Evidence That Moses Existed

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
76,469
Reaction score
6,147
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
My belief is that Moses and Jesus were historical figures. I believe they actually existed.

You're entitled to believe as you wish, none of my business ... but what you can't say is that there's archeological or historical evidence that Moses existed ... not until you produce such evidence and have it vetted by scholars ...

My understanding is that there are documents in Rome that describe Jesus Christ ... the local Jews were very angry with Him and as such this information appeared in the routine reports sent to the Capital ... what little was reported to Rome is roughly in compliance with the Biblical narrative ... folks outside the Jewish community ... He was a historical figure who is ascibed with legendary acts and miracles ... we have confirmation He threw the money-changers out of the Temple, but not that He turned water into wine ... this isn't well vetted, we'd have to read the scholarship and judge for ourselves ...

Remember the Saga of Starling Birdsong? ... the minstrel must witness the heroic act first hand in order to write the ballad of such an act ...
Not to argue with you (because it doesn't bother me that you believe Moses was not a historical figure) but we have written accounts of Moses, we have written accounts of Jesus and Jesus talked about Moses. If you accept confirmation (from written accounts) that Jesus threw the money changers out of the temple, then I see little difference between the two.

I believe that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses and David were historical figures. I believe that because of the written accounts, not all of which were contemporaneous. Some were based on oral accounts and were recorded in writing decades after the event occurred. Some were oral accounts that were passed down hundreds of years before being recorded. This wasn't unusual for ancient events in antiquity; it was the norm.

So why do I accept this? Because their ancestors had a rich tradition of story telling. They passed down historical events in allegorical format to transfer important knowledge and history to future generations. They were meticulous in passing down information that was worth remembering and deemed important for future generations. There is nothing in antiquity that comes close by comparison. So while some may quibble over details of these accounts, I understand that the purpose of the accounts was to transfer knowledge and that the successful transfer of knowledge was aided by making the accounts memorable so that they could be easily remembered. So when I read these accounts I look for the big picture of what they were trying to pass down.
Written accounts of moses while he was alive?
Marco Polo wrote of seeing dragons in China. Thats more credible than written stories a thousand years later.
That's a standard that doesn't exist anywhere in antiquity.

So, no.
Buuuut dragons :dance:
If that's how you processed it, then that's on you.
That's how scholarship addresses it ... not our rules ...

Do you believe Achilles was dipped in the River Styx because Homer said so? ...
No, I believe that's part of the storytelling to make the account memorable. I can't understand why people can't understand how information was passed down in ancient times or why they discount it.

As for scholarship, ancient man knew 6,000 years before science that the universe began and that man is a product of that creation.
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
2,049
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
No, I believe that's part of the storytelling to make the account memorable. I can't understand why people can't understand how information was passed down in ancient times or why they discount it.

As for scholarship, ancient man knew 6,000 years before science that the universe began and that man is a product of that creation.
That's just your own narrow-minded understanding of what we're saying ... no one's discounting anything ... we're just looking at it for what it is ... no more, no less ... don't say your have evidence from outside the Bible unless you have evidence from outside the Bible ... again, you'll ignore me ...

Everybody knows the evil of vainglory ... but even ancient Greeks didn't believe a fox can talk a crow out of her grape ... yet such a tale survives to this very day in Aesop's Fables ... we're still allowed to question Aesop's authorhood here ... without distracting us from the beauty of a crow's caw ...
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
76,469
Reaction score
6,147
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
I can't make you drink. I can only lead you to it.
This trough is dry ... my friend ... what other accounts of Moses do you speak of? ...
You mean other than the Bible you are holding and the documents it is based upon?

I disagree the trough is dry. I hope you are OK with that.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
76,469
Reaction score
6,147
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
No, I believe that's part of the storytelling to make the account memorable. I can't understand why people can't understand how information was passed down in ancient times or why they discount it.

As for scholarship, ancient man knew 6,000 years before science that the universe began and that man is a product of that creation.
That's just your own narrow-minded understanding of what we're saying ... no one's discounting anything ... we're just looking at it for what it is ... no more, no less ... don't say your have evidence from outside the Bible unless you have evidence from outside the Bible ... again, you'll ignore me ...

