Robert Tulip wrote:drdalet wrote:What I find interesting though is that Ankhnaten's dynasty was the same period the Hebrews were in Egypt. Moses was an egyptian raised hebrew (perhaps) who was well aware of the concepts of Egyptian religion. Hebrews were part of the Egyptian dynasty of pharoahs ever since Joseph was sold to Egypt by his brothers.
This assumes historicity of Exodus, which leading archaeologists such as Israel Finkelstein dispute.
No, it doesn't. As always I refer to the STORY Exodus. For me the Bible is FICTION. But there are many fictional stories that are based on real events and even real people. That does not mean the events happened the way the Story tells it or that the actions of the people in the story actually took place. The aim of the biblical stories is not to tell history, so it becomes FICTION.
I know of numerous stories that are basically not true, but it is in our history-books. Why? Because of the intentions of the people who wrote it.
That is why I don't care what people like Finkelstein say, because these people take the STORY literal and then say it didn't happen. That does not mean that there is no basic truth behind it. For instance: were the Hebrew people EVER in Egypt? How do we know?
(Att.: don't react to these "questions", because I am aware of every theory that exists on that matter - but that is not my point)
If they were never there, the exodus can't have happened, or the country it refers to is the wrong place. But if they were in Egypt, are they still there? No! So when did they leave, how did they leave, why did they leave? In the STORY of Exodus there are hints. I could "translate" the exodus as follows: during a period of several decades (in hebrew the number 4, 40, 400 is an indefinite amount) the hebrew people left Egypt because of natural occurences as described in the "plagues". These are natural occurences, so "God did it". The STORY suggests there was a change of dynasty of pharaohs (which is possible) and they suppressed the hebrew people (this is also possible). They left Egypt, not by the controlled roads at the time, but by the sea of reeds, a swampy area, sometimes dry, sometimes under water (a natural phenomena, so "God did it"). They probably assembled somewhere before moving on in small groups. Etc. etc. I could explain every detail of the story in that way, and if I had time I would write it down as a fictional story.
Finkelstein and others never explain the story in other ways than literal. That's why I find it of no importance. Of course it didn't happen the way it is told!! Not even our "history" is true like that!
I am not a christian and never was.
So if I refer to the STORY I NEVER suggests it happened. I guess my English is too poor to make that clear. It is rather frustrating if I talk about a story and the only comment I get is: "but the story isn't true". I could deal with CiE in the same manner: Jesus never existed, Mary never existed, the stories are all made up and bogus, so why write a book about it at all?
Answer: CiE is not about Jesus being a real person or not. It is about the religious believe of people and where it comes from. So it is not important if Jesus was a real person or not. It is interesting to realise how a fictional story is invented and where it comes from.
It does not mean that WHERE it comes from is TRUE either. The STORIES of Isis, Horus and all the other gods and goddesses are just as insane if you take them literally. But all religious stories are myths, based on actual (natural) occurences, like ebb and flood, day and night, the sun moving in the heavens (yes, I know that is not what actually happens), the moon, the stars, wars among people, sadistic rulers, furocious animals, famine, exaggerated "adventures" of people, etc. etc.
People want answers for how this all takes place and why. We have no need for religion anymore, now that we have science.