Did Abraham ever really exist?

Did Abraham ever really exist? The Old Testament puts Abraham having lived at about 2,000 BC. The story wasn't written down until the post-exile period around 500 B.C. So, 1500 years after the alleged events of Abraham, the story is finally solidified. (That is supposedly a reliable eyewitness account, right?) And it turns out that the alleged historical events discussed around the story of Abraham couldn't have happened.

If a religion can't survive the light of truth ... it is unworthy of consideration.

Abraham

The Bible's internal chronology places Abraham around 2000 BCE,[6] but the stories in Genesis cannot be definitively related to the known history of that time, and the opinion of the overwhelming majority of modern biblical scholars is that the Pentateuch (the series of books of which includes Genesis) was shaped in the post-Exilic period.

Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives

"Not only has archaeology not proven a single event of the patriarchal traditions to be historical, it has not shown any of the traditions to be likely."

Abraham in History and Tradition

The book is divided into two parts, Abraham in History and Abraham in Tradition. In Part I part Van Seters argues that there is no unambiguous evidence pointing to an origin for the stories in the 2nd millennium BC. "Arguments based on reconstructing the patriarch's nomadic way of life, the personal names in Genesis, the social customs reflected in the stories, and correlation of the traditions of Genesis with the archaeological data of the Middle Bronze Age have all been found, in Part One above, to be quite defective in demonstrating an origin for the Abraham tradition in the second millennium B.C.".

Specially devastating was his analysis of Genesis 14, where he pointed out that the political situation described in Genesis 14 - a Near East dominated by a coalition led by Elam and including Hatti, Assyria and Babylonia - is not confirmed by any monuments, king lists, or other historical and archaeological sources. Van Seters also pointed out that the ten kings mentioned in Genesis 14 cannot be found in any ancient documents outside the Bible

NOVA/PBS - No historical or archeological evidence for either Moses or Abraham ever existing

Christian site - Tries to prove Abraham story is true, but ends up confirming that the story was written 1500 years after Abraham supposedly existed and it got all landmarks wrong

Did Abraham Exist?

Whether or not Abraham existed, the stories written about Abraham in Genesis are not historically true. For example, Abraham could not have walked to the land of the Philistines centuries before these sea people came ashore in the Levant. While this alone does not prove his non-existence, it points in that direction. Of course, archaeology can not be expected to prove or disprove the existence of a man like Abraham.

If the Patriarchs lived, then the Israelites should have sojourned in Egypt, but there is no evidence of this in the Egyptian records. If Moses did not live then it is unlikely that Abraham lived. For Moses to have lived, there would have to have been an Exodus from slavery in Egypt and a military conquest of the land of the Canaanites. Not only do almost all scholars say there was no biblical Exodus from Egypt and that there was no unified conquest of the Canaanites, they say that the Hebrew people were really Canaanites who left the region of the rich coastal cities to settle in the hitherto sparsely populated hinterland. There was no biblical Moses and there was no Hebrew Patriarch called Abraham.

Oh... and it's impossible for Abraham to have built the Kaaba That story doesn't add up either. And all this means that Muhammad can't claim Abraham as an ancestor because Abraham wasn't real. And that means the Cave of the Patriarchs is bogus too.

Answering Abraham Very long, but excellent presentations by Ibn Warraq on the errors in the Old Testament Patriarchs Stories.

QUESTION - Isn't Sarah already an old lady when she and Abraham go into Egypt? So why is Abraham supposedly uptight about his wifes' supposed great beauty' bringing the attention of the Pharaoh?? And the middle kingdom of Egypt history doesn't match the Abraham account.

ANOTHER QUESTION - The City of Dan didn't exist in Abrahams time so how could he chase an enemy to it??

Oh ... and William F. Albright has been debunked and overturned. Just FYI to anyone who was going to quote him.

In the years since his death, Albright's methods and conclusions have been increasingly questioned. Fellow Biblical archaeologist William Dever notes that "[Albright's] central theses have all been overturned, partly by further advances in Biblical criticism, but mostly by the continuing archaeological research of younger Americans and Israelis to whom he himself gave encouragement and momentum ... The irony is that, in the long run, it will have been the newer "secular" archaeology that contributed the most to Biblical studies, not "Biblical archaeology."

Biblical scholar Thomas L. Thompson contends that the methods of "biblical archaeology" have also become outmoded: "[Wright and Albright's] historical interpretation can make no claim to be objective, proceeding as it does from a methodology which distorts its data by selectivity which is hardly representative, which ignores the enormous lack of data for the history of the early second millennium, and which wilfully establishes hypotheses on the basis of unexamined biblical texts, to be proven by such (for this period) meaningless mathematical criteria as the 'balance of probability' ...

