The historicity of Moses and the Exodus account

[Erikaspirit16]

You’re just repeating part of the Christ-Myth theory. You know that right? You might at well start talking about a flat earth or George Bush orchestrating 9/11, that’s the level of credibility you are on with that theory.

Last thing before TV! I’m not advocating Appolonius or saying anything about the truthfulness of his story. I’m simply saying similar “prophets” were running around the Mediterranean world at that period claiming similar powers. Watch Monty Python’s “Life of Brian”!

Since Jesus is constantly quoting the Old Testament and referring his followers to it, you would have to assume (at least I would) that if the Old Testament was nonsense, Jesus would be a fraud. Or I am missing your point? I thought your point was that the New Testament could stand alone as legitimate even if the Old Testament was nonsense. No?

 

[stupidisasstupiddoes]

Since Jesus is constantly quoting the Old Testament and referring his followers to it, you would have to assume (at least I would) that if the Old Testament was nonsense, Jesus would be a fraud. Or I am missing your point?

Yes, totally. Do you understand a fundamental principle that teachers communicate to students in frames of reference that are familiar to them? Do you ever wonder why the stories of the OT are similar to other cultures like Noah and the flood vrs the epic of Gilgamesh? Because people understand them! The stories are there to convey a truth that may or may not be a scientific truth. Of course Jesus would use stories that were familiar to his audience, the scientific truth of them is almost irrelevant (not totally). Do you think there needs to be an actual good Samaritan for the story to have truth (i.e. wisdom)?

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

I’m a revert Catholic. I was born Catholic, then fell away. For similar reasons, I suppose. Then I came back.

May I know why?

It’s a long story, but I’ve written it down.

Basically, though, it’s because I was a disobedient young man who chafed at authority. This led me to doubt all that I was taught.

Yes, the Torah contains an account, but it is only the Torah, as far as I know.

The oral tradition os very very very very, here it comes again, very unreliable. People forget, misrepresent, nothing is said the same twice, and it is far easier to make things up in an oral tradition.

[/QUOTE]
If all we had was the oral teaching, it would be unreliable. But we have a Magisterium, (I’m talking about the Catholic Church, now) with records of all that it has taught through the centuries. Along with Scriptures by people who were eyewitnesses of Jesus Christ.

I know you’re talking about the Old Testament. But we believe that Jesus Christ is God and we know that He used the Old Testament to Teach various aspects of His Doctrines. Thus, by using them, He confirmed their truthfulness.

Trust me on this, I come from an Islamic background, and the Hadiths, an oral tradition, is hardly reliable with so many conflicting reports.

I understand. But look at the setup. Compare the Islamic traditions to Catholic Tradition.

1. Islam is based upon the testimony of one man, without any verifiable proof of its authenticity.
   a. Who else saw the alleged angel?
   b. What miracles did he provide to prove his mission from God?

Some say, “he had secretaries who wrote down what he said.” But, did they see what he claimed to see? Did they hear what he claimed to hear? No, they just wrote down his claims.

1. Catholicism is based upon the eye witness testimony of men who all witnessed the same Jesus, doing the same signs and miracles. And then, they themselves provide the same signs and miracles to prove their own words.

In addition, Jesus Christ organized them into an Institution with a hierarchy that still stands and continues to Teach His words to this day.

Why would his subordnates have the same authority as him, if they write something, then he had to approve of it to have his authority and accountability on it.

If the authority had only been given to Moses, without being able to pass it down, then Judaism would have died with Moses.

Many ask the same thing about the Catholic Church. The Apostles were given authority by Christ. But that authority didn’t die with them. It continues to be passed down, through the Church, to this day.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Yes, totally. Do you understand a fundamental principle that teachers communicate to students in frames of reference that are familiar to them? Do you ever wonder why the stories of the OT are similar to other cultures like Noah and the flood vrs the epic of Gilgamesh? Because people understand them! The stories are there to convey a truth that may or may not be a scientific truth. Of course Jesus would use stories that were familiar to his audience, the scientific truth of them is almost irrelevant (not totally). Do you think there needs to be an actual good Samaritan for the story to have truth (i.e. wisdom)?

?? “Yes, totally.” In other words I missed your point? OK. I have no quarrel with what you’ve written in this post. It’s pretty much what I’ve been saying. However, your earlier post seemed to say something different.

 

[stupidisasstupiddoes]

If you agree that the scientific validity of the OT isn’t what lends the value of Jesus in the NT (i.e. there are different types of truth) then i don’t understand why you said Jesus wouldn’t be credible if the OT wasn’t. Or is that just semantic differences?

 

[InvisibiliaNaCa]

I have no solid answer to prove or disprove the story of Moses or the Exodus. But your comments on the reliability of history, science versus religious stories moves me to say a word or two.

Secular History is written by the victors and the losers, if they survived. History is also written by those who are in between the victors and losers. There is no such thing as an objective honest completely factual verifiable history. I’ve certainly read enough to figure that out.

