Did Abraham ever really exist?

Abram aka Abraham – awesome role model!!1!!!

Genesis 12:10-20
Basically he tells his wife to say she is his sister because he might be killed when they go to Egypt.

Pharaoh sees Sarai and thinking she’s Abram sister, gives Abram a bunch of stuff (sheep and slaves and so on) so he can get with her.

God then plagues Pharaoh for this action – Pharaoh says to Abram ‘wtf dude you nearly got me in some real trouble with that lying, so get your wife and all the stuff I gave you together and gtfo’

Genesis 20:1-18
Then (after a name change to throw off the authorities) Abraham goes south and pulls the same scam again to Abimelech king of Gerar


If you chuck in the wanting to kill people because of the voices in his head with the stuff above and you can understand why he’s considered the father of the 3 main theistic religions

reply to post by w810i


So its different for people to hear voices in their head back then compared to today?

The guy was on the verge of stabbing his son to death because a voice in his head told him to, try to twist it whichever way you like, but that sounds like a crazy person to me.

3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by w810i

 

So its different for people to hear voices in their head back then compared to today?

The guy was on the verge of stabbing his son to death because a voice in his head told him to, try to twist it whichever way you like, but that sounds like a crazy person to me.

edit on 24-9-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)

Did I say that? No I didn't. All I am saying is that things were looked at in a totally different context especially in regards to religion then they are today.

reply to post by w810i


Of course people looked at religion differently back then, they were illiterate and didn't know any better.

The fact still remains that a man hearing voices in his head telling him to kill his son who was actually willing to do it is crazy, no matter what culture or time you belong to. I'm sure people valued family back then as well right? So a man willing to kill his only son on account of voices would have been looked down on I'm sure.

3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by w810i

 

Of course people looked at religion differently back then, they were illiterate and didn't know any better.

The fact still remains that a man hearing voices in his head telling him to kill his son who was actually willing to do it is crazy, no matter what culture or time you belong to. I'm sure people valued family back then as well right? So a man willing to kill his only son on account of voices would have been looked down on I'm sure.

Take a look thru history and the number of sacrifices that happened in the name of religion. It was a very common event. A lot of those were sacrifices of family members for one reason or another and to many different "Gods" Going by that avenue it would appear as though it was an accepted part of life in that day. To answer your question No I don't think people would have looked down upon him in that setting. Once again you have to take in the account the effect religion had on people back then. It wasn't something that was questioned. If someone said "hey I just heard this voice that said I need to kill so and so and they told me they (the voice) was God" I seriously doubt anyone questioned the validity of the claim.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Yes he did. He was actually born around 1809 and eventually became President of the (Once united again) United States. Then he was assasinated. Oh wait...wrong guy.

salainen
What evidence would be sufficient for you to believe that Abraham existed?

Something other than the bible. A second source. A credible source.
And no, the Qur'an doesn't count as a credible source
Those are fairy tales ... totally unbelievable ... and mostly debunked.
Maybe some archeological evidence.

The bottom line looks like this ....

Did Abraham exist? WE DO NOT KNOW.

The only 'proof' outside of the Old Testament stories is that Jesus mentioned
Abraham. "Before Abraham I Am".

For many people, that's good enough proof.
And I admit that it is strong in my eyes because of my beliefs.
But ... I'd like to see something outside of the bible.

NewAgeMan
Abraham's near sacrifice of Isaac was a prophetic foreshadowing of the cross of Jesus,

I know Christians spin it that way. But honestly ... I really don't think so.

guitarplayer
So when the op wants to argue about this or that about the bible or the Church I will remind them that they do not believe that the basics of the three religions is Abraham therefore their argument for the bible or the church is flawed.

My religious beliefs in a discussion about the bible or church are irrelevant to the discussion.
Just as my religious beliefs in this matter are irrelevant.
Its' entirely appropriate to discuss the facts ... such as 'the bible says this' or 'the church says that',
without buying into what the bible or the church say.

Example. I can tell you exactly where the Mormons get 'baptism of the dead' from.
I'm capable of discussing it. That doesn't mean I have to believe what they believe.

Kaboose
Wow you sure put a lot of effort into attacking Christianity and the Bible,

No. I put a lot of effort into putting the facts down for people to read.
If you don't like the direction those facts take .. that's your problem .. not mine.

of course your opinion is completely biased that is obvious.

I now have an opinion that we can't be sure that Abraham existed.
It's based on FACTS. There is nothing wrong with making an educated opinion.

Funny how most historical accounts written down are accepted as evidence, but the Bible is rejected by folks like you.

Funny how the old testament mythical accounts are accepted as evidence, but REAL EVIDENCE is rejected by folks like you.

Yet is has always been proven over and over to be accurate contrary to what you say.

Empty words on your part.
Prove that the story of Adam and Eve is accurate. Good luck with that.
Prove that the story of Noahs Ark is accurate. Good luck with that.
Prove that the Psalms were actually all written by David. Good luck with that.
Prove that Abraham existed. Good luck with that.
Prove that Moses actually lead the Jews out of slavery. Good luck with that.

