How can we trust the Bible if it's not inerrant?

[otseng]

From the On the Bible being inerrant thread:

How can you trust something that's written about god that contradictory, contains errors and just plain wrong at times? Is there a logical way to do so, or do you just want it to be god's word so much that you overlook these things like happens so often through the history of christianity?

The Bible can still be God's word, inspired, authoritative, and trustworthy without the need to believe in inerrancy.

For debate:
How can the Bible be considered authoritative and inspired without the need to believe in the doctrine of inerrancy?

While debating, do not simply state verses to say the Bible is inspired or trustworthy.

----------

Thread Milestones

• Case study of Hezekiah
• Start discussing global flood / Flood Model summary
• Recap arguments of authority of the Bible
• Start discussing Tower of Babel / Tower of Babel summary
• Start discussing archaeology / Philosophy of science / Origin of alphabet / End of discussion on archaeology
• Start discussing cosmology / Concluding cosmology
• Start discussing Shroud of Turin / Summary top TS imaging theories / Created DefendingChristianity.com and TS subforums / Shroud of Turin summary
• Start discussing Bible and resurrection
• Start discussing the Messiahship of Jesus / Messiahship of Jesus wrap up
• Start discussing Old Testament ethics
• Summary argument of atheism and morality / God basis for objective morality
• Start discussing genocide / Genocide summary argument
• Start discussing slavery / Slavery summary argument
• Start discussing homosexuality / Homosexuality summary argument
• Old Testament ethics summary argument
• Start discussing philosophy / Summary argument on philosophy
• Start discussing creation of universe

[otseng]

When I say correct me if I'm wrong, I don't need to be instructed in the rite but on whether or not Moses would have been circumcised before being discarded in a reed -boat.

I already showed you this. Moses was in the basket when he was 3 months old, which is later than the prescribed circumcision of 8 days old.

As I recall burials were found during the excavations at Avaris. They showed human and donkey - burials. Please show the reason that donkey -burials are not obviously funerary.

Yes, it shows they were buried. I've never claimed there was any sacrifice involved, only you.

So, yes, it seems clear that the Hyksos were not Hebrews as such and the point is that you have failed to show anything that supports a Hebrew element at all.

I've presented arguments already arguing for Israelite presence. I'll review them all in a later post.

It is relevant for the reason I said - it did not exist until after Ramesses III and I have explained this before.

As the article said, what is not clear is what is being referred to - Philistines as a people group, as a kingdom, a great nation, etc. It is entirely possible for the Philistines to exist as a people group prior to being a ruling nation. Similar to what does it mean to refer to Americans.

I do not care what the Bible says.

If you're going to have an honest debate about the Bible, you'll have to care. I'm not saying you need to accept everything it says, but it has to be on the table as a source of evidence that is at least on par with any other ancient document.

I explained it Stone blocks or metal - working or basket -weaving, whatever the Bible might have said it was, you could have pointed to such an activity in Egypt and made the putrid argument that this somehow proves the Bible.

Here was your "explanation"...

Since the workforce did haul stone blocks, that is a reasonable analogy of how, even if the Bible story differed, you could make that fit just as well, the point being that it is Not evidence that the Exodus story is true just because you can get it to fit the history.

viewtopic.php?p=1073509#p1073509

This is not an explanation why hauling stone blocks makes more sense than making bricks.

I've already explained why bricks make much more sense than hauling stone blocks...

Also, the last pyramid built was by Ahmose I.

"In ancient Egypt, pyramid construction appeared to wane after the reign of Ahmose ... The last king's pyramid — that of Ahmose I, at Abydos"
https://www.livescience.com/why-ancient ... g-pyramids

"This building program culminated in the construction of the last pyramid built by native Egyptian rulers."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmose_I

Also, the pyramid of Ahmose I was not built of stones, but the remains is now just sand and rubble.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pyra ... ,_1998.png

"The Pyramid of Ahmose was built not as a tomb, but a cenotaph for pharaoh Ahmose I at the necropolis of Abydos, Egypt.[1] It was the only royal pyramid built in this area. Today only a pile of rubble remains, reaching a height of about 10 m. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_Ahmose

Ahmose I, who was the one who would've enslaved the Hyksos, did not make any stone pyramids, but since the remains is only sand and rubble, it would've been constructed of mud bricks.

