Did Abraham ever really exist?

reply to post by Seede


It would appear I've ruffled someone's feathers. First, I'm not saying that Albright didn't have some amazing accomplishments in his various fields. He laid the groundwork for what we know and understand about both the Middle East and her languages. Where you and I digress is in all the science done by his successors and heir apparents. The very students he trained are the ones who have done additional work that in some cases expanded on Albrights. However, in many many more they have shown him to be so far off track that he must've either been on a vision quest or more likely, was utilizing his preconceived religious bias in an effort to reconcile the archaeological record with his missionary upbringing.
I like how instead of addressing the actual issue you instead demand to "see my papers".
Its not going to happen. Sorry. Ill send you a personal invite to my next lecture though. This is a conspiracy site and I'm certainly not about to place myself in the awkward predicament of colleagues making comments about being late on research because I was up late reading about alien probes on ATS. Yes, Albright had a distinguished career at the time he worked and had many awards. As my father in law says of the grad Students he advises, anyone can get a Phd, all it takes is time and determination. It is in no way a qualifier of their intelligence though. Take that However you like. You are too married to your beliefs to be objective.

reply to post by peter vlar


Peter

What you have digressed is nothing more than what I would expect from any secularist or atheist. Common sense will show that almost all sciences have further expansion in their models. That is what science is all about. Science calls that change and in all reality it is additional information added to the model. There has been not one scientist that cannot admit to either failure or change in his or her career. Not one! If you can list one person who has been infallible then you are the only one that has done just that.

As I stated before, there is science and then there is science. Most all american universities consist of well over ninety percent atheists and their pupils differ greatly from those who are graduates from Christian schooling. That is what made Albright so unique. As you look at his acceptance from every major institution in this country as well as foreign universities you will then realize that all archaeology was vastly infantile in comparison of today. Not just Albright but all science has been improved and their models are at times laughable but one thing that Albright was not in error is that of his linguistic achievements. I have repeatedly outlined that any man that can master 27 languages is a genius in that field alone.

You are mistaken to assume that I am married to a belief system of any sort of religion. I belong to no particular denomination and my opinions differ greatly from most Christianity and Judaic influence. Abraham is a character of many theological camps and is viewed by most in a different light than some others. I belong to no particular camp even though some of my studies involved the Hebrew/Aramaic as well as the Greek manuscripts. It is unfair to try to determine the validity of a theological character through the biased camps of secularism. In other words it cannot be done in a truthful manner. That is like apples to oranges. Almost the same as asking an atheist what he thinks of Yehoshua (Jesus).

I leave this lay where it fell.

Seede
reply to post by peter vlar

 

Peter

What you have digressed is nothing more than what I would expect from any secularist or atheist. Common sense will show that almost all sciences have further expansion in their models. That is what science is all about. Science calls that change and in all reality it is additional information added to the model. There has been not one scientist that cannot admit to either failure or change in his or her career. Not one! If you can list one person who has been infallible then you are the only one that has done just that.

So you're using the fact that science does indeed revise itself (as nearly every thesis postulated by Albright has been revised or overturned), as evidence that Albright was correct in his statements regarding the origins and incept dates of the Hebrew language despite EVERY linguist and middle east scholar stating the opposite and has been presented to you by other posters in this thread? That's one heck of an intellectual disconnect there.

As I stated before, there is science and then there is science. Most all american universities consist of well over ninety percent atheists and their pupils differ greatly from those who are graduates from Christian schooling.

Can you support that statement with any assort of fact? See, 77% of Americans self identify as Christians. if the other 23% supply 90% of college/university students that means less than 8% of Christians have any sort of college education. Are you REALLY going to stand by that statement? I can assure you that in my experience you could not be more wrong and that American campuses have very similar demographics to the public at large. In the American South in particular I think you'd be hard pressed to find ,many admitted Atheists or Agnostics. You're right about one thing though... public and private students differ greatly from those who graduate from Christian institutions. In deference to politeness I won't go into the differences.

