Why do/don't you believe in a higher power? (Any HP)

[Wunderstrafanstalt]

What guarantee your or anyone's interpretation to be correct and why God made his holy book to need complicated interpretation at all? Just like the Quran, the bible can be reinterpreted and used to justify both good stuff and wicked, fucked up stuff. Not to mention we end up with like like 33000 sects denominations. Except if most of them have "Angus" as their name yet they put sugar on their porridge.

[The New California Republic]

I read it the way that original readers would have read it, and anyone reading it should do the same, as doing otherwise leads to the wrong conclusions

The original readers of the Bible likely included a great many skeptics as well, so saying stuff like "we should read it the way that the original readers would have read it" says fuck all, absolutely fuck all.

[Coruscanti Nations]

I read it the way that original readers would have read it, and anyone reading it should do the same, as doing otherwise leads to the wrong conclusions

The original readers of the Bible likely included a great many skeptics as well, so saying stuff like "we should read it the way that the original readers would have read it" says fuck all, absolutely fuck all.

That's a pretty dumb assertion when you consider that Israelites in the ancient period post and pre exile and the Christians of the first century were the ones that read it.

These were written to ancient Israelites and first century Christians, not to you.

[The New California Republic]

The original readers of the Bible likely included a great many skeptics as well, so saying stuff like "we should read it the way that the original readers would have read it" says fuck all, absolutely fuck all.

That's a pretty dumb assertion when you consider that Israelites in the ancient period post and pre exile and the Christians of the first century were the ones that read it.

These were written to ancient Israelites and first century Christians, not to you.

There would have been skeptics amongst them, it's an impossibility that every single one of the original readers completely accepted the Bible. So no, it isn't a "dumb assertion" at all.

[The Caleshan Valkyrie]

Filed once more under: "No U"

I really am curious for an example of skeptics cherrypicking scripture 100% of the time. You're rather quick to accuse us of not understanding the stuff we read, but it really does seem that the trend leans the other way.

No U?

No U No U No U No U No U No U No U No U No U No U No U

It is hilarious how you ignore so many things: ex., the nature of God as unbound by human mindsets.

For example, Richard Dawkins calls God petty, and yet does not consider that God was extrenely gracious to people, like how He would be willing to spare Sodom if only TEN righteous Sodomites can be found. Or just how long He was delaying judgement for VERY long to give second chances to a depraved humanity (100 years before the Flood, 400 years for the Canaanites, and the entirety of history so far for humanity in general).

Or how people assume that He is sinking to Pharaoh's level when He isn't human to begin with, and when other passages stresses that vengeance belongs to God, not to those who follow him.

Or how people call Him a magical skyman, which is dumber than anti-vaxxers and flat-earthers combined.

Or on how people say it is unfair for God to only let some people into Heaven and not all... when being fair is sending all to hell.

Or when people go insane over that Psalm that described Babylonian infants getting smashed against the rockd when it is in fact a psalm of retribution and lamentation against Babylobian oppression.

Or when people say that God can't handle mockery, ignoring that He is the ruler of the universe and such mockery is in a different level higher than mocking Vladimir Putin or Constantine the Great.

Filed under: “You’re just not GETTING it!”

You are not the arbiter of which interpretation is correct. Also, that is a LOT of displacement you’re ladling on me without any justification whatsoever.

[Coruscanti Nations]

That's a pretty dumb assertion when you consider that Israelites in the ancient period post and pre exile and the Christians of the first century were the ones that read it.

These were written to ancient Israelites and first century Christians, not to you.

There would have been skeptics amongst them, it's an impossibility that every single one of the original readers completely accepted the Bible. So no, it isn't a "dumb assertion" at all.

Except that I was referring to individual books (each of which had a SPECIFIC purpose), not to the document that was formed by church councils and put together by St. Jerome ad the Vulgate in AD 400.

