http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terfeziaceae
"Desert truffles, as the name suggests, predominantly grow in the desert. They have been found in arid and semi-arid zones of the Kalahari desert, the Mediterranean basin, Iraq and Kuwait, the Sahara and Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Libya, Hungary,Yugoslavia, and China.[2]"

http://wn.com/desert_truffles

There's as much circular reasoning in this video as the average MA&D or FARMS posting...

The Bible describes manna as such, and therefore...

Don't get me wrong: I love most culinary mushrooms, and the nonsense about psychedelic mushrooms reminds me of a bunch of old Haight Ashbury hippies trying to discuss philosophy while deciding whether they should strain the water from their hookahs and investigate whether it'll get them off...

Here's a bit of a problem with anyone who finds this faith-promoting, however...

a) These truffles are largely seasonal from January to March; what did the fleeing Jews eat the rest of the year?

b) The claims in this video regarding their nutritional value are a bit exaggerated...

http://www.fungimag.com/Truffle-Issue-08-articles/desert-truffles.pdf

>Less than exhaustive studies of the composition and nutritional value of desert truffles have been carried out in those countries where they are known and appreciated. It appears that the dry matter (about 20% by weight) consists of 20-27% protein, some 85% of which is digestible by humans (although it was recently concluded that the protein quality of four studied species is low); 3-5% fat, including unsaturated as well as saturated fatty acids; 7-13% crude fiber; close to 60% carbohydrates; and appreciable amounts (2-5%) of ascorbic acid (Ackerman et al 1975; al-Delaimy, 1977; al Shabibi et al., 1985; Bokhari et al., 1989; Saqri, 1989; Bokhari and Parverz, 1993; Dabbour and Takruri, 2002; Murcia et al. 2003). High levels of potassium and phosphate and fair amounts of iron have been reported. Some studies of suitable methods for their preservation have been undertaken (Murcia et al., 2003).

>Cultivation

>Cultivation of desert truffles is not trivial, and for decades was not a priority, as desert truffles are considered inferior to the much-praised forest truffles. As mentioned above, desert truffles are becoming more desirable of late, and some research is now dedicated to their cultivation. However, the only report of successful man-made desert truffle plantations to date comes from Spain, where T. claveri was cultivated in symbiousis with Heliathemem almeriense.

Anyway, Google up "manna in the wilderness," and you'll find a whole host of hypothetical explanations...

> Here's a bit of a problem with anyone who finds
> this faith-promoting, however...

Why would this information be faith promoting? Manna was supposed to be a divine miracle. If manna was really desert truffles then manna was not a miracle, but a common fungus known to the people of the time.

And there's that other minor detail -- Moses was a fictional character and hundreds of thousands of Jews didn't wander around the wilderness for 40 years -- so no need for mystical manna --

Just like the Noah story was likely based on the story of Utnapishtim. A myth is more believable if it contains real elements.

In order for the comparison to be apropos, the Epic of Gilgamesh (Utnapishtim) would have to have a factual basis in reality...

There's no geological evidence for even a localized flood of the proportions described, and it's absurd to suggest that somebody planned the construction of a large vessel and placed a bunch of animals on it in order to avoid the consequences of a downpour that occurred sometime later...

Now lets try a little hypothetical reasoning where a myth might have some basis in fact...

Suppose back around, oh 2000 B.C.E or so, there was a livestock rustler (well, the Fertile Crescent version thereof), and he suddenly showed up in a group of people; perhaps he had some sons and their ladies with him, and a bunch of critters that maybe looked like they didn't belong to him...

So someone asks him about them, and he concocts a cock-and-bull story about saving them and claims God told him how to do the whole operation...

Sounds reasonable to me...

Now these two guys want to argue with you about the manna... One of them suggests something common (like an edible desert mushroom) would be known to the people, and therefore the manna must have been a supernatural gift from the Almighty (his words, not mine).

http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/959-what-was-the-manna-in-the-wilderness-of-sinai

http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/manna.htm

Have at it...

I'm not sure if you were here when I posted my view that the entire Exodus Story is just a political document to justify the Israelites' occupation of the land of Caanan... At the time, the Egyptian Empire was the superpower of its day, and its claims to legitimacy rested on the resurrection story of Osiris (later borrowed by the Christians in their own claim for legitimacy).

