Did Moses Exist?

[POI]

I created the 'Exodus' thread here (viewtopic.php?t=40622), after being inspired to do so when Otseng made the (paraphrased) statement -- "if the Exodus did not happen, then we must question Biblical veracity".

From there, the topic of "Moses" ultimately came up; which is what I believe eventually prompted the follow-up topic, created here (viewtopic.php?t=42501).

However, since it seems to be imperative and crucial for Moses to be a real character, let us examine....?

For Debate:

1) As compared to other claimed figures from ancient antiquity, such as Alexander the Great, Pontius Pilate, and-the-like, how exactly does the claim(s) of "Moses" stack up as a real character? Meaning, if the (confidence-level) for Alexander and Pilate are fairly high, due to 'evidence(s)', how exactly does 'Moses' compare on the "confidence-meter"? (i.e.) Low, medium, high, or other?

2) If we have low-level confidence that a "Moses" really existed, as compared to other said characters from antiquity, does this jeopardize Biblical veracity claims in any way(s)?

3) Can one even logically remain a believer without accepting "Moses" as being a real dude from history?

4) Outside the Bible's say-so, what evidence suggests a "Moses" actually existed?

[bjs1]

1) As compared to other claimed figures from ancient antiquity, such as Alexander the Great, Pontius Pilate, and-the-like, how exactly does the claim(s) of "Moses" stack up as a real character? Meaning, if the (confidence-level) for Alexander and Pilate are fairly high, due to 'evidence(s)', how exactly does 'Moses' compare on the "confidence-meter"? (i.e.) Low, medium, high, or other?

Compared with Alexander the Great, the evidence for Moses is relatively low. However, Moses lived a millennium prior to Alexander.

It would be more accurate to compare Moses to Amuwanda I of the Hittites or Arhalba of Ugarit, who lived around the same time.

The most famous person from that time was probably Hammurabi of Babylon, creator of Hammurabi’s Code, who lived 100-200 years before Moses. If we take Hammurabi as the gold standard – 5 out of 5, we are certain this person existed – then I would say that the evidence for Moses is a 4 out of 5. For both men, we rely largely on national documents about them or references to them from other nations that were written after the men had died. If we discount this direct evidence, then what remains is the effect these men had on the culture and politics around them. Hammurabi had a broader effect on the culture in the short run than Moses did, but not by that much.

4) Outside the Bible's say-so, what evidence suggests a "Moses" actually existed?

The Israelites as a people became significant in the Middle East in the 13th century BC. The tribes of Israel had leaders. The Israelites said one of those leaders was Moses. If we say that Moses did not exist, then we create a hole in history where we know someone did exist and was active.

From a historian’s standpoint some of the events attributed to Moses may not have happened. However, the idea that Moses simply did not exist is highly unlikely.

[POI]

Compared with Alexander the Great, the evidence for Moses is relatively low. However, Moses lived a millennium prior to Alexander.

By using this applied rubric alone, then (compared to Jesus, the evidence for Alexander is relatively low). Further, many would argue there's more evidence for Alexander the Great's existence than for Pontius Pilate. Sure, ancient antiquity presents challenge(s), but by applying your given standard alone, we can quickly see some large holes in the logic.

It would be more accurate to compare Moses to Amuwanda I of the Hittites

See above...

Also, evidence for the existence of Amuwanda I of the Hittites comes primarily from archaeological findings, particularly in cuneiform texts. These texts provide insights into the Hittite civilization and its rulers. Cuneiform tablets, such as archaeological expeditions to Hattusa, the Hittite capital, uncovered royal archives with thousands of cuneiform tablets written in Akkadian (the diplomatic language) and various Hittite dialects.

In regard to historical and administrative texts, scholarly works such as the CTH (Catalogue des Textes Hittites), which include historical and administrative documents that mention rulers and events of the Hittite Kingdom, have also been located.

He was also mentioned in other archives. He is also referenced in diplomatic and commercial correspondence found in archives in Egypt and the Middle East, which seems to more-so reasonably justify his existence and interactions with neighboring powers. The texts recovered from these archaeological sites provide additional evidence for the existence of Amuwanda I, as well as other expressed Hittite rulers.

