This Book (the Bible) will keep you from sin, and
Sin will keep you from this Book.

Reading and confessing the words of this book will:
Terrify the devil,
Stupefy the rebellious,
Mystify the world,
Pacify the critics,
Ratify the covenant,
Edify the church,
Magnify the Word, and
Glorify the Lord!

Evidence are how the skeptics on this forum have been rattled by the power of this book.  See how their noses, horns and tails are growing by the day. 

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

-- Hebrews 4:12

The order of the appearances of Jesus Christ and who He appeared to is as follows:

[list]
[li]Mary.  John 20:10-18[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Mary and women.  Matthew 28:1-10[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Peter.  1 Corinthians 15:5[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Two disciples.  Luke 24:13-35[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Ten apostles.  Luke 24:36-49; John 20:19-23[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Eleven apostles.  John 20:24-31[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Seven apostles.  John 21[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]All apostles.  Matthew 28:16-20; Mark 16:14-18[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]500 brethren.  1 Corinthians 15:6[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]James.    1 Corinthians 15:7[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]All apostles.  Acts.1:4-8[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Paul.  Acts. 9:1-9; 1 Corinthians 15:8[/li]
[/list]

(The Evidence Bible)

OLAADEGBU:

The order of the appearances of Jesus Christ and who He appeared to is as follows:

[list]
[li]Mary.  John 20:10-18[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Mary and women.  Matthew 28:1-10[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Peter.  1 Corinthians 15:5[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Two disciples.  Luke 24:13-35[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Ten apostles.  Luke 24:36-49; John 20:19-23[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Eleven apostles.  John 20:24-31[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Seven apostles.  John 21[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]All apostles.  Matthew 28:16-20; Mark 16:14-18[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]500 brethren.  1 Corinthians 15:6[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]James. 1 Corinthians 15:7[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]All apostles. Acts.1:4-8[/li]
[/list]
[list]
[li]Paul. Acts. 9:1-9; 1 Corinthians 15:8[/li]
[/list]

Mark (1st of the Gospels), did not originally include the appearance of Jesus. It was added later. Look in ur Bible for the footnote. this is what it says (check yours).

"16:8 The most reliable early manuscripts conclude the Gospel of Mark at verse 8. Other manuscripts include various endings to the Gospel. "

OLAADEGBU:

Matthew and Mark both listed women as the first to see the resurrected Christ.  Mark says, "He appeared first to Mary Magdalene" (Mark 16:9).  But Paul lists Peter (Cephas) as the first one to see Christ after the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:5).

Jesus appeared first to Mary Magdalene, then to the other women, and then to Peter.  Paul was not giving a complete list, but only the important one for his purpose.  Since only men's testimony was considered legal or official in the 1st Century, it is understandable that the apostle would not list the women as witnesses in his defense of the resurrection here.

The seeming 'contradictions' in the Bible are there for a reason.  God has deliberately included seeming 'contradictions' in His Word to "snare" the proud.  He has "hidden" things from the "wise and prudent" and "revealed them to babes" (Luke 10:21), purposely choosing foolish things to confound the wise (1 Cor.1:27).

  For example, the four Gospels give four differing accounts as to what was written on the sign that hung on the cross.  Matthew said, "This is Jesus the King of the Jews" (Matt. 27:37).  However, Mark 'contradicts' that with "The King of the Jews" (Mark 15:26).  Luke says something different when he said; "This is the King of the Jews" (Luke 23:38), and John maintains that the sign said "Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews" (John 19:19).  Those who are looking for contradictions such as the Atheists, Muslims and occultists would jump to the conclusion and say  "the Bible is full of contradictions!"  and choose to reject it entirely as being untenable.

Genuine Christains who trust God have no problem harmonising the Gospels.  There would be no contradictions if the sign simply said, "This is Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews."  The godly base their confidence on two truths

i laugh!

