God's normative morality is consistent, real, and objective. It is not subject to your feelings and false assertions. I'm not sure how you manage to get everything twisted around so badly even after it's clearly explained to you repeatedly. Is it deliberate or do you have a medical reason for it?
And your ignorance continues unabated. There is archaeological evidence and especially textual evidence for the Exodus and the events surrounding the Exodus (both before and after) are testable and datable. This happens to be one of the topics that Wikipedia has wrong and needs to amend.
As Deem pointed out, one reason for this is that extremely strong evidence for the validity of the Exodus has been published only in the scientific journals and never made it to the popular press. For example consider the two studies which examine one of the Egyptian plagues (before the Exodus) and demise of Jericho (after the Exodus).
Drs. Hendrik J. Bruins and Johannes van der Plicht reported in the prestigious British journal, Nature, (1) that the destruction of Jericho was dated to 1580 (" 13 years) B.C. (using 14C dating).
This date is significant, since several archeologists have insisted that Jericho was destroyed by the Egyptians between 1550 and 1300 B.C. The recent study discredits the Egyptian theory, since the date is much too old.
What is even more interesting is that scientists, using 14C dating and tree rings, have found evidence of a volcanic eruption from the Aegean island of Thera, which has been dated to 1628 B.C.(2)
This would place the eruption at 45 years prior to the destruction of Jericho, at a time which coincidentally corresponds to the time of the plagues the Lord unleashed upon Egypt.
Exodus 10:
Then the Lord said to Moses, "Stretch out your hand toward the sky, that there may be darkness over the land of Egypt, even a darkness which may be felt." So Moses stretched out his hand toward the sky, and there was thick darkness in all the land of Egypt for three days. (Exodus 10:21-22)
The researchers conducting the study commented that the 45 years difference in events was "rather striking." (3)
References:
1. Bruins, H.J. and J. van der Plicht. 1996. The Exodus enigma. Nature 382: 213-214.2. Renfrew, C. 1996. Kings, tree rings and the Old World. Nature 381:733-734.Kuniholm, P. I., Kromer, B., Manning, S. W., Newton, M., Latini, C. E., and Bruce, M. J. 1996. Anatolian tree rings and the absolute chronology of the eastern Mediterranean, 2220-718 BC Nature 381:780-783. Friedrich, W.L., P. Wagner, and H. Tauber. 1990. Thera and the Aegean World III Thera Foundation, London, UK.
3. "These averages, taken together, yield 3,356 +/- 18 yr BP, 45 radiocarbon years older than our [SUP]14[/SUP]Carbon destruction date for MB-IIC Jericho. This time difference is rather striking, as it could fit the desert period of 40 years separating the Exodus from the destruction of Jericho, mentioned in ancient Hebrew texts."
But as I continue to read your post I see that you experienced an infantile regression so will have to wait until you return to an emotional and mental state that is mature enough to continue this discussion. In the meanwhile, while you're in the throes of a pacifierific state, consider that your infantile comments are also hypocritical given your previous false assertions.
[QUOTE=Esanta;1653611]Ahh, so THAT justifies killing kids in this absolute moral system of yours where some things are okay some times and not others. Ahh, that Exodus of which there exists no archaeological evidence! Gotcha. Ahh so the all powerful, foreseeing God waited until they numbered hundreds of thousands to kill them, even though he knew what they'd become! Gotcha. Ahh, so the Israelites weren't perfect either but their genocide would be condoned while genocides against them are condemned regardless of the Israelites actions! I see now. So killing the victimized children is just absolutely dandy! Cool .. Comparing a whole demographic of people to a, infected limb. Logic prevails once again! Of course he could ... So even though you can't 'claim to omniescence' you somehow know these kids, if spared, would grow up to be hateful people? Seems reasonable ... Then the Amalekites are really immoral people, no? KILLING OTHERS! GOSH! Yep, genocide is a very awful crime, it certainly is. Aww, so they committed genocide, that awful crime they so hate being perpetrated against them, but kept all the nice, young prepubescent girls? I can only imagine how that's a great example of 'treat others as you would like others to treat you'. I suppose those young girls had absolutely nothing to do with male urges, eh? No, what I would point out is how utterly hypocritical it is to get worked up about genocide against your people then to go and commit one, kill indiscriminately, and think it to be so much more righteous than the one commited against you. Let's face facts, it's disgusting nomatter what side we stand on. 'Love your enemies, wish well for those who mistreat you, pray for those who persecute you'.[/QUOTE]