Please Someone Address This

[Vanguard PCD]

Hi PA,

I'd be curious to know how your understanding of the crossing of the 'Reed Sea' would fit this description:

Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea...

Yes, I know the Exodus story. Please keep in mind that my original post was just to show how hard it can be to convince someone, in keeping with your theme. I am not a conservative (not a liberal either), so it is not my place to post here, and I definitely do not want to cause confusion or doubt.

However, I will answer you since you asked, and then leave it at that, with no further responses.

1. The Hebrew term used throughout the OT to describe the sea that was crossed was Yam Suph. It transliterates as Reed Sea, or Sea of Reeds.

2. The Hebrew term for red is adom, and it was not used.

3. No evidence has ever been found anywhere in the Red Sea. Of course Egypt has outlawed diving in its waters of the Red Sea, so now we may never know.

4. The exact route has been debated for over 1,000 years.

5. Not a single Egyptian hieroglyph mentions the enslavement of the Hebrews, or their exodus.

To specifically answer your question will require me to say something that totally goes against what the Bible says on this one topic. Please understand this is not my personal theory, but this is the common explanation outside of conservative Christiany. It is for thought only, not doctrine or casting doubt...

The story was made up and developed over time. Ancient man was nomadic, and a common form of entertainment was "campfire stories." The Hyksos people were kicked out of lower Egypt and settled in Canaan. Combined with other nomads, they became the Hebrews. They changed their story of defeat into a story of freedom, complete with divine intervention. That is why no evidence has ever been found.

Please understand that this is just a theory that has been around for centuries. Do not tie me to a stake and set fire. I am only presenting a logical argument that explains certain things with regard to this particular story.

Do I personally believe the Bible account as being 100% truth? I want to...but I am not sure. That is the best I can do for now.

 

[miamited]

Hi PA,

Ok, so I won't expect a response back and I'm perfectly willing to accept your thoughts on the name of the sea. But...

Your description of the physical attributes of this sea called the 'Reed Sea' doesn't match the description of the physical description of the event of the crossing. Please provide me with an answer as to how, in a marshy sea of reeds, there can ever be a wall of water on the left and on the right of someone who is standing in it.

You also mention that the chariot wheels on the bottom of the sea floor had been debunked, but I don't think you've been keeping up with the research as it has continued. Here's just something for your purview:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/chariots-in-red-sea-irrefutable-evidence/

You'll notice that this researcher also calls the 'Red Sea' the 'Reed Sea' based on the same evidence that you post. I find it completely understandable that maybe our calling the body of water that lies between Egypt and Saudi Arabia now the 'Red Sea'. It may be that the name somehow got changed between then and now. That's a very common occurrence in the historicity of the Scriptures. For example, the body of land on the other side of Egypt from the 'Reed Sea' was not then called 'Saudi Arabia'. That doesn't mean that what in the Scriptures called the Sinai is not the same piece of land that we today call Saudi Arabia.

Now, here is probably the article or findings you have followed:

Chariot Wheels in the Red Sea Hoax Persists

Notice, however, he says that there are 'wheels' lying at the bottom of the sea, but his only explanation for one of them is that it looks like it might be a ferry boat steering wheel. For me, that brings up a couple of questions. 1.) Ok, so how is a chariot wheel not going to look a lot like a ferry boat steering wheel? 2.) What proof can he offer that it is, in fact, a ferry boat steering wheel and not a chariot wheel?

It's easy to look at a picture and make all kinds of conjectures about what something might be, and his is just another such conjecture. If it is a ferry boat steering wheel, it would certainly seem safe to assume that a ferry boat sank there. Wouldn't there likely be other pieces of such a wreckage? Is there a record that a ferry boat sank there or does he want us to believe that someone just happened to be out on the sea one day and threw their steering wheel in the sea? And Voil'e this is it. Secondly, while he seems careless at throwing doubt on this one piece of evidence, what is his answer to the rest of the evidence. Does he want us to believe that there just happened to be a ferry boat steering wheel factory at this location some time in the past and all of thee 'wheels' are leftovers from when the water covered the factory? All of his 'proof' seems to really be nothing more than so much conjecture to me. So, before I'd start claiming that this idea of chariot wheels at the bottom of the sea had been debunked, I would ask you to show your proof of such. If you don't want to answer here, then feel free to PM me or start another thread on the subject.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[miamited]

duplicate post

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Ok, I fibbed, lol. One more reply, since it pertains to what I wrote and your response. But seriously, this is it for me on this forum...

