It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Moses wore a veil???

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   
The Radiant Face of Moses....
29 When Moses came down from Mount Sinai with the two tablets of the covenant law in his hands, he was not aware that his face was radiant because he had spoken with the Lord. 30 When Aaron and all the Israelites saw Moses, his face was radiant, and they were afraid to come near him. 31 But Moses called to them; so Aaron and all the leaders of the community came back to him, and he spoke to them. 32 Afterward all the Israelites came near him, and he gave them all the commands the Lord had given him on Mount Sinai.

33 When Moses finished speaking to them, he put a veil over his face. 34 But whenever he entered the Lord’s presence to speak with him, he removed the veil until he came out. And when he came out and told the Israelites what he had been commanded, 35 they saw that his face was radiant. Then Moses would put the veil back over his face until he went in to speak with the Lord.


SO.......is the wearing of a veil in Islam due to Moses wanting to be bashful and pious and hide his radiant face or was Moses simply hiding a red hot and sweaty face? If the latter, what caused such a flushed reaction? Had he had a vindaloo at the top of Mount Sinai? Had he used a UV tanning sunbed? Had he been doing some headstands? What, at the top of the 'mountain of fire', could have caused Moses's face to flush?

Hard, I know....but we'll crack it in the end I'm sure. Hopefully in the next four decades though as I'll be dead by then. No hurry though....take your time.....

edit on 30-6-2012 by TheFogHorn because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 


I believe it was a fear thing, taken in context of what was going on you see the isrealites where a skittish after all they been through.

There is something called Hermeneutics that relates to how you should read historical documents, it involves actually knowing the historical customs at the time, general attitudes etc.

When you start to look at things that way, it eliminates many of the various issues people can have with doctrinal problems in Christianity.
edit on 30-6-2012 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 07:46 PM
link   


SO.......is the wearing of a veil in Islam due to Moses wanting to be bashful and pious and hide his radiant face or was Moses simply hiding a red hot and sweaty face?

The veil is a very old tradition, dating back even further than when Paul wrote the following verses...
1Corinthians 11:3-16

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. 6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. 10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. 11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. 12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God. 13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? 14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. 16 But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

As you've noticed in the above verses, the veil is for women traditionally. And its purpose is quite disturbing, considering how demeaning it is to women. So it is not a Hebrew tradition for men by any means.

However, among the Taureg of Northern Africa, it is the men who where veils, and not women. Yet, they practice a form of Islam.

Tuareg men begin wearing a veil at age 25, which conceals their entire face excluding their eyes. This veil is never removed, even in front of family members. It is believed that men began wearing the veil to protect their faces from the Sahara sands.


For an interesting, albeit "out there" theory on this, check the following...


What this sounds like to me is that there is going to be a radiation-like hazard during the time while the ship is landing on the mountain. The LORD commands that any man or beast which is in that danger zone at that time must be killed, not as a punishment (otherwise beasts would not be mentioned) but rather perhaps to prevent spreading a contamination such as radiation poisoning. However, after the ship lands and finishes what ever it was doing to cause this danger, the trumpet will sound the 'all-clear', and then it will be safe to approach the mountain.

Source

I've heard theories that whatever he was eating on that mount could have caused his skin to have a flushed look, but that isn't what the text says exactly, so....
edit on 6/30/2012 by Klassified because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 


Is your reply in any way related to my post?



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 






is the wearing of a veil in Islam due to Moses wanting to be bashful and pious and hide his radiant face or was Moses simply hiding a red hot and sweaty face?


Was I not clear? read the book the way it was supposed to be read.

I can grab any book from history, pick a verse, and make up some absurd notion based on it, IF i was not to follow standard methods for interpretation of historical documents.

IF you look at say Platos republic, with out any knowledge of what lead to it, with out knowledge of classical greek thinkers, with out putting in context, I might come away with many absurd notions or misconceptions as to the impact and meaning of things in the book.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Klassified
 


I thought you'd missed my point and taken my question too literally...and then I got to the space craft landing idea and sighed


Maybe I need to be more direct.

Ever considered the very dull possibility that Moses's face shon due to him staring agog at the 'glory of god', which was nothing other than lava? Could it be that the tabernacle, the other place where only he was permitted to enter and where he also gained a flushed face, could have been sited over a lava tube/vent?

I know it's so boring and definately not Star Trek but....



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 


I believe it was a fear thing, taken in context of what was going on you see the isrealites where a skittish after all they been through.

There is something called Hermeneutics that relates to how you should read historical documents, it involves actually knowing the historical customs at the time, general attitudes etc.

When you start to look at things that way, it eliminates many of the various issues people can have with doctrinal problems in Christianity.
edit on 30-6-2012 by benrl because: (no reason given)


What has any of this got to do with Moses' face shining???



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 





What has any of this got to do with Moses' face shining???


