The Moses Story is a Puzzling Affair From Start to Finnish.

Author: Stephen ,

Posts

Total: 78
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Leaving aside baskets, bulrushes & bullshit, the  story of Moses doesn't make sense in many parts and for many reasons. Here are some of those reasons

God  tells Moses to go free his people but then has to get permission from his father-in law to do so. Why?
God knows that Pharaoh will not let them go because God admit to purposely hardening the heart of Pharaoh. Why? 
God wants Moses dead all over a foreskin. Why ? 

I will here preempt all and any responses that I don't need to hear.

(1) From the literalist: who am I/we to question God.  Translation; 'I don't know'.

(2) From  the Christian non literalist:  It says that but it actaully means this. Translation;  I don't know, but am going to invent an answer so I do not look to be ignorant of my own scriptures'.

(3) from the Christian dogmatist:  We don't just have faith but dogma - Translation;  the faithful have an unwarranted stubborness of opinion and are very poor at hiding it.

(4) from the Jew & Christian:  It is a mistake and we have to make the obvious assumption. Translation;  'we don't know, but I won't admit to not knowing'.


Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
And why cannot the bible make up its mind who Moses' father in-law is? 
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
Translation: give me something I can argue with.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @Mopac

Translation: give me something I can argue with.
Just as I suspected, you don't know and you fit the standard explained here below.

(1) From the literalist: who am I/we to question God.  Translation; 'I don't know'.

(2) From  the Christian non literalist:  It says that but it actaully means this. Translation;  I don't know, but am going to invent an answer so I do not look to be ignorant of my own scriptures'.

(3) from the Christian dogmatist:  We don't just have faith but dogma - Translation;  the faithful have an unwarranted stubborness of opinion and are very poor at hiding it.

(4) from the Jew & Christian:  It is a mistake and we have to make the obvious assumption. Translation;  'we don't know, but I won't admit to not knowing'.

The fact is you simply do not know do you? You have probably never read the parts that I have pointed out because your teacher didn't tell you to turn to those verses and then translate them for you as is customary for a teacher who wants to avoid being questioned and scrutinised on a subject he should know  about.
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
--> @Stephen
Keep frothing at the mouth, it makes people take you seriously.

disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
--> @Stephen
The Moses story is absolute fiction.
keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,053
2
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
2
3
3
--> @disgusted
The Moses story is absolute fiction.
I'd say that everything upto Judges has almost zero histroricity.  Kings has some connection with real events and people, and the latest books of the OT (ezra/nehemiah) are almost straight history.   There is a definite trend there.
 

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @Mopac
Keep frothing at the mouth, it makes people take you seriously.

That will come under number one of non explanations.

(1) From the literalist: who am we to question God.  Translation; 'I don't know'.

Translation: give me something I can argue with.
 It is not for me to help you explain away these ambiguous verses. That is your job. And you obviously missed the fact that it is explanations that I am looking for not necessarily an argument.

God  tells Moses to go free his people but then has to get permission from his father-in law to do so. Why?
God knows that Pharaoh will not let them go because God admits to purposely hardening the heart of Pharaoh. Why? 
God wants Moses dead all over a foreskin. Why ? 
And why cannot the bible make up its mind who Moses' father in-law is? 

Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
--> @Stephen
No one cares.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @Mopac

No one cares.


That comes under number one of non explanations.

(1) From the literalist: who are we to question God.  Translation; 'I don't know.

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @keithprosser
 I'd say that everything up to Judges has almost zero historicity.

Why?
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
--> @Stephen
No, my beef is that no matter what answer you receive you are going to put it in one of those categories.

You have your mind made up, and you are simply making a mockery of the subject.


Which is a shame, because some of these would otherwise be good questions. If your intentions were pure, you'd get alot more. Instead you want to be a wanker.

So this is what you get.

Wank


disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
--> @Mopac
You just have no answers and you either don't understand that or you are a compulsive liar.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @Mopac
No, my beef is that no matter what answer you receive you are going to put it in one of those categories.

 Your above response comes under at least three of those categories.