Everybody knows the evil of vainglory ... but even ancient Greeks didn't believe a fox can talk a crow out of her grape ... yet such a tale survives to this very day in Aesop's Fables ... we're still allowed to question Aesop's authorhood here ... without distracting us from the beauty of a crow's caw ...
Narrow minded? Wow, thanks. Not sure how I can ignore that. So because I don't agree with you I am narrow minded? I fully understand your position. There is no misunderstanding on my part. I believe the misunderstanding is on your part. You say you aren't discounting anything. You say you are just looking at it for what it is, but you are absolutely discounting the written accounts. Not just a little either. You have completely disregarded the accounts when you say you don't believe that Moses was a historical figure because you don't have any archaeological evidence from 3200 years ago, like you would actually expect there to be archaeological evidence of a person from 3200 years ago. I am still wondering what archaeological evidence you are expecting to find of a person from 3,200 years ago. I'm not expecting to find any.

We know the evil of vainglory because of those who wrote about it before us. And they knew about it because standards exist for logical reasons and they were able to connect the cause to the effect. But it had to be communicated and passed down to others because not everyone was able to make the connection between the consequences of vainglory to vainglory. So your example literally proves my point that allegorical accounts used imagery like a fox talking a crow out of her grape to make the message memorable for the express purpose of passing on knowledge to others who needed that wisdom because they weren't capable on their own in discovering it for themselves. They had to be instructed.

You used the phrase "we're." Don't expect for a second that TN is agreeing with you for any other reason than he believes everything in the Bible is a fairy tale. So, I doubt very seriously that he sees the same beauty of a crow's caw that you do.

Lastly, the evidence outside of the Bible is captured in manuscripts that existed before the Bible was compiled. I didn't ignore you. I was pointing you to the manuscripts which existed before the Bible. It seems you must have been ignoring me.
 

Oz and the Orchestra

Platinum Member
Joined
May 25, 2020
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
974
Points
918
Location
Lake District England
"Holy Moses" - Of course, he existed - Every "Holy" Robin (Burt Ward) ever exclaimed!
You will need to listen carefully to catch "Holy Moses".

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO - He never said it. But "Holy Moses" was the only Holy I could distinctly remember over all these decades later. He never actually said it - how can that possibly be?
 

Agit8r

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
11,859
Reaction score
2,048
Points
245
Hebrew mythology, like others, is based on oral traditions that often reference things which actually happened, but which were much much distortion over the course of many retellings.
 

Oz and the Orchestra

Platinum Member
Joined
May 25, 2020
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
974
Points
918
Location
Lake District England
"Holy Moses" - Of course, he existed - Every "Holy" Robin (Burt Ward) ever exclaimed!
You will need to listen carefully to catch "Holy Moses".

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO - He never said it. But "Holy Moses" was the only Holy I could distinctly remember over all these decades later. He never actually said it - how can that possibly be?
"Holy Moses" - Of course, he existed - Every "Holy" Robin (Burt Ward) ever exclaimed!
You will need to listen carefully to catch "Holy Moses".

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO - He never said it. But "Holy Moses" was the only Holy I could distinctly remember over all these decades later. He never actually said it - how can that possibly be?
I would have staked my house on the fact Robin DID say it or given evidence in court.

So if one mind in one lifetime can so easily confuse fact with fiction how much distortion could have taken place between the said event and it being written in the Bible?
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
76,469
Reaction score
6,147
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
Hebrew mythology, like others, is based on oral traditions that often reference things which actually happened, but which were much much distortion over the course of many retellings.
I don't know that it was distorted as much as the original meaning of the account - the main intent of the account - was lost through time.

For example the intended meaning of the exchange between God and Adam and Eve was that man knows right from wrong and when he violates it, rather than abandoning the concept he rationalizes he did not violate it.

When they heard God coming they hid which proves they had done wrong.

When God asked them if they ate the fruit, Adam said the woman you made gave it to me and Eve said the serpent deceived me. It wasn't disobeying God that was the original sin, it was failing to take accountability for disobeying God.

All of mankind's problems would disappear over night if everyone starting to accept accountability for their mistakes.
 