Skepticsm has only been strong in the last two or so centuries, so if there were anyone that didn't accept of the books, it would be Israel when it had its idolatrous phases (which wasn't rejection at all, but rather, forgetting the Torah and the law of Moses), people who took offense to the truth (like some of the Corinthians, who took offence on Paul's letter), and similar cases. Atheism was almost nonexistent back then.

There may be some who did not agree, but they still understand the text differently than us and would be getting the message exactly as it was meant to. After all, the OT was written in Hebrew, and the NT in Koine Greek, and the terms of the Bronze Age and the First Century are different from the modern time.

[Toklax]

I believe because I've personally witnessed a miracle and too many things fit together in the universe. Science can rely on stable things despite an insistence that it's all RNG even in the face of entropy.

I'm not certain how I feel about labels besides "Christian", but I was raised Protestant/Assemblies of God; I guess I'm non-denominational.

I’d be interested to hear what miracle you believe you witnessed.

Ithreland's puppet here, haven't kept up with the thread because I had no reason to until I noticed there was a reply.

Obviously this is an easily-dismissed anecdote, but I asked God for a yes/no sign on something personal to me (that I won't be disclosing) in the form of an acquaintance of mine who mainly attended church on Wednesdays, but would rarely come back on Sundays. The sign was basically: "Is [personal thing] a waste of time? If no, have [Name] show up tomorrow[Sunday] morning." Something immediately clicked in my head that [Name] would show up, and so he did. It was a week before the senior graduation recognition we were to attend onstage and he showed up because he thought it was that Sunday and not the week after. I would have had no reason to expect him due to being acquaintances and not friends.

The personal thing has since slipped out of my grasp and I have no idea what to make of it and the (minor prophecy?) event now, but there you go. I haven't told anyone this before, not even family/friends, because the personal thing has screwed me up for the past four years.

[The New California Republic]

There would have been skeptics amongst them, it's an impossibility that every single one of the original readers completely accepted the Bible. So no, it isn't a "dumb assertion" at all.

Except that I was referring to individual books (each of which had a SPECIFIC purpose), not to the document that was formed by church councils and put together by St. Jerome ad the Vulgate in AD 400.

Skepticsm has only been strong in the last two or so centuries, so if there were anyone that didn't accept of the books, it would be Israel when it had its idolatrous phases (which wasn't rejection at all, but rather, forgetting the Torah and the law of Moses), people who took offense to the truth (like some of the Corinthians, who took offence on Paul's letter), and similar cases. Atheism was almost nonexistent back then.

There may be some who did not agree, but they still understand the text differently than us and would be getting the message exactly as it was meant to. After all, the OT was written in Hebrew, and the NT in Koine Greek, and the terms of the Bronze Age and the First Century are different from the modern time.

Splitting hairs. God was constantly on the case of the skeptics, as shown by his constant admonishment of people who disbelieved amongst the Jews. Moses threw down the tablets and smashed them because people had fell away from the teachings and embraced new beliefs. The only way they could fall away from the teachings is to have had some skepticism regarding them. Moses wasn't away for long enough for the Jews to forget their beliefs, he was only away for 40 days at a time. The Jews would have needed memories like sieves to simply forget their beliefs in that short time. Skepticism as part of our questioning nature is part and parcel of being human, so skeptics existed back then too.

And I beg to differ. Atheism has existed since God was invented.

[Coruscanti Nations]

Except that I was referring to individual books (each of which had a SPECIFIC purpose), not to the document that was formed by church councils and put together by St. Jerome ad the Vulgate in AD 400.

Skepticsm has only been strong in the last two or so centuries, so if there were anyone that didn't accept of the books, it would be Israel when it had its idolatrous phases (which wasn't rejection at all, but rather, forgetting the Torah and the law of Moses), people who took offense to the truth (like some of the Corinthians, who took offence on Paul's letter), and similar cases. Atheism was almost nonexistent back then.

There may be some who did not agree, but they still understand the text differently than us and would be getting the message exactly as it was meant to. After all, the OT was written in Hebrew, and the NT in Koine Greek, and the terms of the Bronze Age and the First Century are different from the modern time.

