Science and Technology : Do You Believe In UFOs

ZealotX

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Jan 21, 2020
83
34
Yes.....depends on the size.
"Yes.....depends on the size."

we're talking about THE pyramids.

"Give me the money and the plans (blue print), the whole of the society does not have to be literate....to know what a volcano is. I have work with many individuals who can not read or write but their knowledge and memory is astounding."

If you knew how to build the Las Vegas pyramid you wouldn't need blue prints. We're talking about a society of people (the Israelites) who didn't build the pyramids; who were primarily herdsmen and paid laborers for the Egyptians.

Fast forward to Christianity when the Moors ruled in Europe, teaching the Christians Algebra and medical sciences like surgery. I'm not insulting their intelligence, but the fact is they attacked science simply because of it originating with non-Christians. Christians, EVEN TODAY, attack science, especially evolution, PURELY on the basis that it conflicts with their narrative driven by superstition. I JUST had one of these conversations with my mother. I even told her that evolution has been proven in a lab by using bacteria because of their faster reproduction rate.

I'm saying it's not about intelligence. It's about knowledge and information. And information, even if present around you, can be ignored, either because it is outside of your specialization, or because it conflicts with your beliefs. Do you disagree?

The idea that volcanoes existed IN THE WORLD before this time, doesn't mean any of the Israelites ever saw one. There's about 2500 years that the bible gives us between Adam and Moses. Volcanoes are not like seasons or storms. They don't simply randomly occur and they require volatile conditions under the ground. The very idea of a volcano, if you think about it, actually flies in the face of creation theory because there's no reason for a Creator to create in such a volatile way that would cause mountains to form in the first place, much less volcanoes that could kill his creations. I've never seen a volcano except on TV, movies, internet; none of which existed back then. The chances of seeing one that is active is rare.


The first record of only dates back to 1500 BC.

The earliest date for the Exodus is 1445 BC while the late date is 1290 BC. This would require word to travel to Egypt and to the Israelites within a very short window of time. And still, the only thing they would have heard was a description, not a scientific understanding of what was happening. Who knows what supersitious logic they might have used to explain such an event. But can you be certain in telling me that with one recorded eruption, they understood what was happening?

Besides... this 1500 BC eruption that is the first recorded...

just so happens to be the very eruption I'm suggesting was seen by the Israelites; the Minoan eruption of Therea, aka Santorini. So if THIS is literally the first one on record how is it that even Moses could have understood what a volcano was?

As I said before, the way people reacted to the volcano does not indicate they knew what it was. This would allow someone to use this ignorance to tell people that it was God. Not literally God, but evidence of God's miraculous power or presence on earth. The idea that God had descended upon a mountain for example.

Numbers 12
4 At once the Lord said to Moses, Aaron and Miriam, “Come out to the tent of meeting, all three of you.” So the three of them went out. 5 Then the Lord came down in a pillar of cloud; he stood at the entrance to the tent and summoned Aaron and Miriam. When the two of them stepped forward, 6 he said, “Listen to my words:

"So now the smoke from the volcano move and stood at the entrance of the tent and spoke to them....thats considerably less that a hundred miles away
After reading that quote do you still think its a volcano?"

Absolutely!

The problem with this quote is the same as the story about the burning bush. While we can speculate about how a buch may have caught on fire and didn't burn, we don't have to. All we have to do is realize that the story wasn't written in real-time. This means that the writer could use elements of the story that were true (people, places, things) to embellish other elements that weren't true.

In other words, if suddenly you have a god that descends in smoke and fire and your culture features a lot of altars with burnt offerings and such... there is already an association between god, fire, and smoke. And we really don't know which element influenced what because the story wasn't a journal written by a journalist. It's a story. It is not true by virtue of being old. Anymore than the Epic of Gilgamesh. And we can also see how elements of other cultures and their stories ended up in the bible.