*********************************

Alternatively, there's a lack of conclusive archaeological or historical evidence outside the Biblical claim(s) to definitively confirm his existence as a historical individual. While some scholars argue for a historical basis for the "Exodus" narrative, pointing to possible connections with Egyptian history and culture, many scholars view "Moses" as a symbolic or mythological figure.

The most famous person from that time was probably Hammurabi of Babylon, creator of Hammurabi’s Code, who lived 100-200 years before Moses. If we take Hammurabi as the gold standard – 5 out of 5, we are certain this person existed – then I would say that the evidence for Moses is a 4 out of 5.

Are you sure about "Moses" being a 4/5? Really?

Hammurabi of Babylon's existence is known through various historical sources beyond the Code of Hammurabi itself, such as clay tablets found at other ancient sites, inscriptions on the Code stele, and mentions in other contemporary texts. These sources provide details about his military campaigns, interactions with other city-states, and even glimpses into his personality and governance style.

Alternatively, we have "Moses." Beyond the claim(s) from the Bible, which is a highly religious collection of text(s), which is also highly filled with the claims of the supernatural, what else do we have?

For both men, we rely largely on national documents about them or references to them from other nations that were written after the men had died. If we discount this direct evidence, then what remains is the effect these men had on the culture and politics around them. Hammurabi had a broader effect on the culture in the short run than Moses did, but not by that much.

See above... Further, the historicity of "Moses" is widely debated among scholars. While some believe he was a real person, possibly with a historical core, many scholars consider him a mythical or legendary figure, especially regarding the details of his life as described in the Bible. There is no conclusive evidence, such as Egyptian inscriptions or archaeological finds, to support the Biblical account of "Moses" and "the Exodus". Many scholars view the "Exodus" story as a national foundation myth, created to unify the Israelites.

The Israelites as a people became significant in the Middle East in the 13th century BC. The tribes of Israel had leaders. The Israelites said one of those leaders was Moses. If we say that Moses did not exist, then we create a hole in history where we know someone did exist and was active.

From a historian’s standpoint some of the events attributed to Moses may not have happened. However, the idea that Moses simply did not exist is highly unlikely.

See my response(s) above. Also, you raise an interesting topic... How much of the Torah necessitates an actual/factual account of historical events?

3) Can one even logically remain a believer without accepting "Moses" as being a real dude from history?

[1213]

...
4) Outside the Bible's say-so, what evidence suggests a "Moses" actually existed?

I think Senmut, or Senenmut was probably Moses, because of many similarities in the story.

"Is there evidence in Egyptian history or ancient Kemet, of the biblical narrative, showing Moses as a ruler. There seems to be a strong case for this. Scholars like Antonio Crasto are confident that Senenmut is in fact Moses. Let’s explore some parallels between each account...
...Hatshepsut, 5th Pharoah of the 18th Dynasty Moses’ first 40 years in Egypt would take us to 1486 BC. During this period of ancient Egyptian history there was the rise of a no name, commoner, who rose to the top ranks of Princedom, during the reign of Hatshepsut. She was the 5th Pharoah of the 18th Dynasty...
...During the time of Hatshepsut, who was a senior Pharoah, an individual from a lower class family, called Senenmut rises up ranks. He becomes the de-facto ruler of Egypt under Hatshepsut. This was rare. Joyce Tyldesley in her book on Hatshepsut, describes him as her confidant and the ‘Greatest of the Great’...
...Senenmut became the tutor for Hatshepsut’s daughter Neferure. The kingdom had control over Nubia, and he was known to go on military expeditions to places like Ethiopia. Likewise, 1st Century historian Flavius Josephus, wrote that Moses lead army to parts like Ethiopia and conquered...
...Senenmut built an impressive, huge mortuary temple for Hatshepsut in Egypt, as the master architecturer. Which is interesting because Moses also oversaw the construction of the tabernacle. Both structures had an outer courtyard, same type of pillars and a concept of a holy of holies. Also called Ḏsr-ḏsrw in Kemet.
Senenmut had a tomb built for him near the burial site, but it was never finished, but instead destroyed. Someone was clearly upset with him . So he wasn’t buried there. He also disappears in ancient Egyptian history around 1486 BC. In the biblical text, it says that Moses escaped after unaliving a Egyptian mistreating one of his Israelite brethren...."


