It concerns Moses, the ultimate liberator, and some truly wild accusations leveled against him.
Now, Josephus, in his work Against Apion, addresses these very claims, specifically those made by the Egyptian historian Manetho. It seems Manetho, while acknowledging Moses as "a wonderful and a divine person," also spins a rather… colorful tale.
The claim? That Moses, far from being a divinely inspired leader, was actually a leper from Heliopolis! And get this – they say he was kicked out of the city because of his condition. Talk about a smear campaign!
Josephus is having none of it. He points out the sheer ridiculousness of the timeline. Manetho’s own records, Josephus argues, place Moses a good 518 years before the events Manetho describes. (Against Apion 1.31) That’s quite a gap, wouldn’t you say?
But it gets better. Josephus highlights the laws that Moses himself established regarding leprosy. Think about it: Moses commanded that those afflicted with leprosy be isolated, kept apart, and undergo rigorous purification rituals. He stipulated that anyone who touched them or lived with them would be considered ritually unclean. As we see in Leviticus 13-14, these are pretty stringent rules.
Now, here’s the kicker: if Moses himself was a leper, as Manetho claims, why would he create such harsh laws against people suffering from the same condition? Wouldn’t he, out of empathy and self-preservation, advocate for more compassionate treatment? It just doesn't add up.
It's like setting up a system that actively works against your own interests. It defies logic! As Josephus asks, "How can it then be supposed that Moses should ordain such laws against himself, to his own reproach and damage who so ordained them?" (Against Apion 1.31)
And the absurdity doesn't stop there. Manetho also alleges that Moses's original name was Osarsiph – a name, Josephus notes, that bears no resemblance to Moses at all. The name Moses, Josephus reminds us, comes from the Egyptian word "Moil" meaning water, signifying someone saved from the water. (Against Apion 1.31)
So, what's the takeaway here? Josephus believes that Manetho, when relying on legitimate historical records, wasn't too far off the mark. But when he ventured into the realm of "fabulous stories," he either invented them himself or gave credence to those who were driven by animosity towards the Jewish people.
It's a reminder that history is often filtered through biases and agendas. Sometimes, the stories we hear, especially those that seem too sensational to be true, require a healthy dose of skepticism. Because sometimes, as in this case, they're simply too ridiculous to be believed.
Perhaps the most important lesson here is to consider the source. Who is telling the story, and what might be their motivation? Are they relying on facts and evidence, or are they peddling hearsay and prejudice? In the case of Manetho's claims against Moses, it seems the latter is far more likely.