Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.—John Adams
Faith as described in the Oxford English Dictionary: “Complete trust or confidence in someone or something; Strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.”
With faith as the cornerstone, any theory is possible and any story is plausible, no matter how far-fetched, outlandish, impossible, or improbable it may be, for faith cannot be controverted by fact, nor can any amount of evidence distract from things that are accepted under its force of power. But even faith has to have an object, or at the very least a content, because—to incorporate a double negative—you can’t believe in nothing. So, faith, while being “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen,” as the Apostle Paul insists in Hebrews 11:1, must have some sort of tangible, substantive object in order to exist. For instance, to have faith in a god, there must be some tangible structure setting forth the character, attributes, acts, mandates, and expectations of that divinity in order to have faith that he/she/it actually exists.
The tale of Moses and his leading the Children of Israel out of bondage in Egypt, as found in the Old Testament’s book of Exodus, is a story that has been written and rewritten to sustain the faithful followers of Jehovah. The account, as we find it in modern bibles, is truly only a reconstruction of whatever was originally written by the original author of the book, which is traditionally said to be Moses. The establishing historical data in the Old Testament account has been ignored, edited, or omitted, and only the rudiments of the tale as it pertains to establishing the faith story remain intact for the reader, thus rendering the entire account as a means to bolster the faithful adherents to Jehovah worship, as opposed to being an accounting that bears information of historical or archaeological efficacy.
“The Bible says…” is an inordinately ineffectual mode of establishing the facts of any historical event mentioned in the scripture. Not because the story being referenced is innately false, but because the story has been incorporated into a book written for the purpose of building faith in religious followers as opposed to presenting information that places the tale into a historical setting. And when it comes to the story of Moses and the Exodus, the biblical account has a definitive “historical facts be damned” ring to it, as it is completely devoid of any solid reference that would allow the reader to establish without a doubt the who, what, where, when, and why of the story. The reasons for this blatant omission of fact from the biblical account are as highly speculative as they are overtly absent. To articulate the possible reasons as to why the facts were ignored would only serve as a speculative exercise. But in brief, the historical details were either omitted because the story itself is false and the writers wanted no connection made to any historical Egyptian monarch or archived event, or they were omitted because the purpose of the story’s presence in the scriptures was important only for purposes of telling a version of the events that would satisfy the overall mandate to bolster faith. The intimate details of these would be distractions to the story of God’s divine deliverance of his enslaved people.
By faith, one could assert that the story of Moses and the Exodus as presented in the Old Testament scriptures is complete and factual, despite not having the historical details enlisted. For faith, it is said in the three major religions of the world—Islam, Judaism, and Christianity—that the story is, indeed, truth, and that it is upheld and sustained by the divine will of God. Historical facts be damned. “If God had wanted the historical facts included, they would appear there,” so say the faithful, “therefore, God must not have wanted the historical facts included in the passage for whatever his reasons might be. It is not mine to question, but rather to believe.” And this is the issue of the faith perspective that allows for contradiction, historical inaccuracy, and the ignoring of facts that may contradict, controvert, or somehow cast the scriptural story in a different light.
There have been a veritable plethora of books written on the topic of Moses and the Exodus, each one dealing with the story from one of three basic perspectives:
1. The story as found in the scripture is the absolute truth, and all you need to do is believe it.
2. The story as found in the scripture is absolutely false and part of religious legend and myth.
3. The story as found in scripture is based on factual events that have been clouded by the faith story and the passage of time. But the big question is how to decipher—or decode—which perspective is “true.”
It is the contention of the authors of this book that the Exodus story is, indeed, a true story based in historical fact. It is also our contention that Moses is a historical character who was intimately involved in the real story behind the faith account recorded in the biblical text.
During the past year or so we have deliberated over the issues that surround faith, burning the midnight oil as we explore its relationship to not only the books of Moses but our own respective theories within the pages of this book, and also its impact upon us both spiritually and emotionally. What is faith? How does one measure its impact upon our own sphere of influence? Does one necessarily have to follow a religion to have faith? To possess the ability and aptitude in one’s emotional response to an event, and in doing so place the future consequences in the hands of faith is probably carried out by everyone on a daily basis, whether they serve within a religious community or not. We all have faith to a certain extent; it is how we interpret its effects upon our consciousness and sub-consciousness decision-making that determines its importance within our emotional state of mind. Is it all relative?
