No such thing as Moses

[_Calculus Crusader]

If Osiris is as rooted in history as Moses, then you shan't have any trouble providing a historical context for him. During what Dynasty did he live and interact with historical figures?

[_Jersey Girl]

Brenton

I'm making a comparison between historicity. They're both only mentioned in non-secular religious texts.

No, Brenton. You're attempting to compare the historicity of a human being with an ancient fertility god.

Caesar, Baal and Molech are all mentioned in the Bible. Would you attempt to compare the historicity of those as well?
<
<
<
<
<

[_TAK]

My studies have led me to believe that there probably really was a religious leader in the Sinai three millennia ago named Moses, albeit undoubtedly quite different from what the Bible describes (lifespan not excepted).

Might I ask what leads you to this conclusion?

CK
I would be interested in your reasons for believing too..

[_Jersey Girl]

I'm afraid I don't understand why anyone wouldn't believe that a historical figure, Moses, didn't exist.

What's the deal?

[_krose]

Much like whether there actually was a historical Jesus, the question of whether ancient characters such as Moses and Abraham actually existed in some recognizable form, wouldn't bother me much. It's a huge leap to go from the concept that a character in a book may have existed, to the concept that that person communed with deities and performed miracles. One is not evidence of the other.

It's just that what I've read from biblical archaeologists like Israel Finkelstein (the kind that are not just Bible apologists) casts a lot of doubt on early Bible characters like Moses, as well as the Egyptian captivity story. When they say that there is no evidence for the patriarchs, and that the pentateuch was mostly written around 600 BCE, during the days of Josiah, I'm inclined to trust their conclusions.

[_Calculus Crusader]

It's just that what I've read from biblical archaeologists like Israel Finkelstein (the kind that are not just Bible apologists) casts a lot of doubt on early Bible characters like Moses, as well as the Egyptian captivity story. When they say that there is no evidence for the patriarchs, and that the pentateuch was mostly written around 600 BCE, during the days of Josiah, I'm inclined to trust their conclusions.

Finkelstein does not speak for the entire profession and he is an apologist for his own ideas.

[_Jersey Girl]

Much like whether there actually was a historical Jesus, the question of whether ancient characters such as Moses and Abraham actually existed in some recognizable form, wouldn't bother me much. It's a huge leap to go from the concept that a character in a book may have existed, to the concept that that person communed with deities and performed miracles. One is not evidence of the other.

It's just that what I've read from biblical archaeologists like Israel Finkelstein (the kind that are not just Bible apologists) casts a lot of doubt on early Bible characters like Moses, as well as the Egyptian captivity story. When they say that there is no evidence for the patriarchs, and that the pentateuch was mostly written around 600 BCE, during the days of Josiah, I'm inclined to trust their conclusions.

krose,

With all due respect, how much data would you expect to have regarding folks who lived thousands of years ago and whose stories are told through the self-identifying orality of the tribes where they originated?

Realistically, how much specific evidence would you expect to find for the ancients?

[_Jersey Girl]

Continuing on with krose or any one else who may be interested.

Again, I'm curious to know how much evidence anyone here thinks they would have regarding ancients who lived thousands of years ago, whose stories were told orally (and much later textualized) and who believed they experienced God in the exact same way that people (and even political leaders on behalf of their country) believe that they experience God today.

I have a feeling that if we went with the position of many skeptics, we'd think that nothing could be known about the ancients, period.

[_Danna]

In defence of Brenton, the Osiris myth was well developed by the time it was committed to writing. Prehistorically, the oral myth may have developed around an actual ancestor figure. Part of the myth in some variants is that Osiris was the first king.

Likewise with Moses, by the time the story was committed to paper, the oral version may have had generations to be embellished and 'corrected' to legitimise land claims and suchlike. In an oral society, history is very flexible, especially when it is useful in the present.

This situation would contrast with people Like Jesus who were surrounded by literate people. Even though actual evidence for the person Jesus is pretty weak we have additional records of events and persons in his story.

[_krose]

krose,

With all due respect, how much data would you expect to have regarding folks who lived thousands of years ago and whose stories are told through the self-identifying orality of the tribes where they originated?

Realistically, how much specific evidence would you expect to find for the ancients?

About the same as there is for a character who was completely manufactured thousands of years ago and whose story was told through the generations: little to none.

And since the claims of supernatural intervention and miracles are an essential part of ancient Bible stories, which events I have very good reasons to dismiss as made up, I see no good reason not to assume that the people in the stories are also fictional (unless there is positive evidence of them). My bias is skepticism.