I am familiar with both stories. The first was a hoax, and the same guy claimed to have found Noah's Ark as well. The second was also a marketing ploy, used some of the same pictures as the first, and was a money making scheme. "Buy my DVD for irrefutable proof!" There is BIG money in religion.

Why not just show the world your proof for free, and put an end to the debate? A book deal along with TV appearances will sell far more than a random DVD will. There is a reason nothing else has been heard from these guys.

At least the DVD guy got the name right. Reed Sea.

Archaeologists have deemed the exodus search fruitless and a waste of time. In truth, the exact path and the exact crossing point have yet to be found, and may never be. No evidence exists for it (yet), so until then all we have is a ~3,600 year old story.

Peace.

 

[miamited]

HI PA,

As I said, feel free to PM me if you're not wanting to discuss this here, but...

All you have offered is your 'understanding'. I've asked for some sort of proof that you're understanding of this phenomenon is true. Do you not have some web site or reading material or news article that you can direct one to, to see where all of this has been debunked? Do you not have some material that one can check and find, "Oh, I see, this person has dived down to the depths and touched and researched these artifacts and they aren't metal wheels and the shafts between two of them aren't wooden or metal axles at all and the chariot bodies are really old model T's that someone has dumped in the sea.

Are you really only going to support your understanding with nothing more than, "Hey, take my word for it." I did the research. I investigated the several web pages and have read even the more recent articles concerning these finds. While Egypt won't let any of these artifacts to be removed from the sea bed, they haven't stopped anyone from going down and investigating them. Where is your contrarian evidence that this was all debunked and it has now been proven that this guy staged these finds in a Hollywood movie lot in the bottom of a swimming pool.

Do you really think that evidence is untrustworthy just because the people who spend millions of dollars in research to find it shouldn't be allowed to recoup some of their costs by charging for written publications that explain it to the public. I'm fairly confident that the news given out initially to the media was for free. Did you go to college? Were all of your books free? If not, then on what basis do you trust that your professors were telling you the truth. After all, you paid a tuition which paid them their salaries to teach you what they believed to be the truth. By your faulty reasoning, all education should be free, otherwise its probably a lie. Scientists study and research all kinds of things and when they publish books about their findings that are let out to the general public, people pay for those books. Are all of their findings then lies because they charge for their books on the subject? Is the gospel not true because I paid $60.00 for my fine leather bound copy of the Scriptures.

Your arguments are fairly laughable in their ignorance. You take for granted that some guy who has never even seen or studied any of the evidence that if he says it looks like a ferry boat steering wheel, then that's what it is! Yes, I know that that was the evidence that I brought to your attention, but honestly you haven't given me any evidence to support your position. How about it? Are you up to the challenge?

Yes, the man who first brought the claim to life was the same man who claimed to have found Noah's ark and I agree that that might make him suspect, but since then others have investigated these finds. Are you really so simple that you're going to throw out the evidence just because something else this man found may be questionable. Can a liar never tell the truth in your book?

You wrote: Archaeologists have deemed the exodus search fruitless and a waste of time. In truth, the exact path and the exact crossing point have yet to be found, and may never be. No evidence exists for it (yet), so until then all we have is a ~3,600 year old story.

Do you have anything to support that claim besides just your word that you say so? Can you show me where you got that statement or is it just something that you have made up?

And still you haven't given any support of this 'Reed Sea' that you speak of that is just some marshy land of reeds. How do you explain that in this 'Reed Sea' there was a wall of water on the left and on the right? How do you explain that Egyptian soldier bodies were washed up on the shore if anyone over two feet tall could have just walked right out of this marshy bed of reeds? Where is any proof to support this 'understanding' that you have.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[miamited]

Hi again PA,

You wrote:

Do I personally believe the Bible account as being 100% truth? I want to...but I am not sure. That is the best I can do for now.