Once we realize this, then you can see it is easy to use the volcano appearance and how scary that was, to create other story elements that used fire and smoke. Since he descended in fire and smoke in one place you have to do the same thing elsewhere just to be consistent. Otherwise, it makes no sense that YHWH could only appear in fire and smoke and Moses could only see his hind parts and then in the next chapter God can appear in a far less terrifying and dangerous form.

Now there is also historical evidence that tells us that priests (in general) often ate the food sacrificed to idols to make it look like the idols were consuming the food. In this case, someone could have simply started a fire near the tent so that people could see the smoke so that when they reported what happened they could tell people that the smoke was the presence of God. And the reason I think this is what happened?

Because NO WHERE ELSE... other than the story of Moses... does YHWH descend in fire and at no other time does such a description occur, like a pillar of fire or cloud. So what? No one else saw God? The bible says this because of the fact that this description is unique to Moses. Why?

Because they lied! That wasn't no god in no fire. It was JUST fire. But once they created that description they were forced to use it to describe God's presence because people wouldn't believe them unless they saw smoke. Keep in mind, that ONLY Moses ever saw YHWH and that was only his hind parts so no matter what it says, or how God "stood at the entrance" of a tent, that is simply artistic license and metaphor. The whole point of Moses going up a mountain... that was holy because God descended upon it... was because this was the only way for God to have this "face to face" interaction. Do you believe Numbers 12 invalidates the whole point of that?



"God is behind everything good and bad....he is the only creator of all things - Monotheism.
The Egyptians are known for their studies of the Stars which is significantly further than any mountain."

Yes, but you're leaving out an important point. They could see the stars because the earth rotates on an axis and there was no pollution to mask the stars in the night sky. One could stand at the top of a pyramid to get a much better vantage of the sky and surrounding territory. That is very different from seeing something over the horizon or around the curvature of the Earth.


"What ever Moses knew the Egyptians Taught him...so he could not use his knowledge to trick them only his expertise."

Magicians improve on tricks of other magicians all the time.


"My Mom does the same and I feel safer when she does it"

key word... "feel"


"Did it say the ate something, to keep them alive????"

Why would it say that? If I'm saying Moses is a con man, why would he explain the con?


"It was Jethro who told Moses that God was up there in the Mountain
You really believe these people do not know what lightening and thunder is"

And what religion was Jethro? (it wasn't the same as Moses)

Other people believed that gods were on mountain tops (because those places weren't explored yet); hence Mount Olympus.
 

ZealotX

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Jan 21, 2020
83
34
And I was in a rush yesterday and forgot to address the thunder and lightning. This is different and actually helps to prove my point. You can see how the writers of the bible all know what thunder is and have a word for it.

Exodus 9:23
And Moses stretched forth his rod toward heaven: and the Lord sent thunder and hail, and the fire ran along upon the ground; and the Lord rained hail upon the land of Egypt.

Hebrew: qowl
Definition:
  1. voice, sound, noise
    1. voice
    2. sound (of instrument)
  2. lightness, frivolity
The way that thunder is translated shows that knew what it was, not scientifically, but had already dealt with it before as a type of sound. This is not the same as saying "pillar of fire"

Revelation 4:5, 6:1, 8:5, 10:3-4, 11:19, 14:2, 16:18, 19:6

Exodus 20
18 And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off.

19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.



so not only did they associate thunder with voices from heaven even though clearly not in every case, but more so when they believed God was present because they believed that's what God would sound like... not only that but it literally tells you they saw the "mountain smoking".

I don't think the mountain was burning up a spliff so when you combine the pillar of fire, the cloud by day, with "the mountain smoking", how is that NOT a volcano? How many mountains smoke that aren't a volcano?
 

frankster

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Aug 3, 2014
553
77
"Yes.....depends on the size."

we're talking about THE pyramids.

"Give me the money and the plans (blue print), the whole of the society does not have to be literate....to know what a volcano is. I have work with many individuals who can not read or write but their knowledge and memory is astounding."

