Picture of Mars vs. the earth. So how did Moses know?

[YoursTrue]

Well, then don't blame me. Blame God.

Actually, if you wanted Him to reach you, He could. He reads the heart. And knows who wants to know Him. (Have another nice day.)

 

[ppp]

Actually, if you wanted Him to reach you, He could. He reads the heart. And knows who wants to know Him. (Have another nice day.)

Damascus Road Experience

 

[YoursTrue]

Damascus Road Experience

Maybe something a little different.

 

[ppp]

Maybe something a little different.

I am just saying, that Paul alleged experience calls BS on the whole hearts thing.

Also, I would point out that any normal human can demonstrate to me that they exists no matter what state my heart might be in. If your god existed and wanted me to know that he exists, then I would know.

 

[YoursTrue]

I am just saying, that Paul alleged experience calls BS on the whole hearts thing.

Also, I would point out that any normal human can demonstrate to me that they exists no matter what state my heart might be in. If your god existed and wanted me to know that he exists, then I would know.

And no it doesn't do as you say it does. I used to be like you but my experience tells me to bid you a good day and so long for now...

 

[ppp]

And no it doesn't do as you say it does. I used to be like you but my experience tells me to bid you a good day and so long for now...

Ah yes. The ol' I know the answer but I am too righteous to speak it ploy.

Quit telling me that you are leaving. Commit.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I realize what some other people are saying. But again -- I see no real evidence that Moses did not exist, or that he did not write about what was happening.

Which doesn't serve as evidence that he did exist or did write stuff.

There's no real evidence that humans are NOT being kidnapped by aliens either, but that doesn't advance the case of alien kidnapping AT ALL either.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Some would say, however, that some theories are "incontrovertibly" correct.

And they would be right.
Examples:
- Plate tectonics
- germ theory
- evolution
...

Among others.

Either Moses existed as written or he did not. Either the Jews were in the wilderness for 40 years or they were not. And I have come to believe and place my trust in the One who inspired the wonderful words of the Bible.

So you believe it based on circular reasoning motivated by blind faith.

(Not evolution as truth or the way things came about...)

So you dismiss well-evidenced, independently verifiable and very testable scientific explanatory models of reality in favor of faith-based circular reasoning.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I did not make up the following: Why Human Evolution Is a Fact | Psychology Today
(When I was younger and did not believe in God, or the Bible, I believed that "human evolution is a fact." Or whatever I was basically taught about this in school. (I no longer believe everything "science" teaches, as theory or theory bordering on fact -- moving as if it is a fact -- re: evolution.)

Just like gravity, evolution is both a fact and a theory.

The fact is that species change over time and that species share ancestry.
The theory is the model that explains how that happens - it addresses the mechanism.

If the mechanism is incorrect or incomplete, the facts remain and still require explaining.

 

[night912]

Some would say, however, that some theories are "incontrovertibly" correct. Anyway, I'm not into too much philosophical argumentation about this. Either Moses existed as written or he did not. Either the Jews were in the wilderness for 40 years or they were not. And I have come to believe and place my trust in the One who inspired the wonderful words of the Bible. (Not evolution as truth or the way things came about...)

So that means that you would be wrong if the words of the bible were wrong because it wasn't inspired by the One. You would be wrong if the true and original words of the bible that were inspired by the One actually said that Moses existed differently from what's written in the bible you know. Your belief would also be wrong if the true and original words inspired by the One said that the Jews were actually in the wilderness for only 10 years.

 

[Brian2]

There is no "other archaeology"? There are a few ideas backed by one team and then another guy used that to make a DVD series about how Exodus could be true? Please link to a source?
If you are picking on D.M. murdock and then are going to post some crank amateur archaeologist team who are "proving the Bible is true" yet no one else is finding any credibility in the work then that's going to be really hypocritical.

What is this "one team" you are talking about?

Yes, Israel copied myths from older cultures. So what is the point? Then during the 2nd Temple Period they really started doing it.

Sounds like an opinion that not everyone holds.

Dever, William G. (1993). "What Remains of the House That Albright Built?". The Biblical Archaeologist. University of Chicago Press. the overwhelming scholarly consensus today is that Moses is a mythical figure

Sounds like the truth is seen as the current consensus,,,,,,,,,,and that of course does not mean that everyone agrees.

Some believe hell is a metaphor, some believe it's literal, it's all over the place.

It is all over the place, just like the opinions about the Israel in Egypt and the conquest of Canaan.

 

[night912]

It requires faith to accept that only the natural world exists.

Correct. But you're forgetting something else, it does not require faith to accept that the natural world exists.

Some scientists believe the supernatural exists, some do not. They are people just like non scientists.

Correct again. But you're forgetting something again, those scientists who believes that the supernatural exists, does and/or uses science to try and understand reality, are not like the non scientists who believes that the supernatural exists and does and/or used pseudoscience to try and understand reality.

Science uses a naturalistic methodology but science does not say that the supernatural does not exist.

