Tags
Archaeology, Catholic, Catholicism, Christian, history, Moses, story, writing
I began to be interested in the topic after conversations with several Atheists who make the claim that Moses isn’t real. In fact, these gentlemen would make the claim that the historical consensus has dictated that Moses is a myth.[1] In this regard, they would be correct, the historical consensus would indicate that the Exodus account didn’t take place. However, when presented with contrary evidence, the atheist scholar indicates that they will only accept unbiased work, which means they will only accept a historical thesis by a none Abrahamic believer. The truth of the matter though is that all people have biases when it comes to forming the narrative and conclusions on historical events, a historian learns this in historiography 101. It’s natural that the secular scholar will not actively search for a result that contradicts their beliefs, but expects scholars of faith to do so.
Where’s the evidence? Now, this isn’t a philosophical discussion that relies on the metaphysical like the discussion whether there is a supreme being or not. The thesis being discussed is whether Moses was a living breathing actor in the temporal world. The secular assertion is mostly based on the lack of archaeological evidence, notwithstanding, I personally, as one who has operated in the field of history, do not believe that archaeology has the final say on all events—especially ones where archaeological evidence would be hard pressed to find—in deserts spanning over three thousand years. This debate is as important, if not more, than the metaphysical debate of the existence of God. The ramifications, of course, are that those who wish to discredit the historicity of Moses expand their assertion to the understanding that if Moses is fictional then Christianity is fiction, due largely to the Transfiguration of Christ, among other events. It’s important for our ability to make fishers of men to refute such secular biased scholarship. Egyptologist K.A. Kitchen writes, “Throughout the Hebrew Bible, there is no single event (or theme, if the status of ‘event’ be denied) to which its various writers hark back so pervasively as the tradition of the ancestral Israelites being liberated from servitude in Egypt, then forming a community under their deliverer deity YHWH.”[2]
Scholars to fully consider whether Moses is truly a historic actor must understand that it’s certainly okay as scholars, and furthermore as the faithful, to disregard the consensus, especially if one is seeking to argue against it. There are other modern scholars who have argued for the case for a historical Moses and are basing their findings on archaeological evidence. One of them by the name of Gerard Gertoux who is Ph.D. candidate in France, who based on his biography at Academic.edu has been black balled by French academia, not by his dissertation on Moses and Exodus, but because he is a Jehovah Witness. Gertoux has published another essay on the topic writing:
“Some atheists refuse to take into account the Bible because that book states clearly the existence of God as well as miracles. However, in my opinion, searching the truth must be the fundamental purpose of any honest historian.“What is truth” Pilate said to Jesus (Jn 18:38). For honest and scientific historians, “truth” is based on two main pillars: 1) an accurate chronology anchored on absolute dates(Herodotus’ principle) and 2) reliable documents coming from critical editions(Thucydides’ principle)”[3]
Again, as one who has worked in the field of history, I thoroughly support Gertoux on the above statement. After explaining what Gertoux considers truth he runs through a list of scholarly experts making claims that the Exodus story and Moses are fiction.
Here is an example:
Modern archaeology has shown that the concept of archives kept in Jerusalem with writings of the tenth century, is an absurdity based on a biblical witness and not on factual evidence. Bible stories would rank therefore among national mythologies, and would have no more historical foundation than the Homeric saga of Ulysses, or that of Aeneas, founder of Rome, sung by Virgil –Israel Finkelstein, Israeli archaeologist[4]
Gertoux makes a clear distinction in his essay by stating, “An objective reader should note that most reasons put forward by these prestigious scholars are ideological, not based on any verifiable factual data”[5]
Now it’s important to note that I am not necessarily endorsing Gertoux’s thesis, if this were the case I wouldn’t be interested in researching the topic myself. However, I do agree with is introductory comments on the topic. Here is his thesis:
“According to Egyptian accounts the last king of the XV the dynasty, named Apopi, “very pretty” in Hebrew that is Moses’ birth name (Ex 2:2), reigned 40 years in Egypt from 1613 to 1573 BCE, then 40 years later hemet Seqenenre Taa the last pharaoh of the XVII the dynasty and gave him an unspecified disturbing message.”[6]
However, there are two particulars of the debate that I would like to discuss and one of them is the term myth. The modern understanding of this word often renders that anything labeled as a myth is fiction; however, this is an incomplete definition of the word. Most ancient oral traditions that would be considered myths effectively conveyed truth to folks who continued to tell the events–a method that was vital before the advent of writing. The Book of Exodus, and the Bible, are not supposed to be read as a historical account per say. It’s merely an account, albeit a cultural one that is a reflection of those who wrote it, of the revelation of God to man. Thus, it is the empiricists who have difficulty understanding that with those who continue to look to this collection of books that appear to reject empirical evidence for valuable information. Empiricists will do their best to dismiss the entirety of the Bible as a credible source, but they negate the fact that it was written by authors who would have recorded events from oral histories that predate the invention of modern historical research and writing. The second part, perhaps broken into subparts, is that does Christianity—due to the Transfiguration—require Moses to be truly historic, and how much of the account of Exodus has to be factual due to oral traditions? (An important point throughout the entire Exodus narrative)
[1] William G. Dever ‘What Remains of the House That Albright Built?,’ in George Ernest Wright, Frank Moore Cross, Edward Fay Campbell, Floyd Vivian Filson (eds.) The Biblical Archaeologist, American Schools of Oriental Research, Scholars Press, Vol. 56, No 1, 2 March 1993 pp.25-35, p.33:’the overwhelming scholarly consensus today is that Moses is a mythical figure.’