If you knew how to build the Las Vegas pyramid you wouldn't need blue prints. We're talking about a society of people (the Israelites) who didn't build the pyramids; who were primarily herdsmen and paid laborers for the Egyptians.
The application of knowledge and information is intelligence. Most if not all construction projects require a plan...blue print.

Fast forward to Christianity when the Moors ruled in Europe, teaching the Christians Algebra and medical sciences like surgery. I'm not insulting their intelligence, but the fact is they attacked science simply because of it originating with non-Christians. Christians, EVEN TODAY, attack science, especially evolution, PURELY on the basis that it conflicts with their narrative driven by superstition. I JUST had one of these conversations with my mother. I even told her that evolution has been proven in a lab by using bacteria because of their faster reproduction rate.

I'm saying it's not about intelligence. It's about knowledge and information. And information, even if present around you, can be ignored, either because it is outside of your specialization, or because it conflicts with your beliefs. Do you disagree?
Knowing what a volcano is...would be considered general knowledge.

The idea that volcanoes existed IN THE WORLD before this time, doesn't mean any of the Israelites ever saw one. There's about 2500 years that the bible gives us between Adam and Moses. Volcanoes are not like seasons or storms. They don't simply randomly occur and they require volatile conditions under the ground. The very idea of a volcano, if you think about it, actually flies in the face of creation theory because there's no reason for a Creator to create in such a volatile way that would cause mountains to form in the first place, much less volcanoes that could kill his creations. I've never seen a volcano except on TV, movies, internet; none of which existed back then. The chances of seeing one that is active is rare.
Jethro and his people was familiar with it as they told Moses about the burning bush that is not consumed. Now an actual volcano would consume the bush if it lit the bush as the description clearly declares it did.
It was no volcano.


The first record of only dates back to 1500 BC.

The earliest date for the Exodus is 1445 BC while the late date is 1290 BC. This would require word to travel to Egypt and to the Israelites within a very short window of time. And still, the only thing they would have heard was a description, not a scientific understanding of what was happening. Who knows what supersitious logic they might have used to explain such an event. But can you be certain in telling me that with one recorded eruption, they understood what was happening?
The Hebrew people lived in Egypt, time for word to travel is a not an issue.
They would have use a very similar logic as the Egyptian for the most as they were a part of Egyptian society.

Besides... this 1500 BC eruption that is the first recorded...

just so happens to be the very eruption I'm suggesting was seen by the Israelites; the Minoan eruption of Therea, aka Santorini. So if THIS is literally the first one on record how is it that even Moses could have understood what a volcano was?
That maybe the first recorded but not necessarily the only or first volcanic eruption in that area. In Ethiopia, one of Egypt cultural trading partners there is over 50 volcanos.



SAUDI ARABIA
[Harrat Khaybar] Type: Stratovolcano/Tuff Cones. Summit Elevation: 2093m. Last Recorded Eruption: Unknown.
[Harrat Lunayyir] Type: Scoria Cones/Cinder Cones. Summit Elevation: 1370m. Last Recorded Eruption: Unknown.
[Harrat Rahat] Type: Scoria Cones/Shield Volcanoes. Summit Elevation: 1744m. Last Recorded Eruption: 1256.
SYRIA
[Es Safa] Type: Cinder Cones. Summit Elevation: 979m. Last Recorded Eruption: Unknown.
YEMEN
[Hanish] Type: Shield Volcano. Summit Elevation: 422m. Last Recorded Eruption: Unknown.
[Harra of Arhab] Type: Stratovolcanoes/Scoria Cones. Summit Elevation: 3100m. Last Recorded Eruption: Unknown.
[Harras of Dhamar] Type: Stratovolcanoes. Summit Elevation: 3500m. Last Recorded Eruption: 1937.
[Jabal al-Tair] Type: Stratovolcano. Summit Elevation: 244m. Last Recorded Eruption: 2007.
[Zubair] Type: Shield Volcano. Summit Elevation: 191m. Last Recorded Eruption: 2013
And in Africa


As I said before, the way people reacted to the volcano does not indicate they knew what it was. This would allow someone to use this ignorance to tell people that it was God. Not literally God, but evidence of God's miraculous power or presence on earth. The idea that God had descended upon a mountain for example.