Correct once again. But once again, you're forgetting something. Science uses a naturalistic methodology, that's why science say that the supernatural cannot be demonstrated using science, eventhough some non scientists arrogantly say that it can.

 

[Brian2]

I am not denying that some parts of the Bible have been verified as being "historical", and they are mostly in the Books of Kings, where Assyrian records confirmed the reigns of contemporary kings of Israel or Judah, like the war of Ahaz with Pekah and Rezin, and Tiglath-Pileser III's invention, attacking Samaria and Damascus (2 Kings 15:29 & 2 Kings 16:5-9) plus Tiglath-Pileser demanding tribute from Ahaz for aiding Judah. Assyrian annals of Tiglath-Pileser recorded the parts he played in the war.

Things like that confirmation and others tend to confirm the true historical nature of all of the books of Kings.

There are no writings of the Old Testament books older than the late 7th or early 6th century Ketef Hinnom scrolls.

I suppose that means that you think the Hebrew text was written then.

There is only one mention of Israel in the late 13th century, by Merneptah (1213 - 1203 BCE), called the Merneptah Stele, that commemorating his victory against Canaan and Israel.

That means the Israel was a political entity worthy of a mention by an Egyptian Pharaoh when the scholars say that the Exodus happened (or whatever other theories they have for Israel coming to Canaan)

 

[IndigoChild5559]

OK, they say water had been on Mars. But the photo of Mars I saw in a journal really showed that the words used to describe the scene might be barren, waste or void. Rocks and lots of them. So the question is -- how do you think Moses knew the earth, at the beginning, was "waste and void;"? (American Standard Version, Genesis 1:2) You think he figured it out that it might have looked that way, although he saw greenery, and animals? I'm also figuring that he couldn't see much on Mars at that point. So how did Moses know the earth's surface was just plain not filled with life as he saw it? Just general reasoning? Of course, the Bible does say that star differs from star...and we know that planets themselves differ from each other.. but so far no one has discovered a planet like the earth as it is now, not conjecture, with trees and animals.

First of all, Moses didn't write Genesis. Second of all, Gen 1 is a creation myth, not a science text.

 

[gnostic]

First of all, Moses didn't write Genesis. Second of all, Gen 1 is a creation myth, not a science text.

Yes, to both points.

I would like to stress that the “myth” mean more than just a fiction.

Myths are narratives that have important meanings, expressed in symbolic stories, just like allegory or fable or parable, that have moral messages for the readers and believers.

In the case of Creation in Genesis 2 & 3, I see multiple messages, such as don’t disobey god and to accept responsibility for one’s own action...in another word, the message is “don’t sin”.

In Genesis 3, Adam blamed Eve, and Eve blamed the serpent, instead of accepting their responsibilities for their own actions.

I think that these messages are on-going themes, repeating throughout the Jewish Torah or Christian Pentateuch.

By accepting whatever sins each person may have committed, in some of these sins, with Hebrew Scriptures, there may be rooms for atonement and forgiveness.

I think the importance of the creation stories, is to find and understand these moral messages, and not focus so much on trying to justify these stories as historical records or as science treatises, a mistake frequently repeating by creationists.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Yes, to both points.

I would like to stress that the “myth” mean more than just a fiction.

Myths are narratives that have important meanings, expressed in symbolic stories, just like allegory or fable or parable, that have moral messages for the readers and believers.

In the case of Creation in Genesis 2 & 3, I see multiple messages, such as don’t disobey god and to accept responsibility for one’s own action...in another word, the message is “don’t sin”.

In Genesis 3, Adam blamed Eve, and Eve blamed the serpent, instead of accepting their responsibilities for their own actions.

I think that these messages are on-going themes, repeating throughout the Jewish Torah or Christian Pentateuch.

By accepting whatever sins each person may have committed, in some of these sins, with Hebrew Scriptures, there may be rooms for atonement and forgiveness.

I think the importance of the creation stories, is to find and understand these moral messages, and not focus so much on trying to justify these stories as historical records or as science treatises, a mistake frequently repeating by creationists.

I agree with you about myth. Myth is perhaps the most powerful form of literature there is. We teach our most deeply held values via myth. I am always recommending people read "On Fairy Stories" by JRR Tolkien to increase their appreciation for myth.

 

[gnostic]

I agree with you about myth. Myth is perhaps the most powerful form of literature there is. We teach our most deeply held values via myth. I am always recommending people read "On Fairy Stories" by JRR Tolkien to increase their appreciation for myth.

For 20 years of my life, since 1st reading Genesis, I actually took the creation story as being literally true, but at that time, I didn’t try to equate Bible with history or with science...but not because I consider the Bible as myths, because again, “at that time”, I didn’t have the understanding of mythology as I do 20 years later.

Before I began my website Timeless Myths in 1999, I only thought of myths as fascinating ancient stories, but I didn’t really understand their cultural significances.