That is what made Albright so unique. As you look at his acceptance from every major institution in this country as well as foreign universities you will then realize that all archaeology was vastly infantile in comparison of today. Not just Albright but all science has been improved and their models are at times laughable but one thing that Albright was not in error is that of his linguistic achievements. I have repeatedly outlined that any man that can master 27 languages is a genius in that field alone.

I've already said that for the time period, Albright was doing some fine work. The consensus, even amongst biblical archaeologists and scholars, predominantly among them his former students that he deemed his heir apparents, now publicly state that he got a lot wrong. you simply can not have your cake and eat it too in this instance. If he was such a profound linguist then why was he so oblivious to the fact that Hebrew was a derivative of Canaanite languages? hy did he refuse to accept the data that was widely regarded even in the 1930's that several languages and language groups predated the earliest known Hebrew not by centuries but by millennia?

You are mistaken to assume that I am married to a belief system of any sort of religion. I belong to no particular denomination and my opinions differ greatly from most Christianity and Judaic influence.

I never claimed you were married to a religious belief system. I said you were married to YOUR belief system. very different concepts and no matter your interpretation of my words I stand by the statement and in your own words you have proven me correct.

It is unfair to try to determine the validity of a theological character through the biased camps of secularism. In other words it cannot be done in a truthful manner. That is like apples to oranges. Almost the same as asking an atheist what he thinks of Yehoshua (Jesus).

and this is a fine example of you being married to your belief system. your own views are extraordinarily biased yet you accuse everyone else of secular bias. Sadly, in Anthropology and Archaeology the only biases we have are in the form of evidence or hyperbole. We deal solely in what we can prove whereas you deal solely in the realm of what can not be Unproven. it's really a sad reactionary way to go about frolicking through the world. Believe it or not, most people who deal in the realm of science are far more open minded to possibilities than any religiously biased individual I've ever spoken with on the subject at hand. Between you and me, some of my proudest moments have come from mistakes or errors. When we open ourselves up to the possibility that we could be incorrect in our assumptions and assertions then we open our minds to all possibilities. Sometimes the "happy mistake" can show us where we went wrong and show us a different path to venture down that may eventually show us the light. By all means though, keep on assuming concrete facts and rationalizing that everyone with an education is a narcissistic puppet who is trying to destroy your faith. Give me a break. When someone presents or finds credible evidence of a historical Abraham it still doesn't lend anymore credence to the bible than someone finding a guillotine and attributing it to A tale of Two Cities. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be an amazing discovery that could open up new doors though. I'll take my "secular bias" over your rose colored glasses any day.

reply to post by peter vlar

TextSo you're using the fact that science does indeed revise itself (as nearly every thesis postulated by Albright has been revised or overturned), as evidence that Albright was correct in his statements regarding the origins and incept dates of the Hebrew language despite EVERY linguist and middle east scholar stating the opposite and has been presented to you by other posters in this thread? That's one heck of an intellectual disconnect there.

You said a mouthful of nothing but nonsense. You have not understood any of this in which I have tried to explain. "EVERY linguist" and every scholar has disagreed with William F. Albright. Are you going to stand by that untrue and ridiculous attempt to defame this man? You are not in the real world at all. Brush up on Chomsky and find where he has ever had a divisive word with or towards Albright. You talk nonsense.

All sciences improve and that has always been a accepted fact even among laypeople. That should be without any discussion and you very well know it. It is not a great revelation that I admit that all sciences improve. You may call that revision but it is not all revision. It is simply a fact that what is perfect today is imperfect tomorrow. It has and will always be that way.

As far as nearly ever thesis of Albright has been overturned is bogus and you cannot show this whatsoever. Insofar as being revised, that is your choice of word whereas my choice was improved. Means the same thing in our English understanding. As was previously discussed all sciences are (revised) improved and that does not denigrate Albright one whit.

