Mosor

In my history of political theory class we discussed Machiavelli's The Prince. My professor, who happens to be Jewish, dropped this bombshell on us. It is perhaps the biggest reason why I am an agnostic right now.

Anyways, for his lecture on Machiavelli's theories, my prof discussed Niccolo's examples of whom a Prince should emulate. Machiavelli puts up Romulus, Cyrus, Theseus and Moses as leaders to be admired. How does Moses compare to the other three? Throughout the book Machiavelli stresses the need for "good laws" and "good arms". One cannot be successful without the other.

My professor went on to stress that Moses was successful because he was able to impose his laws on the Jews through force of arms. He was not above killing anyone who didn't follow him. Moses didn't stress that God was the only god but the "true god" i.e. Moses' god. However, all the rhetoric about god was simply the standard tool of enforcing compliance back in ancient times. Even in the bible it states the israelites witnessed God's miracles but continued to fall into disblief. How unlikely is that? If you witnessed a burning pillar of fire or mana from heaven or the parting of a sea, would you suddenly stop worshiping God? I wouldn't.

After liquidating the opposition Moses then has the power to impose his laws, i.e. the ten commandments. Fortunately the laws were generally seen to be just so it was accepted by the majority after much physical coercion.

Moses then puts his family, the levites, as rulers over the other tribes. They become the priests who wield great power and influence. Over the ages they inevitably become corrupt, looking only to maintian their own power and authority.

I'm not very knowledgeble in biblical scholarship but I found his arguement very powerful and convincing. However, I don't think my overview does it the least bit of justice. What does everyone else think?

Chili

Well I am not very knowledgeble in anything but I do think that Moses was wrong to lead the Children of Israel into the promised land where they died 'nonetheless.' The point here is that in the promised land we should never die (or it would not be the promised land), unless we have been placed there under coercion of a religious leader who was lost himself.

In this case the God of Moses was just Moses' idea of God and that should never be someones elses idea of God in a second hand kind of way. This would be the reason why unbelief returned to them each night and new passages had to be added each morning to brighten their day (and this all in a land where evening should not follow the the day as per Rev. 22:5).

I think it was wrong to part the waters to get into the promised land and do the gospels not tell us that we must walk on top of the waters to get there?

How about freedom from the law (Gal. 5:1) instead of a new sin complex added to us as Gods favorite people. Funny thing is that the whole thing reminds me of a Billy Graham inspired US style dominion over the rest of the world . . . or is history just repeating itself here?

shunyadragon

Moses is an interesting charactor, because, like Jesus, little if nothing is known about him outside the Bible.

Intersting points of history and the Bible.

(1) Finding the male child of the royal family in a basket on the Nile is a common story to bestow Divinity as being desendent from the Gods not man. This would have bestowed upon Moses a special station in the future.

Using the story to justify Moses as Hebrew was convenient to fit the theme and purpose of Exodus.

(2) Moses' special station and the fact that he was not the first born son of the Pharoh so this creates problems and conflicts in the royal family. So from the beginning Moses was in trouble. If he did not do something he would likely have been killed in the rivalry for the throne. He was probably lucky to have survived childhood.

(3) I think the title Moses actually means general of the royal house of Egypt.

(4) The Exodus from Egypt was likely a rebellion planned by Moses, because of his shaky position in the Royal House of Egypt.

(5) A cruel despot? For his time, no. Leaders at that time were not user friendly to the common folk. He was likely a very clever prince and general and figured a way to get out of dodge when he was framed for murder and likely going to be the victum of royal conspiracies. He needed a people and an Army.

(6) Even though there is a distinct lack of any record of Moses in Egyptian history, there are a number of defaced statues of a royal prince dated to about the time of Moses that may have been him.

(7) Archeologically the whole of Exodus is in trouble. There is not any archeological evidence for the huge encampments and settlements in the Sinai described by Exodus.

(8) Monotheism was a competing religious belief in Egypt. One of Moses' problems may have been his choice was not very popular with other member of the royal family and religious elite. He may have found sympathetic support among the Hebrews.

j-ogenes

Allow me, kind folks, to do something a bit unconventional. This issue is one I address in a novel I'm writing. I am going to post a brief excerpt from it--of course this is a novel and not a book making an argument. I thought some may be interested in this.

