Why did the History Channel say that Moses did not write the creation story?

Question

The History Channel said that Moses simply compiled stories that had been passed down by his ancestors. Please explain what you think about that.

About 10 religious Bible scholars confirmed that the creation story was a compilations of stories that had been around for centuries among several religious groups.

"Acid's link" -- It is believed that the basic story once circulated among the early nomadic Hebrews, told perhaps around simple, intimate campfire settings, answering questions about life and the origins of humankind[

I see no problem with compiling stories about an event. (Have you seen the Series or read the book "Roots"?
I do see a problem when Religious Empire hide it from us, and present themselves as ..... well, I am sure you know what I mean.

Please don't misunderstand me. I am a Christian, but I am very suspicious of all verses except for the exact quotes of Jesus. 4 different authors with a few things not the same.Wow! That adds more valididity to those authors; not less.

Answer 1

I thought it was obvious that the first campfire origin stories were eventually codified into text, translated, interpreted, copied, and whatnot.

But then, I took the time to research the actual history of the bible instead of believing 'god diddit'.

update: you say "I am very suspicious of all verses except for the exact quotes of Jesus" but with all this editing going on how you know that his words were not distorted, censored or added to? Just wondering.

Answer 2

well if you really think about it it would make a lot of sense if the creation story were true if every culture in the world celebrated that as the real story (considering the premise was we came from two people, all those people would have to know that story) however, there is a lot of faith placed in Moses and his stories. If you listen to the first conversation during the credits of snatch you will have my opinion. Its a nice story but that doesn't make it true. By the way the reason the history channel is a biased source is because it is ran by right wingers, watch any show on religion and they have mainly sources from relig. Univ. such as Notre Dame and theol. sem. however there are not many from places like Harvard. Most liberal arts men and women are religious but admit that it is faith that is important, not the backing that the history channel tries to put into it. There is no way to prove or disprove god, go with it or don't, and admit when your religion is wrong and don't abide by that rule. sorry for the tangent, but I just don't like any of the judeo religions.

to the posters above... do you watch the history channel or simply condemn it. I watch the history channel non-stop and saying they fabricate anything but proreligion is not intelligent and un educated, and by the way if you think that the bible just fell out of the sky and is the word of god, you NEED to use the sense that GOD gave you, and an example of bible imperfection would be for "slaves be obedient to your masters" said paul. Don't give me that bible is perfect crud.

Answer 3

In the name of Allah the most Gracious the most merciful.
From an Islamic perspective We believe that Moses[ peace be
on him ] was one of the mighty Messengers Of Allah the Almighty
To moses was revealed the Thorah [ the old testament ]and we
believe in the original revelation,but today this does not exist in the original form because todays Bible comprising of the Old and
the new Teatament[ the gospel of jesus peace be on him]is not
the original revelation as they contain absurd theories,
innumeral scientific errors, contradictions and even obsceneties.
The history channel as well as science is not eleminating Moses
{peace be on him] as a messenger of God but they are eleminating the theory of the creation found in the Bible because
it goes against Logic and science.Moses [ peace be on him a
man appointed by God almighty would not have complied stories
from ancestors but his theory would be a direct revelation from
God almighty without any mistakes and would be compatible
with astronomy and science.This only proves what Muslims
are saying all along that the present bible is not the original
revelation of God.Here is why the History Channel and science
and Muslims regect the creation theory of the Bible.
1] In the Bible chapter 1, book of Genesis it implies that the earth was created in six days of a 24 hour period.to which astronomy and science objects .
2] Book of Genesis ch. 1,v 3&5; Light was created on the first
day.
3] Book of Genisis ch 1, v 14- 19; The cause of light,which is
the Sun, stars ect were created on the Fourth Day.How can
light come into existance on the first day and the cause of
light on the fourth day.?
4] Genisis,ch 1 v 9-13.The earth was created on the 3rd. day
How can you have a night and day[ 24hour period] without the
earth? which depends upon the earths roatation.
5] Genisis, ch 1 v 9-13, the Earth was created on th 3rd day.
Genisis, ch, 1 v 14-19,the sun and the moon were created
on the fourth day.Science tell us that the earth is part of the
parent body, the sun. it cannot come into existance before the
sun.
6] Genisis, ch, 1 v 11-13 the vegetation, herbs, shrubs, Trees
were created on the 3rd day and the sun [ ch 1 v 14- 19 ] on
the fourth day. How can vegetation come into existance
without sunlight.?
Whatever approach the christians use thay can explain only 2
0f these six points on the creation that too with great difficulty.
The theory of the creation is one among hundreds of errors
in the bible and therefore all we say is that God who created
the universe cannot make a mistake.
The holy Quran on the other is in complete Harmony with
science with 100 % accuracy.