My last thought on this subject is that I would like you to read Chomsky's biography. He is rated as the top linguist of the top fifty six world wide. Compare his bio with Albright and rethink your distaste for brilliance. You may have the last word in this matter as I realize that neither you nor I could ever reach agreement in unlimited discussions.
Thank you peter for your input -----------------------------

reply to post by Seede


We finally agree on something. That Albright having heen shown to be wrong on so many things was an improvement to the science. Thanks. Oh and btw, you're right. That should have read... Nearly Every Linguist. it was a typo. I would never utilize a blanket statement for an entire discipline. That's the providence of the anti science crowd.

131002

FlyersFan
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.

That cite the story of Abraham not being written down till 500bc, ?did you just pull that out of thin air?
Or more likely confusing the redaction of the TaNaKh by the Scribe/Prophet Ezra (480-440bc) after he lead a group of Hebrew exiles from Babylon back to Yerushalaym (Ez 8:2-14).
The writings from Moshe predate Ezra by centuries and Genesis (Beresit) the Hebrew campfire stories predates Moses by more centuries if not a thousand years. The writings of Moses start with Exodus (Semot); Genesis concludes with the death of Joseph and placement in a coffin in Egypt (also before the time of Moses.)

The time of Patriach Abraham (2k bc, Gen 11-25) in Ur, Mesopotamia (modern SE Irak) was like over seven hundred years before Moses (1200bc). History in the Ur region goes back over six thousand years; about the time the Black Sea flood giving rise to the Flood epic; homo sapien having come out of the stone age just a thousand yrs earlier (neolithic stone age).

In case you did not know, the Old Testament (TaNaKh) is about 20% of actual Hebrew 'scripture' most of it is not made public as gentiles have a habit of misusing it or taking it out of context... The rules (10 Commandments) are binding on observant Hebrews, not gentiles. The orig gentile followers of Christ converted to Judaism.
e.g. Joshua of Nazareth (Yehoshua #3091 Yod, hey, vav, shin, ayin, shortened to Yeshua H3442-H3443 Yod, shin, vav, ayin [aramaic ܝܶܫܽܘܥ]), aka Christ/messiah (~7bc-33ad)... What he did during his Galilean ministry was not what the Mashiach (מָשִׁיחַ mem-shin-chet) was supposed to do. Christ was NOT a 'christian.' His religion was Torah Judaism, his gospel was about the Kingdom of the G of Abraham, and was an attempt to get his people back to a proper worship of that one true G.
christianity came along 300 years after the murder of Christ with a fabricated new testament (nt) cannon that only contains about 20 minutes of content from Christ, over half the content of the nt is from saul/paul who was neither a Disciple of Christ nor a Prophet from G.
Furthermore Messiah (Mashiach, anointed) does not = Savior (moshiah yod-shin-ayin) who will sacrifice himself to save mankind from the consequences of our own sins; that is a purely heathen gentile concept that has no basis in Jewish thought.

In Judaism the mashiach will bring about the political and spiritual redemption of the Jewish people by bringing us back to Yisrael and restoring Yerushalaym (Isaiah 11:11-12; Jeremiah 23:8; 30:3; Hosea 3:4-5). He will establish a government in Israel that will be the center of all world government, both for Jews and gentiles (Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:10; 42:1). He will rebuild the Temple and re-establish its worship (Jeremiah 33:18). He will restore the religious court system of Israel and establish Jewish law as the law of the land (Jeremiah 33:15).

reply to post by bug


Oldest writing in Hebrew is from around 1000 BC.

Are you sure you are not mixing oral story telling and written stories?

Unless you have facts that will prove otherwise...

TextOldest writing in Hebrew is from around 1000 BC.

Are you sure you are not mixing oral story telling and written stories?

