Bible vs. Science

That is not photoshop that was taken from a mold of his skull... The musculature on his face and the skin were created by the worlds best artists of facial recreation. That face of Tut was first revealed to the world just recently.

Rex is correct. The recreation project was led by Zahi Hawass, the secretary general of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, and had many forensic anthropologists working on it. I doubt the skin was smooth like a baby's bottom like it is depicted but in general it should be very close to King Tut's actual face.

Edit: Here's a Photo Gallery.

That's a silly, inaccurate amatuer photoshop portrait of the real King Tut which has little to go on other than the mask on the coffin. To my knowledge, the mummy has never been digitally scanned and recreated.
I believe they were thinking of Barbra Streisand as King Tut.[/quote]

That is not photoshop that was taken from a mold of his skull... The musculature on his face and the skin were created by the worlds best artists of facial recreation. That face of Tut was first revealed to the world just recently.[/quote]

Rex is correct. The recreation project was led by Zahi Hawass, the secretary general of Egypt's Supreme Council of Antiquities, and had many forensic anthropologists working on it. I doubt the skin was smooth like a baby's bottom like it is depicted but in general it should be very close to King Tut's actual face.




I stand corrected. RR has a habit of posting stuff with no links. It was on a National Geographic cover with an extensive article inside and more pictures.

No, he doesn't look Jewish despite the slight resemblance to Barbra Streisand. The truth is, many Jewish men I've known do not look even the slightest like a Jew. Charlton Heston looks nothing like a Jew, however, especially what anthropologist's studies determined the facial characteristics of the Hebrews of that time have revealed.

Maybe Barbara after a nose job:

And why do we care?

Well, Moses could have passed off as an Egyptian.

There is absolutely no historical proof that Moses after existed. As I state before, the Egyptians did not keep slaves. Your head is as dense as a rock.

You shouldn't through stones until you examine your own rock. Egyptian slaves were more like the indentured servants of colonial America. They were able to buy or work their way to freedom, and were usually well cared for. They could hold important advisory positions in government, and there were several well-known slaves who became high officials in the Pharaoh's court. Prisoners were sent to work in the various mines which Egypt owned. The Pyramids, by the way, were NOT built by slaves, but by paid workers who were very proud of their work. The workers put their names and the names of their work teams on the insides of the blocks of stones, and they were allowed to build their own tombs within sight of the Pyramid, which was quite an honor. In those ancient times, you were better off as a slave in Egypt than as a free but poor person anywhere else.

Your supposition about slavery in Egypt is just that. There are no Egyptologists who have any conclusive proof of the existence of slavery anything like the American colonies. There is stronger evidence that they did, as I stated, make citizens of their captive enemies and labor was a free market. You need to do some research other than some of the silly stuff on the internet. My thesis in my masters in university was on Egyptian history. I had concluded then that the pyramids and other monuments were not built by any extensive program of slavery. That took Christianity, the Bible and it's god to really proliferate right up to the U.S. South.

Unless you can provide something other than your suppostion, you have proven no more or less than I have.

Look, none of this changes the fact that no slaves ever built hte pyramids, right? Which kinda goes against what the Bible states, doesn't it?

Darwin's Theory of evolution
....to answer a question from xingu. If you look up Darwin's Theory Of Evolution, you will see a page posted Darwin's Theory of Evolution- A Theory in Crisis. It will explain how this theory can not possibly be correct.

needmoretruth, your username is apt. You do need more truth in your life and that website spouts lies.

The link below it to a Wikipedia article is far more truthful than that Intelligent Design piece of propaganda.

Irreducible complexity is merely an argument of, "I can't believe it happened therefore it can't," and is not real science. furthermore, if you suddenly look up Theory of Evolution, that link drops down to sixth place.

Nope, you were the one who rebuttled with no links and no evidence. Do your own homework.

