Just read a few articles which suggest there is no archaeological evidence that the Jews (well, Israelites) were ever enslaved in Egypt... My mind is a bit blown!
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/the-jewish-thinker/were-jews-ever-really-slaves-in-egypt-or-is-passover-a-myth-1.420844
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus#Archaeology
EVERYTHING I LEARNED IN SUNDAY SCHOOL WAS WRONG :eek:
This is incredibly racist. What next Holocaust de Nile?
-
The question I'd like to see answered is where that story actually came from. Was there an earlier instance where the Hebrews were enslaved and the antagonist was changed later for political reasons? Was it made up whole-cloth long after the time period? It's a really intense story, and it seems like it would take a long time for it to become the basis for a major holiday if it was entirely fictional.
Quote from: Sad Sack on September 30, 2013, 05:38:06 PM
The question I'd like to see answered is where that story actually came from. Was there an earlier instance where the Hebrews were enslaved and the antagonist was changed later for political reasons? Was it made up whole-cloth long after the time period? It's a really intense story, and it seems like it would take a long time for it to become the basis for a major holiday if it was entirely fictional.
I base this on nothing but i suspect slavery might really be refering to assimilation. Perhaps the israelites were becoming too egyptian for moses liking.
Quote from: Twigel on September 30, 2013, 05:54:40 PM
Quote from: Sad Sack on September 30, 2013, 05:38:06 PM
The question I'd like to see answered is where that story actually came from. Was there an earlier instance where the Hebrews were enslaved and the antagonist was changed later for political reasons? Was it made up whole-cloth long after the time period? It's a really intense story, and it seems like it would take a long time for it to become the basis for a major holiday if it was entirely fictional.
I base this on nothing but i suspect slavery might really be refering to assimilation. Perhaps the israelites were becoming too egyptian for moses liking.
I think that's
still giving too much credit to the story. As far as I've heard, there isn't really any support for the idea of them ever being in Egypt in massive numbers.
-
Oh shit, another perfectly good holiday ruined! :sad:
Quote from: Mean Mister Nigel on September 30, 2013, 09:55:50 PM
Oh shit, another perfectly good holiday ruined! :sad:
Balls. Don't let these secular-humanist whackjobs destroy your joy of Passover.
I mean, who are you going to believe? These geeks, or the ANGEL OF DEATH (who apparently can't tell the difference between the heathen and the chosen people unless the door gets marked with BLOOD)?
I'm doing a little bit of work on this now. We have extremely limited evidence of Exodus, but with some newer translations of the Torah, we are finding a shit ton of old mistakes (for instance, Moses didn't cross the Red Sea, it was the Reed Sea near the Nile Delta, which could have easily flooded on it's own natural power.)
The majority of the hypotheses revolving around Hebrew enslavement in Egypt is that they were actually hired workers and mercenaries, and a translation of "Hebrew" could mean that. The most accepted translation is "the ones who cross over [the Euphrates]" from when Abraham moved to Canaan from South Turkey. But it's also possible it could be a bastardized translation of a word that means "mercenary." This is possible in another translation error in which the Hebrews fled "with arms raised" when it could very well be armed with weapons. It's difficult to say.
Translations are written by those who want to make the impact. Which is why the Bible is 99.9% wrong.
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
Which is why the Bible is 99.9% wrong.
But it's that 0.1% that will FUCK US ALL.
Because we DON'T KNOW WHICH BIT IT IS.
Odds are, the one true religion is worshiped by a single clan in New Guinea, and everyone else is DAMNED TO HELL.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 01, 2013, 12:09:32 AM
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
Which is why the Bible is 99.9% wrong.
But it's that 0.1% that will FUCK US ALL.
Because we DON'T KNOW WHICH BIT IT IS.
Odds are, the one true religion is worshiped by a single clan in New Guinea, and everyone else is DAMNED TO HELL.
:lulz:
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 01, 2013, 12:09:32 AM
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
Which is why the Bible is 99.9% wrong.
But it's that 0.1% that will FUCK US ALL.
Because we DON'T KNOW WHICH BIT IT IS.
Odds are, the one true religion is worshiped by a single clan in New Guinea, and everyone else is DAMNED TO HELL.
fingers crossed that it's the book of revelations, that's where the story started to pick up for me.
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 01, 2013, 12:09:32 AM
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
Which is why the Bible is 99.9% wrong.
But it's that 0.1% that will FUCK US ALL.
Because we DON'T KNOW WHICH BIT IT IS.
Odds are, the one true religion is worshiped by a single clan in New Guinea, and everyone else is DAMNED TO HELL.