Maybe if you'd just think through some of the arguments that you're holding on to with an honest mind, you could be sure. I know I am.

Your arguments are not a single one based on facts:

1.) We can't believe this account of the findings on the bottom of the 'Reed Sea' because the guy that first brought it to worldwide attention was never able to prove he had found Noah's ark.

2.) We can't believe these accounts because the people who found them have written books and produced DVD's about their finds for which they charge money.

3.) Archeologists have deemed the Exodus search fruitless and a waste of time.

Really? That's the how an educated man determines truth? You write that you want to believe 100%, but honestly, based on your methodology in determining truth, you really seem like the kind of man who will take just about any tenuous thread he can find to deny the truth.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[classicalhero]

Hi spikey,

Listen, before we get off on the wrong foot here, you don't have to prove anything to me. I believe absolutely everything the Scriptures tell me. The creation event was about 6,000 years ago and spanned 6 rotations of the earth (day). The waters of the flood covered the whole earth, etc. etc.

My point, however, is that no, we cannot with any empirical evidence prove any 'facts' of the Scriptures. It must be believed on faith, but that faith is not something built on a foundation of sand. If the 'facts' of the Scriptures could be proven through empirical evidence then we wouldn't have any atheists on the planet. We might not all agree on who God is, but there wouldn't be any doubt in anyone's mind that there is a God.

Now, just as you conclude, what we have are a line of 'coincidences' that may, depending on who is doing the interpreting, be interpreted to support various 'facts' of the Scriptures.

The missing heir of the Pharaoh may have died of some disease or been killed in a battle or some accident of life. And you shouldn't even be concerned to show that the Red Sea might part by some natural occurrence. While I'd be interested in reading your evidence of such, it wasn't any natural event that caused the parting of the Red Sea. There is no natural event that would part the sea in the manner that the description of the event tells us.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

We don't live by blind faith. There are evidence we see for things written in the Bible. Some people have been actively trying to hide the evidence, but the accuracy of the Bible is beyond any other historical book.

 

[miamited]

We don't live by blind faith. There are evidence we see for things written in the Bible. Some people have been actively trying to hide the evidence, but the accuracy of the Bible is beyond any other historical book.

Hi CH,

Well, I'm certainly willing to accept what you're saying in regards to some things we find in the Scriptures, but I'm not convinced that we can find evidences of 'everything' we find in the Scriptures.

Let me ask one simple question:

What evidence can you provide that shows the sun, or the shadow that it cast, did back up ten steps?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Do you have anything to support that claim besides just your word that you say so? Can you show me where you got that statement or is it just something that you have made up?

And still you haven't given any support of this 'Reed Sea' that you speak of that is just some marshy land of reeds. How do you explain that in this 'Reed Sea' there was a wall of water on the left and on the right? How do you explain that Egyptian soldier bodies were washed up on the shore if anyone over two feet tall could have just walked right out of this marshy bed of reeds? Where is any proof to support this 'understanding' that you have.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Sigh.

Start with this link: Did the Exodus Really Happen? Rabbi David Wolpe on the Passover story - Beliefnet.com

That is a Jewish rabbi that is fluent with Hebrew.

I am sorry. This is why I normally do not chat/debate with conservatives. It never ends well. I am done.

 

[miamited]

Hi PA,

Thanks for the info. So, based on what you provided as your evidence, then you not only believe that the 'Reed Sea' find cannot possibly mean what some say it means because the whole account of the Exodus from Egypt to the promised land is not true. There was no crossing; there was not 40 years wandering in the desert; there was no manna found each of six mornings of the week to feed these wanderers.

Would that be correct?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Hi PA,

Thanks for the info. So, based on what you provided as your evidence, then you not only believe that the 'Reed Sea' find cannot possibly mean what some say it means because the whole account of the Exodus from Egypt to the promised land is not true. There was no crossing; there was not 40 years wandering in the desert; there was no manna found each of six mornings of the week to feed these wanderers.

Would that be correct?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

No.