Unless you have facts that will prove otherwise...

reply to post by SuperFrog


SuperFrog

Here we go again. You are back on the same line of disinformation that you tried to sell some blogs ago. Take a deep breath and read the following ----

Deuteronomy 31:25 That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying,
Deuteronomy 31:26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

This plainly states that Moses had a book that was placed in the ark of the covenant. I am quite sure that this book was not in English or Greek but was in Samaritan (old Hebrew) / Paleo Hebrew. When was the book of Deuteronomy written? Most Gentile sources agree as to 1400 BCE. Hebrew sources tell us that Moses was born in 1393 BCE and was 80-81 years old when Torah was complete. That would be at 1312 BCE. So the window of between 1312 to 1400 is the accepted 88 years in which the written Torah was offered to the Hebrew tribes.

Now how many years do you think it took for the Hebrews to learn a language and use that for communication? Five or ten ? You know as well as I know that it was a gradual process and not overnight. The Paleo Hebrew, derived from the Samaritan (old Hebrew),is believed to be the alphabet by most uninformed people of today and is based upon the codex Leningrad. The codex Leningrad is dated to about 1,000 BCE and that is why you are taught that Hebrew is only 1,000 BCE.

One thing that you have overlooked is the dead sea scrolls. The dead sea scrolls have the same Paleo Hebrew (except for vowel etc.) than does the codex Leningrad. That places this Paleo alphabet to a little over 1,000 years older than the 1,000 years old codex Leningrad of which you date to be 1,000 BCE. So in effect we are looking to at least 2,000 BCE instead of 1,000 BCE which can be proven by the dead sea manuscripts. Then you must consider that this Paleo alphabet has to be older that that which was found in the dead sea scrolls. How old? Don't really know yet but is proven to have been derived from the old Hebrew which was Pictographic. It is the tradition of the Hebrews that the Ancient (old) Pictographic Hebrew dates back to Adam or (as believed) to the tower of Babel when all were of the same language.

Nevertheless of what you or I believe we must accept the science of linguistics till other information is discovered to either qualify or disqualify what is known today. The fact is that the Paleo Hebrew is at least 2000 BCE and most likely much more. Some researchers have estimated (their own opinions) that middle Hebrew (Paleo) is over 3000 BCE. It is even possible that both old and middle Hebrew were intermixed by the different tribes.

So it stands to reason that the codex Leningrad and dead sea scrolls show that the Hebrews did use the Paleo Alphabet of Torah and that Moses did write in that alphabet in 1312 BCE and that this alphabet had been in use for at least 2,000 BCE. I will not argue these facts because it would be senseless to get into another discourse and become sidetracked again.

The entirety of the OP was the question of whether Abraham had ever lived? The answer I give is that ancient manuscripts over 2000 BCE say that yes he did exist. Abraham is said to have been born in 1813 BCE and Paleo Hebrew was in effect at least 2000 BCE so it is accepted and realistic for me to assume that the literature is believable. The dead sea scrolls are the say in this matter.

Text The writings from Moshe predate Ezra by centuries and Genesis (Beresit) the Hebrew campfire stories predates Moses by more centuries if not a thousand years. The writings of Moses start with Exodus (Semot); Genesis concludes with the death of Joseph and placement in a coffin in Egypt (also before the time of Moses.)

reply to post by bug


bug

Very well said and saved your article of good info. You seem to be very well read in your Hebrew history. Thanks for a good read

reply to post by Seede


Bible stories don't prove the Bible stories are true!

Hebrew is NOT the oldest language. It's derived from the old known language, along with several other languages.

The non-Akkadian part of the Semitic family, called West Semitic, divided prior to 2000 BCE into South Semitic, whose major descendants are Arabic and the Semitic languages of Ethiopia, and Northwest Semitic which includes Aramaic and the Canaanite languages of which Biblical Hebrew was one.

Probably even as late as 2000 BCE one can picture a dialect continuum where, from the desert fringes of Iraq through south-eastern Anatolia, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan and the Arabian Peninsula a traveler could have passed from tribe to tribe and village to village noticing only very slight and gradual dialectical changes as he progressed.