Was Abraham Ethical?

IF Abraham existed, which there doesn't seem to be any credible evidence that he did, then he was one sick puppy Supposedly he tried to murder his child and sacrifice him to his God. Voices told him to ... and voices told him not to do it at the last minute.

THIS is the father of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam??
Not exactly a stable foundation ... if the foundation exists at all.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Very interesting topic FF! Starred and flagged.

Personally, I think that Abraham represents a creeping influence of Hinduism in the middle east.

There is definitely a connection between Abraham and Sarah and BRAHMA AND SARAWATI.

There are certain striking similarities between the Hindu god Brahma and his consort Saraisvati, and the Jewish Abraham and Sarai, that are more than mere coincidences. Although in all of India there is only one temple dedicated to Brahma, this cult is the third largest Hindu sect.

Abraham was likely the Historical Hammurabbi, or his teacher. He was a gentle shining light in a brutal and savage world. He fed the hungry, clothed the naked, and enlightened the stupid. And even if he wasnt an actual person, yes, there is much to learn from the narrative of his life. He overcame his most powerful inclinations to do the will of his creator, which he loved more than anything on this earth. To put a murderous label on him would be a misnomer. His whole life was dedicated to helping the less fortunate. Imagine Ur, the Legendary UR, and BAM, Hammurabbi and all his religious followers just up and leave to journey in tents in the Canaanite deserts. Do a little research, speak less from ignorance, and the historical evidence backs ups the Bible. Just let yourself see it

For me its not a big step that he existed . As far as a piece of archaeological evidence existing to prove or disprove by scholars and acidemia goes ,well lets look at that great big Pyramid in Egypt and see what the so called scholars have to say about it ...something is wrong with that historical story and most people know it . Sometimes its much easier to believe a simple story then to buy into a great fiction ... Your thread should be interesting to follow ..who knows maybe tomorrow archaeology will uncover the truth but ,who and how its interpreted can always be debated ....peace

reply to post by windword

Funny you brought that up!!
I was just reading this morning ... tracing backwards the beliefs.
Islam goes backwards to the Christian which goes backwards to Judaism.
The 'Abrahamic' religions go backwards to the Vedics and then Zorostrianism (2,000 BC).
Themes remain ... names change. I've had an interesting morning reading it.

dashen
Do a little research, speak less from ignorance, and the historical evidence backs ups the Bible.

I DID do research. There is no historical evidence that Abraham existed.
You claim that historical evidence backs up the Abraham account? Then prove it.
Post the information here. Otherwise .... speak less from ignorance. (to use your quote).

windword
Personally, I think that Abraham represents a creeping influence of Hinduism in the middle east.

There is definitely a connection between Abraham and Sarah and BRAHMA AND SARAWATI.

There are certain striking similarities between the Hindu god Brahma and his consort Saraisvati, and the Jewish Abraham and Sarai, that are more than mere coincidences. Although in all of India there is only one temple dedicated to Brahma, this cult is the third largest Hindu sect.

I think you may have it backwards my friend. The Aryans who invaded Northern India thousands of years ago were likely the children of Abraham and Keturah his concubine after Sarah's passing.

to quote the OT " Genesis 25:6:

And to the sons of Abraham's concubines, Abraham gave gifts, and he sent them away from his son Isaac while he [Abraham] was still alive, eastward to the land of the East."

FlyersFan

dashen
Do a little research, speak less from ignorance, and the historical evidence backs ups the Bible.

I DID do research. There is no historical evidence that Abraham existed.
You claim that historical evidence backs up the Abraham account? Then prove it.
Post the information here. Otherwise .... speak less from ignorance. (to use your quote).

Excuse me, do you Believe that Hammurabbi ever existed? or do you contest that too? If they were different people they were contemporaries. The Code of Hammurabi and parts of the OT are identical. The OT mentions the Abraham was the son of the spiritual leader of UR, Terach. Nimrod was king in the fertile crescent in those days. The power structure in those days was a sort of caste system. from the bottom up, untouchables, merchants, tradesmen, military, landlords, ministers, king/priests(contended for power), and the guy who made the temple gods. Abraham had the most kush situation in the world. If only he had maintained the Status Quo. Instead the risked his life repeatedly in waking the people that the Creator of All is not made of stone or wood but is in all times and in all places, and it is our duty to search Him out in a world which was made to hide Him

dashen
To put a murderous label on him would be a misnomer.