 

[miamited]

Hi PA,

Well, perhaps then you would explain how the evidence you provided is to be understood as regards this matter. The rabbi never mentions the artifacts lying at the bottom of the 'Reed Sea'. So, if you're not using his understanding that the Exodus never happened, therefore, the artifacts cannot be from the Exodus, then please, what am I missing here? What exactly is the correlation between our discussion of the artifacts and this article that rabbi Wolpe has written? Because I honestly can't see how, if you're not aligning yourself with his premise, that this article even addresses our discussion somehow in your favor.

God bless you
In Christ, Ted

 

[Vanguard PCD]

I will put it this way...

You believe that the Bible speaks true, and that the exodus event happened. The only evidence is a ~3,600 year old story that is the subject of debate among scholars. Blind faith basically. I used to be the same way.

I believe that the truth can't be known at this time. I give it to God that He is all powerful, and if it happened, great!, but if it did not, oh well. My faith is not shaken either way. When it comes to some of the more "out there" stories in the OT, I am somewhat of a skeptic. I see where ancient man was merely telling an elaborate campfire story. Ultra conservatives think that "if it is in the Bible, it is 100% pure truth, and can't possibly be anything but." Sigh.

My position comes from the following:

1. Understanding the Hebrew terms for red and reed.
2. Knowing that archaeologists have given up on exodus evidence because nothing has ever been found.
3. Knowing that the Hyksos were driven out of Egypt and settled in Canaan around the same time.
4. Knowing that not a single Egyptian hieroglyph ever mentions the exodus story.
5. Hearing straight talking Jewish rabbis (there's more than 1) saying that it was not literal, or it was not on the scale that the Bible claims.

Call me blasphemous, a heretic or whatever. My faith is not determined by archaic stories written in Hebrew and Aramaic. Look to the NT.

May I leave now? I am not a conservative.

 

[PBA]

Revealing God's Treasure
Revealing God's Treasure - The Red Sea Crossing on Vimeo

 

[miamited]

Hi PA,

Well, I'll let you off the hook for now, but I would like you to seriously consider one, I believe, very important issue about your supporting evidence. You wrote:

5. Hearing straight talking Jewish rabbis (there's more than 1) saying that it was not literal, or it was not on the scale that the Bible claims.

You do understand that these are the same straight talking rabbis who deny that the Jesus who walked among us 2,000 years ago was the Messiah spoken of in the old covenant, right?

If they are unable to discern the truth in such an important matter as that from the Scriptures, then why would you trust that they understand anything else of the Scriptures? I'd just caution you to be careful who you believe knows the truth.

God bless you and you are free to stop replying now if you so choose. This is just something for you to toss over in your mind and ask yourself, "On what basis do I believe that this man knows the truth about anything?"
In Christ, Ted

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Hi PA,

Well, I'll let you off the hook for now, but I would like you to seriously consider one, I believe, very important issue about your supporting evidence. You wrote:

5. Hearing straight talking Jewish rabbis (there's more than 1) saying that it was not literal, or it was not on the scale that the Bible claims.

You do understand that these are the same straight talking rabbis who deny that the Jesus who walked among us 2,000 years ago was the Messiah spoken of in the old covenant, right?

If they are unable to discern the truth in such an important matter as that from the Scriptures, then why would you trust that they understand anything else of the Scriptures? I'd just caution you to be careful who you believe knows the truth.

God bless you and you are free to stop replying now if you so choose. This is just something for you to toss over in your mind and ask yourself, "On what basis do I believe that this man knows the truth about anything?"
In Christ, Ted

I do not put much thought into Orthodox Judaism when it comes to the NT. They reject the notion, and that is where I draw the line as a Christian. However, when it comes to the OT, they know best what their language says. It is their history. When you have a Jewish rabbi saying "it was not literal," that is pretty solid. When you have several Jewish rabbis saying it, well...

That is the same reason why my views on "Satan" are what they are, in the OT.

 

[miamited]

HI PA,

Well, I would completely understand your disagreeing with me, but you're wrong.

