"Scholarly consensus" sees Moses as a mythical figure?

Status
Not open for further replies.
If there is any evidence to see the scholarly consensus would not disagree with you.
 
Again you would have to go see for yourself before you can say who is right and who is wrong.
 



Here is a three-part series about exodus and Moses that I found in an old CAF thread. I’ve only watched the first one so far.
 
Three thousand years ago, a mere 40 year trek. What, pray tell, would you expect to find? Hunting tools? Scripture says they were fed by Heaven, essentially, Manna and quail. Houses? They were wandering and moving within about a single lifespan. Compared to some other tribes whom we barely have any evidence of whatsoever who lasted much longer, I don’t see what one would exactly really hope to find.
 
Kei said:
Three thousand years ago, a mere 40 year trek. What, pray tell, would you expect to find? Hunting tools? Scripture says they were fed by Heaven, essentially, Manna and quail. Houses? They were wandering and moving within about a single lifespan. Compared to some other tribes whom we barely have any evidence of whatsoever who lasted much longer, I don’t see what one would exactly really hope to find.
Click to expand...
So, is the reason archaeologists and scientists dispute the exodus and existence of Moses based on the fact that archaeologist haven’t found anything?
 
KevinK said:
Do you allow that it is possible Moses is a mythical figure who did not exist in reality?
Click to expand...
Catholics are not allowed to believe this. Moses was a historical person and did everything the Bible says he did.
 
You don´t get the difference between tools of scientific work and belief. Don´t mix it, and maybe leave the discussion to those who have at least a little insight in both.
 
How could a man possibly die and raise himself from the dead?
With God, all things are possible.
 
It is impossible for natural science to lead to truths contrary to Scripture as truth cannot be contrary to truth. The Scripture is clear that a man named Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt and performed many miracles and thus we know for absolute certainty that this happened. No natural science is required.
 
I am not sure what “scholars” are being consulted or included, and I cannot say. It’s in vogue for some to say that important Christian figures are mythical or not real in some way, though.
 
ChunkMonk said:
It is impossible for natural science to lead to truths contrary to Scripture as truth cannot be contrary to truth. The Scripture is clear that a man named Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt and performed many miracles and thus we know for absolute certainty that this happened. No natural science is required.
Click to expand...
What about all the archaeologists and other so called experts in dozens of articles who are positive Moses didn’t exist?

And is their belief based on the lack of archaeological findings?
 
  1. it is, against your view, possible and in accordance with the church to see certain biblical passages as metaphorical. I do not see moses as this, but in general, we are not there taking everything in a plain simple word meaning.
  2. If I would try to prove my belief with sience, I would be a bad believer. If I would only look for back up facts in science for my belief, I would also be a bad historian.
    I think I remeber you are a teenager. Maybe make a degree, spent some years in scientific research among theologians and historians and we´ll talk afterwards.
 
Again, we also found not very much of ancient greece from 800-600 BC. This diesn´t mean there were no people with culture living at this time, but we would make a bad job in science to simply fill this gap with belief. Let theology to theologians, belief to believers, and science to scientists. One of my dearest profs was a catholic and deeply faithfull. She woud never mix this.
 
alice24 said:
it is, against your view, possible and in accordance with the church to see certain biblical passages as metaphorical
Click to expand...
Only if the literal explanation is contrary to reason. Otherwise we are bound to assume the literal sense. Note that it does not say “contrary to whatever evidence is currently available” but contrary to reason. Moses’ existence is not contrary to reason and thus must be believed.
alice24 said:
I think I remeber you are a teenager.
Click to expand...
I am almost 30 years old.
alice24 said:
Maybe make a degree,
Click to expand...
No.
alice24 said:
spent some years in scientific research among theologians and historians and we´ll talk afterwards.
Click to expand...
There is no need.
 
ChunkMonk said:
I am almost 30 years old.

Maybe make a degree,

No.

spent some years in scientific research among theologians and historians and we´ll talk afterwards.

There is no need.
Click to expand...
Sorry, then I mixed two posters in my mind - apologize.
I think there is a need. I am tired of people with absolutely no insight in scientific working methods judging science.
 
To be honest, I am tired of scientists not understanding that natural science is the lowest form of gaining knowledge.
 
🤣🤣 I´m working with theologians and historians. Not in the maths department.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top