Splitting hairs. God was constantly on the case of the skeptics, as shown by his constant admonishment of people who disbelieved amongst the Jews. Moses threw down the tablets and smashed them because people had fell away from the teachings and embraced new beliefs. The only way they could fall away from the teachings is to have had some skepticism regarding them. Moses wasn't away for long enough for the Jews to forget their beliefs, he was only away for 40 days at a time. The Jews would have needed memories like sieves to simply forget their beliefs in that short time. Skepticism as part of our questioning nature is part and parcel of being human, so skeptics existed back then too.

And I beg to differ. Atheism has existed since God was invented.

They didn’t embrace new things. They were surrounded by idolatry in Egypt, remember? And just because the Tribe of Levi and whatnot are dedicated to Yahweh, historically speaking, the idolatrous saturation they experienced while under slavery (it can be assumed that they made temples for Egyptians gods as well) would have heavily affected their psyche. It is similar to what happened when Roman Catholicism was mixed with animistic beliefs in Latin America and in the Philippines. They weren’t exactly disbelieving and neither were they embracing anything new, because golden calves were originally an Egyptian thing. They were mixing things up, as Aaron said, “Look, Israel. This is the God that brought you out of Egypt.” They were accustomed to seeing material things for their belief, and it was difficult for them to be accustomed to an invisivle deity, and were reliant on Moses to sustain their faith.

In the absence of Moses, the judicial authority had been delegated to Aaron, and a vast crowd gathered about his tent, with the demand, “Make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.” ] The cloud, they said, that had heretofore led them, now rested permanently upon the mount; it would no longer direct their travels. They must have an image in its place; and if, as had been suggested, they should decide to return to Egypt, they would find favor with the Egyptians by bearing this image before them and acknowledging it as their god.

Such a crisis demanded a man of firmness, decision, and unflinching courage; one who held the honor of God above popular favor, personal safety, or life itself. But the present leader of Israel was not of this character. Aaron feebly remonstrated with the people, but his wavering and timidity at the critical moment only rendered them the more determined. The tumult increased. A blind, unreasoning frenzy seemed to take possession of the multitude. There were some who remained true to their covenant with God, but the greater part of the people joined in the apostasy. A few who ventured to denounce the proposed image making as idolatry, were set upon and roughly treated, and in the confusion and excitement they finally lost their lives.

Aaron feared for his own safety; and instead of nobly standing up for the honor of God, he yielded to the demands of the multitude. His first act was to direct that the golden earrings be collected from all the people and brought to him, hoping that pride would lead them to refuse such a sacrifice. But they willingly yielded up their ornaments; and from these he made a molten calf, in imitation of the gods of Egypt. The people proclaimed, “These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.” And Aaron basely permitted this insult to Jehovah. He did more. Seeing with what satisfaction the golden god was received, he built an altar before it, and made proclamation, “Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord.” The announcement was heralded by trumpeters from company to company throughout the camp. “And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink and rose up to play.” Under the pretense of holding “a feast to the Lord,” they gave themselves up to gluttony and licentious reveling. .

[The New California Republic]

Splitting hairs. God was constantly on the case of the skeptics, as shown by his constant admonishment of people who disbelieved amongst the Jews. Moses threw down the tablets and smashed them because people had fell away from the teachings and embraced new beliefs. The only way they could fall away from the teachings is to have had some skepticism regarding them. Moses wasn't away for long enough for the Jews to forget their beliefs, he was only away for 40 days at a time. The Jews would have needed memories like sieves to simply forget their beliefs in that short time. Skepticism as part of our questioning nature is part and parcel of being human, so skeptics existed back then too.

And I beg to differ. Atheism has existed since God was invented.