WHAT A LAUGH!
YOU CHRISTIANS NO GO LAUGH ME DIE!!
First you say there are no contradictions and the divine authour has his finger prints making the word "virtually uncompromisable". . . .
Now you claim he did add compromises and contradictions in order to "snare" unbelievers!
OLADEEGBU you no go kill us ooo

Why would a loving good who wants everybody to be saved deliberate set  traps for unbelievers in his word?? If god can come down to die for us, why would he be wicked in sabotaging himself (the word is god)?
oladeegbu these questions scream for answers!

why would he be wicked in sabotaging himself (the word is god)? Huh
oladeegbu these questions scream for answers!

@Tudor,

Why don't you ask your mother for answers to these questions. She's a christian isn't she? She's more likely to talk sense into the fool she raised.

JIL:

@Tudor,

Why don't you ask your mother for answers to these questions. She's a christian isn't she? She's more likely to talk sense into the fool she raised.   

well i asked her and she hasn't no answers. Professor JIL any clue?

Quote from : JIL

Roses are Red. Violets  are Blue. Atheists are Fools!

This is funny!

well i asked her and she hasn't no answers. Professor JIL any clue?

I think she refused to tell you because she knows that you are so dumb that you wouldn't be able to comprehend it.

Roses are Red. Violets are Blue. Atheists are Fools!
This is funny!

Don't look at the funny side rather look at the factual side.

JIL:

I think she refused to tell you because she knows that you are so dumb that you wouldn't be able to comprehend it. 

Err actually because she's DEAD.

Don't look at the funny side rather look at the factual side.

i still laugh!

Err actually because she's DEAD.

Wasnt aware. My sincere apologies. 

As a christian, I truely believe she's in heaven with the Lord. Your unbelief notwithstanding.

JIL:

Wasnt aware. My sincere apologies. 

As a christian, I truely believe she's in heaven with the Lord. Your unbelief notwithstanding.

Wouldn't we all love to believe that. . . But the sad reality is she's gone and gone forever.

Karl Barth writes " theology, means rational trouble over the mystery. . .If we are unwilling to take the trouble, neither shall we know what we mean when we say that we are dealing with the mystery of God".

An appeal to the Bible or the Holy Spirit should not be considered an alternative to serious reflection. Christian faith must not be reduced to a euphoric feeling or to a religious cliche. Christ is indeed the answer, but what was the question? And who is Christ? Christian faith is no authoritarian, uncritical, unreflective set of answers to the human predicament. Genuine faith does not suppress any questions; it may give people a lot more questions than they had before. Thus the anxiety of simple piety is misplaced. The sort of thinking that Christian faith sets in motion does not replace trust in God but acts as a critical ingredient that helps to distinguish faith from mere illusion or pious evasion.

The suspicion of the "mystifying" function of religion is by no means original to Marxism. We find it in the judgments of the Old Testament prophets and in the teachings of Jesus. They knew very well the extent to which religion and its official custodians can stand in opposition to God's intention for human life,  . .


The basic question that a doctrine of scripture must address is, what do we mean by the authority of scripture? Does it's authority reside in a coercive power capable of enforcing compliance or in its inviting power that calls for our free and glad trust in God? is the authority of scripture an arbitrary datum simply to be accepted by a sacrifice of the intellect, or is it inseparable from the scriptural proclamation of the liberating grace of God in Jesus Christ? Put differently, the question is whether the church has forgotten that its own scriptural tradition contains a powerful critique of arbitrary authority and a distinctive message of freedom.

Within the Biblical witness, there is relentless criticism of every authority that identifies itself with the ultimate authority of God. Jesus refused to ascribe ultimacy either to religious doctrines and traditions (Matt 5:21 ff.; Mark 11:28ff) or to the claims of the state (Mark 12:13-17). Paul distinguished between the written codes that kill and the spirit that gives life (2 Cor. 3:6). This remarkable biblical heritage is one of freedom from the idolatory, including bibliolatry.

