Did Abraham ever really exist?

Beavers
if you now include Brahma.... which I'm definitely going to look into, it's too juicy not too!

Yep. Look backwards .. the common thread ... each one takes from the previous and twists it ..

Islam took from Christianity and twisted it to fit it's agenda.
Christianity took from Judaism (and Buddhism) and twisted it to fit it's agenda.
Judaism took from the Vedics ... who took from the Zoroastrians (2000 BC)...
... who took from the Summerians.

All roads lead back to the Summerians (4000 bc)
The common themes are there ... just the words used are a bit different each generation.

windword
reply to post by adjensen

 

If Jesus was God, one would think that he might had emphasized the importance of washing ones hands, after laying hands on the sick, rather than arguing the matter with the Pharisees.

A) What does that have to do with anything in this thread?

B) Who's to say that he didn't emphasize washing your hands for hygiene and no one thought it important enough at the time to write down?

C) His argument with the Pharisees was in regards to a ritual washing, not a hygienic one.

But, again, what does any of it have to do with whether Abraham existed, or are you just trolling?

S/F FF!

I doubt seriously that ANY of those ancient people can be proven to exist.
In my opinion, anyone who believes the Bible is literal, that the earth is only 6,000 years old, and so on and so forth, is not paying attention, or even TRYING to be reasonable.

So - let's say Abraham did not exist...nor did Adam and Eve...and the creation story in Genesis is just that, a story - of no more nor less value than the Aborigine's DreamTime, or any other culture's creation story.

What does that mean for modern followers? They will, in my estimation, simply ignore the 'debunkings', as per usual. Even Jesus's existence is legitimately questioned...

and as easy as it seems (to me) to simply behave according to what Jesus was "supposed to have said", and that doing so would suffice - HOW IS IT that some people cling to so sketchy a set of stories?

I don't understand how people can be so defensive and stubborn in the face of science, academia, linguistic studies, cultural studies, etc. and STILL be persuaded that the Bible is the "only literal true holy book and Word of God."

It really makes me shake my head, perplexed....

No disrespect to those that DO believe it without question, but....HOW do they keep that belief afloat? How many other "believers" do they need to stand their ground? What if they were the ONLY ONE LEFT who believed it? Would they explore further?

If a person learns DEFINITIVELY that the stories they believed true are simply stories, metaphors, symbolic parables.....what is the consequence?

I think it all goes back to fear.

I don't know how one can stay in such an archaic mindset...I really don't. Can someone explain it to me?

reply to post by Beavers

Yep. Very possible.

But IF that is what happened (we don't know it was) - doesn't that also show that the story was changed over the 1500 years? For the Abraham story to be pristine, the wording of the story would have used the names of cities from 1500 years earlier. IMHO.

Amarna in Egypt doesn't exist anymore ... but we still refer to it when talking about Akhenaten

FlyersFan


They ARE myths inserted into the bible.

Right. Between the front and back covers.

Also read as one sentence.

Proven myths. Their origins are well known.
Taken from the Summerians and 'freely adapted' by the Jews. Fact is fact.

Truth.

Basically only the names have changed to protect the believers. lol

wildtimes
I don't understand how people can be so defensive and stubborn in the face of science, academia, linguistic studies, cultural studies, etc. ...

Fear and indoctrination and egotism. IMHO.

For example. I have given evidence that the 10 Commandments did NOT come from God on a mountaintop to Moses. Irrefutable evidence that the 10 commandments were pretty much in tact and around for hundreds and hundreds of years before Moses. And yet ... a poster will be shaken to the core by the cold hard facts and then claim i'm 'insulting Moses' by stating that truth. That's absurd. Truth is truth.

Never be afraid of truth. No matter what direction it goes in.

reply to post by adjensen


Well, Jesus had just finished casting devils out of a man, then, when he went to eat he didn't wash his hands, ritually or hygienically.

You're the one saying that Abraham HAD to have existed because Jesus, who was God, mentions him. I'm not trolling by questioning such an argument to confirm the story of Abraham as truth. And, I don't believe that Jesus was God, so that excuse doesn't convince me of anything.