They didn’t embrace new things. They were surrounded by idolatry in Egypt, remember? And just because the Tribe of Levi and whatnot are dedicated to Yahweh, historically speaking, the idolatrous saturation they experienced while under slavery (it can be assumed that they made temples for Egyptians gods as well) would have heavily affected their psyche. It is similar to what happened when Roman Catholicism was mixed with animistic beliefs in Latin America and in the Philippines. They weren’t exactly disbelieving and neither were they embracing anything new, because golden calves were originally an Egyptian thing. They were mixing things up, as Aaron said, “Look, Israel. This is the God that brought you out of Egypt.” They were accustomed to seeing material things for their belief, and it was difficult for them to be accustomed to an invisivle deity, and were reliant on Moses to sustain their faith.

In the absence of Moses, the judicial authority had been delegated to Aaron, and a vast crowd gathered about his tent, with the demand, “Make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.” ] The cloud, they said, that had heretofore led them, now rested permanently upon the mount; it would no longer direct their travels. They must have an image in its place; and if, as had been suggested, they should decide to return to Egypt, they would find favor with the Egyptians by bearing this image before them and acknowledging it as their god.

Such a crisis demanded a man of firmness, decision, and unflinching courage; one who held the honor of God above popular favor, personal safety, or life itself. But the present leader of Israel was not of this character. Aaron feebly remonstrated with the people, but his wavering and timidity at the critical moment only rendered them the more determined. The tumult increased. A blind, unreasoning frenzy seemed to take possession of the multitude. There were some who remained true to their covenant with God, but the greater part of the people joined in the apostasy. A few who ventured to denounce the proposed image making as idolatry, were set upon and roughly treated, and in the confusion and excitement they finally lost their lives.

Aaron feared for his own safety; and instead of nobly standing up for the honor of God, he yielded to the demands of the multitude. His first act was to direct that the golden earrings be collected from all the people and brought to him, hoping that pride would lead them to refuse such a sacrifice. But they willingly yielded up their ornaments; and from these he made a molten calf, in imitation of the gods of Egypt. The people proclaimed, “These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.” And Aaron basely permitted this insult to Jehovah. He did more. Seeing with what satisfaction the golden god was received, he built an altar before it, and made proclamation, “Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord.” The announcement was heralded by trumpeters from company to company throughout the camp. “And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink and rose up to play.” Under the pretense of holding “a feast to the Lord,” they gave themselves up to gluttony and licentious reveling. .

You basically just gave a very verbose affirmation of what I said.

[Korhal IVV]

They didn’t embrace new things. They were surrounded by idolatry in Egypt, remember? And just because the Tribe of Levi and whatnot are dedicated to Yahweh, historically speaking, the idolatrous saturation they experienced while under slavery (it can be assumed that they made temples for Egyptians gods as well) would have heavily affected their psyche. It is similar to what happened when Roman Catholicism was mixed with animistic beliefs in Latin America and in the Philippines. They weren’t exactly disbelieving and neither were they embracing anything new, because golden calves were originally an Egyptian thing. They were mixing things up, as Aaron said, “Look, Israel. This is the God that brought you out of Egypt.” They were accustomed to seeing material things for their belief, and it was difficult for them to be accustomed to an invisivle deity, and were reliant on Moses to sustain their faith.

In the absence of Moses, the judicial authority had been delegated to Aaron, and a vast crowd gathered about his tent, with the demand, “Make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.” ] The cloud, they said, that had heretofore led them, now rested permanently upon the mount; it would no longer direct their travels. They must have an image in its place; and if, as had been suggested, they should decide to return to Egypt, they would find favor with the Egyptians by bearing this image before them and acknowledging it as their god.

Such a crisis demanded a man of firmness, decision, and unflinching courage; one who held the honor of God above popular favor, personal safety, or life itself. But the present leader of Israel was not of this character. Aaron feebly remonstrated with the people, but his wavering and timidity at the critical moment only rendered them the more determined. The tumult increased. A blind, unreasoning frenzy seemed to take possession of the multitude. There were some who remained true to their covenant with God, but the greater part of the people joined in the apostasy. A few who ventured to denounce the proposed image making as idolatry, were set upon and roughly treated, and in the confusion and excitement they finally lost their lives.