How does one truly describe the unknown? It is without form, shape, size, color, and depth, but it is that exact nothingness that faith feeds upon and allows us to continue the journey of exploration, not knowing what life has in store or what is around the next corner. We place our lives in the hands of an unknown equation that we have no control over. For sure there are those who will argue that destiny and other related pseudo religious dogma rule or govern our very existence, and that placing oneself in that area of religious comfort secures one’s fate. But is that not faith, the ability to embrace the unknown, and without fact or knowledge continue blindly without any further information regarding the next steps. We argue that one does not have to follow a religion to except the parameters of faith. If the emotional response to an experience leads to a series of events taking place that one does not have any control over, but is aware that they are the direct result of not reacting to the initial experience, is that not faith in one’s own ability to allow the natural occurrence to take place, without interference?
However, when dealing with sacred texts and other related ancient writings we employ the faith card to come to terms with outlandish terminology and events that we have no comprehension of in our modern world. Faith restores our equilibrium; it allows us to continue without having a major breakdown and dismissing that which we are trying to understand. It is an emotional state of mind that allows us to believe in myth and legend. For many, faith is a state of mind, a self-preservation switch that allows one to view the world in a totally different sphere than that of those who surround them. Like an alternative personality it equips us to deal with those issues that we have no understanding of or control over, and in times of trauma it takes over as the main driving force behind our psyche. One could equate it to an adrenaline rush, but on a conscious level. We have heard it said many times: It is my faith that keeps me going. A direct association to a higher power; is that God or some other Supreme Being or manifestation? Drawing on that association on a spiritual level, that person feels that he or she can deal with the trauma in his or her life while finding some kind of solace in his or her respective religious text. But what exactly is this strength, and is it tangible? How can we measure its effects upon the human body in terms of energy and endurance? Was it faith or belief that gave us the strength to climb Serabit el Khadim in search of our respective viziers? To a certain extent, it was our passion, belief, and faith in what we were trying to achieve that provided us with the necessary tools and energy that allowed us to climb the mountain. However, to the point of exhaustion in some respects to reach our goals, we endured hardship and discomfort in pursuit of knowledge, but always had faith and respect that we were on the correct path.
Was it faith and belief that carried us to those heights? Or was it the end result that drove us? Walking in the area where Moses climbed the same mountain to receive the word of God, we had faith in our own theories to such an extent that they manifested as our staff that supported us on our journey.
Do we have faith that one day there will be world peace? Do we have faith that we can eradicate famine? Is it faith that saves us from immediate impact by a stray asteroid from outer space? Can faith and belief in a higher power restore our belief in humanity and its ultimate self-destructive outlook? In these circumstances the word faith can be used to determine one’s own outlook on the greater picture, used as a common denominator that covers in general instead of a select few, but at the same time revealing a slight but ever-present religious undertone that serves as a backdrop to the word without becoming embroiled in religious dogma or scripture.
Faith as a word has become such a common metaphor in our modern world, yet it is also used to allow those within certain groups to continue along their respective paths regardless of the consequences or associated cost. It is widely accepted as a word associated with religion and other spiritual-based organizations, but is far stronger than using the word belief instead. To belong to a group that practices some sort of religious function, which has no foundation or physical representation within the sphere of quantifiable scientific methods, allows one to use the word faith as a defining metaphor. From our point of view, faith takes on a more religious tone and sets the bar at a height that we must walk under. It sets apart those who believe and those who question. But is there a harmony to be had between faith and fact? Can we truly merge the historical archaeological evidence with that of religious faith? We would like to believe there is a middle ground. We have faith in that!
The bulrushes along the River Nile.
Retracing the story of Exodus from its origin when Moses was floated within his pitch and reed basket upon the waters to where Moses died upon Mount Nebo overlooking the land of Gilead, we are presented with numerous acts of faith not only within the story, but in our ability to continue absorbing its contents. The binding word that is required to transform faith as an emotional reaction into a religious connotation is belief. To believe the contents of the story without question, to follow its word blindly, takes faith.