The main character his named Shell, short for Michelle, and she's at a Seventh-Day Adventist boarding academy:

The next time Shell got in trouble with the administration was for writing a comparison contrast paper in Mrs. Kingsley's Bible class which took as its thesis that Virgil's tale of the Trojans being expunged from their city and traversing, finally, to Latinium, was a more inspiring diaspora narrative than the myth of the Israelites wandering from Egypt to Canaan. The chief problem with the story of the Exodus, she argued, was that the Israelites had to wander in the desert for forty years for nor greater an offense than griping. Moses himself never got to see the promised land, and why? For being an ineffective middle-manager? What kind of myth was that, Shell wanted to know. In the Aeneid, when the people became disillusioned and impatient, they set fire to the fleet of ships, rather than muttering like Israelites. And Aeneas summoned the help--the help!--of Jupiter and his rainstorm that put the fire out. No punishments above and beyond the significance of the crime, just action. Aeneas was active, killing hundreds when he got mad, not banging his shepherd's staff on a rock. His killings were swift and manly--Moses, on the other hand, was queer and psychotic, making his people eat the grit of the golden calf they'd made, in melted- down powder form. Shell received an F and was asked to write the paper again. She had to meet with both Mrs. Kingsley and the school's dean, who had drafted, before the meeting, a letter to her parents, describing this issue as very grave, and mentioning the possibility of a suspension.
Mr. Colney's office was a big, obtuse-feeling square, his desk too far out from the wall behind it. Shell sat next to Mrs. Kingsley on cheap, aluminum fold-out chairs. The dean's chair wasn't any luxury, a bland office-type with lots of swivel, covered, inexplicably, with what appeared to be a navy bath towel. Perhaps Colney was a profuse sweater. The room seemed in flux, flanked on the short ends with book cases both half full, both containing several copies of a particular biology text the dean seemed to have received a surfeit of. Also, a portrait, rather lovely, of Ellen G. White sat indifferently against one of the bookshelves, its left side butting the wall. It was as though Mr. Colney had been fired several times in the last few days, then spared a few minutes into his packing.
Shell had been in the office for twenty minutes and felt it may be several hours round and round. The problem was, she wasn't sure exactly what the three of them were supposed to be arguing. Well, they weren't. She was just being lectured. But that was something she felt she'd outgrown--there should be a discussion, a role for her to play. But she wasn't disputing her grade, or wouldn't have, if not to fill her part in the conversation, to have an active role rather than sitting and being fired at. She didn't care what someone at this idiot school wanted to scrawl atop one of her compositions. What she did want was someone to read what she'd written and come back with something interesting, disagreement or otherwise.
Mr. Colney and Mrs. Kingsley's problem was that Shell had repeatedly referred to the Exodus story as a myth, that she'd considered it on equal terms with whatever this "An-Ide" was, and that she'd critiqued God's actions and, seemingly, his right to take them.

Al Kafirun

The only thing I disagree with (but I'm nobody so who cares what I think) is the assumption that the accounts of Moses accurately reflect history. But the fact that such an interpretation can be lifted from pious holy writ says a lot in favor of Machiavelli's theories.

JEST2ASK

Very good how far along are you ... ??
I would like to read more ...

As to the OP I agree in "General" principle... I also thinkthat a "Real" life Moses would be a more interesting study than the Biblical one ... However something that I was always somewhat confused by is that Aaron's son's not those of Moses became the Priests...
I think it had something to do with the linage of his wife ... Again something hinting (IMO) at the real world underpining of the myth / legend ...

JEST2ASK

I also see several parrells to a certain real historical figure who was the founder of a later religion (Hint Islam)

repoman

Moses means "drawn from the water" as I learned from "The Bible Unearthed".

Also in that book, so far it seems that Moses probably never existed or at least not as a leader of an exodus. It seems that the Hebrews settled in the Eastern Nile delta and then were forced out in a battle (possibly in 1570 BCE not at about 1320 BCE matching with Ramesses reign). The exodus story was made up later to (my opinion) save face over being defeated.

Al Kafirun

That's the thing with examining abstract concepts like this. Most of what you need to draw on is fiction. History is fairytales minus 80% of the boasting.

batjew

Well, he was to me at least brutal. Stoning a guy to death for working on the sabbath isn't nice.