Aaron feared for his own safety; and instead of nobly standing up for the honor of God, he yielded to the demands of the multitude. His first act was to direct that the golden earrings be collected from all the people and brought to him, hoping that pride would lead them to refuse such a sacrifice. But they willingly yielded up their ornaments; and from these he made a molten calf, in imitation of the gods of Egypt. The people proclaimed, “These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.” And Aaron basely permitted this insult to Jehovah. He did more. Seeing with what satisfaction the golden god was received, he built an altar before it, and made proclamation, “Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord.” The announcement was heralded by trumpeters from company to company throughout the camp. “And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink and rose up to play.” Under the pretense of holding “a feast to the Lord,” they gave themselves up to gluttony and licentious reveling. .

You basically just gave a very verbose affirmation of what I said.

I see no confirmation of skepticsm.

[The New California Republic]

You basically just gave a very verbose affirmation of what I said.

I see no confirmation of skepticsm.

I do. Skepticism is a prerequisite of being open to the ingress of other beliefs.

[Korhal IVV]

I see no confirmation of skepticsm.

I do. Skepticism is a prerequisite of being open to the ingress of other beliefs.

Except that it was a short return to old beliefs, not an openness to new ones.

[The New California Republic]

I do. Skepticism is a prerequisite of being open to the ingress of other beliefs.

Except that it was a short return to old beliefs, not an openness to new ones.

Not really essential to what I was saying, splitting hairs a bit, and still confirms what I was saying, but alright.

[Luxcentra]

I believe that those who are positive will have good things happen to them. The universe is on our side, and people are essentially good on the inside.

I do not, however, believe in God. Most theologies reek of the culture they came from, suggesting a man-made origin. I think they can provide peace of mind to the grieving, but they don't provide much else outside of a good story.

The universe has a much crazier origin story that is much less of an offense to its grandeur than a sky daddy who supposedly made liquid water appear before light or heat. Instead of listening to a book that tells me that I'll go to hell for touching or loving someone that sky daddy didn't want me touching or loving, or for not thinking he may totally exist, I think the detailed explanation about how the universe in its very first moments, was essentially frozen in time because it was too hot--with real measurements on how large it was mere fractions of a fraction of a fraction of a second after its creation--is a much more plausible explanation. We have books on those too.

And while one book proposes an Earth age that is younger than ancient pots we've found in the desert, the other book is the product of the same methods that have allowed me to type this very sentence. You tell me which one is based more in reality.

[Jolthig]

There would have been skeptics amongst them, it's an impossibility that every single one of the original readers completely accepted the Bible. So no, it isn't a "dumb assertion" at all.

Except that I was referring to individual books (each of which had a SPECIFIC purpose), not to the document that was formed by church councils and put together by St. Jerome ad the Vulgate in AD 400.

Skepticsm has only been strong in the last two or so centuries, so if there were anyone that didn't accept of the books, it would be Israel when it had its idolatrous phases (which wasn't rejection at all, but rather, forgetting the Torah and the law of Moses), people who took offense to the truth (like some of the Corinthians, who took offence on Paul's letter), and similar cases. Atheism was almost nonexistent back then.

There may be some who did not agree, but they still understand the text differently than us and would be getting the message exactly as it was meant to. After all, the OT was written in Hebrew, and the NT in Koine Greek, and the terms of the Bronze Age and the First Century are different from the modern time.

Considering that atheism is derived from Koine Greek, the language your NT was written (atheos; "without god"), I'll have to disagree with you.

[Salandriagado]

There would have been skeptics amongst them, it's an impossibility that every single one of the original readers completely accepted the Bible. So no, it isn't a "dumb assertion" at all.

Except that I was referring to individual books (each of which had a SPECIFIC purpose), not to the document that was formed by church councils and put together by St. Jerome ad the Vulgate in AD 400.

Skepticsm has only been strong in the last two or so centuries,

Skepticism is literally older than the New Testament as a philosophy.

so if there were anyone that didn't accept of the books, it would be Israel when it had its idolatrous phases (which wasn't rejection at all, but rather, forgetting the Torah and the law of Moses),

Those are the same thing.

people who took offense to the truth (like some of the Corinthians, who took offence on Paul's letter), and similar cases.

