Comments by "Ronin Dave" (@RoninDave) on "Bible Story About Man Living In Whale Is True, Says Fox 'Historian'" video.

  1. For "believers" Fox and many fanatical followers really miss the point focusing on what they believe is the literal interpretation and not the metaphorical meaning behind such tales. Jonah being swallowed by a whale or great fish is not the crux of the story but the meaning behind it. It was obviously a metaphor about dating fat chicks back in Biblical Times.
    4
  2. not to jump on the side of the fanatics but that hardly proves anything. Trying to locate individuals from thousands of years ago via archeology is nigh impossible especially if they were only carpenters and nomadic herdsmen with illiterate followers
    2
  3. sleazybtd I didn't say anything about the remains but any tangible evidence given the amount of time between now and then. You are still talking about a very narrow time for contemporary evidence of individuals who lived on the fringe of the major cultural power centers of their day. With Jesus, there were only about 3 years and much of that time was spent in the backwaters of a backwater area.  And you do understand with writings that we don't have some complete wikipedia of everything written from the ancient world, right? You do understand how the ravages of time, war, theft, fire, floods, etc... affect these things, right?
    1
  4. sleazybtd I don't recall saying anything about the miracles so stop with the ridiculous pseudo-intellectual assumptions. I am talking about the historical Jesus. There are historical figures who have also had legendary and miraculous things attributed to them but we don't throw the whole thing out because of that. You have a poor understanding how history works.
    1
  5. sleazybtd just another jew? Are you drunk or high writing such trite? Just another jew doesn't go around the wilderness preaching people to be nice to each other. Just another Jew listens to his mother, gets married, has a stable job, and hates the Romans. You might as well call Socrates just another Greek since he didn't blow up the Persians with his mind. Like I said - you have a very poor understanding of how history works.
    1
  6. mars Cubed actually the Bible gives us nothing on which pharaoh it was that Moses quarreled with and there are several contenders while ancient sources disagree when they think he lived. All it takes is to be off a few decades or centuries and the situations can very different. And looking archeologically for places where a nomadic people supposedly camped 3000 years ago as written down from oral traditions centuries later is looking for the proverbial needle.
    1
  7. mars Cubed your faith in archeology is almost on par with that of a religious person with their Bible. Archeology can only find what's there to be found and is always changing. Next year, 5 years from now, 20, or 50 someone may stumble on some bit of pottery and all the old theories will be thrown out as has happened before. And of course there's the matter of survivability of material evidence such as those records of egyptian military forts. Trying to dispute the literal Exodus with literality is literally dumb. Exodus as we have it was written down in 500s BC from earlier written records and oral traditions by people who were less interested in historical detail than the message nor would they have been able to understand that history. They would not have been able to accurately set Moses in an exact timeframe nor would they have really cared. As for numbers those are modern estimates based a number that was written down by those for whom such details were of less important and which had obviously been exaggerated, misunderstood, or mistranslated. It's more than likely the Exodus was a tribal memory of one or several tribes of the original 12 tribes of Israel which echoed the expulsion of the Hykos or the Sea Peoples or just any group of semi-nomadic migratory people which wasn't written about by the Egyptians or it was lost or has been misinterpreted. I don't think the Exodus writers just decided to make up the entire egypt story out of the blue for no reason then foist it on their people who would have up to that point not been aware of it. Obviously there was some connection with Egypt that was in their tribal memory and oral traditions. Moses and the exodus is memory coming from a time period when there a number of semi-nomadic, migratory, and invading groups of people wandering around in the ancient world from the Hykos, the mysterious Sea Peoples, the Dorians, etc...
    1
  8. sleazybtd brain cells literally are dying reading your crap
    1
  9. sleazybtd wasn't speaking to you and why am I not surprised you missed the point by a mile? Did I say I dismissed the archeological evidence? No. I said archeology is always changing due to new finds. I accept that as with many legends there is a truth to it rather than supposing some conspiracy theory that a group of people just decided to make up a journey out of Egypt on a whim then foist that story on everyone. 
    1
  10. sleazybtd  Comparing Washington's cherry tree adventure to a tribal memory of mass migration is ridiculous especially as migrations in the ancient world were common. As I said it is more likely Exodus which I am not defending its literal existence is a mixed memory of one or more tribes of the Hebrews of the Hyksos Invasion/Migration into northern Egypt. The Hyksos were a collective group of people primarily Canaanite and their rulers also took the name "pharaoh." They were driven out of Egypt thru the Sinai. And several centuries later we have the invasion and defeat of the Sea Peoples one group being thought to be related to the tribe Dan of the hebrews. In short there is plenty of historical evidence to show that Exodus is a garbled memory of one or several migration accounts during these periods.
    1
  11. sleazybtd would a religious person say that the exodus is a garbled memory of migrations related to the Hykos and the Sea Peoples? Hardly. You would have save yourself a lot of pseudo-intellectual typing if you hadn't ignored that rather obvious fact. I know it makes it easier if you can pigeon-hole your opponent in order to make up a bunch of strawman arguments but really it wasn't necessary though I appreciate the laugh
    1