The 10 Commandments--which were far more about property than morality--were then a "My Yahweh can beat up your "Egyptian Mafia" consortium of Osiris/Amun-Re/Isis/Anubis/Horus et al...

And seriously, isn't the Exodus story simply a document that supports that claim?

SL Cabbie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In order for the comparison to be apropos, the
> Epic of Gilgamesh (Utnapishtim) would have to have
> a factual basis in reality...
>
> There's no geological evidence for even a
> localized flood of the proportions described, and
> it's absurd to suggest that somebody planned the
> construction of a large vessel and placed a bunch
> of animals on it in order to avoid the
> consequences of a downpour that occurred sometime
> later...

You are losing me with your arguments. No where have I suggested that the flood that spawned the Noah myth would have to be of the exact size of the Biblical flood. There is plenty of evidence for large localized floods in the region that could have spawned the story. It is the classic fish story, or FPR that grows over time and is used to teach a moral lesson.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth


> Now these two guys want to argue with you about
> the manna... One of them suggests something common
> (like an edible desert mushroom) would be known to
> the people, and therefore the manna must have been
> a supernatural gift from the Almighty (his words,
> not mine).

That argument makes no sense to me. If manna can be explained as a common desert fungus then there is nothing supernatural about it. However, it is clear from ancient writings about the fungus that the locals did believe it was magical because it seemed to appear overnight and had no roots. So it is easy to see how that could have been incorporated into the story.


> And seriously, isn't the Exodus story simply a
> document that supports that claim?

I think that it is possible that there was a small group of Semites that left Egypt. Or perhaps they were priests of Amun who were driven out of Egypt and carried their monotheism to Canaan. I think most myths have some origin in a real event that has been retold and embellished and turned to support a particular set of values or political claims. I am not saying it proves the divinity of the Bible.

To me finding real world evidence and natural explanations of "miraculous" events does not strengthen the believers argument. It shows that the original writers had a magical world view based on their limited knowledge. I don't think we should dismiss these stories as being completely mythological because the evidence does not measure up to every level of embellishment and exaggeration they may contain.

Not hard to do; those LDS strawman techniques ("build-em-up-and-knock-em-down") have been fashioned into resilient thinking patterns that can require years to unlearn...

Hang onto that denial...

>"No where [sic] have I suggested that the flood that spawned the Noah myth would have to be of the exact size of the Biblical flood."

The myth of Noah involves way more than a flood, and your disingenuous denial that you didn't say what you said creates a convenient opportunity for a "shell game," permitting you to overlook the obvious.

Now, ever been in a desert flood? Nothing you're ever going to ride a boat through; trust me, maybe a kayak if you were skillful, but that's all... Only solution is get the hell out of the way (those older folks who remember "The State Street River" of '83 in Salt Lake are nodding right now).

And the point is that if manna could be explained by a common desert fungus, the Israelites would've known what it was beforehand, and they didn't; they claimed a miracle... And they ate it continuously for forty years, not for a few months after some desert monsoons...

The lesson in a "classic fish story" is that it didn't happen, another bit of reality that seems to be lost on you... On that one, you can trust me, too. I'm a decent fisherman, and even in these days of catch-and-release when the liars are everywhere, I've still managed to acquire a few pictures as evidence...

The "moral" of a fish story is the provider-in-chief came home empty-handed and had to make excuses...

There's a certain resemblance here... You're making excuses for a certain lack of miracles...

Edit: And it might do for you to review your Egyptian religions as well; they were a polytheisitic people, and Amun-Re was merely the principle god (fashioned from several earlier morphs). It was Akhenaten who briefly introduced the closest thing to monotheism that Egyptians experienced, and most records of his short reign were expunged from the historical record.

See the September "National Geographic" for an article on that subject; it's likely they found his mummy (via DNA testing), and he and his full sister were parents of King Tut...



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/05/2010 11:45AM by SL Cabbie.

That's pretty damn funny about the hookah water inquiry! Thanks for the laugh!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/05/2010 02:16AM by itzpapalotl.

this reminds me of the recent reports of how the red sea could have been parted by natural weather patterns

it seemed to cause a lot of excitement amongst the christian faithful, but my view is: a miracle is a miracle.... a natural occurrence is a natural occurrence,

If something happens by normal means, it can hardly be considered as 'faith promoting'