In the biblicist view, the Bible is authoratative by virtue of its supernatural origin and the direct identity of its words with the word of God. this view grew out of the Church's efforts to defend itself against modernity. Anxious to protect the insights of the reformation, theologians became increasingly defensive and strident about the supernatural character of the scripture. They insisted that every book and every chapter, every verse, every word was directly inspired from God. Speaking of the scripture as inspired is, of course, an ancient doctrine of the Christian, and most other religious traditions. . . . .This way of thinking about scripture leads to 2 problematic conclusions.

First, in the biblicist view inspiration involves inspiredness. It refers to an inherent property of scripture resulting from its supernatural origin. It refers to something set before us as a given, a sheer datum. The task of a doctrine of inspiration is thus reduced to the defense of certain theories of the superntural origin of the Bible.

Second, in the biblicist view inspiration requires infallibility. Since God in considered the author of scripture in a straight forward literal sense, it is said to be without error. Some protestant apologists have pushed this assertion to extreme limits. Scripture is without error not only in what it teaches about God and human salvation but also in all matters of history and science. the defense of Christian faith thus becomes the defense of the doctrine of infallibility. To the Roman catholic dogma of the infallibility of the pope (1870), directed against the rising tide of modernity, there corresponds the protestant doctrine of the infallibility of the Bible. the church that wants an absolute guarantee of its faith and proclamation finds it in the parallel doctrines of biblical and papal infallibility. But a church with an infallible teaching office and an infallible Bible no longer allows scripture to work as liberating and life-giving Word in its own way. Insistence on the infallibility of the Bible obscures the true basis of Christian confidence.

So, for christians with this view, the Bible is taken as authority not because of what it tells us centrally about God and humanity, but simply because its words are identified without qualification with God's words. one result of this identification is that biblical texts tend to be levelled in importance. When this happens, the account of the command of God to utterly destroy the Amalekites, their men, women, children , infants, and animals (1 Sam 15:3), or the apostolic instructions that slaves should obey their masters (Eph. 6:5) and women should be silent in Church (1 tim 2:12) are vested with the same authority as proclamation that God was in christ (2 Cor. 5:19) and that in him is new and inclusive community (Gal. 3:28). in this way biblicism turns true life giving authority of scripture into a deadening authoritarianism.

excerpts from . . Daniel L. Migliore's Faith Seeking Understanding "An Introduction to Christian theology"

This is the confession of a man of God who said: "I am going to tell you some things about my father that will make him look bad.  He regularly left my mother to fend for herself.  I was once horrified to hear that he deliberately killed a helpless animal.  Not only that, but he hit me (often).

Here's the information that's missing: "The reason he left my mum during the day was to work to earn money to take care of her and their children.  He killed the animal because it had been run over by a car and was suffering.  He regularly chastened me because he loved me enough to teach me right from wrong (I was a brat).

Portions of the Bible that "make God look bad" merely reveal that we lack understanding.  I never once questioned my dad's integrity, because I trusted him. (Mark 10:15)."

The analogy above sums up the reason why He has "hidden" things from the "wise and prudent" and "revealed them to babes" (Luke 10:21), purposely choosing foolish things to confound the wise (1 Cor.1:27). -- The Evidence Bible

"Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came to the selpulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them." -- Luke 24:1

There seems to be a contradiction as to who arrived first at the tomb.  However, there is no contradiction when the Gospels are read in harmony.  When the women arrived at the edge of the garden, they looked and saw that the stone had been rolled back from the tomb.  Mary concluded that the body had been stolen and ran back to Peter and John in Jerusalem.  The other women continued to the tomb, and went on inside where they encountered the angels.  So, who said that there are contradictions in the Bible? (The Evidence Bible)

This is what John McRay had to say about the historical accuracy of the Bible:

"Given the large portion of the New Testament written by him, its extremely significant that Luke has been established to be a scrupulously accurate historian, even in the smallest details. One prominent archaelologist carefully examined Luke's references to thirty-two countries, fifty-four cities and nine islands, finding not a single mistake."

