Oh, I don't deny that some Israelites were likely held as slaves by the Ancient Egyptians, but I deny that the Bible is 100% historically accurate. Even your own article that you posted suggested that 1 million people very likely didn't survive in the desert for 40 years.<quoted text> If you deny 400 years of Israeli history as it relates to slavery to the degree where the first born sons were murdered by Egyptians then it is not so hard a stretch for your counterpart to deny the holocaust in the years to come. You laugh at biblical accounts and dismiss them as myth and now you get a taste of your own medicine and you call me coward. I have long since given up on how others except a handful who have earned the right think of or view me.
Were the first born sons of the Jewish slaves murdered in Egypt? I wasn't aware that was in the Bible, sorry. That doesn't make a lot of sense, though. If you're a slave owning people, you kind of want those valuable first born sons.
No, you called me a Holocaust denier because we are in disagreement about Exodus. That's cowardly. I won't stand for it. 1000 years from now, someone like me won't either - we have film footage of the terrible atrocities inflicted on the Jews by the Christian Nazi Germany state and people.
Yes, I will not accept your book of myth as evidence. So it's laughable when you write "it is scripture!" as if that should somehow sway an argument. You wouldn't if I put any other religion's mythology down - why should I with yours?
Oh, some parts of the Bible have some historical truths in them. Yet you have to be careful about accepting it as accurate - it's a book that is designed to promote a cultural identity for the Jews. Several different versions were stitched together by an editor hundreds of years after the events described - and he altered them. We know this, Bible scholars know this - and here you are claiming it's 100% accurate???
I'm sorry, LB, this isn't Sunday school. You'll have to do better than that. Or don't. Perhaps this is your limitation.