Paul mentions Adam and Eve, but they were't real.

reply to post by windword

You're the one saying that Abraham HAD to have existed because Jesus, who was God, mentions him. I'm not trolling by questioning such an argument to confirm the story of Abraham as truth

Don't mean to interrupt.
The OP - who you starred and flagged - happens to accept Jesus as "real".

If Jesus mentioned Abraham (who the OP rejects as a myth) as a real person... then doesn't it mean that Abraham is real... at least by the OP's standards?

I'm assuming you're an atheist. How much do you really agree with the OP, as far as the Bible is concerned? Are you willing to tell the OP that Jesus isn't real as well?

Answering Abraham in Islam - Videos Available

Contrary to Genesis, Philistines didn't exist in the time of Abraham, neither were camels domesticated when he lived and the trade routes and caravans with camels described don't match anything close to 1800BC, they match Arabian trade resembling the 7th century. Not to mention Abrahamic biblical migration route was not being in place at the time of Abraham, it is therefore unlikely the authors were contemporaries or knew what they were talking about.

Israel itself never started from outside Canaan, not by Abraham, nor a mass immigration of liberated slaves, rather Israel is clearly shown to have risen and appeared in an economic crisis, where Nomads have appeared to have been forced by circumstance to settle down due to the chaos inflicted by anarchy and corrupted cities and trade routes. The region in which they settled appears to have within 30 years grow from about 20 settlements to about 250 or more settlements.

The Islamic stories of Abraham were clearly made up with notions from ~ 700 AD .. not facts that come from 2000 BC. The stories don't match what was really going on way back in 2000 BC.

FlyersFan

wildtimes
I don't understand how people can be so defensive and stubborn in the face of science, academia, linguistic studies, cultural studies, etc. ...

Fear and indoctrination and egotism. IMHO.

For example. I have given evidence that the 10 Commandments did NOT come from God on a mountaintop to Moses.

(snip)

Never be afraid of truth. No matter what direction it goes in.

This is a dangerous leap in logic, I think.

Is there evidence that the Ten Commandments existed, in some form, prior to Moses? Well, sort of -- earlier cultures had similar laws, though none are exactly the same.

Is there evidence that God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses on a mountaintop? Well, sort of -- the Bible indicates that he did, and, literal or not, it's still documentary evidence.

Is there evidence that Moses just copied the Ten Commandments from the Egyptians? No, there is no such evidence.

The first two points are evidentiary, but the third, which you have presented as "the truth", is nothing more than an inference on your part -- "Moses COULD have swiped them from the Egyptians, therefore he did", but this is an unreasonable conclusion, because there is no evidence for it.

It is entirely possible that God gave us some moral absolutes, and they are reflected in the underlying rules of all cultures, like don't murder or steal, and if that is the case, we would certainly expect to see some of the things that you have pointed out, but none of it precludes God giving Moses ten specific laws that the Israelites were to follow.

reply to post by FlyersFan

The stories don't match what was really going on way back in 2000 BC.

Unless you have a time machine in working condition, all your claims can be dismissed as "opinion".

Anyway tell us... was Jesus lying when he mentioned Abraham?

windword
reply to post by adjensen

 

Well, Jesus had just finished casting devils out of a man, then, when he went to eat he didn't wash his hands, ritually or hygienically.

From the text, you can prove the former, you can't prove the latter.

I didn't say that, if Jesus is God, Abraham HAD to exist, I said that because of the citation of him in the New Testament, I have faith that he existed.

adjensen
Is there evidence that the Ten Commandments existed, in some form, prior to Moses? Well, sort of -- earlier cultures had similar laws, though none are exactly the same.

Egyptian Book of the Dead is written.
The Code of Ur-Nammu (Summerian)
The Code of Hammurabi
10 Commandments

Not 'sort of'. Absolutely. And Moses, being a very well educated high prince of Egypt, would have been well versed in the laws. These had been around for hundreds and hundreds of years. They weren't obscure. When he's put in charge of a group of nomad type people, he would have pulled from his intensive learning and given them a set of laws to live by. Laws that civilization had used for hundreds and hundreds of years. It's just common sense to come to that conclusion.