Last edited:

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
2,049
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
Lastly, the evidence outside of the Bible is captured in manuscripts that existed before the Bible was compiled. I didn't ignore you. I was pointing you to the manuscripts which existed before the Bible. It seems you must have been ignoring me.
What manuscripts? ... I understand there are verbatim copies of Isaiah from King David's time ... faithfully transcribed to this very day ... but this is the exact same narrative ... that doesn't count as an outside source ...

You're deflecting from the OP ... we have the Bible ... what other archeological or written evidence is there for Moses? ... or for millions of people criss-crossing the Sinai for 40 years ...
 

Agit8r

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
11,859
Reaction score
2,048
Points
245
Hebrew mythology, like others, is based on oral traditions that often reference things which actually happened, but which were much much distortion over the course of many retellings.
I don't know that it was distorted as much as the original meaning of the account - the main intent of the account - was lost through time.

For example the intended meaning of the exchange between God and Adam and Eve was that man knows right from wrong and when he violates it, rather than abandoning the concept he rationalizes he did not violate it.

When they heard God coming they hood means they knew the difference between right and wrong.

When God asked them if they ate the fruit, Adam said the woman you made gave it to me and Eve said the serpent deceived me. It wasn't disobeying God that was the original sin, it was failing to take accountability for disobeying God.

All of mankind's problems would disappear over night if everyone starting to accept accountability for their mistakes.
On the other hand, maybe the partiarchal elements of the OT were added under pressure from Persian censors, since it was first laid down in writing during the exile.
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
76,469
Reaction score
6,147
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
Hebrew mythology, like others, is based on oral traditions that often reference things which actually happened, but which were much much distortion over the course of many retellings.
I don't know that it was distorted as much as the original meaning of the account - the main intent of the account - was lost through time.

For example the intended meaning of the exchange between God and Adam and Eve was that man knows right from wrong and when he violates it, rather than abandoning the concept he rationalizes he did not violate it.

When they heard God coming they hood means they knew the difference between right and wrong.

When God asked them if they ate the fruit, Adam said the woman you made gave it to me and Eve said the serpent deceived me. It wasn't disobeying God that was the original sin, it was failing to take accountability for disobeying God.

All of mankind's problems would disappear over night if everyone starting to accept accountability for their mistakes.
On the other hand, maybe the partiarchal elements of the OT were added under pressure from Persian censors, since it was first laid down in writing during the exile.
Can you be more specific about patriarchal elements in the OT that you are referring to? I'm not sure what you are talking about.
 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
2,049
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
Hebrew mythology, like others, is based on oral traditions that often reference things which actually happened, but which were much much distortion over the course of many retellings.
Plenty of evidence of flood events that a primitive people could well think encircled the entire Earth ... do we move Noah's Flood from "mythology? to "legend"? ... it only takes a little creativity to fill in the gaps ... and I'm fine with that as long as we say where we're guessing and what we can document ...
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
76,469
Reaction score
6,147
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
Lastly, the evidence outside of the Bible is captured in manuscripts that existed before the Bible was compiled. I didn't ignore you. I was pointing you to the manuscripts which existed before the Bible. It seems you must have been ignoring me.
What manuscripts? ... I understand there are verbatim copies of Isaiah from King David's time ... faithfully transcribed to this very day ... but this is the exact same narrative ... that doesn't count as an outside source ...

You're deflecting from the OP ... we have the Bible ... what other archeological or written evidence is there for Moses? ... or for millions of people criss-crossing the Sinai for 40 years ...
I don't mean to be deflecting from the OP, maybe my narrow mindedness is getting in the way. In my tiny little pea sized brain, I don't envision the OT being created all at once. I envision many different sources over many different years by many different authors. That is your argument, right? Because you don't believe Moses did it because you don't acknowledge Moses was a historical figure because you can't find his house slippers from 3200 years ago. Was everything that was ever written about Exodus included in it? Do you know? How many different authors of Exodus are there?

 
Last edited:

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
76,469
Reaction score
6,147
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
This a a very balanced discussion on the subject of whether exodus was an historical event or not.

 

ReinyDays

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
5,410
Reaction score
2,049
Points
210
Location
State of Jefferson
That is your argument, right?
Lord almighty ... just how spun up are you? ... nothing could be further from the truth ... you're stuck on a narrow track ... anything I post outside that track just seems to confuse you ...