Oh, the idiocies floating around the internet about evolution and written. no doubt, by church clerics are they're not even good reading. They don't even illicit a laugh even though they are so absurd, someone has to be smokin' some good weed to believe them.

State servitude is slavery... Do you really think building a pyramid is really a day at the park.

Egypts own citizens were slaves so what really makes you think they would not turn into slaves, others?

No link was given LW because your supposition is rather flimsy. It can be toppled by only reasoning, who built the pyramids?

Such an arduous task is possible only through civil tyranny.

Years ago the world thought Babylon was myth until the city was dug up in the desert.

http://www.bible-history.com/babylonia/BabyloniaHistory_of_Babylonia.htm

Excerpt:

The city of Babylon was the capital of the ancient land of Babylonia in southern Mesopotamia. It was situated on the Euphrates River about 50 miles south of modern Baghdad, just north of what is now the modern Iraqi town of al-Hillah.

The tremendous wealth and power of this city, along with its monumental size and appearance, were certainly considered a Biblical myth, that is, until its foundations were unearthed and its riches substantiated during the 19th century. Archaeologists stood in awe as their discoveries revealed that certain stories in the Bible were an actual situation that had happened in time.

A quick overview of the writings of the prophet Isaiah in the Bible, especially chapter 13, reveals some predictions concerning Babylon that stagger the imagination.


Comment:

Yes and all the atheists and rationalists that forced their opinions on society that Babylon was a myth, had to eat crow when the city was finally found. Biblical truth will always be a myth to the skeptical until the actual facts are presented boldly in their face. They they will jump to any other fully unsubstantiated truth of the Bible and rail on that.

Egypt was styled after her neighbor Babylon who most certainly took captive slaves.

Another excerpt:

The once great city of Babylon, where the Jews were held captive

for 70 years, became a symbol of power, materialism, and cruelty.

Comment:
In all due respect you are telling us something rather radical LW
and it is you who do not really support it...

The Bible is the only historical source of many ancient cities that have proven to exist time and again.

The only Biblical city that I know of that has never been literally found is Zion which is a city, like paradise or Valhalla. A land of time and a city "within".

Wikipedia

Slavery in ancient Egypt
Historians can trace slavery in Egypt from an early date. Private ownership of slaves, captured in war and given by the king to their captor or otherwise, certainly occurred at the beginning of the Eighteenth Dynasty (1550 - 1295 BCE). Sales of slaves occurred in the Twenty-fifth Dynasty (732 - 656 BCE), and contracts of servitude survive from the Twenty-sixth Dynasty (ca 672 - 525 BCE) and from the reign of Darius: apparently such a contract then required the consent of the slave.

The Old Testament also recounts tales of slavery in Egypt: slave-dealers sold Joseph into bondage there, and the Hebrews suffered collective enslavement (Exodus, chapter 1) prior to the Exodus.

Wikipedia is not written by any particular authority -- anyone can contribute and the adminstrators are inadequate to check out every article to beware using it.

http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/timelines/topics/slavery.htm

This is, again, an online article which is not correspondent to my extensive library on ancient Egypt which belies that there were indentured servant slaves as there is not enough historical proof. At any rate, at the time Exodus too place is really sketchy and points to there being no slavery at all.

You're barking up a tree that is about to fall on you.

Incidentally, the few captives in a war were punished by the Pharaoh and assigned to masters but their freedoms make our slavery of the blacks brought in from Africa even more reprehensible. These "slaves" (there's even an obscurity in the ancient Egyptian language of a word for slave). These servents were paid by their "masters," and given a freedom virtually the same as the general citizenry. Real slavery, again, was endorsed by your Old Testament Hebrew god and was most definitely indentured servitude which was encourage for the lifetime of the slave.

Again, no historic proof, not a shred, that the Exodus ever occured. First gross error made by many clerics, and Cecil B DeMille ( ) was that Moses parted the Red Sea. It was the Reed Sea, a shallow body of water in the Delta Region of the Nile.

Get the cobwebs out of your brains.