Although people at the opposite extremes of this language area might have been unable to understand each other, at no point would a language frontier like those, say, between French and German occur. This situation is quite similar to that pertaining to the various dialects of spoken Arabic over the same area (and beyond in North Africa), today[13]. It is from this period i.e. the third millennium BCE, that we receive our first records of the Semitic languages. These records comprehend 3 languages:

Akkadian (East Semitic) – both in Akkadian texts and Akkadian words preserved in Sumerian texts;

Eblaite (intermediate between East Semitic and West Semitic) – preserved in Early Bronze Age (2500 BCE) tablets amounting to about 3000 tablets in all;

Amorite[14] – this West-Semitic language is preserved mainly in proper names in Sumerian and Akkadian texts. Fortunately, as Semitic names are frequently short sentences – e.g. Hebrew ’eli'yah = 'my God is YH' – the language can be partly reconstructed even from such meager data.
www.adath-shalom.ca...

Clearly, Hebrew ISN'T the oldest language. Sankrit is even older than the Akkadian, Eblaite and Amorite language!

From the Rigveda until the time of Pāṇini (fl. 4th century BCE) the development of the early Vedic language may be observed in other Vedic texts: the Samaveda, Yajurveda, Atharvaveda, Brahmanas, and Upanishads. During this time, the prestige of the language, its use for sacred purposes, and the importance attached to its correct enunciation all served as powerful conservative forces resisting the normal processes of linguistic change. However, there is a clear, five-level linguistic development of Vedic from the Rigveda to the language of the Upanishads and the earliest Sutras (such as Baudhayana)
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Seede


Seede,

You can't seriously take Torah as historical fact book...

There is no written record that is dating earlier then 1000BC in Hebrew, if there is, please share it with rest of the world. Nothing inside the Bible can't be taken as fact.

reply to post by SuperFrog


Frog,
did you mean "nothing in the Bible CAN be taken as fact"?

Just in case you want to edit it - I THINK that's what you meant to say.



that is all.

Yep, that is what I meant... too long bad day...

Thank you for noticing it.

Seede

TextOldest writing in Hebrew is from around 1000 BC.

Are you sure you are not mixing oral story telling and written stories?

Unless you have facts that will prove otherwise...

reply to post by SuperFrog

 

SuperFrog

Here we go again. You are back on the same line of disinformation that you tried to sell some blogs ago. Take a deep breath and read the following ----

Deuteronomy 31:25 That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying,
Deuteronomy 31:26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

This plainly states that Moses had a book that was placed in the ark of the covenant. I am quite sure that this book was not in English or Greek but was in Samaritan (old Hebrew) / Paleo Hebrew. When was the book of Deuteronomy written? Most Gentile sources agree as to 1400 BCE. Hebrew sources tell us that Moses was born in 1393 BCE and was 80-81 years old when Torah was complete. That would be at 1312 BCE. So the window of between 1312 to 1400 is the accepted 88 years in which the written Torah was offered to the Hebrew tribes.

Now how many years do you think it took for the Hebrews to learn a language and use that for communication? Five or ten ? You know as well as I know that it was a gradual process and not overnight. The Paleo Hebrew, derived from the Samaritan (old Hebrew),is believed to be the alphabet by most uninformed people of today and is based upon the codex Leningrad. The codex Leningrad is dated to about 1,000 BCE and that is why you are taught that Hebrew is only 1,000 BCE.

One thing that you have overlooked is the dead sea scrolls. The dead sea scrolls have the same Paleo Hebrew (except for vowel etc.) than does the codex Leningrad. That places this Paleo alphabet to a little over 1,000 years older than the 1,000 years old codex Leningrad of which you date to be 1,000 BCE. So in effect we are looking to at least 2,000 BCE instead of 1,000 BCE which can be proven by the dead sea manuscripts. Then you must consider that this Paleo alphabet has to be older that that which was found in the dead sea scrolls. How old? Don't really know yet but is proven to have been derived from the old Hebrew which was Pictographic. It is the tradition of the Hebrews that the Ancient (old) Pictographic Hebrew dates back to Adam or (as believed) to the tower of Babel when all were of the same language.