Archaeology confirms the accuracy of the Bible:

Following the 1993 discovery in Israel of a stone containing the inscriptions "House of David" and "King of Israel,"
Time magazine stated, "This writing -- dated to the 9th century B.C., only a century after David's reign -- described a victory by a neighbouring king over the Israelites . . . The skeptics' claim that David never existed is now hard to defend."

-- Time, December 18, 1995

A hidden burial chamber, dating to the first century was discovered in 1990 two miles from the Temple Mount. One bore the bones of a man in his 60s, with the inscription "Yehosef bar Qayafa" -- meaning "Joseph, son of Caiaphas." Experts believe this was Caiaphas, the high priest of Jerusalem, who was involved in the arrest of Jesus, interrogated Him and handed Him over to Pontius Pilate for execution.

A few decades earlier, excavations at Caesarea Maritama, the ancient seat of Roman government in Judea, uncovered a stone slab whose complete inscription may have read: "Pontius Pilate, the prefect of Judea, has dedicated to the people of Caesarea a temple in honour of Tiberius."

The discovery is truly significant, establishing that the man depicted in the Gospels as Judea's Roman governor had the authority ascribed to him by the Gospel writers.

-- Jeffery L. Sheler, "Is the Bible True?" Reader's Digest, June 2000

Scientific facts recorded in the Bible.

For ages, scientists believed in a geocentric view of the universe.  The difference between night and day were believed to be caused by the sun revolving around the earth.  Today, we know that the earth's rotation on its axis is responsible for the suns "rising and setting."  But 4,000 or more years ago, it was written, "Have you commanded the morning since your days; and caused the day spring [dawn] to know his place? . . . It [the earth] is turned as clay to the seal" (Job 38:12,14).  The picture here is of a clay vessel being turned or rotated upon the potter's wheel.  This is an accurate analogy of the earth's rotation. -- The Evidence Bible

Scientific fallacies and falsehood recorded in the bible.
Genesis 30 : 37 - 39, 41- 42.

37. Then jacob took fresh rods of polar and almond and plane,and pealed white streaks in them,exposing the whites of the rods.
38. He set the rods which he had peeled in front of the flocks in the runnels, that is, the watering troughs, where the flocks came to drink. And since they bred when they came to drink,
39. The flocks bred in front of the rods and so the flocks brought forth stripped, speckled and spotted.
41. Whenever the stronger of the flock were breeding jacob laid the sticks and rocks in the runnels before the eyes of the flock, that they might breed among the rods,
42. but the for the feebler of the flock he did not lay them there; so the feebler where laban's, and the stronger jacob's.

Even an slowpoke knows you can't produce stripped and spotted goats or lambs by placing fruits and stripped sticks in their drinking water. . .
Obviously the slowpoke who wrote the bible didn't understand genetics. . .

Tudór:

Scientific fallacies and falsehood recorded in the bible.
Genesis 30 : 37 - 39, 41- 42.Even an slowpoke knows you can't produce stripped and spotted goats or lambs by placing fruits and stripped sticks in their drinking water. . .
Obviously the slowpoke who wrote the bible didn't understand genetics. . .

You cannot comprehend that God decided to BLESS Jacob regardless of his uncle's tricks - that was the reason why the flock gave birth to the type that they did, because of a divine blessing upon him not because of the poles.

The poles likely served as a faith aid for Jacob more than anything else, showing God that he believed he would prosper regardless of his uncle's deception.

Olaagbedu . . the stuff u are posting is all false. It's nonsense. where do u find this stuff?

If there is one thing Luke was definitely not, it was an accurate historian.

[color=#006600][/color]

[color=#006600][/color]

debosky:

You cannot comprehend that God decided to BLESS Jacob regardless of his uncle's tricks - that was the reason why the flock gave birth to the type that they did, because of a divine blessing upon him not because of the poles.

[b]The poles likely served as a faith aid [/b]for Jacob more than anything else, showing God that he believed he would prosper regardless of his uncle's deception.