If someone today has a Masters in Business from Yale. And he's put in charge of a company that is failing or flailing ... he's going to pull from his education and use that information to set the company on the right course. It makes sense that Moses would of done the same ... relied on his extensive education to govern.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

The OP - who you starred and flagged - happens to accept Jesus as "real".

If Jesus mentioned Abraham (who the OP rejects as a myth) as a real person... then doesn't it mean that Abraham is real... at least by the OP's standards?

The OP is readily acceptant to the possibility that Jesus was misquoted.

I'm assuming you're an atheist. How much do you really agree with the OP, as far as the Bible is concerned? Are you willing to tell the OP that Jesus isn't real as well?

So because I don't believe that Jesus was God, and that Abraham wasn't a real person, but represented actually a migrating tribe of people, I'm an atheist? LOL! Let me put it this way, my God doesn't ask people to kill their sons, as a test, and doesn't kill his own son, as a sacrifice, either.

adjensen
if Jesus is God, Abraham HAD to exist, I said that because of the citation of him in the New Testament, I have faith that he existed.

When Jesus brought up Noah .. He didn't say Noah, He said "in Noah's time'.
So He never confirmed that Noah existed. Just that a time period existed.

Jesus brought up 'the sign of Jonah', but not Jonah himself.
So Jesus didn't confirm Jonah.

Jesus brought up Daniel and directly spoke of the prophecy of Daniel.
So that's a confirmation form Jesus about Daniel and his prophecies.

Jesus spoke directly about Moses and Abraham.
So either Jesus got it wrong, which means He isn't God like he claims ...
Or Moses and Abraham existed and Jesus claim to be God stands ...
Or those who wrote the bible down got it wrong
Or Jesus was just speaking in terms that those around Him would understand and Moses and Abraham didnt' really exist.**
(which is what I"m thinking at the moment .. but that could change as I learn more)

FlyersFan

Large parts of the Abraham story can be disproven.
For example ... Abraham couldn't take his troops to Dan .. Dan didn't exist.

That's an easy one. Moses wrote the 5 Books on the day the Hebrews were set to cross the Jordan River. The plots and divisions of the land were already completed. The North of Canaan was already apportioned to the Danites at the time of the writing of Abrahams exploits as transmitted through Moses.

adjensen

Is there evidence that God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses on a mountaintop? Well, sort of -- the Bible indicates that he did, and, literal or not, it's still documentary evidence.

No this is not any kind of evidence and is the equivalent of calling Harry Potter books documentary evidence of witches.

"Moses COULD have swiped them from the Egyptians, therefore he did", but this is an unreasonable conclusion, because there is no evidence for it.

Writing style IS evidence and is used all the time in courts. The laws being so similar to Egyptian and previous cultures laws is a lot better evidence than claiming the bible is documentary. It is not.

reply to post by FlyersFan


strange OP, flyersfan.

- the Hindu deities are Brahma and Sarasvati

= abraham and Sarah

these 'deities' are Distorted names of abraham and Sarah.

..and millions upon millions pray every single day to those deities,
created by Evil,
because THEY are the 'multitude' what was promised to Abraham.

abraham: app 2300 bC
brahma and parasvati: introduced app 1500 bC

...and you do nót see ány connection here........?

winnar

adjensen

Is there evidence that God gave the Ten Commandments to Moses on a mountaintop? Well, sort of -- the Bible indicates that he did, and, literal or not, it's still documentary evidence.

No this is not any kind of evidence and is the equivalent of calling Harry Potter books documentary evidence of witches.

Well your very offensive quote WOULD be correct except that it is not just some scifi mystery novel,

It also makes the PREPOSTEROUS claim that about 2 MILLION PEOPLE, Men, Women, And Children all beheld the miracles of Sinai, and lived in the desert for 40 years. And they all managed to stick with that story?

Lone12
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

strange OP, flyersfan.

- the Hindu deities are Brahma and Sarasvati

= abraham and Sarah

these 'deities' are Distorted names of abraham and Sarah.

..and millions upon millions pray every single day to those deities,
created by Evil,
because THEY are the 'multitude' what was promised to Abraham.

abraham: app 2300 bC
brahma and parasvati: introduced app 1500 bC

...and you do nót see ány connection here........?

- moreover ;
you rather trust some 1-dimensional, completely Ignorant ' researchers'...?