Here is another good text about the similarities.

https://armstronginstitute.org/1041-is-this-moses

[earl]

Considering the question did Moses exist it must be recognized there is a difference between the commandments at Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 ,the paramount cornerstone of Moses' teachings ,in that this difference should not exist between the two except for a legit reason to create the difference.Moses is credited for making the change.

[earl]

Another point to consider is that the Hebrews did not have a written language in the Moses era.This contributes to hardly any written records of him.

[Difflugia]

Considering the question did Moses exist it must be recognized there is a difference between the commandments at Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 ,the paramount cornerstone of Moses' teachings ,in that this difference should not exist between the two except for a legit reason to create the difference.Moses is credited for making the change.

There's even a wider gulf between Exodus 20 and Exodus 34. According to Exodus 34:1, these two sets should be identical:

And Yahweh said to Moses, "Carve two tablets of stone like the first, and I will write upon the tablets the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke."

Note that this is the set that is called "the Ten Commandments" in Exodus. The Exodus 20 set isn't actually called that, but only the copy of it in Deuteronomy 5. Here are the Ten Commandments of Exodus 34:

1. Be careful not to make a covenant with the inhabitants of the lands you conquer. Destroy their holy sites and don't worship any other god, because Yahweh is a jealous god. (vv. 12-16)
2. Make no molten gods for yourselves. (v. 17)
3. Keep the feast of unleavened bread. (v. 18)
4. All the firstborn belong to Me. (vv. 19-20a)
5. Nobody shall appear before me without a sacrifice. (v. 20b)
6. Work six days, but rest on the seventh day. (v. 21)
7. The men shall appear before Yahweh three times during the year: the feast of weeks, the beginning of the wheat harvest, and the feast of gathering at the end of the year. (vv. 22-24)
8. Do not offer a blood sacrifice with leavened bread. (v. 25)
9. You will bring the first of every harvest into the temple of Yahweh. (v. 26a)
10. Do not boil a kid in its mother's milk. (v. 26b)

[earl]

Yes ,I see but did you find the difference between the two in that there is recognition of Moses credibility? Thus his credibility fo existence.

[Difflugia]

Yes ,I see but did you find the difference between the two in that there is recognition of Moses credibility? Thus his credibility fo existence.

I'm not sure what you're saying. Do you think that the differences make a real Moses more credible or less?

[POI]

I think Senmut, or Senenmut was probably Moses, because of many similarities in the story.

Speaking of similarities, isn't this just more evidence of Biblical authorship committing verisimilitude?

Before we go down this attempted road from the believer, I must preface....

Much like the previous topic created for which this topic was born -- (viewtopic.php?t=40622), one interlocutor attempted to directly link the Hyksos with the expressed Israelites from the Pentateuch. However, none of you believers came to the aid of this argument to support him. Instead, that topic resulted in the vast majority of you being okay with sticking to the position that 'absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence,' even though "the Exodus" is a very large claim which would leave tons of evidence.

In this case, the reign of Hatshepsutm verses the events surrounding "Moses", as described in the Bible, do not directly align. Even if you want to begin trying to directly link Senenmut with a 'Moses', then how much leeway do we grant the Biblical account, being most believers view the Pentateuch as being an accurate historical account of events? I mean, do we 1) just call it 'close enough', when claims differ a bit, or do we 2) assume the Bible is right, and the other accounts are wrong, or 3) other? Please plant your flag before I address your position.

Here is my current planted flag... My current hypothesis is that the authors of the Bible borrowed, enhanced, added, and augmented existing events from antiquity to taste, in order to unify their own people; especially since it seems to be quite clear that the Pentateuch expresses their believed upon Gpd to be a very tribal one at that towards their own people.

Your thoughts?