Numbers 12
4 At once the Lord said to Moses, Aaron and Miriam, “Come out to the tent of meeting, all three of you.” So the three of them went out. 5 Then the Lord came down in a pillar of cloud; he stood at the entrance to the tent and summoned Aaron and Miriam. When the two of them stepped forward, 6 he said, “Listen to my words:

"So now the smoke from the volcano move and stood at the entrance of the tent and spoke to them....thats considerably less that a hundred miles away
After reading that quote do you still think its a volcano?"

Absolutely!

The problem with this quote is the same as the story about the burning bush. While we can speculate about how a buch may have caught on fire and didn't burn, we don't have to. All we have to do is realize that the story wasn't written in real-time. This means that the writer could use elements of the story that were true (people, places, things) to embellish other elements that weren't true.

In other words, if suddenly you have a god that descends in smoke and fire and your culture features a lot of altars with burnt offerings and such... there is already an association between god, fire, and smoke. And we really don't know which element influenced what because the story wasn't a journal written by a journalist. It's a story. It is not true by virtue of being old. Anymore than the Epic of Gilgamesh. And we can also see how elements of other cultures and their stories ended up in the bible.
Now you saying these people do not know the difference between smoke coming from an alter and smoke coming from a volcano.
How stupid do you think these people are????

Once we realize this, then you can see it is easy to use the volcano appearance and how scary that was, to create other story elements that used fire and smoke. Since he descended in fire and smoke in one place you have to do the same thing elsewhere just to be consistent. Otherwise, it makes no sense that YHWH could only appear in fire and smoke and Moses could only see his hind parts and then in the next chapter God can appear in a far less terrifying and dangerous form.

Now there is also historical evidence that tells us that priests (in general) often ate the food sacrificed to idols to make it look like the idols were consuming the food. In this case, someone could have simply started a fire near the tent so that people could see the smoke so that when they reported what happened they could tell people that the smoke was the presence of God. And the reason I think this is what happened?
Jethro has lived in the presence of the burning bush, he did not seemed scared just respectful....if he was scared he would moved.

So now that provided evidence of God appearing in a pillar smoke...it’s about him trying to be consistent
Because NO WHERE ELSE... other than the story of Moses... does YHWH descend in fire and at no other time does such a description occur, like a pillar of fire or cloud. So what? No one else saw God? The bible says this because of the fact that this description is unique to Moses. Why?

Because they lied! That wasn't no god in no fire. It was JUST fire. But once they created that description they were forced to use it to describe God's presence because people wouldn't believe them unless they saw smoke. Keep in mind, that ONLY Moses ever saw YHWH and that was only his hind parts so no matter what it says, or how God "stood at the entrance" of a tent, that is simply artistic license and metaphor. The whole point of Moses going up a mountain... that was holy because God descended upon it... was because this was the only way for God to have this "face to face" interaction. Do you believe Numbers 12 invalidates the whole point of that?

Not only in the time of Moses here also in the Time of Solomon

1 Kings 8:10-12
It happened that when the priests came from the holy place, the cloud filled the house of the LORD, so that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud, for the glory of the LORD filled the house of the LORD. Then Solomon said, "The LORD has said that He would dwell in the thick cloud.

Here the Cloud moves between the Egyptian Camp and the Israelite Camp.....Volcano I think not.