To believe the story of Moses without questioning any one of his miraculous feats is an act of faith; the plagues of Egypt and their entailing devastation inflicted upon the ancient Egyptians need no introduction, but it is faith that allows us to comprehend the disaster that unfolded before them and that it was indeed the Lord God that brought such chaos to the Egyptian empire as directed by Moses and Aaron, and not some natural phenomena, although it could be said that any natural disaster is an act of God by design, and again falls on belief first and then is backed by faith second. Faith allows us to continue and oblige the narrative without looking for an alternative suggestive reason. But belief acts as a supporting agent to the faith, going hand-in-hand together, allowing us to take on board the stories of biblical greatness and yet equating them to a size and nature that are acceptable to our thought process, without having to question the parameters of their existence. So, faith and belief work together in a single harmony, allowing the reader or believer to continue with strength of the message behind the stories with them, acting as their staff.
However, if one was to suggest a plausible alternative, does this then contradict the faith and belief in what one has just read? To a certain extent it supports it and underpins its validity without taking away any of its religious importance or the dogmatic role it has to play in the overall message. If the plagues of Egypt had a natural alternative explanation without taking away the devastating effects they had upon the ancient Egyptians, or the consequences of those affects with regards the releasing of the enslaved Hebrews, then does that then not support the message of God?
There are and will continue to be many times when we are confronted by the religious faith question; it is one that has continued to present itself to us time and time again throughout the researching of this book. Confronted by megalithic structures and characters that would have also trodden the same streets as Moses, do we have to take a leap of faith to believe this? To a certain extent we do, only because when confronted by that situation we have to have reference for the character of Moses; without it, one cannot place him there. This is one of the biggest problems that we have faced, and to a certain extent one that we do not have an answer for. Our own theories that we will discuss later pertain to various characters that we have researched, which could replace Moses as a biblical character, but not replace the events and stories behind him and his family.
This is the nature of dealing with a religious text that has been one of the main supporting pillars of the Judaic and Christian religions for thousands of years, which leads to another aspect of faith and belief in these holy texts: Are they considered metaphors for salvation, hiding behind a word or its meaning in a way that certifies one’s own belief system? Is faith, as a word, a religion in itself, without having to label it? Do you have faith in God, but at the same time have problems in dealing with the written word of Man? It is a question that really should be addressed if God is the divine and almighty power in the universe, then having faith in his physical manifestation, Jesus, and the numerous prophets surely allows room for maneuver.
This comes down to interpretation, but an earthly interpretation at that. Without entering a huge debate on the metaphysical state of the universe and where divine begins and ends, John considers himself to be of a spiritual nature, but lacks the ability to believe without questioning the words set out in biblical scripture. That does not mean that he does not respect or adhere to its codes or rules, which are set down for humankind within its leafy pages. No, he just does not possess the faith and belief in its actions and feats that are laid out. For the hardened Christian, he could be labeled as blasphemous for his words, but without context or reference, he has no evidence of representation with regard to the stories in Exodus. However, he can interpret them and place them in a context that he feels more comfortable with and, by doing so, share these insights and theories with others. But he cannot accept that you take them on faith, which would be placing him in the same context as the biblical scripture, something that would be a juxtaposition and contradictory.
For the ancient Egyptian, faith was a matter of everyday life; it was as natural as the rising of the sun in the morning sky, the inundation of the Nile waters bringing with it the fertile soil that allowed the great harvests to take place. Faith was their bedrock, in contradiction though, chaos brought with a devastating awakening that not all things could be controlled through the nurturing of the gods. If there was ever an opposite of faith I would suggest it would resemble something like the aspect of chaos that the ancient Egyptian feared so much. Nothing was left to chance: the daily routines, ceremonial practices, sacred rites, yearly festivals, and the never-ending servitude toward the ruling priest class and the divine personification of God on earth, Pharaoh. Everything centered on his well being; without a male heir to rule over men there would undoubtedly be chaos and thus disaster would strike. Belief and faith in the overriding state religion kept the populace at work, faith in the coming harvest, belief in the pantheon of Gods, faith in their ever Omni presence.