Okay do you really want theological answers? are do you just want confirmation of your theory god is a volcano and Moses got sun tan from lava.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 

If you read my whole post, you saw that I covered the "literal" aspect of your question, added something mundane, even though the text doesn't call for it. Food. And for a little fun, the "star trek" stuff.

Volcano? No different from a sunburn, really.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 





What has any of this got to do with Moses' face shining???


Okay do you really want theological answers? are do you just want confirmation of your theory god is a volcano and Moses got sun tan from lava.


I want a feasible explanation, which you cleary cannot give. You CAN, however, give a long winded and convoluted excuse....but they don't work on me.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 


Well lets see, from your very first statement you seem unwilling to compromise, would it be a futile waste of my time to explain theological concepts to someone who does not care to hear them.

You have to work at first clarifying your questions to a comprehensible answerable form, next, do you want to argue this from a Theological few point, do you want to look at it as viewing the text as a mythological document, much like the great Greek epics?

Do you wan't to argue religion and theism as a whole? again you are not presenting your questions in even a manner to which we could even begin to debate.

why even bother to try and propose new scientific theory to explain away events in a book you clearly have no interest even in studying in the manner of all ancient text and documents.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 

There was nothing wrong with your first post benrl. Look at his other thread, The Creator Was A...?
He believes God was a volcano, and hopes to prove it, I guess.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 


Well lets see, from your very first statement you seem unwilling to compromise, would it be a futile waste of my time to explain theological concepts to someone who does not care to hear them.

You have to work at first clarifying your questions to a comprehensible answerable form, next, do you want to argue this from a Theological few point, do you want to look at it as viewing the text as a mythological document, much like the great Greek epics?

Do you wan't to argue religion and theism as a whole? again you are not presenting your questions in even a manner to which we could even begin to debate.

why even bother to try and propose new scientific theory to explain away events in a book you clearly have no interest even in studying in the manner of all ancient text and documents.


This is a test.....2+2= ?



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by benrl
 

There was nothing wrong with your first post benrl. Look at his other thread, The Creator Was A...?
He believes God was a volcano, and hopes to prove it, I guess.



.... I AM doing and people email to support me and people are right now writing PHD's on the very subject.

You'd better prepare yourselves for it. Do some Google searches on the subjects and you will find a rapidly growing number of people connecting the dots. It's child's play when you see it.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 





2+2= ?




Am I to do your home work as well now?

If that was the level of intellectual debate I was dealing with in the first place I wouldn't have bothered, thought this would at least be an intriguing discussion.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 





2+2= ?




Am I to do your home work as well now?

If that was the level of intellectual debate I was dealing with in the first place I wouldn't have bothered, thought this would at least be an intriguing discussion.


Answered as expected.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 

I've heard this theory before. It's nothing new. Flyersfan mentioned it in a thread not so long ago. I may be an atheist/agnostic, but I'm not buying it. I don't care how many PHD's write about it. Too many other variables involved.

I would come nearer believing God was an alien, rather than a volcano, and I don't really buy that either.



posted on Jun, 30 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Klassified
reply to post by TheFogHorn
 

I've heard this theory before. It's nothing new. Flyersfan mentioned it in a thread not so long ago. I may be an atheist/agnostic, but I'm not buying it. I don't care how many PHD's write about it. Too many other variables involved.

I would come nearer believing God was an alien, rather than a volcano, and I don't really buy that either.



GOOGLE 'was god a volcano' and 'yahweh volcano'

Take your time. I'm off to bed to get my remaining three hours sleep.

edit on 30-6-2012 by TheFogHorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2012 @ 06:51 AM
link   
I dont know about the veil but the statue of Moses at the vatican shows him having horns..Wassup wit dat ?



posted on Jul, 1 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by avatard
 

It was supposedly a mistranslation of a word in the Latin Vulgate:


The Bible that was in use during Michelangelo's time was the Latin Vulgate. Exodus 34:29 says " When Moses came down from Mount Sinai, . . . he did not know that the skin of his face shone because he had been talking with God." For the word shone, the Latin uses the word cornuta (cornu means horn). So, Moses grew horns while he talked with God. In the original Hebrew, the word used here does mean shone.

Source


Owing to the representations of the old painters and sculptors, it has become a wide-spread belief that Moses, when he came down from Mount Sinai with the tables of the Law, had two horns on his forehead. This strange idea, however, is based upon a wrong interpretation of Ex. xxxiv. 29, 35, ("And behold the skin of his face shone"), in which means "to shine" (comp. Hab. iii. 4, = "brightness was on his side"). The old translations give = "shine," with the exception of Aquila and the Vulgate, which read "his face had horns." This misunderstanding, however, may have been favored by the Babylonian and Egyptian conception of horned deities (Sin, Ammon), and by the legend of the two-horned Alexander the Great (see the Koran, sura xviii. 85).

Source

However, there is some debate among scholars as to whether or not this was actually a mistranslation.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join