Dude .. he was going to murder his child on the orders of 'voices' that he heard. That's murder.

Cant even prove jesus existed and that was half as long ago. For the first 300 years xtians didnt think he was real. Now they do thanks to Nicea.

dashen
I think you may have it backwards my friend. The Aryans who invaded Northern India thousands of years ago were likely the children of Abraham and Keturah his concubine after Sarah's passing.

Look at the religion of the Vedics and the Zoroastrians (from 2000 bc). And look at the Summerian religion which (from 4000 bc) Then look at the fact that the story of Abraham wasn't written until around the year 500 BC and that Judaism was built upon that story.

The similarities of the Jewish faith can be seen evolving from the Vedics and the Zoroastrians and the Summerians - ALL which predate Judaism. The creation myth story of Adam and Eve is from the Summerians. The Noahs Ark story is from the Summerians as well. They were freely adapted by the Jews and made into their own stories. But they started in other religions that predated Judaism by hundreds and thousands of years.

So no .. he doesn't have it backwards. He's got the time line correct. IF there was an Abraham, his children may have gone down into India .. but the religion that was there predates them by hundreds and thousands of years.

FlyersFan

dashen
To put a murderous label on him would be a misnomer.

Dude .. he was going to murder his child on the orders of 'voices' that he heard. That's murder.

Its so much better than that. Isaac was 36 years old at the time of the binding. Abraham only told his son that he was to be the sacrifice at the last moment. Isaac understood and asked to be bound because he wanted to be a perfect sacrifice. It is profoundly difficult to understand the mindset of these people. To label them as people who "heard voices" only serves to begin the dialogue in a negative tone. Besides "hearing voices" he taught the , readin', ritin', and 'rithmetic to the illiterate masses at the Dawn of Civilization. And the only reason you can read right now may just be because of him.

FlyersFan

dashen
I think you may have it backwards my friend. The Aryans who invaded Northern India thousands of years ago were likely the children of Abraham and Keturah his concubine after Sarah's passing.

Look at the religion of the Vedics and the Zoroastrians (from 2000 bc). And look at the Summerian religion which (from 4000 bc) Then look at the fact that the story of Abraham wasn't written until around the year 500 BC and that Judaism was built upon that story.

The similarities of the Jewish faith can be seen evolving from the Vedics and the Zoroastrians and the Summerians - ALL which predate Judaism. The creation myth story of Adam and Eve is from the Summerians. The Noahs Ark story is from the Summerians as well. They were freely adapted by the Jews and made into their own stories. But they started in other religions that predated Judaism by hundreds and thousands of years.

So no .. he doesn't have it backwards. He's got the time line correct. IF there was an Abraham, his children may have gone down into India .. but the religion that was there predates them by hundreds and thousands of years.

Except that Judaism is almost OCD about recording bloodlines. In the OT every player can have their ancestry placed back to Adam. Genesis goes from Adam, at the Dawn of Ancient Civilization, to Joseph in in around the 18th Dynasty of ancient Egypt. There's your few thousand years right there. In reality the whole book is just a thread of these particular characters through history which where a "Light Unto Mankind".

dashen
do you Believe that Hammurabbi ever existed? or do you contest that too?

The Code of Hammurabbi exists. It dates to 1772 BC. Hammurabbi enacted it.

The Code of Hammurabi and parts of the OT are identical.

So? The Code of Hammurabi doesn't confirm that Abraham existed.
It is a set of laws to live by that were commonly seen throughout that part of the world.
And the Code of Hammurabbi predates Exodus when Moses supposedly got the 10 commandments
so that is why the Old Testament has some similarities .. it borrowed from the Code of
Hammurabbi. And the code of Hammurabbi and the OT both borrowed from the
Summerians for the creation myth and noahs ark stories. So of course some of it
will be similar.

The OT mentions the Abraham was the son of the spiritual leader of UR, Terach. Nimrod was king in the fertile crescent in those days.

Again ... so? The ONLY place Abraham is talked about is the Old Testament ... and
then the Muslims talk about him because they borrowed off the Old Testament. There
is no historical or archeological evidence outside the OT that Abraham existed.
And that OT story was written 1500 years after Abraham supposedly existed.

How do you account for the errors in the story of Abraham?
Like him going in to Dan with his troops .. when Dan didn't even exist at that time??

dashen
And the only reason you can read right now may just be because of him.

