Have a consistent understanding of the Bible
In your opinion, it is impossible to seriously understand what is said in the Bible.
But you do criticize those who try to give rational explanations for the miracles of Egypt. For example, the tides in the Red Sea or a solar eclipse in a plague of darkness.
No explanation is acceptable to you, and all fantastic stories must be understood literally.
On the other hand, when the Bible tells of over a million Hebrews leaving Egypt, you claim that it is not necessary to accept this, even though one and a half million Hebrews leaving Egypt is not that fantastic (even though it is less acceptable from other approaches).
So what’s the point – can we understand what the Bible says or not?
And even when you try to build a certain line for your understanding, how can you build something on it with the two examples given above, when in my opinion it is the less rational explanations that are accepted by you (Hans), and where perhaps it is possible to grasp a hint of rationality (the number of those leaving), so in your opinion is it okay to compromise?
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The Bible refers to the event of the crossing of the Red Sea as a very specific event quite clearly.
But it also writes that 60 thousand men came out quite clearly.
I agree that the question may not be which is more fantastic.
But if there are no facts in favor of 60 thousand, what facts are there in favor of the crossing of the Red Sea or a huge number of firstborns who died, the latter of which you tend to accept literally if from the Bible's perspective everything is narrated in the same way – literally?
You insist on nothing. The Bible not only mentions the event but also refers to it in several places. I see no other possible explanation for the miracle.
On the other hand, the story can be typological, especially if there are facts against it (and not just no facts for it).
Focus:
2 million leave – There are facts against it, according to you.
Hundreds of thousands die in the plague of the firstborn - there are no facts against it, according to you.
What kind of facts are there against 2 million leave, but there are none against hundreds of thousands dying in the plague of the firstborn?
It makes sense that the number 60 thousand is typological. It also makes sense that the story of the Red Sea and all the plagues is metaphorical.
The fact that the Torah/Hanak mentions the miracles twice is not strong enough to argue that it is unlikely that this is a metaphor.
I didn't write that there are facts against him, nor that the number is incorrect.
I wrote that if there are facts against him (and they claim there are) I have no problem interpreting it differently.
Well, I've exhausted it.
A typological number? Consists of many small numbers of the tribes, and the number of firstborns is contrasted with the number of Levites? (It is true that the number of firstborns is relatively very large, and still)
I still can't understand why you don't accept other explanations for miracles.
Beyond saying that ”the Torah repeats this several times as a miracle” I didn't find in your words even a fraction of an explanation for why we shouldn't accept rational explanations for miracles.
By the way, as the commenter above me wrote, the Torah also repeats a huge number of exodus even during the censuses and even gives quite respectable detail. More than once. Which reduces the likelihood that this is a typological number.
So then, I have to make a distinction between the miracles and the number of exodus –
If the miracles are not likely to be interpreted in a clever way, then the number of exodus is also not likely to be interpreted as a typological number.
I couldn't understand why there is a distinction between the two.
All the best
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
