12 Oct 22
I had assumed that one of the first 5 books in the Old Testament would be the first written (presumably by Moses), but it's possible that Job is the oldest?
Some say that Genesis wasn't written until 1500BC.
Anyone know what's 'true'?
And does the credibility of what Moses wrote get questioned so many years after the fact?
@chaney3 said"The credibility of what Moses wrote" is a matter of faith rather than something that can be calibrated according to the time of writing or the age of the oldest surviving text. Almost all Jews, Muslims and Christians will be convinced of "the credibility of what Moses wrote" and this will mostly be impervious to observations by people that are not convinced. Just a thought.
I had assumed that one of the first 5 books in the Old Testament would be the first written (presumably by Moses), but it's possible that Job is the oldest?
Some say that Genesis wasn't written until 1500BC.
Anyone know what's 'true'?
And does the credibility of what Moses wrote get questioned so many years after the fact?
12 Oct 22
@chaney3 saidI believe Job was the oldest, Genesis is first in order of placement in OT, which has nothing to do with the oldest concerning age.
I had assumed that one of the first 5 books in the Old Testament would be the first written (presumably by Moses), but it's possible that Job is the oldest?
Some say that Genesis wasn't written until 1500BC.
Anyone know what's 'true'?
And does the credibility of what Moses wrote get questioned so many years after the fact?
12 Oct 22
@kellyjay saidSo technically, Satan's first mention would have been in the exchange with him and God in regards to Job..... before he was mentioned in the garden of Eden.
I believe Job was the oldest, Genesis is first in order of placement in OT, which has nothing to do with the oldest concerning age.
12 Oct 22
@chaney3 saidThat's a tough one. I'd say it would be either Job, Genesis, or Exodus. The stories in all of them were passed down by word of mouth or in songs, but it's hard to say which was actually written first.
I had assumed that one of the first 5 books in the Old Testament would be the first written (presumably by Moses), but it's possible that Job is the oldest?
Some say that Genesis wasn't written until 1500BC.
Anyone know what's 'true'?
And does the credibility of what Moses wrote get questioned so many years after the fact?
The credibility of what Moses wrote gets questioned after the fact quite often by non-believers, and even by some Jews and Christians as new archeological evidence is discovered. That's been going on for a long time.
12 Oct 22
@mchill saidIf there is an issue with the "credibility of what Moses wrote", then being a non-believer is perhaps a reasonable stance, and maybe a more solid one than lending credence to "stories ... passed down by word of mouth or in songs"... which have then been echo-chambered through hearsay and confirmation bias for millennia. Just a thought.
The credibility of what Moses wrote gets questioned after the fact quite often by non-believers, and even by some Jews and Christians as new archeological evidence is discovered.
12 Oct 22
@mchill saidas new archaeological evidence is discovered
That's a tough one. I'd say it would be either Job, Genesis, or Exodus. The stories in all of them were passed down by word of mouth or in songs, but it's hard to say which was actually written first.
The credibility of what Moses wrote gets questioned after the fact quite often by non-believers, and even by some Jews and Christians as new archeological evidence is discovered.
"The credibility of what Moses wrote" is subjective and a function of faith. I don't see how archaeological evidence could ever challenge or undermine the beliefs involved. I think the necessary faith needs to be weakening first before the archaeological evidence can start to affect one's perspective. I don't see how archaeological evidence, in and of itself, can be the cause of non-belief.
12 Oct 22
@fmf saidJust a thought.
If there is an issue with the "credibility of what Moses wrote", then being a non-believer is perhaps a reasonable stance, and maybe a more solid one than lending credence to "stories ... passed down by word of mouth or in songs"... which have then been echo-chambered through hearsay and confirmation bias for millennia. Just a thought.
It's an interesting thought, but as I stated here before, this "reasonable stance" may indeed make perfect sense, but when viewed through the lens of a power we have not the capacity to understand, it may not.
12 Oct 22
2 edits
@mchill saidI have been doffing my cap to those who have faith in "a power we have not the capacity to understand" but that faith, no matter how strong, does not enhance the "credibility of what Moses wrote".
It's an interesting thought, but as I stated here before, this "reasonable stance" may indeed make perfect sense, but when viewed through the lens of a power we have not the capacity to understand, it may not.
I see this thread and chaney3's OP as being about credibility rather than about whatever specific article of faith happens to be today's topic - in this case, "what Moses wrote".
Personal testimony about "a power we have not the capacity to understand" is fine, but it is an assertion that does not add anything nor does it subtract anything from the credibility of the claim that is being made.
12 Oct 22
@fmf saidfaith, no matter how strong, does not enhance the "credibility of what Moses wrote".
I have been doffing my cap to those who have faith in "a power we have not the capacity to understand" but that faith, no matter how strong, does not enhance the "credibility of what Moses wrote".
I see this thread and chaney3's OP as being about credibility rather than about whatever specific article of faith happens to be today's topic - in this case, "what Moses wrote".
...[text shortened]... not add anything nor does it subtract anything from the credibility of the claim that is being made.
I disagree. If we find out a higher power than us is precisely what Moses wrote about it would add a great deal to the "credibility of what Moses wrote".
12 Oct 22
@mchill saidIn other words, if what you believe about the nature of X corresponds to the texts that you believe reveal the nature of X, then your assertion about the nature of X is more credible. Right?
I disagree. If we find out a higher power than us is precisely what Moses wrote about it would add a great deal to the "credibility of what Moses wrote".
12 Oct 22
@fmf saidThis is akin to KellyJayism which contends that, if his perception of the reality of the universe matches what he believes about the reality of the universe, then what he believes about the reality of the universe must be absolutely true.
In other words, if what you believe about the nature of X corresponds to the texts that you believe reveal the nature of X, then your assertion about the nature of X is more credible. Right?
12 Oct 22
@mchill saidFurthermore, how can you “find out” what “a higher power precisely is” (or isn’t), when a couple of posts above you claim you are “viewing through the lens of a power we have not the capacity to understand”?
If we find out a higher power than us is precisely what Moses wrote about it would add a great deal to the "credibility of what Moses wrote".
More circular and contradictory reasoning.