In addition, there is no evidence that stone pyramid building or hauling stone blocks was ever done by slaves in Egypt. In fact, stone pyramid construction was done by paid workers.

Archaeologists now believe that the Great Pyramid of Giza (at least) was built by tens of thousands of skilled workers who camped near the pyramids and worked for a salary or as a form of tax payment (levy) until the construction was completed, pointing to workers' cemeteries discovered in 1990. For the Middle Kingdom Pyramid of Amenemhat II, there is evidence from the annal stone of the king that foreigners from Canaan were employed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_ ... techniques

[otseng]

There is not a shred of evidence that put Hebrews in Hyksos Avaris.

You may not believe the arguments, but I certainly have presented evidence Israelites were in Egypt. To recap...

One is the four-room house that have been excavated in several locations throughout Egypt.

Another interesting find in Tell El-Dab'a is the four-room house. The four-room house is also known as an "Israelite house".



"A four-room house, also known as an "Israelite house" or a "pillared house" is the name given to the mud and stone houses characteristic of the Iron Age of Levant."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_room_house

I've also presented evidence of the palace at Avaris.

Evidence linking Joseph and Israel with the Hyksos...



There is a palace in Avaris (Tell El-Dab'a) that has 12 pillars at the entrance and 12 primary tombs at the back. And one of the tombs was in the shape of a pyramid with a statue of a Semitic ruler wearing a multi-colored coat. The remains are missing from the tomb.
https://patternsofevidence.com/2018/09/ ... rom-egypt/

Another evidence is the seal with the alignment with the blessings of Jacob.

According to author, Michael Bar-Ron, the reason it is supportive of the 12 tribes of Israel is the Biblical references the seal has. It also reflect the birth order of the sons of Israel: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Joseph, and Benjamin.

Another evidence is the statue in the Avaris palace, the origin of the name "Avaris", no bones found in the tombs at the Avaris palace, and severed hands found buried near the palace.

Some more comments about the palace and Avaris:

Hebraic slaves names from the Brooklen Papyrus.

The Brooklyn Papyrus is from the 13th Dynasty that contains a list of Canaanite servants, several of which are Hebraic names.

Though most scholars reject the Exodus account, surprisingly, they do not totally reject the idea that Israelites had a connection with Egypt.

According to Avraham Faust "most scholars agree that the narrative has a historical core, and that some of the highland settlers came, one way or another, from Egypt."[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_a ... the_Exodus

One "evidence" of Israelites is the absence of pig bones.

Almost the sole marker distinguishing the "Israelite" villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_a ... the_Exodus

In Avaris, no pig bones have yet been found.

"No pig bones were found, possibly indicating that the Canaanite settlers already had some sort of taboo concerning the consumption of pig meat, at least as a temple ofering."
https://www.academia.edu/10071070/Avari ... the_Hyksos

Some more on burials of donkeys. A potential reason is symbolism of being in a chariot.

Males were buried “with bronze weaponry in constructed tombs without scarabs or other protective amulets,” and “[t]he most elite had equids of some sort (potentially donkeys) buried outside the tombs, often in pairs as though ready to pull a chariot.”

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-ne ... 180975354/

Donkeys could also have been used to seal treaties.

"One should recall that within the Mari correspondence the expression 'to butcher a donkey' was synonymous for making a treaty."
https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/dai ... he-hyksos/

[JoeyKnothead]

[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #949]

The "initial state" seems to be out of the reach of being described in any accurate or meaningful manner.

In that, it is no more or less better than the idea of an exclamation "let there be light" from an Intelligent Source being the Initial State.

Plenty fair. Though one's gotta ponder what did it that thinking.