This is the assumption that I base my whole theology around.
Quote from: Faust on October 01, 2013, 08:05:27 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 01, 2013, 12:09:32 AM
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
Which is why the Bible is 99.9% wrong.
But it's that 0.1% that will FUCK US ALL.
Because we DON'T KNOW WHICH BIT IT IS.
Odds are, the one true religion is worshiped by a single clan in New Guinea, and everyone else is DAMNED TO HELL.
fingers crossed that it's the book of revelations, that's where the story started to pick up for me.
The Book of Revelations, aka, the Apocalypse of St. John, is a butthurt pissy ass hate letter to the Emperor Nero from the Apostle John who was stuck in exile living in a cave for being a zealous jerkface. He's lucky he was just dismissed from the Roman court with laughs and not killed.
666 = Nero, written in Greek and translated over into the Greek use of their alphabet to determine numerics. None of it is real, it's all allegory in attempts to shake up the Roman Empire. Unfortunately, it looks like by the time the letter GOT to Rome, John was dead, Nero was dead, and the psycho Domitian was Emperor, who was a Flavian and a known anti-Semite. Considering Christianity was looked upon as as sect of Judaism at this point still, Domitian ordered a nasty persecution because of it. This resulted in a lot of the "oh woe unto us Christians" bullshit. They already had their apocalypse, and it was brought on by one of their own for being a douchenozzle to the Greatest Fucking Empire in the World.
-Suu
Might be a Romanophile.
I heard somewhere that St John was on shrooms. If you take that as a starting point it makes a lot more sense - Revelations is about going down to the local shop to buy some party snacks. On shrooms
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
(for instance, Moses didn't cross the Red Sea, it was the Reed Sea near the Nile Delta, which could have easily flooded on it's own natural power.)
There's historical evidence of Moses? Or do you mean that another translation said "Reed sea"?
Are Red and Reed as easily confusable in Arameic?
thanks suu! always interesting
Quote from: Cain on September 30, 2013, 06:49:57 PM
It's possible, due to the regional power dynamics at the time, that certain Canaanite city-states would copy Egyptian cultural traditions and power structure, as a means to appeasing them and showing themselves as supportive of the Pharoh.
This, alongside the pesistent warfare in the region, and propaganda supporting such warfare, as to where and what really occured.
But I'm not an expert on the region or its history. Maybe Phoxxy would know more, if she's available to comment?
It's a bit before the time period I'm familiar with, I'm afraid. I think that you've made as good a hypothesis as I could, at any rate, Cain.
Hi Phox!
Quote from: Cramulus on October 01, 2013, 02:49:36 PM
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
(for instance, Moses didn't cross the Red Sea, it was the Reed Sea near the Nile Delta, which could have easily flooded on it's own natural power.)
There's historical evidence of Moses? Or do you mean that another translation said "Reed sea"?
Are Red and Reed as easily confusable in Arameic?
thanks suu! always interesting
No historical evidence of Moses, just a mistranslation of the Torah. Most maps that I've seen recently of the proposed Exodus in my class do show them cross the Reed Sea and not the Red Sea. My guess is that after seeing the comparison of Aramaic and modern Hebrew at the Dead Sea Scrolls exhibit, is that it was very easy to miss a vowel or two. They are similar and yet different.
Quote from: Suu on October 01, 2013, 02:03:09 PM
Quote from: Faust on October 01, 2013, 08:05:27 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 01, 2013, 12:09:32 AM
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
Which is why the Bible is 99.9% wrong.
But it's that 0.1% that will FUCK US ALL.
Because we DON'T KNOW WHICH BIT IT IS.
Odds are, the one true religion is worshiped by a single clan in New Guinea, and everyone else is DAMNED TO HELL.
fingers crossed that it's the book of revelations, that's where the story started to pick up for me.
The Book of Revelations, aka, the Apocalypse of St. John, is a butthurt pissy ass hate letter to the Emperor Nero from the Apostle John who was stuck in exile living in a cave for being a zealous jerkface. He's lucky he was just dismissed from the Roman court with laughs and not killed.
666 = Nero, written in Greek and translated over into the Greek use of their alphabet to determine numerics. None of it is real, it's all allegory in attempts to shake up the Roman Empire. Unfortunately, it looks like by the time the letter GOT to Rome, John was dead, Nero was dead, and the psycho Domitian was Emperor, who was a Flavian and a known anti-Semite. Considering Christianity was looked upon as as sect of Judaism at this point still, Domitian ordered a nasty persecution because of it. This resulted in a lot of the "oh woe unto us Christians" bullshit. They already had their apocalypse, and it was brought on by one of their own for being a douchenozzle to the Greatest Fucking Empire in the World.
