Reading Genesis from the Torah.

[Cramulus]

highly related and extremely lulzy:

"Genesis 19: Total Insanity"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bar3GOzDNzg

[Template]

Moral of the story: DO NOT ATTEMPT TO FUCK ANGELS, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.

Hey, there was nothing wrong with asking.  Just insisting...

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

highly related and extremely lulzy:

"Genesis 19: Total Insanity"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bar3GOzDNzg

I love those.

[dontblameyoko]

1) Angels are HAWT. Holy shit, fucking I want to fuck you now hawt.

After seeing Metatron in "Dogma," I'd have to agree with you there.

[Kai]

And God Bob help you if you wear clothing made of mixed fibers.

Except that was in Leviticus with Moses, long after the Sodom and Gommorah incident, after the death of Abraham, Issac, Jacob and the fathers of the 12 tribes. Hell, I have no idea how many years after the death of Joseph that the regime even changed in Egypt leading to Exodus.

It appears likely that the correct answer is "NEVER". If it's based on any actual historical events, they would have been before 1200 BC. Joseph supposedly died somewhere in the neighborhood of 1450 or so. So in the mythical story, we're talking a couple centuries... In reality, it seems unlikely that the Hebrews were ever slaves, let alone slaves in Egypt or that Jacob/Joseph/Abraham/Moses etc were actual people.

JESUS CHRIST JUST LET ME TAKE MY TORAH AS LITERAL TRUTH AND LEAVE ME ALONE! 

[Suu]

The Hebrews weren't slaves. They were paid contract workers and mercenaries. They got fed up with Egypt not living up to their end of the deal and went "up in arms" out of Egypt. Because I don't know about you, but no way in hell would the entire population of Goshen allow a bunch of "slaves" to own weapons or raid places where they could get to enough of them to leave "up in arms".

There's also very little Egyptian evidence supporting anything regarding the Exodus. There's only one papyrus that may even hint of the plagues.

[0]

Suu's right,

The very word "Hebrew" is a modernization of the ancient word "Ha-bay-roo" (phonetic), which was a tribe of mercenaries employed first by the ancient syrians and later proven to have been hired on as a private military force by the Egyptians. Exodus says how the Hebrews "went up armed" out of the land of Canaan. If they were slaves, why would they have been given weapons in their escape?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Or at least that's one theory... still light on actual evidence.

[Suu]

Everything is light on actual evidence, especially when you're focused on written word in a holy book telling only one side of the story, and the other side doesn't really seem to exist.

[Jenne]

Everything is light on actual evidence, especially when you're focused on written word in a holy book telling only one side of the story, and the other side doesn't really seem to exist.

THIS.

Also, Kai, it's very interesting reading the Old Testament portions of the Bible form the Torah and Qu'uran.  I've done both awhile back, and it's kind of a mindblow in several ways.

I should get into reading up on the fr rly rls history of the Hebrews...seeing as how I have read the Bible several times over it would be interesting to compare.

[Suu]

They HAVE found evidence on the Egyptian side for the invasion of Israel in 925 BC, which is post-Exodus, but not for anything substantial regarding the Exodus, and the one papyrus that may refer to the plagues was written in the 19th Dynasty, which was 600 years prior to the reign of Ramesses II, the probable Exodus pharaoh according to Biblical readings. This can mean one of two things.

A: The Egyptians erased it from their history. As they HAVE been known to do this.

B: The story is bullshit.

[Freeky]

1) Angels are HAWT. Holy shit, fucking I want to fuck you now hawt.

After seeing Metatron in "Dogma," I'd have to agree with you there.

Oh my god, Alan Rickman is so fucking hot in that movie. Can you believe he was in his 50s then?

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

They HAVE found evidence on the Egyptian side for the invasion of Israel in 925 BC, which is post-Exodus, but not for anything substantial regarding the Exodus, and the one papyrus that may refer to the plagues was written in the 19th Dynasty, which was 600 years prior to the reign of Ramesses II, the probable Exodus pharaoh according to Biblical readings. This can mean one of two things.

A: The Egyptians erased it from their history. As they HAVE been known to do this.

B: The story is bullshit.

That is the correct motorcycle. It seems possible that the Egyptians have wiped their history... but the screamingly loud lack of any physical evidence for proto-hebrews in Egypt circa 1400-1200 seems pretty damning. If we add to that the lack of eviddence for the existence of a Nation with its capital in Jerusalem (the 12 tribe kingdom) under Saul or David's lineage, it seems reasonable to think that maybe the first several books of the Bible are fraudlent. There were tribal groups living in Palestine and the area claimed as Israel, but the idea that they had a single King, that they were a large Nation of people bound together by a Law Covenant etc etc all seems to be AWOL.

I think the first archeological evidence of a Judea like the one in the Bible comes after the fall of Babylon, when Cyrus the King of Persia gets involved.. so from a biblical perspective that's Ezra and afterward. Everything before that is still in the realm of myth until something useful gets dug up

On the other hand... the Bible did correctly identify the guy in charge of Babylon at the time it fell as 'Belshazzar'... Historically, the name was unknown until archeologists figured out that it was a grandson that was acting as Regent while Nabonidus  ran like a bitch. So it would seem that 'at least', some aspects of the book of Daniel were possibly correct. However, that still leaves a huge gap between the fall of Babylon and the 'historical' books of the Kings, Chronicles, Judges, etc etc