Enjoy the blue pill, when it is time for you to leave the matrix, then I guess you will find out the real truth.

Right back atchya.

3NL1GHT3N3D1
Just because Jesus read and taught from the OT does not mean he believed it was the word of God. It could mean that he was using the material he had at the time to expose it as the lie it was.

Jesus could have used materials that the peasants He was working with could understand. He said that He had much more to teach them, but they weren't ready for it. If Jesus had said the Abraham story was wrong, or that Moses didn't really lead the Jews out of Slavery in Egypt ... no one would have listened to His message. He would have been rejected by everyone immediately. Some people can't handle truth . (as is evidenced by some of the remarks by people on this thread .. refusing to look at the facts presented ... clinging to their indoctrinated notion of what is 'correct' ... and just spewing personal insults instead of dealing with the facts).

Of course, Peter (previous poster) could be correct. It was about providing context not historical accuracy. Jesus was working with some pretty uneducated people. He could have been giving a time frame for reference and not an actual historical teaching.

Then again .. he could have been confirming that Abraham actually existed and the severe lack of evidence that we have in this matter doesn't mean anything. Abraham may have actually existed. The stories about him could be true. Or he could have existed and the stories about him were totally made up over the 1500 years between when he lived and when they were written down. That actually makes a lot of sense as well.

It's possible that there was an Abraham .. and the stories surrounding him were just myth.

Who knows. I guess we'll find out for sure when we are dead.

NewAgeMan
the OP is a Bible reading Catholic (which means universal).

I was raised Catholic. I kept what I think is good from the Catholics, but I accept truth that others teach. Like some of what Buddha teaches for example. And the Hindus have some pretty credible beliefs. No one religion seems to have it 'right'.

FlyersFan

3NL1GHT3N3D1
Just because Jesus read and taught from the OT does not mean he believed it was the word of God. It could mean that he was using the material he had at the time to expose it as the lie it was.

Jesus could have used materials that the peasants He was working with could understand. He said that He had much more to teach them, but they weren't ready for it. If Jesus had said the Abraham story was wrong, or that Moses didn't really lead the Jews out of Slavery in Egypt ... no one would have listened to His message. He would have been rejected by everyone immediately. Some people can't handle truth . (as is evidenced by some of the remarks by people on this thread .. refusing to look at the facts presented ... clinging to their indoctrinated notion of what is 'correct' ... and just spewing personal insults instead of dealing with the facts).

Of course, Peter (previous poster) could be correct. It was about providing context not historical accuracy. Jesus was working with some pretty uneducated people. He could have been giving a time frame for reference and not an actual historical teaching.

Then again .. he could have been confirming that Abraham actually existed and the severe lack of evidence that we have in this matter doesn't mean anything. Abraham may have actually existed. The stories about him could be true. Or he could have existed and the stories about him were totally made up over the 1500 years between when he lived and when they were written down. That actually makes a lot of sense as well.

It's possible that there was an Abraham .. and the stories surrounding him were just myth.

Who knows. I guess we'll find out for sure when we are dead.

edit on 9/25/2013 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)

- i apologize for having interfered somewhat Harsh into your thread , FF.

i ve send a PM to donttreadonme, after he locked it ;
saying that , its not about ' did abraham exist ' as such ;
but that its a fundamental discussion here,
and only from the stance on that [the fundamental ] , one can conclude whether 'abraham existed or not'.

with other words:
if one dont believe in Gods version of history, one dont believe in abraham -
if one dóes, then, by context, he existed.

Good luck with your thread,
and best wishes.

Lone12
if one dont believe in Gods version of history, one dont believe in abraham -
if one dóes, then, by context, he existed.

Here's the thing .. is the Old Testament 'God's History' ... or it is a collection of myths, fables, 'borrowed texts', and some history thrown in? Or something else all together? Just because people have said that it's 'God's History' ... that doesn't mean that it really was. We can't say that the Old Testament is God's History simply because it claims to be ... that's circular logic. There has to be something to back it up with.

FlyersFan

Lone12
if one dont believe in Gods version of history, one dont believe in abraham -
if one dóes, then, by context, he existed.

Here's the thing .. is the Old Testament 'God's History' ... or it is a collection of myths, fables, 'borrowed texts', and some history thrown in? Or something else all together? Just because people have said that it's 'God's History' ... that doesn't mean that it really was. We can't say that the Old Testament is God's History simply because it claims to be ... that's circular logic. There has to be something to back it up with.

oh - but there is Massive Proof to back it up with.

...in the form of "negatives", like a photo negative.

- one only has to look to the ancient, documented, literal clay tablets or papyruses.
They *all* tell the same story:
a once gorgious Garden, then being destroyed by them,
[that is: those Entities, who inspired to write the tablets and papyruses]
and then concocted another kind of 'reality' - our present Matrix.

now
do you believe in their [ the tablets and papyrus'] reality ?
that they are genuine ?

..if you DO - then by Default, you need to accept Gods version of history.

[since the topics of the tablets and papyruses, is to counteract and Spell the Original]

This is a small example from my own life which is pertinent to the discussion.