Exodus 14:19-20
The angel of God, who had been going before the camp of Israel, moved and went behind them; and the pillar of cloud moved from before them and stood behind them. So it came between the camp of Egypt and the camp of Israel; and there was the cloud along with the darkness, yet it gave light at night. Thus the one did not come near the other all night.



"God is behind everything good and bad....he is the only creator of all things - Monotheism.
The Egyptians are known for their studies of the Stars which is significantly further than any mountain."

Yes, but you're leaving out an important point. They could see the stars because the earth rotates on an axis and there was no pollution to mask the stars in the night sky. One could stand at the top of a pyramid to get a much better vantage of the sky and surrounding territory. That is very different from seeing something over the horizon or around the curvature of the Earth.
Even back then it was easy to travel from Egypt to any where in the middle east....as a matter of fact the used the star as their guide


"What ever Moses knew the Egyptians Taught him...so he could not use his knowledge to trick them only his expertise."

Magicians improve on tricks of other magicians all the time.
Exactly he was not using his knowledge to trick them as they understood what he was doing, but his individual ability or expertise is different.


"My Mom does the same and I feel safer when she does it"

key word... "feel"
Yes...feel.
When it comes to matters of the Heart and Spirit feelings are very Important...Not so with matters of the Head and Science(not withstanding the Heisenberg uncertainty principle or Hawthorne effect)


"Did it say the ate something, to keep them alive????"

Why would it say that? If I'm saying Moses is a con man, why would he explain the con?


"It was Jethro who told Moses that God was up there in the Mountain
You really believe these people do not know what lightening and thunder is"

And what religion was Jethro? (it wasn't the same as Moses)
I do not think Jethro Practice Judaism, but maybe some sort of Polytheism(Astarte/Baal) as he was a Midianite priest and Moses it appears was founding Judaism at that time....so true Judaism did not yet exist. Anyway they both recognize the burning bush as God

Other people believed that gods were on mountain tops (because those places weren't explored yet); hence Mount Olympus.
(Royal)We/you think they believed their Gods lived on mountain tops.....not that God is a Mountain
 
Last edited:

ZealotX

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Jan 21, 2020
83
34
Good morning frankster, hope you are doing well.

"Most if not all construction projects require a plan...blue print."

but the point was that were educated people who could make the blue prints for the pyramids. However, that was very specialized knowledge that everyone didn't have. Everyone who practices music may be able to read Mozart and Bach but that's different from creating that music. So the point is that just because intelligence existed and there were people who could engineer the pyramids, that doesn't mean that everyone could do it.

"Knowing what a volcano is...would be considered general knowledge."

No, that's general knowledge now. Flying today is general knowledge but I couldn't tell you how to design a jet engine or even an electric car engine. We can't look back and assume that everyone knew something as common knowledge that wasn't common. Even if there were 1,000 volcanoes in the area, that doesn't mean they were erupting with any type of frequency. Most volcanoes are dormant. So if a volcano wasn't active how would THEY know it was a volcano? We can tell because we have instruments and we can see into the ground with ground penetrating radar. That's the only way WE know. So assuming they knew, without these capabilities, I don't understand.

"Jethro and his people was familiar with it as they told Moses about the burning bush that is not consumed."

??? According to Ex 3, Moshe is the one who discovered the burning bush. I don't see anything in thie chapter suggesting someone else saw this bush. The problem is, that if no one else saw what Moshe claimed to see then you don't know that he wasn't making it up in order to sell a story to a bunch of uneducated people that their God was real. Since this story was written after the fact, he simply could have used the eruption, which they all witnessed, and then filled in a back story that involved the same fiery elements. Again, no where elese is God rendered in this way; just in the Mosaic testimony.


wikipedia: "Elsewhere in the Mediterranean are pumice deposits that could have been sent by the Thera eruption. Ash layers in cores drilled from the seabed and from lakes in Turkey, however, show that the heaviest ashfall was towards the east and northeast of Santorini. The ash found on Crete is now known to have been from a precursory phase of the eruption, some weeks or months before the main eruptive phases, and it would have had little impact on the island.[19] Santorini ash deposits were at one time claimed to have been found in the Nile delta,[20] but this is now known to be a misidentification.[21][22]"

note: there was a precursory phase of eruption. If Moshe saw this then he had enough time to construct a story, travel, and convince people that there was about to be a cataclysmic event that their God would be behind. And of course... he's the messenger/god sent by God.