Watch the Marco Polo video again ... this time pay attention to how an actual HISTORIAN deals with the material ... see, scholarly-like ... only saying what is true that which can be verified ... how do we know Polo visited China? ... because the Chinese said he did ... most everything Marco Polo said about China can be verified by the Chinese ... see how that works, two completely different cultures and civilizations say the same thing ...

Who ... other than the Hebrews ... speak of Moses? ... one people telling one story without any verification from outside their culture doesn't qualify as factual history ...

You're being narrow-minded in the sense you are only looking at this from a position of faith ... without regard to any other point of view ... you think you have to believe the literal interpretation of every single passage in the Bible or somehow you won't be a Christian ... sticks into snakes ... Loki consuming all of Egypt's firstborn ... Mana from Heaven ... I get that ...

You know we don't allow that in science ... I guess it's news to you we don't allow that in history either ...
 

shimon

Silver Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2015
Messages
1,654
Reaction score
159
Points
95
THE HIDDEN MOSES
Can any evidence be found in the museums of the world for the historical existence of Moses? Just who was the Egyptian princess who claimed him as her own son? And who was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, and who was his first born son that died in the 10th plague?
First let's look at what we know about Moses from scripture.
Moses died at age 120 (about 1405 B.C.)
Deu 34:7 And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.
After the exodus, Moses and Israel wandered in the wilderness 40 years:
Num 32:13 And the LORD'S anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until all the generation, that had done evil in the sight of the LORD, was consumed.
So Moses was 80 at the time of the first Passover and exodus from Egypt.
The first Passover and Exodus is dated by the reign of Solomon
1 Ki 6:1 And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD.
With Solomon's 4th year estimated at 967/966 B.C. - 480 years earlier places the Exodus at about 1445 B.C.
Moses spent 40 years in Midian / Madian:
Acts 7:29 Then fled Moses at this saying, and was a stranger in the land of Madian, where he begat two sons.
Acts 7:30 And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush.
So Moses was 40 years old when he smote the Egyptian (about 1485 B.C.):
Acts 7:23 And when he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren the children of Israel.
Acts 7:24 And seeing one of them suffer wrong, he defended him, and avenged him that was oppressed, and smote the Egyptian:
So Moses was born about 1525 B.C., and the daughter of the reigning Pharaoh (Tutmoses I) who found him in the Nile was princess Nefure, who later became known as Queen Hatshepsut, Pharaoh of Egypt.
Moses Born
Moses 40
Moses 80
Moses 120
1525 B.C.​
1485 B.C.​
1445 B.C.​
1405 B.C.​
Ex 2:1-10​
Acts 7:23-24​
Acts 7:29-30​
1 Ki 6:1​
Num 32:13​
Deu 34:7​
Found by Pharaoh's daughter​
Moses kills
the Egyptian​
40 Years spent
in Midian
Pharaoh dies
(Ex 2:23)​
Leads Exodus from Egypt​
40 Years spent in the wilderness​
Dies in Moab​
Tutmoses I
(had no son's,
only a daughter)​
Hatshepsut
Tutmoses II​
Tutmoses III​
Tutmoses IV
(not first born)​
Akhenaten
(changes religion)​