Let's leave the actual event that we are discussing and look at some other evidences. After all, that is what you are claiming to be searching for and so let's see if we can find some.

In the book of Leviticus we find a number of statements that are claimed to be the very words spoken by God to Moses. If I may ask, would it also be your contention that God didn't speak the words that are attributed to Him in these writings?

The reason I ask this question is because in the book of Leviticus we read:

I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt to give you the land of Canaan and to be your God.

As a matter of fact, at least nine times God, in His speaking to the Israelites through His servant Moses makes the point that He brought them 'out of Egypt'.

In the book of Numbers, along with several more instances of God speaking of His bringing the Israelites out of Egypt, we have the people bemoaning the fact that they ever left Egypt.

Why did you bring us up out of Egypt to this terrible place? It has no grain or figs, grapevines or pomegranates. And there is no water to drink!"

In Deuteronomy we find again the Lord speaking of this event of bringing His people out of Egypt and confirming somewhat, how He did it:

Has any god ever tried to take for himself one nation out of another nation, by testings, by miraculous signs and wonders, by war, by a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, or by great and awesome deeds, like all the things the LORD your God did for you in Egypt before your very eyes?

There are actually very few phrases of words more oft repeated in the book of the law, than that God brought His people, 'out of Egypt'.

But, I imagine that for you, if you do find your evidentiary basis in teachings such as rabbi Wolpe, the whole giving of the law is some kind of farce being carried out. A story, if you will, but then that begs the question: Was there a law that God gave to Israel and when did He give it to them and how? Since the entire giving of the law is set in the days of their wandering in the Sinai, and that didn't happen, when did Israel receive the law from God, or did they ever receive laws from God. Since the events of the goings on of the people when they received the law didn't happen, is there any law? Since they were not out wandering in the Sinai desert when God spoke the law unto the people, where were they when they got the law or is the whole of the law just some made up manmade effort of a people saying to themselves as they sat around their campfires at night, "Let's write a story about a god and make up some laws that he would make people live by." Where did the law come from, friend?

Alright, hopefully you'll put at least some real effort into thinking out the logical consequences of what you believe to be the truth and how that belief carries on and affects other parts of the Scripture. It's very easy for one to say, "Well, I don't believe such and such happened." But, when there is a several thousand year future now attached to that such and such event, it is wise to sit back and consider, "If what I believe is true, then how does that change other pieces of the puzzle."

Where did the law come from? When was it given to Issrael? How was it given to Israel? Can we honestly really even have any faith that all this talk of some law of God given to Israel has any more basis in truth than the account of the Exodus, if there were no days as described when God spoke to the people through His servant Moses and gave unto them this law that we talk so much about?

So, let's leave this fictional story of the Exodus and move on into the future and see what the Scriptures tell us about this event that never happened.

We find that Joshua assembled all the tribes of Israel at Shechem and spoke these words to them, which he claimed to be the words of God:

"Then I sent Moses and Aaron,http://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-14 and I afflicted the Egyptians by what I did there, and I brought you out.http://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-15 When I brought your fathers out of Egypt, you came to the sea,http://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-16 and the Egyptians pursued them with chariots and horsemenhttp://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#fn-descriptionAnchor-bhttp://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-17 as far as the Red Sea.http://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#fn-descriptionAnchor-chttp://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-18 But they criedhttp://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-19 to the LORD for help, and he put darknesshttp://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-20 between you and the Egyptians; he brought the sea over them and covered them.http://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-21 You saw with your own eyes what I did to the Egyptians.http://www.biblestudytools.com/joshua/24.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-22 Then you lived in the desert for a long time."

Did God speak these words? If so, is He really accounting to the people events that they did see and did know happened? Can we honestly believe that when the Scriptures tell us that God spoke, that He really did speak? Are the Scriptures, that we claim to believe in, just completely filled with this story and that this story, when it makes claims that God really spoke and that God really said, just isn't so. It's just a nomadic group of people as they grew to understand and then tell us what their idea of a god would be and the things he would say and the things he would do...if, there was a god.