That is a journey in itself and provides me with lifetime of interesting subjective experience re my own way of interreacting with and finding out about such a thinker...

I'd learn to read for that book.

[Tcg]

Ok That one is cleared up and couldn't you have done that instead of pussyfooting around?

Your point about stone blocks is putrid.

Moderator Comment

Please avoid personal and uncivil comments.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[Diogenes]

There is not a shred of evidence that put Hebrews in Hyksos Avaris.

You may not believe the arguments, but I certainly have presented evidence Israelites were in Egypt. To recap...

One is the four-room house that have been excavated in several locations throughout Egypt.

....

I've also presented evidence of the palace at Avaris.

Evidence linking Joseph and Israel with the Hyksos...



There is a palace in Avaris (Tell El-Dab'a) that has 12 pillars at the entrance and 12 primary tombs at the back. And one of the tombs was in the shape of a pyramid with a statue of a Semitic ruler wearing a multi-colored coat. The remains are missing from the tomb.
https://patternsofevidence.com/2018/09/ ... rom-egypt/

According to Avraham Faust "most scholars agree that the narrative has a historical core, and that some of the highland settlers came, one way or another, from Egypt."[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sources_a ... the_Exodus

This quote from Faust is immediately preceded by :
"The scholarly consensus is that there was no Exodus as described in the Bible.
Modern archaeologists believe that the Israelites were indigenous to Canaan and were never in ancient Egypt, and if there is any historical basis to the Exodus it can apply only to a small segment of the population of Israelites at large. Nevertheless, there is also a general understanding that something must lie behind the traditions, even if Moses and the Exodus narrative belong to the collective cultural memory rather than history...."

It is also helpful to bear in mind many of your images, such as the one claiming to depict a palace in Avaris (Tell El-Dab'a), are 3-D renderings, to which "Patterns of Evidence" holds the copyright. They are not photos and not evidence. 'Patterns of Evidence' is a Christian film series, not a scholarly production. Rather, it is produced by the non academic film maker Tim Mahoney, who's film making style has been characterized as:
"Mahoney’s method of film-making is pretty straight forward. Gather together an ensemble cast of legitimate scholars, then lionize some fringe loon on the outskirts of the academic radar."
— David A. Falk, The Moses Controversy: More So-called Patterns of “Evidence”'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterns_of_Evidence

[Diogenes]

More on Tim Mahoney from a Minnesota "Christian homeschooling" site that features him:

"Tim was raised hearing that the stories in the Bible where true, but as he got older he was challenged to lose those beliefs. These questions led him on a trip to Egypt and the very location of the Exodus story. It was there that he experienced his own crisis of faith when told there was no evidence for this account."
https://mache.org/speakers/timothy-mahoney/

One might opine that Mahoney's "evidence" is made of PAPER MÂCHÉ.

For more information on Mahoney's work and his 'fringe' sources, http://www.egyptandthebible.com/index.p ... -evidence/

[otseng]

This quote from Faust is immediately preceded by :
"The scholarly consensus is that there was no Exodus as described in the Bible.
Modern archaeologists believe that the Israelites were indigenous to Canaan and were never in ancient Egypt,[/size] and if there is any historical basis to the Exodus it can apply only to a small segment of the population of Israelites at large. Nevertheless, there is also a general understanding that something must lie behind the traditions, even if Moses and the Exodus narrative belong to the collective cultural memory rather than history...."

Yes, the scholarly consensus as I mentioned at the onset was:

The consensus of modern scholars is that the Torah does not give an accurate account of the origins of the Israelites, who appear instead to have formed as an entity in the central highlands of Canaan in the late second millennium BCE from the indigenous Canaanite culture.[3][4][5] Most modern scholars believe that the story of the Exodus has some historical basis,[6][7] but contains little material that is provable.[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus

The story of Egypt and the Exodus is a significant portion of the Torah and most modern scholars believe it was written between 600 - 400 BC.

