"Scholarly consensus" sees Moses as a mythical figure?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A preceding poster said “Will you please point me to some online articles that indicate scholars generally believe Moses was a real person?”

The scholars generally simply proceed on the basis of his existence, accepting his historicity without speaking of it. What you could do is go on amazon.com and tripe in Moses on the search screen. Then you will find many books, some by scholars, which proceed on the basis of his actual existence.
 
mdgspencer said:
A preceding poster said “Will you please point me to some online articles that indicate scholars generally believe Moses was a real person?”

The scholars generally simply proceed on the basis of his existence, accepting his historicity without speaking of it. What you could do is go on amazon.com and tripe in Moses on the search screen. Then you will find many books, some by scholars, which proceed on the basis of his actual existence.
Click to expand...
I looked and found very little.
 
Hope1960 said:
I looked and found very little.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you consider “very little” but I just now looked and saw what I would consider “quite a few”.

I also agree that searching Google brings up some good references.

I would suggest that perhaps if you are very interested in this topic, you might go to a library and ask the librarian to assist you in finding some references. I’m not quite sure why you seem to find every suggestion people have made on here to be lacking.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
I’m not sure what you consider “very little” but I just now looked and saw what I would consider “quite a few”.
Click to expand...
You looked up “Moses” on Amazon? And found quite a few currently written books by scholars from the perspective that Moses was real?
 
Even if you found books that say he was real, there will still be some books that say he was not. So I’m not sure what would make you decide.
 
thephilosopher6 said:
Legitimate Christianity rests on the resurrection and the grace of God, not the Law.
Click to expand...
And the resurrection is based on the law! 1 Co 15:3-4 it is of first importance that the resurrection was “according to the scriptures” meaning the Old Testament of which the Law was an essential and major piece. Paul had the Old Testament so he could preach the resurrection without having been with Jesus during His public ministry.
Grace and peace,
Bruce
 
bobperk said:
Even if you found books that say he was real, there will still be some books that say he was not. So I’m not sure what would make you decide.
Click to expand...
Jesus the divine Son of God could not lie or be in error. He said Moses said … repeatedly. Moses appeared with Him at the transfiguration. These ignorant men reveal their blindness when they argue that Moses did not exist. They also accept an inaccurate archaeology. The correct archaeology place Moses at the end of the Old Kingdom in Egypt see The Bible vs. Archaeology, You Decide. If there was no Moses, there was no Jesus.
Grace and peace,
Bruce
 
Bruce_Killian said:
Jesus the divine Son of God could not lie or be in error. He said Moses said … repeatedly. Moses appeared with Him at the transfiguration.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly. As I made clear in my posts, Jesus would not be quoting some fictional person, nor would He have some fictional person appearing with him at the Transfiguration. So believers must necessarily believe that Moses existed, whether or not the Scriptures made some aspects of him “Larger than life” (what some people are calling “mythical”) .

Of course, unbelievers would not take the Scriptural words or activities of Jesus as being truth, but we know better.

I suspect any ideas of Moses not existing are on the same level as when scholars thought King David didn’t exist either until some archaeological proof suddenly cropped up.
 
I agree with you that Jesus referring to Moses is enough for me to believe he was an actual historical figure…I was responding to Hope1960, who kept asking for “scholarly evidence” supporting the existence of Moses. Very good point though.
 
Bruce_Killian said:
Jesus the divine Son of God could not lie or be in error. He said Moses said … repeatedly. Moses appeared with Him at the transfiguration. These ignorant men reveal their blindness when they argue that Moses did not exist. They also accept an inaccurate archaeology. The correct archaeology place Moses at the end of the Old Kingdom in Egypt see The Bible vs. Archaeology, You Decide . If there was no Moses, there was no Jesus.
Grace and peace,
Bruce
Click to expand...
The article you posted was too long for me to read so I pretty much skimmed it until the conclusion. Basically it doesn’t really match the Bible. Either the Bible embellishes the story or the timeline is off. How do we trust the Bible, then?
 
Hope1960 said:
The article you posted was too long for me to read so I pretty much skimmed it until the conclusion.
Click to expand...
Um, why do you repeatedly ask for sources on here, if when people provide them, you say they’re “too long for you to read”?

If you’re not going to read what people post, then you shouldn’t be asking for help, and you also shouldn’t be making statements like “doesn’t really match the Bible” and asking further questions when you can’t even be bothered to read what was provided. Please stop.
 
Oh, Moshe. Pray for the non-believers, as you prayed for the children of Israel when you took them out of darkness…
 
Last edited:
<<<<<<These nomads wandered exclusively in the desert proper, not in the better land to the north. Their pottery indicates they were a sedentary people from Egypt living as nomads.[20] The evidence of their wandering is abundant, but their presence remains a puzzle.[21] The main evidence of their presence is a distinctive form of pottery made on a fast wheel, for they built few structures.>>>>>>>

This article said what I quoted, above. Then why all the comments from archaeologists that there are no finds from them?
 
<<<<<In this revised interpretation, Egypt’s conquered Judah at the start of the Late Bronze IB period. The Egyptian archaeological record supports this. Since the end of the Old Kingdom, Egypt had not attempted to conquer Canaan. Rehoboam’s reign corresponds to the sole reign of Pharaoh Thutmose III, the great conqueror of the New Kingdom. Thutmose III invaded and conquered Judah. Rehoboam, Judah’s king became subject to Thutmose III and the Temple was sacked. Thutmose III carefully details on the wall of the temple of Karnak the treasures carried from the Temple. The wall pictures include the type, number, design and material of the Temple contents. These match the account given in the Bible.[49] Thutmose III is called Shishak in the Scriptures. Although Canaan was part of the Egyptian Empire, control was left almost entirely in the hands of the native princes.[50] This is the period of the Amarna letters, correspondence between Egypt’s pharaohs and various rulers in the countries to the North.[51]>>>>>>>

Again, it’s “revised interpretation”. How does that match Scripture?
 
Last edited:
This is not a matter of patience and charity. It is a matter of you not wanting to read what people suggest to you.

Please don’t turn it around to blame others for your own lack of interest in considering others’ replies.
 
Tis_Bearself said:
This is not a matter of patience and charity. It is a matter of you not wanting to read what people suggest to you.

Please don’t turn it around to blame others for your own lack of interest in considering others’ replies.
Click to expand...
I didn’t say I wouldn’t read it later, I said I skimmed it.
I ended up reading it after all, and my questions still stand.

BTW, Happy Birthday.
 
Last edited:
For you to reach a satisfactory answer to your question, it is going to take a lot of independent study on your part. This is the type of question that needs more than a few CAF responses in order to make a determination for yourself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top