[Southtown]

Originally Posted by Switchy

The passover started when Moses was in Egypt where the Jews/Israelites were slaves. To free the Jews/Israelites, God killed every firstborn in the land of Egypt except the firstborn of households with blood painted on the outside of the house. This was the origin of the passover!

Is there any evidence this story is true?

Switchy

This is the best docu on the subject that I have seen so far. I recommend it.
Exodus Decoded - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Southtown]

Originally Posted by Switchy

Is there any evidence it's not a true story?

BTW,
To me it seems the best way to free the israelites is to teleport them out of Egypt. That way God wouldn't have to take revenge out on the Egyptians because of Pharoh's decision (which isn't really fair)!

Also, there's one God but three in one:- The father, the son & the holy spirit.
Are they of one mind or three individual minds?
If they are of one mind would this mean that Jesus would have some responsibility for the killing of all First Born in Egypt?
(& how does this compare with Herod killing all the children in Bethlehem?)

Switchy

My take is that the Almighty (as in "Father") doesn't mess with things. He simply says 'do this or this will happen.' He simply knows both what we will do and also what will happen subsequently. So, he just tells people this before hand, so that after we do what he knew we would do, and after it happens what he knew would happen, then there will be no more doubt that he knows. Clear as mud? Good.

[modest]

Originally Posted by Southtown

This is the best docu on the subject that I have seen so far. I recommend it.
Exodus Decoded - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I saw that show and I was not convinced. It basically took the two biggest events of the time we can conjure - an eruption and an exodus and tries to tie them together. But, there's no reason to tie them together, no evidence from what I saw to do so. It's basically a fanciful what-if.

-modest

[Southtown]

Originally Posted by modest

I saw that show and I was not convinced. It basically took the two biggest events of the time we can conjure - an eruption and an exodus and tries to tie them together. But, there's no reason to tie them together, no evidence from what I saw to do so. It's basically a fanciful what-if.

-modest

But quite reasonable all the same.

Edit, I noticed you say "two" events, naming the exodus as one of those. But he actually explains every detail of the exodus story in one real known event and the known consequences of such an event.

[modest]

Originally Posted by Southtown

But quite reasonable all the same.

So you can date the eruption to the exodus, yes?

[Southtown]

Originally Posted by modest

So you can date the eruption to the exodus, yes?

No. I simply offer it as food for thought.

[modest]

Originally Posted by Southtown

No. I simply offer it as food for thought.

As 'food-for-thought', I think it is a good show. I really do. I would just recommend a critical mind while watching it.

-modest

[Southtown]

Originally Posted by modest

As 'food-for-thought', I think it is a good show. I really do. I would just recommend a critical mind while watching it.

-modest

Yes, of course. As always.

[Southtown]

Another good one that I have only seen a part of, which was my previous favorite and running a close second is

exodus revealed
exodus revealed

. This one relates more toward the actual sea crossing but has quite a bit more evidence.

[jedaisoul]

Getting back to "is the passover a true story?", it depends on what you mean by true.

If we accept as historic fact that the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt for a time, then it would have taken some compelling event(s) or threat(s) to cause the Egyptians to free them. It is unlikely that they simply decided that slavery was immoral. So there may be some factual basis for the account. Just as there could be some factual basis for the story of the parting of the Red Sea, or the battle of Jerico.

However, I would hasten to add that a "factual basis" would not necessarily make the stories in their present form literally true. It just means that there may have been events that the description that has been passsed down to us is, to some extent, based on.