Oh shut up! What the f@#k is this?
Faith aid
The passage clearly shows that it was because of the sticks and stripped rods that the spotted goats/lambs were produced.
Faith aid my arse!
where was it mentioned in the scriptures that the sticks and rods were "faith aid"- mordern day word of faith movement just sit in your houses and invent jargons!

Time and time again on NL when christians see a scientific fact coincidentally predicted by the bible, y'all say the bible is scientifically accurate but when we show scientific inaccuracies you claimit was as a result of a "miracle" or "blessing of god" -how much more dumb escapist can one get??

Tudór:

Oh shut up! What the f@#k is this?
Faith aid
The passage clearly shows that[b] it was because of the sticks and stripped rods that the spotted goats/lambs were produced.[/b]
Faith aid my arse!
where was it mentioned in the scriptures that the sticks and rods were "faith aid"- mordern day word of faith movement just sit in your houses and invent jargons!

Time and time again on NL when christians see a scientific fact coincidentally predicted by the bible, y'all say the bible is scientifically accurate but when we show scientific inaccuracies you claimit was as a result of a "miracle" or "blessing of god" -how much more dumb escapist can one get??

Even so, did the stick themselves cause the change or what they represented? Did Moses' rod part the Red Sea or was it as a result of his obeying the instruction to stretch the rod that the Sea parted on God's command?

Hebrews 11:29 It was by faith that the people of Israel went right through the Red Sea as though they were on dry ground. But when the Egyptians tried to follow, they were all drowned.

Jacob was blessed because of this declaration from God:

“I am the Lord, the God of your grandfather Abraham, and the God of your father, Isaac. The ground you are lying on belongs to you. I am giving it to you and your descendants. 14 Your descendants will be as numerous as the dust of the earth! They will spread out in all directions—to the west and the east, to the north and the south. And all the families of the earth will be blessed through you and your descendants. 15 What’s more, I am with you, and I will protect you wherever you go. One day I will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have finished giving you everything I have promised you.”

Genesis 28:13-15

Hebrews 11:20 20 It was by faith that Isaac promised blessings for the future to his sons, Jacob and Esau.

Obedience to instruction/exhibition of faith is what leads to blessing.

PS - a 'faith aid' is not really alien to the bible, people asked for 'signs' from God before acts came to pass, and using things like Lamb's blood was a 'sign' to protect families against the plague of Egypt.

What will always hang up atheists like yourself is a failure to look at issues in context.

Tudór:

Oh shut up! What the f@#k is this?
Faith aid
The passage clearly shows that it was because of the sticks and stripped rods that the spotted goats/lambs were produced.
Faith aid my arse!
where was it mentioned in the scriptures that the sticks and rods were "faith aid"- mordern day word of faith movement just sit in your houses and invent jargons!

Time and time again on NL when christians see a scientific fact coincidentally predicted by the bible, y'all say the bible is scientifically accurate but when we show scientific inaccuracies you claimit was as a result of a "miracle" or "blessing of god" -how much more dumb escapist can one get??

Is there any scientific fact that the bible has ever predicted? The bible has NEVER made any scientific prediction last time i checked, gravity was not pridicted by the bible, DNA was not predicted by the bible, computers, electricity, cars, internet, elements, NOTHING scientific has ever been predicted by the bible only that humans can survive inside a fish for 3 days or that the sun moves round the earth those are biblical science. Conventional physics, chemistry and biology has nothing to do with the little concept of physics chemistry and biology that is written in the bible because conventional science has shown that the little concept of science written in the bible is wrong.

debosky:

Even so, did the stick themselves cause the change or what they represented? Did Moses' rod part the Red Sea or was it as a result of his obeying the instruction to stretch the rod that the Sea parted on God's command?

Hebrews 11:29 It was by faith that the people of Israel went right through the Red Sea as though they were on dry ground. But when the Egyptians tried to follow, they were all drowned.