Nevertheless of what you or I believe we must accept the science of linguistics till other information is discovered to either qualify or disqualify what is known today. The fact is that the Paleo Hebrew is at least 2000 BCE and most likely much more. Some researchers have estimated (their own opinions) that middle Hebrew (Paleo) is over 3000 BCE. It is even possible that both old and middle Hebrew were intermixed by the different tribes.

So it stands to reason that the codex Leningrad and dead sea scrolls show that the Hebrews did use the Paleo Alphabet of Torah and that Moses did write in that alphabet in 1312 BCE and that this alphabet had been in use for at least 2,000 BCE. I will not argue these facts because it would be senseless to get into another discourse and become sidetracked again.

The entirety of the OP was the question of whether Abraham had ever lived? The answer I give is that ancient manuscripts over 2000 BCE say that yes he did exist. Abraham is said to have been born in 1813 BCE and Paleo Hebrew was in effect at least 2000 BCE so it is accepted and realistic for me to assume that the literature is believable. The dead sea scrolls are the say in this matter.

And here YOU go again making unfounded claims with no basis residing in the historical or archaeological record. Could you provide citations to support your claims? And a quote of a biblical passage is not a citation. You make the erroneous claim that "gentile sources" agree that Deuteronomy was written in 1400 BCE despite every source I can find saying it was compiled during the reign of Josiah(641-609 BC) and was further developed during the Babylonian exile. If Moses had been doing all of this writing why then is there no mention of the Exodus by the prophet Isaiah who lived a century prior to the reign of Josiah?

You are correct that paleo Hebrew predates the Codex Leningradensis by 2 millennia but that is because the Codex wasn't written until 1008 or 1009 AD.

The Dead Sea scrolls were written primarily in the Hebrew spoken and written in 1st century BC and 1st century AD. They were written between 150 BC and 70 AD when Rome crushed the Jewish uprising of Judea. There were some pieces written in paleo-Hebrew but very few. Ske others were in Aramaic and some in Greek but the vast majority were written in Hebrew contemporary with the afore mention time frame.

Because the vast majority of your claims are either greatly exaggerated or completely wrong your conclusions of when the written Hebrew language came to be are therefore incorrect as the evidence very much contradicts your assertions. Pleo Hebrew simply did not exist in the time periods you ascribe it to and therefore can not be used as evidence for the contemporaneous chronicling of Abraham or Moses.

reply to post by Seede


I also forgot that since you're such a fan of facts perhaps I should also point out that you have yours backwards regarding etymogy of Samaritan and Paleo Hebrew. Hebrew came into being during Solomon's reign. It was derived from Canaanite. This, as has been reiterated time and again, was approximately 1000 BCE. Samaritan became a distinct language approximately 400 years later around 600 BCE. It is chronologically impossible for Paleo Hebrew to have derived from Samaritan when Samaritan was the direct descendant of the former.

reply to post by peter vlar


@ petervlar and superfrog

Without animosity and name calling and bitterness I will explain this once more in a loving way.

The book of Deuteronomy is the last book of written Torah. It is known as the book of the second law and Moses presented this book to the Hebrew tribes about forty days before the Exodus. In that book (Deuteronomy 31:25, 26), tells us that the written books of Torah were then placed in the Ark of the Covenant. By finding the date of Deuteronomy is to find the date that writing was practiced by the Hebrews.

When was Torah completed so that it could be placed in the Ark of the Covenant? We do not know the actual day or hour but we know through tradition that it existed about forty days before the Exodus from Egypt which is accepted by most as being about 1441 BCE.

*1 Kings 6:1 (King James Version):
1And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the LORD.
*Separately, archeologists have dated the beginning of the construction of the temple as 961 BCE.
*If you simply add the two dates (961 and 480), this arrives at a 1441 BCE date for the Exodus and the Torah of course soon after in 1441 or 1440 BCE.