So nobody was skeptical, apart from all of the people who were skeptical.

Atheism was almost nonexistent back then.

Only true if you take a very narrow definition of "atheist", and entirely irrelevant to the discussion.

[New Legland]

well then

[Jolthig]

well then

I'm still here lol

[Celritannia]

I am British, and normally all of the British are devout Christians.

U W0T M8?

[Celritannia]

The original readers of the Bible likely included a great many skeptics as well, so saying stuff like "we should read it the way that the original readers would have read it" says fuck all, absolutely fuck all.

That's a pretty dumb assertion when you consider that Israelites in the ancient period post and pre exile and the Christians of the first century were the ones that read it.

These were written to ancient Israelites and first century Christians, not to you.

And we can thank good old imperialistic military colonisation for taking Johnny Foreigner's land and converting them to the Christian way, or killing them if they didn't.

[Celritannia]

Splitting hairs. God was constantly on the case of the skeptics, as shown by his constant admonishment of people who disbelieved amongst the Jews. Moses threw down the tablets and smashed them because people had fell away from the teachings and embraced new beliefs. The only way they could fall away from the teachings is to have had some skepticism regarding them. Moses wasn't away for long enough for the Jews to forget their beliefs, he was only away for 40 days at a time. The Jews would have needed memories like sieves to simply forget their beliefs in that short time. Skepticism as part of our questioning nature is part and parcel of being human, so skeptics existed back then too.

And I beg to differ. Atheism has existed since God was invented.

They didn’t embrace new things. They were surrounded by idolatry in Egypt, remember? And just because the Tribe of Levi and whatnot are dedicated to Yahweh, historically speaking, the idolatrous saturation they experienced while under slavery (it can be assumed that they made temples for Egyptians gods as well) would have heavily affected their psyche. It is similar to what happened when Roman Catholicism was mixed with animistic beliefs in Latin America and in the Philippines. They weren’t exactly disbelieving and neither were they embracing anything new, because golden calves were originally an Egyptian thing. They were mixing things up, as Aaron said, “Look, Israel. This is the God that brought you out of Egypt.” They were accustomed to seeing material things for their belief, and it was difficult for them to be accustomed to an invisivle deity, and were reliant on Moses to sustain their faith.

In the absence of Moses, the judicial authority had been delegated to Aaron, and a vast crowd gathered about his tent, with the demand, “Make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.” ] The cloud, they said, that had heretofore led them, now rested permanently upon the mount; it would no longer direct their travels. They must have an image in its place; and if, as had been suggested, they should decide to return to Egypt, they would find favor with the Egyptians by bearing this image before them and acknowledging it as their god.

Such a crisis demanded a man of firmness, decision, and unflinching courage; one who held the honor of God above popular favor, personal safety, or life itself. But the present leader of Israel was not of this character. Aaron feebly remonstrated with the people, but his wavering and timidity at the critical moment only rendered them the more determined. The tumult increased. A blind, unreasoning frenzy seemed to take possession of the multitude. There were some who remained true to their covenant with God, but the greater part of the people joined in the apostasy. A few who ventured to denounce the proposed image making as idolatry, were set upon and roughly treated, and in the confusion and excitement they finally lost their lives.

Aaron feared for his own safety; and instead of nobly standing up for the honor of God, he yielded to the demands of the multitude. His first act was to direct that the golden earrings be collected from all the people and brought to him, hoping that pride would lead them to refuse such a sacrifice. But they willingly yielded up their ornaments; and from these he made a molten calf, in imitation of the gods of Egypt. The people proclaimed, “These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.” And Aaron basely permitted this insult to Jehovah. He did more. Seeing with what satisfaction the golden god was received, he built an altar before it, and made proclamation, “Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord.” The announcement was heralded by trumpeters from company to company throughout the camp. “And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink and rose up to play.” Under the pretense of holding “a feast to the Lord,” they gave themselves up to gluttony and licentious reveling. .