Jacob was blessed because of this declaration from God:

“I am the Lord, the God of your grandfather Abraham, and the God of your father, Isaac. The ground you are lying on belongs to you. I am giving it to you and your descendants. 14 Your descendants will be as numerous as the dust of the earth! They will spread out in all directions—to the west and the east, to the north and the south. And all the families of the earth will be blessed through you and your descendants. 15 What’s more, I am with you, and I will protect you wherever you go. One day I will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have finished giving you everything I have promised you.”

Genesis 28:13-15

Hebrews 11:20  20 It was by faith that Isaac promised blessings for the future to his sons, Jacob and Esau.

Obedience to instruction/exhibition of faith is what leads to blessing.

PS - a 'faith aid' is not really alien to the bible, people asked for 'signs' from God before acts came to pass, and using things like Lamb's blood was a 'sign' to protect families against the plague of Egypt.

What will always hang up atheists like yourself is a failure to look at issues in context.

I respect your position, but the problem is that you guys are looking at the issue from very different perspectives. You believe that those events actually happened while he doesn't because there is no evidence for any of them like the exodus for example there is absolutely nothing that supports the biblical narrative, no archeological or historical evidence to back it up. So guess you understand the point he is trying to make.

toneyb:

I respect your position, but the problem is that you guys are looking at the issue from very different perspectives. You believe that those events actually happened while he doesn't because there is no evidence for any of them like the exodus for example there is absolutely nothing that supports the biblical narrative, no archeological or historical evidence to back it up. So guess you understand the point he is trying to make.

I would challenge the assertion in bold, but I do agree archeological experts are not convinced about it's existence.

Individuals have sought to find proof by themselves, and while I do not vouch for their authenticity or veracity, it does indicate there might be 'evidence' not fully explored yet.

http://www.arkdiscovery.com/red_sea_crossing.htm

http://www.creativeministry.org/article.php?id=124

debosky:

Even so, did the stick themselves cause the change or what they represented? Did Moses' rod part the Red Sea or was it as a result of his obeying the instruction to stretch the rod that the Sea parted on God's command?
Hebrews 11:29 It was by faith that the people of Israel went right through the Red Sea as though they were on dry ground. But when the Egyptians tried to follow, they were all drowned.

Moses was supposedly commanded to stretch out the rod by god. Where did we see jacob being commanded to place the stripped sticks in their drinking water?? Jacob clearly put those fruits and rods because he thought it was technology not because of "faith" or "commandment" i.e it narrated to look like it was on his own accord.- shows the bible is fake.

Jacob was blessed because of this declaration from God:

“I am the Lord, the God of your grandfather Abraham, and the God of your father, Isaac. The ground you are lying on belongs to you. I am giving it to you and your descendants. 14 Your descendants will be as numerous as the dust of the earth! They will spread out in all directions—to the west and the east, to the north and the south. And all the families of the earth will be blessed through you and your descendants. 15 What’s more, I am with you, and I will protect you wherever you go. One day I will bring you back to this land. I will not leave you until I have finished giving you everything I have promised you.”

Genesis 28:13-15

rubbish! Since he was blessed because of this promise why are poor and cheated jews not producing goats and lambs with stripped sticks today

Hebrews 11:20  20 It was by faith that Isaac promised blessings for the future to his sons, Jacob and Esau.

Obedience to instruction/exhibition of faith is what leads to blessing.

Where is it written "by faith jacob produced spotted goats with sticks"??
Where did we see jacob being commanded to strip sticks and rods before we even get to obedience

PS - a 'faith aid' is not really alien to the bible, people asked for 'signs' from God before acts came to pass, and using things like Lamb's blood was a 'sign' to protect families against the plague of Egypt.

How is this crap relevant to jacob's story??
Did he ask for any sign

What will always hang up atheists like yourself is a failure to look at issues in context.

what context??
Is it the one invented by you or the other 30,000 different contexts invented by different christian sects??

debosky:

I would challenge the assertion in bold, but I do agree archeological experts are not convinced about it's existence.