"Now an actual volcano would consume the bush if it lit the bush as the description clearly declares it did."

Again... if Moshe is lying there is NO REASON to assume that there was even a bush at all. And why is it that the Midianite priest didn't convert to Judaism after witnessing the power of Yahweh when the bible says that there was a mixed multitude of Israelites and Egyptians who believed? You don't find this odd?

"The Hebrew people lived in Egypt, time for word to travel is a not an issue."

Except, that the point I'm making to you is that it was THROUGH MOSHE that the word traveled. And being most likely educated by priests, Moshe created a story around the volcano.

volcano (n.)
1610s, from Italian vulcano "burning mountain," from Latin Vulcanus "Vulcan," Roman god of fire, also "fire, flames, volcano" (see Vulcan). The name was first applied to Mt. Etna by the Romans, who believed it was the forge of Vulcan.

source: https://www.google.com/search?q=etymology+of+volcano&rlz=1C1GCEU_enUS827US827&oq=etymology+of+volcano&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l4.4566j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

The same logic you're trying to apply to Egypt, look at how the Romans reacted to Mt. Etna. If we look at the etymology of the word we can trace it back to Romans and the fire god, Vulcan.

wikipedia: *Volca could therefore be a cognate of the Sanskrit words ulkā ("darting flame") and/or várcas- ("brilliance, glare").

The problem is... humans really can't get close to a volcano without advanced materials and very protective gear. If you cannot filter out the sulfur, you're dead. So no one in the ancient world would be able to report on exactly what a volcano was and they're only looking up at it, not down. This is like only looking up towards the brim of a paper cup. You can't see what's inside. So unless you can explain to me how they would have been able to observe a volcano without jumping to superstitious conclusions I'm left unconvinced that they knew what a volcano was when there wasn't even a word for it spreading around the planet until the Romans. And their explanation was superstitious in nature and shows that they weren't informed by any prior reporting, including Moshe's or anyone else who witnessed/survived the Minoan eruption.

You listed a number of volcanoes but if they don't have reports of eruptions in the BC time period that doesn't help your case. They had no way of knowing these were volcanoes just because we do.

"Now you saying these people do not know the difference between smoke coming from an alter and smoke coming from a volcano. How stupid do you think these people are????"

Again... it's not about being smart. It's about being superstitious. In the exact same way that the Romans reacted to Etna and thought it was the forge of a the fire god, Vulcan, there's no reason to believe the Israelites weren't equally superstitious. Even those who did science even in modern times were often superstitious as well and applied superstition when they didn't know the natural origins of a thing. So why should people in ancient times be any different? Why would they differentiate smoke coming from an alter from smoke coming from a volcano? The only difference is scale. And that's why the smoke coming from the volcano was referred to as a "cloud". But even Moshe thought that he could correlate a small fire (burning bush) with a large fire. Because that's exactly what he did. So who's to say that when they burned an offering that they didn't think the fire was somehow God's way of "consuming" the meat. After all... it was being "consumed" by the fire. Add to this, the way the bible depicts the smell of burning animal flesh. The way that God is written to react to it implies he knew how it "tasted".

So... basically, meat eating humans were implying that God ate meat also, because by implication God could smell it as something that smelled good. Again... its not about being smart or stupid. It's about being superstitious. When you are superstitious you simply use your intelligence to defend it.


"Jethro has lived in the presence of the burning bush, he did not seemed scared just respectful....if he was scared he would moved."