"The majority of Biblical scholars believe that the written books were a product of the Babylonian captivity (c. 6th century BCE), based on earlier written sources and oral traditions, and that it was completed with final revisions during the post-Exilic period (c. 5th century BCE)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torah

"The Torah devotes more than four books to the proposition that the Israelites came to Canaan after having been subjugated in Egypt for generations, and yet there is no archaeological evidence to support that they were ever in Egypt."
https://www.reformjudaism.org/were-jews-slaves-egypt

But, as many already know, I'm willing to disagree with the experts.

It is also helpful to bear in mind many of your images, such as the one claiming to depict a palace in Avaris (Tell El-Dab'a), are 3-D renderings, to which "Patterns of Evidence" holds the copyright. They are not photos and not evidence.

I agree the 3D renderings images would be more of an artistic interpretation rather than evidence. I'm willing to pull that as evidence.

'Patterns of Evidence' is a Christian film series, not a scholarly production.

Nobody is claiming it's a "scholarly production". But, I have watched them and it's done fairly well.

Rather, it is produced by the non academic film maker Tim Mahoney, who's film making style has been characterized as:
"Mahoney’s method of film-making is pretty straight forward. Gather together an ensemble cast of legitimate scholars, then lionize some fringe loon on the outskirts of the academic radar."

This is just an ad hom attack. I thought Mahoney does a good job trying to be balanced. The people he interviews are not "loons" and he does present differing viewpoints on the positions.

[otseng]

Partial statue head of the pharaoh Amenhotep II
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... Boston.png

Amenhotep II (sometimes called Amenophis II and meaning 'Amun is Satisfied') was the seventh pharaoh of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt. Amenhotep inherited a vast kingdom from his father Thutmose III

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amenhotep_II

It is claimed he had great athletic skills and was even more powerful than the great Thutmose III.

Amenhotep has left several inscriptions touting his athletic skills while he was a leader of the army before his crowning. Amenhotep was no less athletic than his powerful father. He claims to have been able to shoot an arrow through a copper target one palm thick, and that he was able to row his ship faster and farther than two hundred members of the navy could row theirs.

The king was well known for his physical prowess and is said to have singlehandedly killed 7 rebel Princes at Kadesh, which successfully terminated his first Syrian campaign on a victorious note.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amenhotep_II

There are two different possible dates for the reign of Amenhotep II - 1453 to 1419 BC and 1427 to 1400 BC.

"As usual, different resources provide different time frames for Amenhotep II's reign. While the Chronicle of the Pharaohs by Peter A. Clayton gives his reign lasting from 1453 until 1419 BC, The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt provides a reign between 1427 until 1400 BC."
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/amenhotep2.htm

These sightings limit the date of Thutmose's accession to either 1504 or 1479 BC.[16] Thutmose died after 54 years of reign,[17] at which time Amenhotep would have acceded to the throne. Amenhotep's short coregency with his father would then move his accession two years and four months earlier,[7] dating his accession to either 1427 BC in the low chronology,[18] or in 1454 BC in the high chronology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amenhotep_II

Unlike his predecessors, his home was originally in the northern kingdom.

"Amenhotep II was born and raised in Memphis in the north, instead of in Thebes, the traditional capital.[5] While a prince, he oversaw deliveries of wood sent to the dockyard of Peru-nūfe in Memphis, and was made the Setem, the high priest over Lower Egypt."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amenhotep_II

He became king when he as 18 years old and reigned between 26 and 35 years.

"When he assumed power, Amenhotep II was 18 years old according to an inscription from his great Sphinx stela"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amenhotep_II

The beginning of his reign, he went on many campaigns, but ceased campaigns after his ninth year.

"Amenhotep's last campaign took place in his ninth year, however it apparently did not proceed farther north than the Sea of Galilee.[29] According to the list of plunder from this campaign, Amenhotep claims to have taken 101,128 slaves."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amenhotep_II

His scribes attributes the end of his campaigns to his enemies seeking to make peace.