Individuals have sought to find proof by themselves, and while I do not vouch for their authenticity or veracity, it does indicate there might be 'evidence' not fully explored yet.

http://www.arkdiscovery.com/red_sea_crossing.htm

http://www.creativeministry.org/article.php?id=124

Again I respect your position and objectivity, you have said what I was about to say, any bias individual out to find "evidence" for his/her self with regards to this kind of issue will find such "evidence" the other link talks about the cave of moses found in saudi arabia and they some how believe that is an "evidence" for the exodus . When talking about evidence I am talking about the kind of evidence that will show that over 2 million people resided in the  desert of the sinai peninsula. Over two million people wandering in such a desert ALONE for 40 years will leave some kind of evidence at least, yet no such evidence have been found. Archaeological research has found no evidence that the Sinai desert ever hosted, or could have hosted, millions of people. There is nothing in the egyptian records that shows that the jews were ever enslaved in egypt in the first place.

Nothing about the egyptian record talks about any of the plagues mentioned in the bible even though the people were very well known for keeping records. The population of egypt at that time was about 6 million or so according to historians and 2.5 million(whom the bible claims are the people that do all the work) people leaving egypt will leave a devastating effect on the egyptian economy yet NO such evidence have been found. The bible fails to mention the name of any of the egyptian pharaohs (it only refers to them as pharaohs) or the one whose daughter the bible says adopted moses or any member of his family at that time which is very telling.

Jewish archeologist like Israel Finkelstein, Ze'ev Herzog and William G. Dever, regard the biblical Exodus as non-historical because there is no evidence to back it up.

toneyb:

Again I respect your position and objectivity, you have said what I was about to say, any bias individual out to find "evidence" for his/her self with regards to this kind of issue will find such "evidence" the other link talks about the cave of moses found in saudi arabia and they some how believe that is an "evidence" for the exodus . When talking about evidence I am talking about the kind of evidence that will show that over 2 million people resided in the  desert of the sinai peninsula. Over two million people wandering in such a desert ALONE for 40 years will leave some kind of evidence at least, yet no such evidence have been found. Archaeological research has found no evidence that the Sinai desert ever hosted, or could have hosted, millions of people. There is nothing in the egyptian records that shows that the jews were ever enslaved in egypt in the first place.

Nothing about the egyptian record talks about any of the plagues mentioned in the bible even though the people were very well known for keeping records. The population of egypt at that time was about 6 million or so according to historians and 2.5 million(whom the bible claims are the people that do all the work) people leaving egypt will leave a devastating effect on the egyptian economy yet NO such evidence have been found. The bible fails to mention the name of any of the egyptian pharaohs (it only refers to them as pharaohs) or the one whose daughter the bible says adopted moses or any member of his family at that time which is very telling.

Jewish archeologist like Israel Finkelstein, Ze'ev Herzog and William G. Dever, regard the biblical Exodus as non-historical because there is no evidence to back it up.

Again, I am not claiming to be an Egyptian Anthropologist or historian with definitive knowledge of what happened where and when, but there are publications out there challenging the mainstream opinion of the biblical Exodus.

I do not expect everything to be clearly and neatly explained, but there is historical evidence that might point to a mass exodus from Egypt. Again, as with all historical accounts, this may be looked at from different viewpoints depending on the writer. I give you an excerpt:

This exit from Egypt by the Hyksos probably included the Israelites as well. The story of the Exodus is most likely bases on the expulsion of the Hyksos from Egypt, for there is no other record of any mass exit from Egypt (Robertson 1990, 36; Halpern 1994, 89-96; Redford 1897, 150). The evidence seems to fit well with Josephus' account. Although the Egyptians saw the expulsion of the Hyksos as a great military victory, the Israelites viewed this as a great salvation victory for them. T[b]his seems similar to other events recorded in ancient history where both sides claim a great victory.[/b] Ramses II battled with the Hittites and almost lost his life, yet he calls this a great victory, but so do the Hittites. In reality it was a stalemate, so they both signed a treaty

http://www.bibleandscience.com/archaeology/exodus.htm