture etc. Talk to those who have created
human-looking robots. If it rains on a robot, it probably shorts out.
But a human is water-proofed and so much more. 

So you believe a force with no mind and an IQ of zero, created super
complex things like the human brain? Now who is being silly.


>
>
>> >> That means there was a lot of water on the earth, and water canapy
>> >> above the earth. (high in the atmosphere) It was like Venus looks
>> >> today, except their clouds surrounding it are made up of sulfuric
>> >> acid, etc, instead of the earth's water vapor.
>> >> (I surely won't be sunbathing on Venus)
>> >
>> >Canopy of water over earth is impossible.  We're talking
>> >29,000 feet of water being stored in the atmosphere.  The
>> >pressure would be greater than at the bottom of the ocean.
>> >All that water (or vapor) would block the sunlight from
>> >earth.  The water would displace all the O2.
>> 
>> You are guessing about the possible outcomes. Let's try this: 
>
>I'm not guessing.  This is a simple application of stuff I
>studied in high school and college.  The more mass there is
>above you, the greater the pressure on you.  How can you have
>29,000 feet of water over you and not have thousands of psi
>of pressure pushing on you?  Unless you want to invoke the
>firmament supporting it.
>
>There was no canopy of water storing floodwaters for noah's
>flood.

Are you so sure? 

"In a study published Thursday in Science, researchers present new
evidence that Earth has had its water since the very beginning -- no
asteroids required."
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/11/13/ancient-volcanic-rocks-suggest-that-earths-water-arrived-surprisingly-early/)

For example, this article appeared in the New Scientist magazine, Jan
3, 2009. The first few paragraphs state:

"Ancient Earth was a barren waterworld 

DRY land may be something of a novelty. Until around 2.5 billion years
ago our planet was almost completely covered by water, a model of the
early Earth suggests.

Today, some 28 per cent of Earth's surface is above sea level. Exactly
how the ratio of land to sea has varied through Earth's history is
unclear, but it is generally agreed that the amount of continental
crust has increased over time.

Now, calculations by Nicolas Flament of the University of Sydney,
Australia, and colleagues suggest that Earth was a water-world until
about 2.5 billion years ago, with land making up only 2 to 3 per cent
of its surface (Earth and Planetary Science Letters, DOI:
10.1016/j.epsl.2008.08.029)."

"NEW VIEW of the young earth covered in oceans of liquid water as
early as 4.4 billion years ago contrasts sharply with the hot, hostile
world typically depicted in textbooks." (Scientific
American)(http://geotest.tamu.edu/userfiles/GEOL106/CoolEarlyEarthSciAm2005.pdf)

Thus, scientists are knowingly or unknowingly, supporting the Genesis
account of creation. If this turns out to be accepted as fact, how
could the Genesis writer have known about such things? You might be
amazed at how scientifically accurate the Genesis creation account is,
once you investigate it. 

Why don't you criticize and correct scientific articles when they say
such things? For example, from a NASA web page promoting its "Passport
to Knowledge Project", it makes the following statement:

"Electronic field-trips via television, print and telecomputing take
students on adventures to the ends of the Earth, to the bottom of the
oceans and out into space."
(http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/antarctica/passport.html)

Is NASA saying the earth has "ends", thus is flat or cubical? I am
sure you don't conclude they meant that literally, and neither should
you conclude the Bible is literal all the time. You have look at the
context, and other related verses etc, to determine literalness or
not. 




>
>> Water weighs about 8 lbs per gallon. How much would the water weigh in
>> a hurricane. How can something so heavy still hang in the atmosphere?
>> If I take a gallon milk jug, and fill it with water, and throw it high
>> in the air, guess what happens?
>
>What does that have to do with anything we're talking about?

The weight of water has everything to do with it. 

As the facts tell us, Venus is surrounded by surfuric acid clouds.
SULFURIC ACID IS ABOUT TWICE AS HEAVY AS WATER, PER GALLON. Yet it
still is found in its atmosphere! So logically the lighter water
physically could have surrounded the earth at one early time.

AI Overview
"The surface gravity of Venus is 8.87 m/s², which is about 90% (or
0.9g) of Earth's gravity. If you weigh 100 pounds on Earth, you would
weigh about 90 pounds on Venus."

Then I could skip my diet. (:>)
 

>
>> >(round earth hanging etc)
>> >> >> So in summary we have:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> A spherical earth hanging in space by nothing. 
>
>Round, not spherical.  Round can be flat.

Don't be so quick to condemn. The Hebrew word for "circle" there is
"hhug". Some Bible scholars say that word can be rendered "spherical".

>
>Again, i'd be impressed with that anyway, were it not for
>many other passages, even in the NT, that clearly reflected a
>flat earth cosmology.

Then, NASA believes in a flat earth. Here is the proof:

 The "Passport to Knowledge Project", it makes the following
statement:

"Electronic field-trips via television, print and telecomputing take
students on adventures to the ends of the Earth, to the bottom of the
oceans and out into space."
(http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/antarctica/passport.html)

>
>> >> >Again, by the time most of the OT was written down, it was
>> >> >already widely known that the earth was round.  Certainly the
>> >> >Greeks knew it when they translated the Septuagint.
>> >> 
>> >> How do you know?
>> >
>> >Because they were educated greeks from Alexandria, a center
>> >of learning.  They knew that Aristotle proved the earth was
>> >round in 400 BCE, and that Eristosthenes measured &
>> >calculated the size of the earth in 240 BCE.
>> 
>> Good for him.
>> 
>> But the Bible outdates them. Isaiah ("the circle of the earth") was
>> written in the 8th century BCE.
>
>Depends on which part of Isaiah.  It's believed to have 3
>different authors, written mostly in the 8th and 6th century
>BCE.  The Septuagint wasn't translated until the 3rd century
>bce.

So how couls uneducated sheepherders know of such things?

>
>> The book of Job, around the 15th century BCE. ("hangs the earth upon
>> nothing"). How would sheepherders of all people, know such things?
>
>No, Job is about a thousand years later than that.

"Writer: Moses
Place Written: Wilderness
Writing Completed: c. 1473 B.C.E."
(All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial)

Earthquakes:Jesus said
some things about them.
Go to: jw.org (8/20/2026)
[email protected]



>
>(...)
>> >> >Thank you for your replies, James, I appreciate your time,
>> >> >effort and explanations.
>> >> 
>> >> Thank you for your beliefs.
>> 
>> Anytime.
>
>As always.