I do admit there is a discrepancy between the Jewish Encyclopedia and other sources. The Jewish Time line lists the Exodus at about 1313 BCE compared to archaeologists who have determined their dating the construction of the temple as 961 BCE and arriving at 1441 or 1440 BCE. That is a 171 years difference between the two sources. Nevertheless, I will give you those 171 years and stay with the Jewish Timeline Encyclopedia.

The Jewish time line encyclopedia lists the completion of written Torah at 1313 BCE. or in the 80th to 81st year of Moses’ life. Moses was born in 1393 BCE minus 81 would be 1312 BCE and or minus 80 would be 1313 BCE.

You stated that the book of Deuteronomy was compiled in King Yoshiyahu’s (Josiah).reign. That may be your problem right there. We are not discussing canonization or gathering together but we are discussing the creation of the literature of Deuteronomy. That creation was in 1313 BCE and not 640 BCE to 609 BCE as you have stated. The entire reason in determining this date was to show (or believe) that Paleo Hebrew was used in the writing of Torah.

What you are advocating is that Torah (which includes Deuteronomy) was created in King Yoshiyahu’s (Josiah’s) reign of 640 BCE to 609 BCE. That is absolutely wrong and not even reasonable. At the very least you are off by as little as 704 years.

Isaiah began his ministry in 619 BCE which was at least 694 years after the Exodus. Simply because the authors of Isaiah did not expound Torah means nothing significant. I don’t see your connection in this at all.

Now getting back to the Codex Leningrad which is dated by the schools of literary science. It is accepted in the literary field that the Codex Leningrad is dated (when it was written) as about 1,000 BCE. In other words that Paleo Hebrew alphabet was used in 1,000 BCE to write that manuscript called the Codex Leningrad. This means that Codex Leningrad is accepted as about 300 years apart from the exodus and Codex Leningrad used Paleo Hebrew.

Now the Dead Sea scrolls are found in 1948 CE and they are dated with multiple dates but there is literature in the Dead Sea Scrolls that is dated at about 2000 BCE and written in Paleo Hebrew with some minor differences of sound pronunciations. This means that Paleo Hebrew was used about 2000 BCE which is at about the time that Abraham came upon the scene.

You have said that Abraham lived at about 2,000 BCE and we believe that the Paleo Hebrew alphabet was used in Abraham’s life span and actually many years before his birth. If that is true then why is it impossible for Moses to have written about Abraham in Paleo Hebrew? All of this discussion shows me that Paleo Hebrew was used for at least 2000 BCE and in all sensibility many centuries before. Some opinions cite Paleo Hebrew to be at between 3000 BCE and 3500 BCE.

The Jewish Time Line Encyclopedia states that the entire mankind of Adam was of one language in the era of Nimrod. This was in the year 1996 BCE. The reason that this is important in a theological mindset is that Abraham knew and dealt with this King Nimrod. In fact Abraham’s father was Terach and was the viceroy of Nineveh, Rechovot and Kalach. In other words Abraham’s father was second in command to King Nimrod. This coincides with Abraham being at about 2000 BCE. Abraham was thought to be around 40 to 50 years old at this time. Now if our dates of Paleo Hebrew are correct then this alphabet was in use before the languages were scattered and if that is true then all languages had to come after the Tower of Babel fell which would mean that Paleo Hebrew was the mother tongue of languages. Of course I am using theology in my assumptions but then this entire OP is based upon a theological man called Abraham. You must use some of the bible in order to relate the OP's question of a bible character named Abraham.

Seede, you are now trying to provide proof with another questionable statement... exodus.

There is no archeological evidence that it ever happened. At least all archeologist agree on that.

Don't forget, we have findings of even older civilizations, for example Harappan Civilization (Today's India and Pakistan) dating back to 5-7,000 BCE. They had writing system, but unfortunately we have not decipher it yet.

