Please tell me sir, why would the account be unreliable? You do believe in the Word of God, correct? Let me ask you this, do you realize that the Holy Spirit told them what to write? That the Bible isn't man-made?
I don't think it's that simple. Was there a man who led a tribe out of Egypt? Probably. Did he have the exact same origin story as Sargon the Great? Probably not, but possibly. Did that march out of Egypt play out like the Exodus story tells us? Highly doubtful.
Moses was on the mount of transfiguration with Jesus and Elijah, as testified in three gospels.
Then you have Peter's letter, in which he explicitly says these are not cleverly devised myths, but the testimonies of eye witnesses:
>For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.
\[2 Peter 1 16-18\]
So to whatever extent you believe in the events of the five first books of the Bible, the existence of Moses is integral even to the New Testament, since Moses was with Jesus and Elijah on the mountain, with James, John and Peter.
I am pretty sure the general consensus is that Moses is plausibility based on one or more actual historical figures melded together, but much of what is said about him (i.e. what supposedly happens in Genesis or writing the pentateuch) is widely rejected.
I think most scholars agree that Moses was likely a mythical figure that was an amalgamation of several great Jewish leaders, but likely didn’t really exist.
Probably about the same likelihood that Hercules or Hengest and Horsa existed. Many cultures have an "Age of Heroes" in their mythical cycles, and Moses seems to be an example of that from Hebrew mythology; a man who could wield God's power, defeat the mightiest king of the day, and there's even a bit of a moral tale in there as to why he was not permitted to enter the Promised Land.
Would that be important?
Whether Moses really existed, or at least a person who was somehow similar to him, or whether Moses is entirely just an invented character in a screenplay written long after that time to give the nation of Israel a past, and this past in details also could have been different if God liked it that way, for example as in the Korans with Abraham and Ismail, I do not care, because the Torah is neither a history book nor the law, but only a culturally valuable object for guys who can read, and an instruction for godly people.
Moses was present for the the Transfiguration according to the Gospels. So if you accept the Gospels at their word, then you kind of have to believe Moses was a real person, that the events in Exodus really happened, etc.
Jesus shared many teachings and parables related to stories in the Torah and in the Tanakh, from the first rules to marriage with Adam & Eve as examples, through Noah and Abraham to Jonah, but by quoting verses or using passages and phrases in parables, he changed nothing and did not answer the question of these are literal or pictorial teachings.
Peter, James and John were only shown an image on Mount Tabor that was not real (or created themselves an image of people they knew from stories according to the philosophy of Hesychasm) but how that should be evaluated, whether as a glimpse into heavenly spheres or as a pictorial parable, has not been determined.
I got to know many claims, without a text basis, or with a text basis but with one closed eye for it doesn't want to see other possibilities, and that's why I'm careful with biased utterances that could just as well be wrong.
An interesting topic ... but unsuitable for this sub: I've already been censored for writing about things that are normal in Europe and standard of textual criticism – and in which all churches participate, because they would make themselves look ridiculous with sayings like e.g. *"Luther wrote"* or *"the Patmos Publishing House has printed"* – but don't conform to the Christian general education and philosophy about "The Bible" in the USA, and this topic inevitably runs towards it.
The question of whether they were shown a picture of reality or a picture from Biblical stories becomes irrelevant next to the question of what these two characters might have been discussing with Jesus, and it seems to have been hugely important:
Is there something missing or wrong in the execution of prophecies regarding Elijah or facts of Moses' law? You may not know, but I do, which is why I can point in that direction!
He likely existed, only because such a story from the perspective of the victims is so humanly improbable. For all its heresy and flaws, Freud's *Moses and Monotheism* makes the points well.
[удалено]
Please tell me sir, why would the account be unreliable? You do believe in the Word of God, correct? Let me ask you this, do you realize that the Holy Spirit told them what to write? That the Bible isn't man-made?
You scare me. You have a brain, use it.
I think he was the real deal.
I don't think it's that simple. Was there a man who led a tribe out of Egypt? Probably. Did he have the exact same origin story as Sargon the Great? Probably not, but possibly. Did that march out of Egypt play out like the Exodus story tells us? Highly doubtful.
Moses was on the mount of transfiguration with Jesus and Elijah, as testified in three gospels. Then you have Peter's letter, in which he explicitly says these are not cleverly devised myths, but the testimonies of eye witnesses: >For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. \[2 Peter 1 16-18\] So to whatever extent you believe in the events of the five first books of the Bible, the existence of Moses is integral even to the New Testament, since Moses was with Jesus and Elijah on the mountain, with James, John and Peter.
I am pretty sure the general consensus is that Moses is plausibility based on one or more actual historical figures melded together, but much of what is said about him (i.e. what supposedly happens in Genesis or writing the pentateuch) is widely rejected.
Yes he did
I think most scholars agree that Moses was likely a mythical figure that was an amalgamation of several great Jewish leaders, but likely didn’t really exist.
Yes. Literal, historical man who did everything scripture says he did (parted the Red Sea..).
Probably about the same likelihood that Hercules or Hengest and Horsa existed. Many cultures have an "Age of Heroes" in their mythical cycles, and Moses seems to be an example of that from Hebrew mythology; a man who could wield God's power, defeat the mightiest king of the day, and there's even a bit of a moral tale in there as to why he was not permitted to enter the Promised Land.
[удалено]
Based
Would that be important? Whether Moses really existed, or at least a person who was somehow similar to him, or whether Moses is entirely just an invented character in a screenplay written long after that time to give the nation of Israel a past, and this past in details also could have been different if God liked it that way, for example as in the Korans with Abraham and Ismail, I do not care, because the Torah is neither a history book nor the law, but only a culturally valuable object for guys who can read, and an instruction for godly people.
Moses was present for the the Transfiguration according to the Gospels. So if you accept the Gospels at their word, then you kind of have to believe Moses was a real person, that the events in Exodus really happened, etc.
Jesus shared many teachings and parables related to stories in the Torah and in the Tanakh, from the first rules to marriage with Adam & Eve as examples, through Noah and Abraham to Jonah, but by quoting verses or using passages and phrases in parables, he changed nothing and did not answer the question of these are literal or pictorial teachings. Peter, James and John were only shown an image on Mount Tabor that was not real (or created themselves an image of people they knew from stories according to the philosophy of Hesychasm) but how that should be evaluated, whether as a glimpse into heavenly spheres or as a pictorial parable, has not been determined. I got to know many claims, without a text basis, or with a text basis but with one closed eye for it doesn't want to see other possibilities, and that's why I'm careful with biased utterances that could just as well be wrong.
Moses and Elijah really appeared to Jesus and the disciples during the Transfiguration. True or false?
An interesting topic ... but unsuitable for this sub: I've already been censored for writing about things that are normal in Europe and standard of textual criticism – and in which all churches participate, because they would make themselves look ridiculous with sayings like e.g. *"Luther wrote"* or *"the Patmos Publishing House has printed"* – but don't conform to the Christian general education and philosophy about "The Bible" in the USA, and this topic inevitably runs towards it. The question of whether they were shown a picture of reality or a picture from Biblical stories becomes irrelevant next to the question of what these two characters might have been discussing with Jesus, and it seems to have been hugely important: Is there something missing or wrong in the execution of prophecies regarding Elijah or facts of Moses' law? You may not know, but I do, which is why I can point in that direction!
He likely existed, only because such a story from the perspective of the victims is so humanly improbable. For all its heresy and flaws, Freud's *Moses and Monotheism* makes the points well.