We find all sorts of references to this story account in the book of Judges with the same attestation that it is God speaking about the days when He brought them 'out of Egypt'. The book of Samuel and the book of Kings make repeated references to this event and reinforce the claim that God Himself spoke to the people about the event. Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, all supposedly prophets of God, make references to this great event. Friend, there is actually no single event in all of the old covenant that is attested to by more writers of the old covenant Scriptures than this event of the Exodus, the plagues that God brought upon the people, and the rescue of His people from the hands of the Egyptians in crossing through the sea.

What of Stephen in the book of the Acts of the Apostles? Is he recounting events that didn't really happen when he lists for the Sanhedrin the many 'facts' to them of who God is and what He has done for them when he told them:

"This is the same Moses whom they had rejected with the words, 'Who made you ruler and judge?'http://www.biblestudytools.com/acts/7.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-39 He was sent to be their ruler and deliverer by God himself, through the angel who appeared to him in the bush. He led them out of Egypthttp://www.biblestudytools.com/acts/7.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-40 and did wonders and miraculous signshttp://www.biblestudytools.com/acts/7.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-41 in Egypt, at the Red Seahttp://www.biblestudytools.com/acts/7.html#fn-descriptionAnchor-ghttp://www.biblestudytools.com/acts/7.html#cr-descriptionAnchor-42 and for forty years in the desert."

Is the writer of Hebrews actually just building on some story when he wrote:

Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt?

Were there really no such people who heard and rebelled? Then why is the question being asked?

However, because I have gone on to other Scripture and I know it is a natural human response to deal with the most current and set aside earlier work, let me draw you back to the real question at hand. Please, I would really like to understand. Where did the law come from? How and when did Israel get it? Did it just one day drop out of the sky or did Moses actually go sit on the top of a mountain for 40 days and speak face to face with God?

You travel through these threads with an icon of a dark soldier wearing the cross of Christ emblazoned upon your chest. The defender of God's truth! Ok, defend it! You who are the dark knight of God almighty, where did Israel get the law? How did Israel know what the law of God is? When did Israel get this great law that even rabbi Wolpe believes they got? Or does he? Perhaps he doesn't believe there is a law that came from God and thinks the commandments are just good 'rules of life' that some of his people came up with many years ago, but in all honesty, not any different than the 'rules of life' that Hindus and Muslims teach. Or any other religion for that matter.

Oh great dark knight and defender of the truth. Is there a difference?

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[miamited]

Hi again PA,

Ok, well, we've dealt with some of the spider web of future consequences that may result if the exodus account isn't true. But what about the past?

Did Joseph and his 11 brothers and father and their families move to Egypt in the days of the famine? Was there even a famine that precipitated their move to Egypt? Were they then given the land of Goshen in which the Scriptures tell us they grew into a great number of people, set apart from the Egyptians? How did they then get from Egypt to the land of promise where we find them in the writings of the Kings and Chronicles?

Did Joseph's brothers put him in a cistern where he was found and carried off to Egypt?

Was Joseph imprisoned due to the charges of Potiphar's wife?
Did he then explain the vision of feast and famine that Pharaoh had.

You see, friend, not only are there fairly serious implications to the future if we discount the exodus, but there are likewise changes that would necessarily need to be made to the past. I mean the Scriptures tell us that the Hebrews became a very large and powerful force of people while in Egypt, so if the exodus account isn't true, fine, but then how did these, at least, several thousand people get to the promised land where they supposedly find themselves crossing over the river Jordan and fighting various other established peoples for their land? Did none of that happen either?

God bless you and again, if you would rather reply by PM you may surely do so. Or, go stand your dark knight at someone else's door and propose to them that you know the truth, and not reply to my queries at all.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Moses was alone every time God spoke to him, gave him the laws, etc.

So was Joseph Smith.

One we believe in, the other is considered a charlatan by many.

I understand the full implications of the path I am headed down. I know what it means if I decide that perhaps some of these new age rabbis are right. But my faith is not centered on the OT.

 

[Albion]

Moses was alone every time God spoke to him, gave him the laws, etc.

So was Joseph Smith.

One we believe in, the other is considered a charlatan by many.

But of course we judge each one's revelations at least in part by other things that he did or said in life.