-Suu
Might be a Romanophile.
Thanks for ruining one of the bet works of surrealist Sci-fantasy I've read :(
Quote from: Faust on October 01, 2013, 04:40:51 PM
Quote from: Suu on October 01, 2013, 02:03:09 PM
Quote from: Faust on October 01, 2013, 08:05:27 AM
Quote from: Dirty Old Uncle Roger on October 01, 2013, 12:09:32 AM
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
Which is why the Bible is 99.9% wrong.
But it's that 0.1% that will FUCK US ALL.
Because we DON'T KNOW WHICH BIT IT IS.
Odds are, the one true religion is worshiped by a single clan in New Guinea, and everyone else is DAMNED TO HELL.
fingers crossed that it's the book of revelations, that's where the story started to pick up for me.
The Book of Revelations, aka, the Apocalypse of St. John, is a butthurt pissy ass hate letter to the Emperor Nero from the Apostle John who was stuck in exile living in a cave for being a zealous jerkface. He's lucky he was just dismissed from the Roman court with laughs and not killed.
666 = Nero, written in Greek and translated over into the Greek use of their alphabet to determine numerics. None of it is real, it's all allegory in attempts to shake up the Roman Empire. Unfortunately, it looks like by the time the letter GOT to Rome, John was dead, Nero was dead, and the psycho Domitian was Emperor, who was a Flavian and a known anti-Semite. Considering Christianity was looked upon as as sect of Judaism at this point still, Domitian ordered a nasty persecution because of it. This resulted in a lot of the "oh woe unto us Christians" bullshit. They already had their apocalypse, and it was brought on by one of their own for being a douchenozzle to the Greatest Fucking Empire in the World.
-Suu
Might be a Romanophile.
Thanks for ruining one of the bet works of surrealist Sci-fantasy I've read :(
I also do parties.
Heh, super interesting thread. Thanks everybody. (I'm sick today, or I'd probably have something to add....)
Quote from: Cramulus on October 01, 2013, 02:49:36 PM
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
(for instance, Moses didn't cross the Red Sea, it was the Reed Sea near the Nile Delta, which could have easily flooded on it's own natural power.)
There's historical evidence of Moses? Or do you mean that another translation said "Reed sea"?
Are Red and Reed as easily confusable in Arameic?
thanks suu! always interesting
Don't see why not. People keep talking about a 'camel' going through the eye of an needle, when the original, more likely version is 'rope'. Camel & rope in Hebrew both equate to Gimel.
And for the 666 thing, it's possible that the person who wrote the original may have actually rendered it 616. The problem comes from how Nerun Kaisar is rendered into Hebrew Gematria. There's a possibility that the 'number of the beast' is not 666.
Yet more examples of the 99.9% Bible fail.
So yeah, as far as I am aware, the Jews were probably not enslaved in Egypt, they didn't build the pyramids and it wasn't during the reign of Rameses II.
Quote from: Mangrove on October 01, 2013, 09:29:23 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on October 01, 2013, 02:49:36 PM
Quote from: Suu on September 30, 2013, 11:03:21 PM
(for instance, Moses didn't cross the Red Sea, it was the Reed Sea near the Nile Delta, which could have easily flooded on it's own natural power.)
There's historical evidence of Moses? Or do you mean that another translation said "Reed sea"?
Are Red and Reed as easily confusable in Arameic?
thanks suu! always interesting
Don't see why not. People keep talking about a 'camel' going through the eye of an needle, when the original, more likely version is 'rope'. Camel & rope in Hebrew both equate to Gimel.
And for the 666 thing, it's possible that the person who wrote the original may have actually rendered it 616. The problem comes from how Nerun Kaisar is rendered into Hebrew Gematria. There's a possibility that the 'number of the beast' is not 666.
Yet more examples of the 99.9% Bible fail.
So yeah, as far as I am aware, the Jews were probably not enslaved in Egypt, they didn't build the pyramids and it wasn't during the reign of Rameses II.
*IF* they were enslaved, it was in Goshen, in Lower Egypt near the Nile Delta. The Pyramids were already 2000 years old by the time Alexander got to Egypt, and any Hebrew occupation of the area would have been around 1700-1500 BC.
If you ignore the source of this page, this map is a good representation of what a possible Exodus route could have been. Note the Reed Sea crossing near the delta.
(http://jtf.org/israel/ooo.exodus.map.large.jpg)
The description of the ark is an Egyptian one and highly suspect when god says make no depictions of anything on earth or in heaven. Oh by the way, carve the box this way with some angelic creatures.
-