Why are "visions" from drunken bronze age goat herders taken seriously?

Question

Nobody takes visions from modern, educated people seriously, so what's the deal? Charles Manson was just as believable as Moses, and didn't cause the murders of nearly as many people, so why aren't they seen as equal?

sympleesymple: Almost ALL the "visions" mentioned in the Bible ARE ascribed to murdering lunatics. Either that or the Bible makes them sound more bloodthirsty than they actually were. Manson's bunch killed a few people, Moses' bunch killed a few million according to the Bible. In both cases, it was cold blooded murder. I simply fail to see why you think one lying murderer (Moses) is any more believable than another lying murderer (Manson). If you go by body count, Moses was much worse.

Orpheus Rising: Your insight is always welcome and much respected. *bows*

Answer 1

I wouldn't say "nobody" takes modern visions seriously. Recent decades have had enough sad headlines to the contrary.

Anyway, according to the story, Moses' own people didn't take him seriously, and precisely because he was a murderer. It wasn't until he led them out of "bondage" that they took him seriously, and even then he had a time of it convincing them he had the "truth". It took a whole generation dying off before the Israelites were a cohesive cultural & religous unit.

Nobody believes Manson, because he hasn't done anything to merit listening to. But remember there was a time when the civil rights movement stood on a perilous edge between murderous and pacifist impulses. And it's very conceivable that someone like Malcolm X could have become a modern day Moses.

The thing to realize is that time itself has a "sanctifying" effect on ideas as well as historical figures. So Moses' visions could become the stuff of legend and oral tradition and eventually become one of humanity's oldest religions. If, say, Joseph Smith's visions are less "hallowed" it's largely because less time has elapsed. If the Mormon church is still around in 4000 years, you can bet he'll be as hallowed a figure as Moses; we'll have discussions about sexuality rather than violence, but your point would be the same.

Peace to you.

Answer 2

you're overlooking an substantial ingredient of that factor. It exchange into on the brink of the previous due bronze age traditionally speaking. So? it particularly is not a pejorative term. Goat herding exchange right into a nomadic-translate that as tribal-way of existence, as a livelihood. Abraham had accumulated significant wealth and no small degree of effect from his herds. So, to the those that would use the term "bronze-age goat herders" as an insult, overlook approximately them. in case you have been prosperous adequate, influential adequate, useful adequate be written approximately, does it particularly count huge sort? FYI: Paul exchange into no longer a member of the Sanhedrin,he exchange into maximum probable a Roman that later converted.

Answer 3

Moses actually left a cult to start one of his own. He was a highly skilled magician in the Egyptian temples. He was in essence a wizard. I don't know why they call the ark of the covenant sacred and holy. It came from the Egyptian cult. They used these regularly. They were used to make mono atomic gold which they baked into conical cakes and ate. This is what the Hebrews ate in the wilderness that started as a golden calf. It heals the body and feeds the light body. Your mind is opened to all dimensions. So, Moses knew what he was doing. But, he isn't portrayed as he really was. He was a master of the occult and started his own religion we know as Judaism. In either case it's all wrong. btw The Hebrew priests were the only ones later to have access to the mono atomic gold.

Answer 4

At first I thought your issue was with "drunken", but then I remembered the drinking game that is played here. My attention moved to "goat herder" and that was discounted as the issue because that goat herder may have been the most intelligent or most righteous man at the time. Everyone knows of your call for God to reveal himself and it seems He did so at the earliest time, so "bronze age" can't be sticking in your craw. You seem to have no difficulty accepting the idea of visions if they can be ascribed to murdering lunatics. The problem must be with the message. That's it. You disrespected God before you disrespected the messenger.

Edit:
Perhaps there is more you should take into account than body counts. The disrespect for God continues. When you clear that hurdle you may begin to understand a little more than what you do. A righteous God can do no unrighteousness. Of course, the god that is you disagrees strongly with that.

Answer 5

Because Moses did something good for his people based on his religion , while Manson killed a bunch of people based on a Beatles song. Big difference.

Answer 6

Because those visions led to the release in captivity of hundreds of thousands of people held enslaved by the Egyptians, that's why.

Answer 7

lol! another good argument to throw religion out the window.

Answer 8

res ipsa loquitur...
atheist rulers slaughtered 60.000.000 just in 20th century alone, both sides have blood on their hands

Answer 9

I don't know whether to shake my head in disbelief or to feel sorry for you.

I think you are just going for the reaction you get for your question, so I feel sorry for you.

Answer 10

I'm sorry, but all the insults ijn the world won't make me renounce my belief in God.