Wonder, how this simple proof of civilizations untouched by great flood or other biblical stories don't make you question your source of all facts.

reply to post by Seede


Seede,

While I truly do appreciate that you keep attempting to address my points as well as clarify your own, I stand by everything I've said. The facts simply don't support your assertions. I may have misspoke regarding Deuteronomy being "compiled" during Josiah. I meant to say written during Josiah. Lets put this in perspective. If Moses wrote the entire penatatauch, why then is his death discussed in Deuteronomy 34?

I'm not advocating that the entire Torah was written or compiled during Josiah. I'm pointing out that the penatatauch was written by several people over a lengthy period of time and put together in a fashion somewhat similar to how the Council of Nicea gathered together to canonize Christisn texts. It's a logical course of action that the priests would gather together to codify the laws and traditions into one canonical text. It's not like anyone else would be able to participate as literacy was between .5 & 1% of the population and that's a pretty liberal estimate. But I'm digressing into what I believe and ignoring what can be proven via the historical record. Back on point, you say that I'm wrong and my assertion is unreasonable as my date is off by several centuries for Deuteronomy. I can back my dates up. Can you give any citations to show your earlier date? Every indication is present that the vast majority of the Torah was written or heavily edited during the Babylonian exile. The oldest text of Isaiah for example is from the Dead Sea scrolls but dates to only the first century BCE. Not one of the Dead Sea scrolls has been shown to be anywhere near as old ad you claim. There have been multiple different tests done on fragments and the dates I posted lay night hold up. In fact, you truly are the first person I've seen make some of these claims. Likewise no biblical scholars I've read agree with you that paleo Hebrew was used in the time frames you ascribe to the script. Every linguist traces paleo Hebrew directly to Canaanite and from the paleo Hebrew you arrive at Samaritan several hundred years later. I appreciate the faith you have but I can only work with facts, things that can be verified. And your claim that paleo Hebrew was used as far back as 3500 BCE is astounding as the earliest known usage of the script was 10th century BCE. If you cou,d show me a link or citation to back up your claim I'd love to see it as I'm open minded to verifiable evidence or data.

When you say "You said Abraham lived approx 2000 BCE" are you referring to myself or Superfrog? Just trying to clarify because I didn't say it and don't want to misaddress you. Again though, there is absolutely nothing out there that comes anywhere near indicating that paleo Hebrew was in usage when Moses allegedly wrote the penatatauch. In fact most data indicates that paleo Hebrew was phonetic, like song and the best indication this gives us is that traditions were orally passed down likely as songs or poems. Whatever the method of delivery, the oral tradition is still impressive if it survived as long as it seems to until a written language came into being.

All in all, there is no evidence of paleo Hebrew prior to the tenth century BCE. There is a great deal of evidence for earlier Semitic languages, Sanskrit as well as indo-European having been on the scene far longer.

Here, for what it is worth,, at least its current




Jerusalem, July 10, 2013

—Working near the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Hebrew University of Jerusalem archaeologist Dr. Eilat Mazar has unearthed the earliest alphabetical written text ever uncovered in the city.The inscription is engraved on a large pithos, a neckless ceramic jar found with six others at the Ophel excavation site. According to Dr. Mazar, the inscription, in the Canaanite language, is the only one of its kind discovered in Jerusalem and an important addition to the city’s history.

Dated to the tenth century BCE, the artifact predates by two hundred and fifty years the earliest known Hebrew inscription from Jerusalem, which is from the period of King Hezekiah at the end of the eighth century BCE.



Hebrew University of Jerusalem archaeologist Dr. Eilat Mazar displays a jar fragment unearthed near Jerusalem’s Temple Mount bearing an inscription in the Canaanite language. Dated to the tenth century BCE, it is the earliest alphabetical written text ever uncovered in the city. (Photo courtesy of Dr. Eilat Mazar; photographed by Oria Tadmor)

bug: christianity came along 300 years after the murder of Christ

That is not true. We've got New Testament papyri dated earlier than 300 AD.
Then you have Paul the Apostles epistle of 1 Corinthians dated around 25 AD.