That's downright silly.

And The dude heard 'voices' and tried to kill his kid.
IF he even existed at all.
Spin it any way you want. That's crazy and that's murder.

dashen
Except that Judaism is almost OCD about recording bloodlines.

Except that they HAD to get it wrong because the world isn't 6,000 years old.
And that's what the bloodline recordings claim. The world is 6,000 years old.
Not to mention the fact, that once again, there is still no proof that Abraham existed.
A debunked bloodline list (age of the world debunks it) in the Old Testament
doesn't prove he existed.

reply to post by dashen


If, as you say, Abraham was Hammurabbi then why wasn't he called Hammurabbi and all his good deeds you mention given. Seems a far better originator than the Biblical Abraham who nearly made a blood sacrifice of his own son. Most people like to criticise Pagans for that kind of behaviour.

There is no historical Abraham, he is like the beginning of the Bible, begged, borrowed or stolen from other religions in order to unite a bedraggled group into a separate people and culture.

There are a number of questions about Abraham, one open question is whether Abraham was circumcised, if not was he Jewish? Why did he travel and who was Sarah? Some have said she was also his sister - In Egypt his behaviour was somewhat strange especially as another pointed out that she must have been an old woman and Pharoah, would have been unlikely to have looked on her with lust, having the pick of a huge number of wives for his entertainment.

Biblical Abraham is a story most of us hear as children. Religion is pumped into kids so that during their formative years they accept this knowledge without questioning it. Once one gets older one doesn't think about it, its still just accepted. Its only comparatively recently that people have questioned their religious conditioning/indoctrination and looked at these impossible stories they believed as children. You would also need to be very strange to wander for some 40 years in the desert with the stars to navigatge by.

dashen

FlyersFan

dashen
To put a murderous label on him would be a misnomer.

Dude .. he was going to murder his child on the orders of 'voices' that he heard. That's murder.

Isaac was 36 years old at the time of the binding. Abraham only told his son that he was to be the sacrifice at the last moment. Isaac understood and asked to be bound because he wanted to be a perfect sacrifice.

where are you getting this from?
Genesis Chapter 22:5

And Abraham said unto his young men: 'Abide ye here with the ass, and I and the >lad< will go yonder; and we will worship, and come back to you.'

lad a 36 years old man


Genesis Chapter 22:8

And Abraham said: 'God will provide Himself the lamb for a burnt-offering, my son.' So they went both of them together.

Abraham lied and nowhere does it say Abraham told Isaac it just says he 'bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar'

FlyersFan

Again ... so? The ONLY place Abraham is talked about is the Old Testament ... and
then the Muslims talk about him because they borrowed off the Old Testament. There
is no historical or archeological evidence outside the OT that Abraham existed.
And that OT story was written 1500 years after Abraham supposedly existed.

How do you account for the errors in the story of Abraham?
Like him going in to Dan with his troops .. when Dan didn't even exist at that time??

Read Above in this thread about Brahmin and Sarasvati? so yea, and the Hammurabbi connection. In the Jewish tradition Abraham taught the Torah before it was put to writing by Moses. Abraham was taught by Shem, son of Noah, and Eber son of Shem. Noah learned from Methusaleh, he from Lemech and So on till Adam. Torah is a fluid thing, which takes the shape of its container and is affected by the environment, time and context and vice-versa. Only when it was transmitted through the lense and experience of Moses and his Generation was it crystalized into a form that would encompass all human experience.

racasan

dashen

FlyersFan

dashen
To put a murderous label on him would be a misnomer.

Dude .. he was going to murder his child on the orders of 'voices' that he heard. That's murder.

Isaac was 36 years old at the time of the binding. Abraham only told his son that he was to be the sacrifice at the last moment. Isaac understood and asked to be bound because he wanted to be a perfect sacrifice.

where are you getting this from?
Genesis Chapter 22:5

And Abraham said unto his young men: 'Abide ye here with the ass, and I and the >lad< will go yonder; and we will worship, and come back to you.'

lad a 36 years old man


Genesis Chapter 22:8

And Abraham said: 'God will provide Himself the lamb for a burnt-offering, my son.' So they went both of them together.

Abraham lied and nowhere does it say Abraham told Isaac it just says he 'bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar'

6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, 7 Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”

“Yes, my son?” Abraham replied.

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”

22.8 Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.

He told him in a non shocking way as to not make Isaac lose his resolve. Abraham was 136 years old at this point, so yes a 36 year old is a lad.