You have your mind made up, and you are simply making a mockery of the subject.

No I haven't. That is why all end with the question why and a question mark. I would like you or any other of the faithful flock simply to explain them.


Which is a shame, because some of these would otherwise be good questions.

Questions are neither good or bad, they are just questions. They are questions that you should be able to approach without calling me a "wanker". 



If your intentions were pure, you'd get alot more. Instead you want to be a wanker.

What you think of me is irrelevant. i don't care. I want you, as a proud member and supporter of the Catholic Orthodox Church to explain to me WHY,

God  tells Moses to go free his people but then has to get permission from his father-in law to do so. ?
God knows that Pharaoh will not let them go because God admits to purposely hardening the heart of Pharaoh.? 
God wants Moses dead all over a foreskin ? 
And why cannot the bible make up its mind who Moses' father in-law is? 

Wank

Not very Christian-like, but I think that would come under the new category of ignorant replies - i.e. 


 'I don't know the answers to your awkward questions and I am far too embarrassed to try to explain something I do not understand or know ; Unless you will let me get away with making something up like we always do when we believers have our backs to the wall.'?






zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,540
3
3
3
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
3
--> @Stephen
Believers believe what they were told to believe. 

keithprosser
keithprosser's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,053
2
3
3
keithprosser's avatar
keithprosser
2
3
3
--> @Stephen
 I'd say that everything up to Judges has almost zero historicity.
Why?


I think there is trend running across the histotrical books of the OT such that we start with genesis full of legends, miracles and  magic which often runs counter to common-sense and archeologial evidence but end with Nehemiah and Ezra which have no magic or miracles at all and are generally consistent with other sources.









Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @keithprosser

I'd say that everything up to Judges has almost zero historicity.......
We start with genesis full of legends, miracles and  magic


So you believe then, Exodus -  Leviticus - Numbers - Deuteronomy and Joshua are all fiction?

So you are claiming then that the characters and places and events in the first 5 books of the Old Testament are all fiction?

So educated scholars such as Ahmed Osam , Dr  David Rohl,  Sir Laurence Gardner - to name a few - are all delusional in your opinion and have simply wasted absolute years - some a lifetime - inventing evidence to support the existence of the Old Testament characters, places and events? The last two being atheist.

You are dismissing people who are in a much better position than you to discuss these things far too easily, but you are more than welcome to that ignorant opinion.

But you see, biblical scholars and archaeologist look past those thing that you refer to as " legends, miracles and  magic" and strive to discover what it is that lies behind these "legends, miracles and  magic". Where as you, like many other ignorant fkrs just simply dismiss these biblical accounts as you do the findings of those above mentioned scholars,with a wave of your ignorant hand. 
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
--> @Stephen
This would seem to rule out Exodus.

There is an almost universal consensus among scholars that the Exodus story is best understood as myth;[36] more specifically, it is a "charter" (or foundation) myth, a story told to explain a society's origins and to provide the ideological foundation for its culture and institutions.[1] While some continue to discuss the potential historicity or plausibility of the Exodus story, the overwhelming majority have abandoned it as "a fruitless pursuit" (Dever, 2001).[37][38] There is no indication that the Israelites ever lived in Ancient Egypt, and the Sinai Peninsula shows no sign of any occupation for the entire 2nd millennium BCE (even Kadesh-Barnea, where the Israelites are said to have spent 38 years, was uninhabited prior to the establishment of the Israelite monarchy).[39] In contrast to the absence of evidence for the Egyptian captivity and wilderness wanderings, there are ample signs of Israel's evolution within Canaan from native Canaanite roots.[40][41] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Exodus

Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
I hope your not running away from this one




Why would I run away from my own threads,. I am not your best new and only friend, prosser who actually has a track record for such behaviour of abandoning his threads.
 I am still waiting for anyone to explain those questions posed in the OP. I am not in the slightest interested in your wikki link. The argument here is not if the stories are true or not. The argument is why are these ambiguous verses in the OT without any explanation that I can see. But you are far too ignorant to understand what a retarded sea sponge would grasp without a problem, you repugnant, vile specimen.

