Out of Egypt

Numberup at worldnet.att.net Numberup at worldnet.att.net
Mon Mar 26 12:37:36 EST 2001


The fundamental problem I have with things like this is: If we are to
reduce the Biblical accounts to speculation and embellishment, how is it
that our similar speculation and refurbishment 3000 years after the
facts (whatever they were) is more worthy of consideration?

Solomon Landers

Polycarp66 at aol.com wrote:

> Some among us hold to a very literal understanding of the BH (and the
> NT)
> while others, including myself, do not.  I do not write this to attack
> the
> views of those who hold the historicity of these accounts as
> fundamental to
> their faith.  I am simply pointing out for the sake of understanding
> what I
> am proposing that I do not agree with their position.  Nevertheless,
> the
> accounts do not seem to be simply made up out of whole cloth.  Beneath
> them
> there usually seems to lie a kernal of fact which has been
> transmogrified
> into its present form.  It was customary for kings to give grandiose
> descriptions of their reigns and accomplishments -- are the accounts
> of David
> and Solomon perhaps no different in this respect?  But the accounts of
> David
> and Solomon are not my concern here.   It has been fairly well
> established
> that Israel grew out of a people indiginous to Palestine.  Why then do
> we
> have an account of the entrance of the patriarchs into Egypt and the
> subsequent exodus many years later under Moses?
> *********************************************<snip>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/attachments/20010326/8f610b25/attachment.html 


More information about the b-hebrew mailing list