I have been involved with a religious community since 1976. At that time our group bought a house and I and others moved into it. Prior to buying this house, members of the community had rented a place at another location and prior to that they had had meetings at various addresses where members and interested parties had homes.

We also rented spaces where we set up meditation halls and shrines.

Very few people who are still with our group know the accurate history of the development of the group. People who are members of the group now, don't know how things came about. They don't know who the important former members of the group were and what their contributions were to the founding and the building of our group, to its present state of "establishment".

They don't know, or care, about the struggles, effort, personal commitment, and sacrifice of the early builders of this group.

This latter bunch of people have invested only a fraction of the time, commitment, money and sheer grit of the early builders. By comparison to them, the current people appear to be posturing featherbedders or political operators whose main contribution to the group is nepotistic attention to the welfare of their even less deserving offspring.

I have even had the displeasure of hearing the history of the group being misrepresented, rewritten in fact, to suit the current political agenda as it relates to shifting political winds in the greater context of our religion and in order to wipe the intentions of the original builders of the group out of everyone's minds.

And this has all transpired in the period since 1976.

Within 37 years the early history of our group has all but been obliterated to serve the particular interests of the obliterators.

Make of that what you will.

see, dear FF,
you *cant* pick a thing like this apart out of its context.

'abraham' was nothing more
then a literal Representative of a wide Truth -
namely, "the salvation of a large part of mankind".

..so it is rather Irrelevant to ' doubt whether abraham existed',
since that 'doubting' is not about ábraham, as such,
but about " doubting the Truth which he represents".

- it is No Coincidence,
that the pyramid shafts locked to Sirius, 2300 bC
- approx the same time, abraham took place

it is néither 'coincidence',
that the aryan priests went to india, and introduced the Brahma and Sarasvati there
around 1500 bc

why ?
- because its all one great Metaphysical Play
a chess game

and, knowing how Evil works,
it lets people to imprison THEMSELVES

in this case: by mimicking the promise to abraham,
by creating a Legal link to him [ the name 'brahma' ]

yet all the energy of that devotion, is going straight to Evil
- since Evil *will not have* the multitudes Saved
- the multitudes, promised to Abraham.

..i hope this makes sense,
regards,

i tell you something else:

SO afraid was Evil, to lóse the multitudes,
that It sent 'ganesha' to india - to the multitudes -
700 AD

ganesha - the elephant - the potbelly -
which is no other as Chemesh, the Moabite human sacrifice deity,
the same as Moloch, where humans were burned inside his thick belly -

20] Gaṇādhipa (equivalent to Ganapati and Ganesha), Ekadanta (one who has one tusk), Heramba, Lambodara (one who has a pot belly, or, literally, one who has a hanging belly),

Ganesha is Vighneshvara or Vighnaraja or "Vighnaharta"(marathi), the Lord of Obstacles, both of a material and spiritual order.[82
...'removing obstacles'..? he IS the obstacle ! causing them !

en.wikipedia.org...

note,
how "no one knows, how ganesha entered, 700 AD ".
ofcourse not -
but we DO know ' why ' .

- to Block the Multitude.

Of course he never existed, the Bible like the Quran and Torah are mere fairytales. You've researched and discovered for yourself that there is no evidence of Abraham.

Maybe there was once a nice guy who helped people who the stories were based on but 1500 years of Chinese whispers would have destroyed any truth. Let's not forget the Bible also painted Abraham as a nasty misogynist. Let's remember that and not just the good things.

I'm sorry if my blunt point of view offends people but I don't really care. If you're going to be stupid enough to live your life believing in fairytales without ANY evidence to support them you deserve to be told the truth.

There was no Abraham as the Bible depicts, in the same way as there was no Jesus. But most important of all there is NO god. Never was, never will be.

Wake up now and get living this precious life you have, you won't get another chance.

..in Scripture, He télls how "moab will rule from another country, in the times of the end"
= now

and that is *exactly* what happened ;
moab, the pot-belly, went to india, 700 AD.

and millions upon millions of deluded india pray to that entity -
blocking their OWN salvation, their own promise !

how tragic is that...?

so
i wont interfer with your thread no more - promised -
just please
if you ask questions like in your OP,
make sure you get the Context right

..kind regards to you,

GafferUK1981
Of course he never existed, the Bible like the Quran and Torah are mere fairytales. You've researched and discovered for yourself that there is no evidence of Abraham.

Maybe there was once a nice guy who helped people who the stories were based on but 1500 years of Chinese whispers would have destroyed any truth. Let's not forget the Bible also painted Abraham as a nasty misogynist. Let's remember that and not just the good things.

I'm sorry if my blunt point of view offends people but I don't really care. If you're going to be stupid enough to live your life believing in fairytales without ANY evidence to support them you deserve to be told the truth.

There was no Abraham as the Bible depicts, in the same way as there was no Jesus. But most important of all there is NO god. Never was, never will be.

Wake up now and get living this precious life you have, you won't get another chance.

edit on 25-9-2013 by GafferUK1981 because: (no reason given)

- thank you.
You ve just posed your fundamental stance.