There is no reason to believe the bush was always burning or that it burned before or after the encounter with Moses. The reason it burned was not a natural occurrence, according to Exodus 3, but rather because a "messenger" of God was speaking to Moshe from the flames. There's no need to believe an angel was just hanging out in a bush for no reason, and decided to talk once it saw Moshe. No, Exodus is pretty clear that this wasn't something Jethro saw or knew about. Furthermore, again we have an archetyping.

Ex 3 Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian, and he led the flock to the far side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the MOUNTAIN OF GOD. 2 There the angel of the Lord appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up.

Then only other reference to anything even remotely close would be Genesis 22:2. And the reason I say that one is because it had to be a special mountain. But there's no reason, I can find, to call Horeb "the mountain of God" UNLESS... it is named this only after the inclusion of the burning bush in the story. And so now, again, the archetype is set up... mountain... fire... God. Come on, I know its fun to debate, but tell me you cannot see where I'm coming from at least.

Exodus 20:18 And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the MOUNTAIN SMOKING: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off.

11 So that the priests could not stand to minister because of the cloud: for the glory of the LORD had filled the house of the LORD.

This might have been a problem for my argument if it weren't for verse 5

5 And king Solomon, and all the congregation of Israel, that were assembled unto him, were with him before the ark, sacrificing sheep and oxen, that could not be told nor numbered for multitude.

An actual cloud (As we know it) is a mass of water vapor or ice crystals suspended in the atmosphere. It forms when water condenses in the sky. Fog can be considered a type of low-laying cloud that is heavily influenced by nearby bodies of water.

So a few possibilities come to mind.
1- it was smoke from the burnt offerings but on a scale that was big enough for them to call a cloud
2- it was fog partially influenced by their activity along with a local water source.
3- it was steam or vapor as a result of putting out the fires from the burnt offerings

3, I think, is the most probable. Wouldn't they know that putting out a fire with water is going to create smoke? Of course. And would there be too much for them to stay inside of a tent? Yes. But does it mean they wouldn't use that as proof of the presence of God? Pastors and preachers lie ALL THE TIME, saying "God is here. He's in this room. I can feel his presence, yada yada yada." You've likely heard this many times. And yet, you felt nothing, just the energy in the room generated by believers. But pastors MUST, to some degree, say things like this in order to keep up with the Jones. They don't think they're lying because the believe God is everywhere and yet... if the pastor at another church says "God is here" you don't want people in your congregation to believe God doesn't "come by here".

Exodus 14:19-20
The angel of God, who had been going before the camp of Israel, moved and went behind them; and the pillar of cloud moved from before them and stood behind them. So it came between the camp of Egypt and the camp of Israel; and there was the cloud along with the darkness, yet it gave light at night. Thus the one did not come near the other all night.


Here's the problem... When you're talking about the cloud in exodus its a "pillar". But the cloud in 1 Kings was simply inside a tent. I see pillars of clouds all the time everytime I pass by a factories or power plants that have exhaust stacks. And especially if the air is colder you can see what looks like cloud formation. But these wouldn't light up at night. What would light up at night is a FIRE. I repeat... clouds/smoke... are not a light source. If you have a pillar of "cloud/smoke" that is emanating light then there is a fire there. But you may not see it in the day because of the smoke and because it is diffusing with the light from the sun. But at night... you could see it.

Because its a volcano.
 
Destee Chat

Latest profile posts

Destee wrote on Joyce's profile.
Thanks for the Blessing! Love You! :kiss:
Making sure I do more than I did yesterday. Progress is the Concept.
Ms Drea wrote on yahsistah's profile.
Welcome Back Sister!!
Love and Blessings!!
Hey Sister Destee just logged in to say Love you and miss you much! Hope you are well.
Destee wrote on candeesweet's profile.
Hi Sweetie Pie Honey Bunch!!!! :love: ... it's good to see you! I hope you and yours are all well and staying safe. I Love You! :kiss:
Top