If you want to start a thread on the veracity of OT stories, then be my guest. 
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
--> @Stephen
It proves that the Exodus story is pure fiction but your not interested in truth, you poor thing.
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
--> @disgusted
It proves that the Exodus story is pure fiction

 OK. Then Start your own fkn thread on why you believe that the OT stories are based on nothing and are pure fiction. You could even have a stab at breaking down your pointless wiki link for all of us to discuss. Go on now, off you trot, you have lot of work to do.




but your not interested in truth, you poor thing.

Your opinion of me goes nowhere in explaining those questions posed in the op or did you miss what I wrote above. here you g>>

I am still waiting for anyone to explain those questions posed in the OP. I am not in the slightest interested in your wikki link. The argument here is not if the stories are true or not. The argument is why are these ambiguous verses in the OT without any explanation that I can see. But you are far too ignorant to understand what a retarded sea sponge would grasp without a problem, you repugnant, vile specimen.
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
--> @Stephen
You could even have a stab at breaking down your pointless wiki link for all of us to discuss.
I think you should get the nearest child to explain it to you.

The argument here is not if the stories are true or not.
But you did argue for their truth, look here:

So you believe then, Exodus -  Leviticus - Numbers - Deuteronomy and Joshua are all fiction?

So you are claiming then that the characters and places and events in the first 5 books of the Old Testament are all fiction?

So educated scholars such as Ahmed Osam , Dr  David Rohl,  Sir Laurence Gardner - to name a few - are all delusional in your opinion and have simply wasted absolute years - some a lifetime - inventing evidence to support the existence of the Old Testament characters, places and events? The last two being atheist.

You are dismissing people who are in a much better position than you to discuss these things far too easily, but you are more than welcome to that ignorant opinion.

But you see, biblical scholars and archaeologist look past those thing that you refer to as " legends, miracles and  magic" and strive to discover what it is that lies behind these "legends, miracles and  magic". Where as you, like many other ignorant fkrs just simply dismiss these biblical accounts as you do the findings of those above mentioned scholars,with a wave of your ignorant hand. 

Who produces the vile posts? Oh it's you, poor little thing.
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
--> @Stephen
Why would I run away from my own threads,. I am not your best new and only friend, prosser who actually has a track record for such behaviour of abandoning his threads.
Below is your original response in the Atonement thread where you thought I was prosser, what's that all about?



Why would I run away from my own threads,. I am not your best new and only friend, prosser.




Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,838
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
You could even have a stab at breaking down your pointless wiki link for all of us to discuss.
I think you should get the nearest child to explain it to you.
 So you can't explain what it is that you have posted YOURSELF!!! so won't be starting a thread .No surprises there then.
So you believe then, Exodus -  Leviticus - Numbers - Deuteronomy and Joshua are all fiction?

So you are claiming then that the characters and places and events in the first 5 books of the Old Testament are all fiction?

So educated scholars such as Ahmed Osam , Dr  David Rohl,  Sir Laurence Gardner - to name a few - are all delusional in your opinion and have simply wasted absolute years - some a lifetime - inventing evidence to support the existence of the Old Testament characters, places and events? The last two being atheist.

You are dismissing people who are in a much better position than you to discuss these things far too easily, but you are more than welcome to that ignorant opinion.

But you see, biblical scholars and archaeologist look past those thing that you refer to as " legends, miracles and  magic" and strive to discover what it is that lies behind these "legends, miracles and  magic". Where as you, like many other ignorant fkrs just simply dismiss these biblical accounts as you do the findings of those above mentioned scholars,with a wave of your ignorant hand. 

Who produces the vile posts? Oh it's you, poor little thing.

I wouldn't call that Vile. I would call it fact. But you are entitled to your opinion.

Now, if you cannot address the op. simply fk off this thread because there is nothing you can add. 
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
--> @Stephen
You've lost again, as you have on every occasion you have attempted to duel with me, have you learned anything yet?
Whenever we have a battle of wits just try to remember that you are unarmed and I possess a nuclear arsenal. You may remember to avoid such a confrontation.