I’ve followed science as well. Science is a human affair. Anything involving humans will drop the ball on scientific facts and theories. It’s happened. And it will happen again.

Quantum theory says that at a fundamental subatomic level we really don’t know what is in fact reality.

On the other hand, using the tools of understanding on human behavior can shed much inner light for your spiritual eyes to see. Will it prove facts? No. It’s all probabilities at this point. But we are human beings and can become quite adept at seeing probable truths.

But for the sake of a little secular peek:

Let’s suppose the whole Exodus story is made up. A myth. Where can we not learn something about ourselves thru the mirror of this story? The behavior of these peoples reflects human behavior to this day. Be it a single individual or a whole community.

The Adam and Eve story? Wow, there is plenty of food for thought from a purely psychological perspective.

And have we forgotten that history is replete with the migrations of whole peoples! They brought their myths with them. Their migrations happened much to the grief of the peoples whose Lands they “migrated” into(invasion). The community of Hebrews migrated. Nothing new in world history.

 

[Raafat]

So I guess the answers boil down to its irrelevant whether it happened or it didn’t
It doesn’t matter if Moses wrote it or not.

Am I missing something here?

I’m particularly annoyed with the idea that Moses may have not written anything. Because, eh, it is supposedly the word of God as it came from the prophet, with “showcased” prophetical position.

If it is not the prophetic writer, but another unknown writer, then this unknown writer might be an impostor.

Sorry if I sound repeating myself, but I must emphasise (No British English, err?) what I have come to understand from the previous discussions.

 

[Raafat]

If you agree that the scientific validity of the OT isn’t what lends the value of Jesus in the NT (i.e. there are different types of truth) then i don’t understand why you said Jesus wouldn’t be credible if the OT wasn’t. Or is that just semantic differences?

Well, not the Scientific validity, but rather it just shows how trusted is tradition that makes the case for the exustence of prophets and that “this is their writing”

If onecan’t show the prophetic source amd nature of text, remind me why then it is the word of God?

 

[Raafat]

Let’s suppose the whole Exodus story is made up. A myth. Where can we not learn something about ourselves thru the mirror of this story? The behavior of these peoples reflects human behavior to this day. Be it a single individual or a whole community.

Yes we can. However, it is not really about the story, but rather who wrote it?
How can I know he’s a prophet and that’s indeed the word of God?

It hasno known, it has no good history, it has no coherent nature of writing, and it is certainly not that relevant today.
It has contradictions too!

I don’t care about the validity of the story itself, if by other means one shows me that the Bible (in whivh there is a fight about the canonicity of some books) that it is the inspiredwordof God.

Not as Quraish lablled the Quran, fables of the predecessors.

I hope I didn’t sound disrespectful or anything, it is unintetional.

 

[DetectiveNiko]

My view might be a bit more skeptic but, the way I see it, some events are true, and some aren’t. Most of the Torah and the whole old testament was written pretty late, in fact, I would say its closer to Jesus’s birth than those events, but I don’t think that shows that they weren’t real. People look at the biography of a person and tradition passed down and write it down, but also add their own theological elements to it. What I think the main point of the old testament is to show God’s nature, and the prophecy of a messiah, which is fulfilled in the new testament for us Christians at least. When put into that light, I don’t think the JEDP theory contradicts anything.

 

[Raafat]

My view might be a bit more skeptic but, the way I see it, some events are true, and some aren’t. Most of the Torah and the whole old testament was written pretty late, in fact, I would say its closer to Jesus’s birth than those events, but I don’t think that shows that they weren’t real. People look at the biography of a person and tradition passed down and write it down, but also add their own theological elements to it. What I think the main point of the old testament is to show God’s nature, and the prophecy of a messiah, which is fulfilled in the new testament for us Christians at least. When put into that light, I don’t think the JEDP theory contradicts anything.

Then, it is just fictional to an extent, which seems to say that God employed fiction, that is not really objectionable. Because of the later date and being based on oral tradition.

But if later scribes just used this folk memory and added their theology, how do we know that it is what God wanted, if I have no verifiable evidence to test his credibility? Might not he be just a pagan priest?

JDEP conflicts everything, it says,in plain English, that there were four documents with conflicting Theology and interests and that the Pentateuch is just a stitched-up work of them. Keeping the conflicts found in them.
It just makesit hard fo accept the gidly authority it ought to have.

 

[DetectiveNiko]

Then, it is just fictional to an extent, which seems to say that God employed fiction, that is not really objectionable. Because of the later date and being based on oral tradition.

Jesus used parables all the time, I don’t see why God can’t use fiction to speak theological truths, which is the whole point of the Bible and other religious texts, not as a scientific or historic book (while it can have those elements in it, especially the historic ones) but as a book that teaches about what people believe about God.
Of course as I said, this is only to show that things don’t need to always be historic, but a lot of the time they are.