Answer 4

Many Bible scholars think the History Channel got it inside out. Moses likely never wrote anything, especially considering the fact that he is an important part of four of the five books of Torah. It is more likely that both the great ancestor stories of Genesis and the desert stories of Moses were handed down orally through the generations.

The stories were only written down after the Northern Kingdom fell to the Assyrians and Northern refugees fleeing to Judah brought a slightly different version of Torah with them. You may have noticed some internal contradictions or inexplicable repetitions among some of the older stories. This was likely the result of combining different narratives to keep all parties happy. The priestly clans and the "deuteronomists" ("second law") of Josiah's court also put their mark on the Torah.

Genesis 1's orderly account of creation is considered the Priestly account. The folksy version in Genesis 2 (which depicts God walking through the garden during "the breezy part of the day") was likely the Jahwist account. Moses himself was a figure of legendary times and these stories predated him by centuries. The likelyhood that he took pen to parchment in the desert, chronicling all of Israelite history up through his death is a pious fiction. He had more important things to do.

Answer 5

There is no evidence that any of it was written specifically by Moses or any other individual - it's not like we have a signature at the bottom or handwriting to compare. I assume that the books you are referring to include the story of the arrival of the Israelites in "the Promised Land". As Moses is said to have died before entering the promised land it seems unlikely that he wrote it. In addition, it seems unlikely that any form of written account was made of the Israelite's wanderings in the desert - keeping a daily diary isn't high on your priority list when you're searching for food and water in a desert - and that's if you just happened to have the necessary writing materials available for such a trivial purpose. The accounts that were first written down (if they're in any way true at all - there is no evidence that they are) would have been the written recording of a spoken history handed down by generations of story-tellers. The account of the earlier parts of the books, namely of creation, Adam and Eve and the Flood were obviously not contemporary accounts - if only for the fact that they contain demonstrable falsehoods.

Answer 6

A lot of the biblical stories were written for a different purpose then they seem. Those evil laws in Deuteronomy were actual laws. They just figured they would be better accepted if it was from God. Evil by our standards since back then they were better then nothing. Bible is just that a bunch of compiled stories. Some of the dead see scrolls had longer and shorter version of different books. The bible is just that a story. Nothing more nothing less.

Answer 7

The History Channel is not the most reliable of sources, especially when it comes to Biblical things. However, they got this right.

Most likely Moses compiled the books from the past and Moses even refers to some of the books: Book of the generations of Adam (Genesis 5:1), Book of the covenant (Exodus 24:7), Book of the wars of the LORD (Numbers 21:14). The Book of the Covenant might be the "words of the covenant" which are said to be written down later, but who knows? It might have been God's covenant with Adam, Noah, Abram, Isaac, and/or Jacob/Israel (and with his children). It is mentioned that the Word of the Lord came to Abram (later called Abraham) in Genesis 15:1.

Any time we see generations listed, more than likely this was in a book. If you notice, the first part of Genesis seems to go from one of God's covenants to another, which, in my opinion, must have been written down for other generations. A covenant was just like a legal contract, I cannot imagine them not being written down in a book, or books.

Birthrights too might have been in books, or at least in a legal contract. That is how and why Esau could sell it.

Also, Moses might have been aware of the book of Job, which is said to be older than any of his books, and he might have known about the book of Jasher since this is mentioned in the book of Joshua. Joshua did write some of the book of the law of God (Joshua 24:26). The book of Enoch, was quoted by Moses (and by James, Jude, and others). This is probably where we get the fall of some of the sons of God and the account of the giants, their offspring.

Jethro (also called Hobab), Moses' father-in-law, might have helped too. Remember that Moses was servant to this priest of Midian for decades. Maybe it was Jethro who had some of the ancient books.

The books of the laws of God (also called the law of Moses), the tables of testimony, the commandments, were all given to Moses by God. These laws incorporated the previous laws and covenants, and added to them.

These books may or may not have been works inspired by God, but Moses got to speak directly to God about these things. It is just my opinion, but I think most of those books were left out on purpose because all God was concerned with at that time was His direct part in the covenants.

These ancient books, even if they were directly of God, may not be necessary for us today, just like the New Testament, the Prophets, and so on, were not necessary for Moses then. Nevertheless, they are preserved somewhere, if nowhere else, then in Jesus, the Word of God. Who knows, maybe some of them will turn up someday.

Answer 8

Yes it is true. Most of the stories were folk tales. And some of them like the flood story are Babylonian in origin. And the fact that there two creation stories, indicated that there was more than one author.

Answer 9

Because the History channel is run by a bunch of people who don't like the idea of there being an afterlife.

They also don't like the idea of being told they are wrong for lieing, cheating and many other actions specificly forbidden in the 10 commandments or other parts of the Bible.

Answer 10

The History Channel is correct. Most stories in the bible were around way before the bible was written. They were plagiarized.