Pharaoh
Moses
Ahmoses
(the moon is born)​
Founder of the 18th dynasty. Defeated the Hyksos and regained all Egypt. Initiated building work at Karnak
Amenhotep I
(Ammun is pleased)
Tutmoses I
(born of Thoth)​
Son of Amoses.Aaron, brother of Moses is born (about 1533 B.C.)
This is the pharaoh who issued the decree that all the infant sons born to the Israelites were to be thrown into the river Nile, but that infant girls were permitted to live. (Exodus 1:22)Moses born (about 1525 B.C.) and found in the Nile in Memphis (Ex 2:5-9) Moses named by Princess Nefure (Hatchepsut)
(Ex 2:10).
"Senmut" is another Egyptian name given to Moses when he came to live at the palace.
The third king of the 18th Dynasty Tutmoses I was a commoner by birth. He had married Ahmose, a sister of Amenhotep I, and was named king when the king died childless.
Tutmoses I had no sons, but was the father of Nefure (Hatshepsut), the princess who is the most likely candidate for having found Moses in the Nile.
In Serabit El-Khadim there was erected a stele in the 11th year of reign. It bears the image of Princess Neferure and it is to her, oddly enough, that the regnal years are ascribed. She is accompanied by her steward Senenmut [Moses], bearing a fan.
A.H.Gardiner, T.E.Peet and J.Cerny, The Inscriptions of Sinai, Part II (Oxford, 1955) pp.151-152.
First Pharaoh buried in the Valley of the Kings.Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was powerful in speech and action. (Acts 7:22). Moses declines to become Pharaoh when Tutmoses I dies. (Heb 11:24)
Tutmoses II
22 years - Moses
32 Years his successor.​
Senmut/Tutmoses II (Moses) is groomed to become pharaoh. He is the architect of Deir El Bahri, the mortuary temple of Hatshepsut.Another name for Moses: Hatshepsut Xnem Amen (offspring of Hatshepsut by the god Amen).
Princess Nefure
Daughter of Tutmoses I. It is thought she was about age fifteen when her father died.
Hatshepsut married her half-brother, Thutmose II, who had a son, Thutmose III, by a concubine/minor wife (Mutnofret). Co-ruled with Tutmoses III who was only a child when Tutmoses II died. Tutmoses III was the illegitimate son of Tutmoses II (not a son of Hatshepsut).
The last that we hear of Senenmut (Moses) is in year 16 of Hatshepsut's reign.
Moses when 40 years old slays an Egyptian (Ex 2:12) and flees Egypt (Ex 2:15) because pharaoh (Moses replacement) wanted to kill him.
At Deir El Bahri, there is a wall which depicts the birth of the future heir to the throne, one scene shows a baby boy in the arms of Hatshepsut-the infant Moses!Tomb No. 71 at Deir El Bahri was first of two tombs intended for Moses (Senenmut). Tomb No. 353 was the second, but work stopped when he fled Egypt, and the tomb remains unfinished.
In 1488, six years prior to her death, all official records of Hatshepsut ceased.​
After Moses leaves for Midian he is replaced by the half brother of Hatshepsut, whom she marries. The half brother takes over the title of Tutmoses II, which used to be Moses' title.
Tutmoses III
Amenhotep II

Pharaoh when Moses
first fled Egypt.​
Assumed the position of Pharoah with the demise of Hatshepsut. (Moses was his competitor for the position of pharaoh). Tutmoses IIIwas "The Napoleon of ancient Egypt and captured over 350 cities.Moses in Midian
Hatshepsut's royal wall paintings in her mortuary temple at Deir el Bahri were defaced, and her statues were destroyed, because of the hatred Tutmoses III had for her and Moses.Images of Senmut (Moses) also defaced by Tutmoses III, the childhood rival of Moses.
Amenemhab mentions the month and the day of Tutmoses III death: "The last day of the third month of the second season ... He mounted to heaven, he joined the sun: the divine limbs mingled with him who begat him." According to James Henry Breasted, founder of American Egyptology, this translates to the 17th of March, 1450 BC.Exodus 2:23 states: "During that long period, the king of Egypt died...".
Tutmoses IV

Pharaoh of the Exodus​
Pharaoh of the Exodus. He was not a first born son, or else he would have died in the tenth plague too.
He was the second born son of Amenhotep II. The Dream Stela of Thutmose IV, found between the front paws of the Sphinx, indicates he was not the firstborn legal heir to the throne, that he killed his firstborn brother to take the crown. The stele was used to legitimize the murder by claiming it was directed by the Sphinx in a dream.
Thutmose IV/Amenhotep III may have perished with his army while pursuing Moses into the Red Sea. (Ex 14:27-28, Psa 136:15)
Moses returns (Ex 4:19) after 40 years in Midian (Acts 7:30) and leads Israel out of bondage after the first born of Egypt dies at Passover. (Ex. 12)
Destruction of Jericho at about 1407 BC. According to "New Bible Evidence" by Sir Charles Marston, the scarab and pottery found in Jericho indicate it was destroyed at the time of Amenhotep III.
Tutankaten
Tutankamun


In an inscription on a statue of a lion dedicated by Tutankhamen to the temple of Soleb, he calls Amenhotep III his father.
First born son of Pharaoh struck dead by the 10th plague of God!
(Ex 12:29)
Supposedly reigned from an age of only 9 until his death at about 18. Dies "mysteriously". Actually was only the heir apparent to the throne (Crowned Prince) that may have co-reigned with his father in his later years.
Tomb found in the Valley of the Kings by Howard Carter in 1922, said to be a "cursed" tomb. His burial looks rushed, and in a tomb generally too small - not designed for a reigning pharaoh's burial.