But if later scribes just used this folk memory and added their theology, how do we know that it is what God wanted, if I have no verifiable evidence to test his credibility? Might not he be just a pagan priest?

While it was to some extent fiction (once again I am not implying everything is ) a lot of the events were based either on real people or real events and we generally believe Abraham, Moses and such were real people, although they might not have written the books.

JDEP conflicts everything, it says,in plain English, that there were four documents with conflicting Theology and interests and that the Pentateuch is just a stitched-up work of them. Keeping the conflicts found in them.

It just makesit hard fo accept the gidly authority it ought to have.

Oh sorry, I didn’t read it throughly, I thought it just says that there were 4 different authors. Could you tell me what those conflicts would be ?

 

[Raafat]

While it was to some extent fiction (once again I am not implying everything is ) a lot of the events were based either on real people or real events and we generally believe Abraham, Moses and such were real people, although they might not have written the books.

If they were not the writers who were they then?
How do you know they had authority, may be the so-called miracles are fabrications as well, may be the prophecies are written at a later date.

Oh sorry, I didn’t read it throughly, I thought it just says that there were 4 different authors. Could you tell me what those conflicts would be ?

Here are the contradictory or "different’ 10 Commandments.

Bible Contradiction #134. Which Ten Commandments?

Also there some other contradictions too:

Other details were noticed as well. Certain parts of the Torah use words for places and things that are different from other parts. For instance, some stories (Exodus 3, 17, and 31; Deuteronomy everywhere but once) used “Horeb” as the name for the mountain where Moses receives the Law, while other parts of the story (Exodus 16, 19, 31, 34; Leviticus and Numbers throughout; and Deuteronomy 33) use the name “Sinai”. Some stories throughout use the name “Amorites” for the original dwellers of Canaan, while others use the word “Canaanites”. Moses’ father-in-law is named as Jethro in most stories, but in others he is named Reuel.

Source:
http://www.mesacc.edu/~thoqh49081/handouts/torahclues.html

 

[DetectiveNiko]

Yeah at first I wouldn’t say that using different names really means different things happened since it comes down to oral tradition, but yeah the ten commandments do raise interesting questions. I won’t act all high and mighty and will just ask you to ask someone else since I don’t seem to know the answer to this question after all.
Yeah, sorry

 

[Raafat]

Yeah at first I wouldn’t say that using different names really means different things happened since it comes down to oral tradition, but yeah the ten commandments do raise interesting questions. I won’t act all high and mighty and will just ask you to ask someone else since I don’t seem to know the answer to this question after all.

Yeah, sorry

Yeah, but why use this name then that name then this name for the same person, unless whatever I’m copying from has no agreement on the name.

Yeah the ten Comandmants need some further insight and hopefully one will come and have the answer.

No need fir apologies we are all students.

 

[goout]

Hi, Erikaspirit.
Pardon me, but I don’t get the point of the
Iinked reply.
I mean, it says, if the story is fictional, then the Jewish/Christian/Islamic is indeed fictional, and that is my point.

You might want to consider that you are attempting to conform ancient writings to modern categories of literature.
It’s not a matter of fiction/non fiction.
It’s a matter of writings that convey Truth as God wills it. Scripture is rooted in history, and also not confined to it strictly as journalism. It is history “plus”.

You will never find adequate explanations for scripture if you don’t have a docile disposition to it, ie are a “good listener”.

 

[Raafat]

You will never find adequate explanations for scripture if you don’t have a docile disposition to it, ie are a “good listener”.

So you are basically telling me that I’m about to become an Agnostic all my life.

There’s no way then to verify that it’s God’s inspiration, unless I want to believe so.

Or am I missing something?

 

[goout]

goout:

You will never find adequate explanations for scripture if you don’t have a docile disposition to it, ie are a “good listener”.

There’s no way then to verify that it’s God’s inspiration, unless I want to believe so.

Belief is about response to something and someone, not just intellectual assent. It’s not about verification, it’s about plunging forward into trust.

You have to trust someone in life.
Who are you going to trust? (don’t put your trust in me that’s not the point at all…)

Who do you place your faith and trust in? Not for your material well being, but for your identity before God, the meaning of your life, the vehicle for your salvation.

Who? Are you going to rely on yourself, or is there a community to help you?

The way I came to trust the inspiration of scripture is that I read it, and gave it a chance, and the life of Christ came through it and changed my life.

 

[Kei]

If he was to do such, that’s an odd claim to make, considering the Life of Apollonius of Tyana was written no earlier than AD 217.

I also don’t reccomend using movies as an actual source for how a society actually was. And the similarities are ridiculous (for instance, it records his birth simply being premature as birds danced around his mother. It’s even doubtful the book was written to be a biography due to various factors.

 

[stupidisasstupiddoes]

Can you quote the bit you are replying to. I have no idea what you mean by this.