You say historically speaking, yet archaeological records and well documented Egyptian administrations shows there were no mass slaves of Israelites in Egypt at anytime.

[Korhal IVV]

They didn’t embrace new things. They were surrounded by idolatry in Egypt, remember? And just because the Tribe of Levi and whatnot are dedicated to Yahweh, historically speaking, the idolatrous saturation they experienced while under slavery (it can be assumed that they made temples for Egyptians gods as well) would have heavily affected their psyche. It is similar to what happened when Roman Catholicism was mixed with animistic beliefs in Latin America and in the Philippines. They weren’t exactly disbelieving and neither were they embracing anything new, because golden calves were originally an Egyptian thing. They were mixing things up, as Aaron said, “Look, Israel. This is the God that brought you out of Egypt.” They were accustomed to seeing material things for their belief, and it was difficult for them to be accustomed to an invisivle deity, and were reliant on Moses to sustain their faith.

In the absence of Moses, the judicial authority had been delegated to Aaron, and a vast crowd gathered about his tent, with the demand, “Make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.” ] The cloud, they said, that had heretofore led them, now rested permanently upon the mount; it would no longer direct their travels. They must have an image in its place; and if, as had been suggested, they should decide to return to Egypt, they would find favor with the Egyptians by bearing this image before them and acknowledging it as their god.

Such a crisis demanded a man of firmness, decision, and unflinching courage; one who held the honor of God above popular favor, personal safety, or life itself. But the present leader of Israel was not of this character. Aaron feebly remonstrated with the people, but his wavering and timidity at the critical moment only rendered them the more determined. The tumult increased. A blind, unreasoning frenzy seemed to take possession of the multitude. There were some who remained true to their covenant with God, but the greater part of the people joined in the apostasy. A few who ventured to denounce the proposed image making as idolatry, were set upon and roughly treated, and in the confusion and excitement they finally lost their lives.

Aaron feared for his own safety; and instead of nobly standing up for the honor of God, he yielded to the demands of the multitude. His first act was to direct that the golden earrings be collected from all the people and brought to him, hoping that pride would lead them to refuse such a sacrifice. But they willingly yielded up their ornaments; and from these he made a molten calf, in imitation of the gods of Egypt. The people proclaimed, “These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.” And Aaron basely permitted this insult to Jehovah. He did more. Seeing with what satisfaction the golden god was received, he built an altar before it, and made proclamation, “Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord.” The announcement was heralded by trumpeters from company to company throughout the camp. “And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink and rose up to play.” Under the pretense of holding “a feast to the Lord,” they gave themselves up to gluttony and licentious reveling. .

You say historically speaking, yet archaeological records and well documented Egyptian administrations shows there were no mass slaves of Israelites in Egypt at anytime.

There might as well been just 60,000 males instead of 600,000. This kind of numerical innacuracy reflects in a wall killing 27,000 men and Israel having an army of 400,000. They might as well have been a small part of the workforce, and if anything, it was clear that Egypt was crawling with Semitic peoples, Israelite and otherwise.

[The New California Republic]

You say historically speaking, yet archaeological records and well documented Egyptian administrations shows there were no mass slaves of Israelites in Egypt at anytime.

There might as well been just 60,000 males instead of 600,000. This kind of numerical innacuracy reflects in a wall killing 27,000 men and Israel having an army of 400,000. They might as well have been a small part of the workforce, and if anything, it was clear that Egypt was crawling with Semitic peoples, Israelite and otherwise.

According to what?

[Salandriagado]

You say historically speaking, yet archaeological records and well documented Egyptian administrations shows there were no mass slaves of Israelites in Egypt at anytime.

There might as well been just 60,000 males instead of 600,000. This kind of numerical innacuracy reflects in a wall killing 27,000 men and Israel having an army of 400,000. They might as well have been a small part of the workforce, and if anything, it was clear that Egypt was crawling with Semitic peoples, Israelite and otherwise.

The bold is a lie, and has already been thoroughly refuted by an actual archaeologist in this very thread.