[2] K.A. Kitchen On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 2003), 241.
[3] Gertoux, Gerard. “Moses and the Exodus: What Evidence?” Moses and the Exodus: What Evidence? Accessed March 24, 2016. https://www.academia.edu/13001480/Moses_and_the_Exodus_what_evidence.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid.
Josephus and others held that Moses, owing to his position as foster son in the royal family, rose to the position of general and led a campaign against the Nubians. If the Exodus happened c. 1446 BC, and the Exodus was c. 40 years after Moses fled Egypt (we have to be careful with round numbers in the Bible, of course), then we would be looking for a campaign against Nubia during the reign of Thutmose I, or Thutmose II or Hatshepsut or Thutmose III. This tradition of Moses as general is not found in the Bible itself, so we are not bound by it, but it is plausible.
A good circumstantial case can be made for the Exodus. The ‘Apiru mentioned in the Amarna letters may well be Israel in the period of the Conquest/Judges when they were not fully established as a nation. The reference to “tents” in the Barak/Deborah episode suggests that many Israelites were semi-nomadic at this time (which would be a natural extension of their life during the wilderness wanderings), so they would fit the profile of the ‘Apiru and Shasu.
LikeLiked by 3 people
There is also a reference to curses poured out by the gods of Egypt on the Pharoah if he does not perform his duties properly from the time of Akhenaten/Tutankhamun (https://amazingbibletimeline.com/blog/was-king-tut-the-pharaoh-of-the-exodus/) – these curses look suspiciously like the 10 Plagues. Perhaps this is a memory amongst the Egyptians of the Exodus.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Exodus is a hodgepodge of many traditions. I took a class on Geomythology and there is a lot of evidence for the 10 plagues of Egypt. However, it may have been added to flavor the account. The Song of Miriam for example predates much of the rest of the text by some time.
Again, all we need though are Hebrews in Egypt that left Egypt for Canaan. If the other authorship dates Babylonian Captivity then It certainly doesn’t concern me if these inconsistencies.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That’s really interesting, never heard of that account of Moses.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Those names do appear in Gertoux’s work on Academia.edu. He’s a French Ph.d student that the French government has been persecuting due to his religion faith, a seventh-day Adventist. From a strict historical perspective his research seems sound, but as education in France has ties with the state, it appears the state isn’t interested in Exodus positive research.
Of course it’s pure speculation, However, Josephus’ view, being a Jew, should at least illuminate a tradition or an oral history that was circulated in ancient Israel. Furthermore, in regards to Scripture, the writers, inspired by God, are primarily concerned with the revelation of God. Moses being a general for the Egyptians, a foreign power, may not have say well with any writers during Babylonian captivity, if one dates Exodus to this period. Although, perhaps Moses’ striking down the Egyptian in defense of the Hebrew served better the revelation of God’s plan.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Correction: Gertoux is a Jehovah Witness .
LikeLiked by 1 person
Important correction – for us. From what I read, for the French, irrelevant, as long as he’s not a secularist, it hardly matters. Fascinating article, Philip
LikeLiked by 1 person
NEO, have you heard from C lately?
LikeLike
Not directly, but then neither has he, me. I see him in passing on Twitter and such. He sounds OK, just busy. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
An interesting side note is the price paid for Joseph in Genesis: 20 shekels of silver (the shekel is a unit of weight). This is correct for the “Patriarchal Period”, but is incorrect for earlier periods and for later ones – e.g. the Persian period when much of the OT was redacted, and some of it composed.
I would also recommend reading about the “stratigraphy” of the Iliad, which forms a nice parallel to the processes that shaped the Bible. Parts of the Iliad reflect a Bronze Age view of iron, and other parts reflect and Iron Age view of iron, indicating that the text was redacted.
LikeLike
This interview is worth watching:
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2017/01/08/ABR-Associate-Dr-Doug-Petrovich-Reveals-Ancient-Moses-Inscription.aspx#Article
LikeLike
“Again, as one who has worked in the field of history”
Where were you when the morning stars sang together and the sons of God shouted for joy? If you have wisdom, declare it.
LikeLike