But as I worked on my website - reading, researching and writing - I learned why ancient people created these stories.

Since they weren’t historians, one purpose to writing myths, was themselves a cultural or even a national identity that reflect who they were.

The other purposes I have already spoke of in my last reply to you, tell stories that teach their society, moral messages of how they should conduct themselves, like codes of conduct, and what behavior or action they should avoid.

The Hebrew Torah, do both. It is both cultural stories as well as moral teachings. It was and still is the inspiration for the Jewish people.

Now, I may not always agree the Bible, especially how stories were interpreted, or its teachings (more Christian teachings than Jewish teachings, because I have more exposure to church teachings due to where I lived), but I do respect that was the ways the Jews lived at that time, when the Exodus and Genesis were composed.

I think some Christians, especially creationists, have forgotten that. They tried to push modern contexts into ancient myths, by elevating their bible as science treatises or inerrant historical records. Doing this, only exposed the Bible’s weaknesses in these areas, exposed it scrutiny that the Bible were never intended for.

This thread that @YoursTrue started, is exactly the example of exposure that were never intended in the books of Genesis and Exodus.

 

[joelr]

I realize what some other people are saying. But again -- I see no real evidence that Moses did not exist, or that he did not write about what was happening.

Uh, I just gave you some quotes by some expert scholars. scholars who understand that there is real evidence that Moses did not exist. Because you sitting around at home and at church don't see this shouldn't be a reason to say that?
What have you read on the subject? Do you even try to educate yourself? To say "I see no real evidence...:" sounds like you have been studying the Archaeology field and historicity.
Because personally I see no real evidence of many things scholarship and science says. But that has no bearing on what is true? I'm not actually looking for a Higgs Boson and have seen no evidence. But I'm pretty sure science has good reason to declare they found it.

 

[joelr]

The evidence are the photos of a completely barren (matter of description) surface.

No I meant evidence of religious things being real.

 

[joelr]

There are others who say that the Bible speaks for itself.

What does that even mean? There are no historical scholars who say what you think this means.
Some current thoughts from modern historians:

"Van Seter and Thompson's works were a paradigm shift in biblical scholarship and archaeology, which gradually led scholars to no longer consider the patriarchal narratives as historical."
Some conservative scholars attempted to defend the patriarchal narratives in the following years,[46][47] but this position has not found acceptance among scholars.[48][6]

Today, only a minority of scholars continue to work within this framework, mainly for reasons of religious conviction.[49] William Dever stated in 1993 that

[Albright's] central theses have all been overturned, partly by further advances in biblical criticism, but mostly by the continuing archaeological research of younger Americans and Israelis to whom he himself gave encouragement and momentum. ...The irony is that, in the long run, it will have been the newer "secular" archaeology that contributed the most to Biblical studies, not "Biblical archaeology".


"Mainstream scholarship no longer accepts the biblical Exodus account as history for a number of reasons. Most scholars agree that the Exodus stories reached the current form centuries after the apparent setting of the stories."

"Many scholars believe that the Deuteronomistic history preserved elements of ancient texts and oral tradition, including geo-political and socio-economic realities and certain information about historical figures and events. However, large portions of it are legendary and it contains many anachronisms."

"The Books of Samuel are considered to be based on both historical and legendary sources, primarily serving to fill the gap in Israelite history after the events described in Deuteronomy. The battles involving the destruction of the Canaanites are not supported by archaeological record, and it is now widely believed that the Israelites themselves originated as a sub-group of Canaanites.[78][79][80] The Books of Samuel exhibit too many anachronisms to have been compiled in the 11th century BCE.["


"
Much of the focus of modern criticism has been the historicity of the United Monarchy of Israel, which according to the Hebrew Bible ruled over both Judea and Samaria around the 10th century BCE. Thomas L. Thompson, a leading minimalist scholar for example, has written:

There is no evidence of a United Monarchy, no evidence of a capital in Jerusalem or of any coherent, unified political force that dominated western Palestine, let alone an empire of the size the legends describe. We do not have evidence for the existence of kings named Saul, David or Solomon; nor do we have evidence for any temple at Jerusalem in this early period. What we do know of Israel and Judah of the tenth century does not allow us to interpret this lack of evidence as a gap in our knowledge and information about the past, a result merely of the accidental nature of archeology. There is neither room nor context, no artifact or archive that points to such historical realities in Palestine's tenth century. One cannot speak historically of a state without a population. Nor can one speak of a capital without a town. Stories are not enough."

Historicity of the Bible - Wikipedia

I've been looking into what some scholars are saying, and some (not all of course) say that there is much within the pages of the Bible that demonstrate the historicity of the record. Naturally not everything can be proven, or shown in other ways.

What scholars? Historians are attempting to find some history, some glimpses of what early Israel was actually like. The supernatural stories are not considered history at all. The creation and flood tales are re-writes of Mesopotamian myths. Moses getting laws on stone is a common Egyptian manner of getting laws carved in stone from a deity. Nothing new there.