"Amenhotep records that the kings of Babylon, the Hittites, and Mitanni came to make peace and pay tribute to him after his ninth year, although this may be outlandish boasting."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amenhotep_II

At the height of his military career at age 27, why would he have retired from campaigns? Could it be his army had been crushed by attempting to chase the Hebrews in the parting sea?

Amenhotep II also was a part of erasing the memory of Hatshepsut.

"They point to the fact that he participated in his father's removal of Hatshepsut's name from her monuments and the destruction of her image."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amenhotep_II

Since Hatshepsut was closely associated with Moses, could that be the main reason for her removal from history?

Thutmose IV succeeded Amenhotep II, however he was not the first born of Amenhotep II. Apparently Thutmose IV had an older brother that we know little about and died under unknown circumstances.

Thutmose IV was born to Amenhotep II and Tiaa, but was not actually the crown prince and Amenhotep II's chosen successor to the throne. Some scholars speculate that Thutmose ousted his older brother in order to usurp power and then commissioned the Dream Stele in order to justify his unexpected kingship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thutmose_IV

If the first born son was killed by the 10th plague, could that be why we know so little of his first born son?

[Diogenes]

Rather, it is produced by the non academic film maker Tim Mahoney, who's film making style has been characterized as:
"Mahoney’s method of film-making is pretty straight forward. Gather together an ensemble cast of legitimate scholars, then lionize some fringe loon on the outskirts of the academic radar."

This is just an ad hom attack. I thought Mahoney does a good job trying to be balanced. The people he interviews are not "loons" and he does present differing viewpoints on the positions.

The use of "Loons" would have gotten him at least "warned" here.
Nonetheless, Mahoney is not an archaeologist or Biblical Scholar. Falk IS a Biblical scholar and annoyed enough by Mahoney's efforts to let loose with an intemperate "Loon" epithet. At about 12:00 of this video Falk starts to make some great points about how David Rohl (one of the experts Mahoney uses) confirms his biases by being off by 300 years in his chronology and how Mahoney extends that by an additional 100 years, citing cherry-picked data and confirmation bias.

More importantly, even David Rohl is upset by how Tim Mahoney distorts evidence in his films. Rohl wrote to Mahoney:
"20/02/2020
(Written in pain and sorrow)
Dear Tim,
I am writing this long letter immediately after having watched, for the first time, the first part of the Red Sea Miracle movie that you sent me the link to.
I spent the entire viewing of ‘Patterns of Evidence: The Red Sea Miracle (Part One)’, shaking my head in astonishment and disbelief as I watched you misrepresent the facts, and leave out so much evidence that counters the so-called ‘Hebrew’ scenario. The very decision you made to label the two versions of the Exodus journey ‘Egyptian’ and ‘Hebrew’ exposes your bias. You know very well that the evangelical community will see that as the ‘Enemy’ versus the ‘Heroes’, and so the enemy also equals secular scholars/academics versus evangelical Christians who favour God’s heroic Israelites. That is propaganda, not truth-seeking."
https://www.facebook.com/groups/184188
839207/permalink/10158245235404208/?comment_id=10158579386839208

In other words, both Falk and Mahoney's own expert complain about how Tim Mahoney distorts facts. Mahoney is one of several lay publishers who make money ($1Million in just one of Mahoney's films) by telling Evangelicals what they wan to hear.

There is a reason mainstream archaeology and Biblical scholars disagree with the chronology that Mahoney pushes.

[Diogenes]

Since Hatshepsut was closely associated with Moses, could that be the main reason for her removal from history?
....
If the first born son was killed by the 10th plague, could that be why we know so little of his first born son?

Removal from history by whom? These are unfounded speculations.

Archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman write that archaeology has not found any evidence for even a small band of wandering Israelites living in the Sinai:
"The conclusion – that Exodus did not happen at the time and in the manner described in the Bible – seems irrefutable....
... repeated excavations and surveys throughout the entire area have not provided even the slightest evidence."
Finkelstein, Israel; Silberman, Neil Asher (2002). The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Sacred Texts, p. 63