Akhenaten
Akhenaten abruptly abandons the worship of the previous gods of Egypt.
Amenhotep IV changed his name to Akhenaten, symbolizing the change from Amun worship to monotheistic Aten (Sun) worship. (Moses showed the former gods of Egypt to be powerless, hence the change to monotheism)
Shifted his capital from Luxor to a new capital Akhetaten.
His wife was the famous Nefertiti which means 'maiden of joy'.
In a song written by Akhenaten to his god, there are seventeen verses which correspond with Psalm 104.
Statues of the infant Moses (Senmut)
and Princess Nefure (Hatshepsut)


SENMUT AND NEFERU-RA
Egyptian Museum, Cairo​
SENMUT AND NEFERU-RA
from Karnak
Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York​
Egyptologists claim the infant in these statues is princess NEFERU-RA and the adult is Senmut, her vizir, but when she claimed Moses as her son, he became the child heir-apparent to the throne of Egypt. The child wears the serpent on the forehead and lock of hair on the right side of the head that designates a prince of Egypt! It is Moses!
SENMUT AND NEFERU-RA
Berlin Museum​
The Princess and Moses​
As Moses grew to adulthood in Egypt, he assumed the title of Tutmoses II as heir to the throne of Egypt, but when he left Egypt after committing murder, he was replaced, and another man assumed that title. But statues of Moses as an adult apparently do still exist! On the left below is Moses as a child, and on the right is Moses as an adult, as Thutmoses II, prince of Egypt, before he left Egypt for Midian!​
SENMUT AND NEFERU-RA
Egyptian Museum, Cairo​
Statue of TUTMOSIS II (Moses)
Egyptian Museum, Cairo
Note the Semitic nose!​
The above information was compiled from many different sources, and this page will likely change to reflect corrections and any new information I come across.
Sources and Related Links:
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
76,469
Reaction score
6,147
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
That is your argument, right?
Lord almighty ... just how spun up are you? ... nothing could be further from the truth ... you're stuck on a narrow track ... anything I post outside that track just seems to confuse you ...

Watch the Marco Polo video again ... this time pay attention to how an actual HISTORIAN deals with the material ... see, scholarly-like ... only saying what is true that which can be verified ... how do we know Polo visited China? ... because the Chinese said he did ... most everything Marco Polo said about China can be verified by the Chinese ... see how that works, two completely different cultures and civilizations say the same thing ...

Who ... other than the Hebrews ... speak of Moses? ... one people telling one story without any verification from outside their culture doesn't qualify as factual history ...

You're being narrow-minded in the sense you are only looking at this from a position of faith ... without regard to any other point of view ... you think you have to believe the literal interpretation of every single passage in the Bible or somehow you won't be a Christian ... sticks into snakes ... Loki consuming all of Egypt's firstborn ... Mana from Heaven ... I get that ...

You know we don't allow that in science ... I guess it's news to you we don't allow that in history either ...
I'm not spun up or confused in the slightest. If I were spun up and confused I'd be trying to make this personal like you are doing.

You want me to watch a video on Marco Polo to better understand why Moses wasn't an historical character? And you believe that would be productive? I don't. I believe my time would be better spent looking at the specific arguments against Moses being an historical person; or more specifically the argument against Exodus being historical. Which I have done. This guy does a pretty good job of being objective. So why don't you look at this video and tell me what you disagree with. and what you believe he failed to discuss ...


I'm not being narrow minded ... I'm not only looking only looking at this from a position of faith ... I'm not disregarding any other point of view ... I don't read the Bible literally ... I don't care if people see me as Christian ...

You don't get anything about me ...

And that's one of the reasons you are making this personal ...
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top