Genealogical Abraham

Conversation
15

“Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said to himself, ‘Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?’” (Gen. 17:17). Many have assumed that because Genesis 11:26 states, “Now Terah lived seventy years, and begot Abram, Nahor, and Haran,” that Abram (also known as Abraham; cf. Genesis 17:5) was Terah’s firstborn, and that he was born when Terah was 70. The truth is, however, according to the Bible, Abraham was not born for another 60 years. When Stephen was delivering his masterful sermon recorded in Acts 7, he stated that Abraham moved to the land of Palestine “after the death of his father [Terah—EL]” (7:4). Yet if Terah was 205 years old when he died (Genesis 11:32), and Abraham departed Haran when he was 75 (Genesis 12:4), then Terah was 130, not 70, when Abraham was born. In light of this information Henry Morris and John Whitcomb have aided us in better understanding Genesis 11:26 by paraphrasing it as follows: “And Terah lived seventy years and begat the first of his three sons, the most important of whom (not because of age but because of the Messianic line) was Abram” (1961, p. 480).

While the Mesopotamian city of Ur dates back almost 3000 years the city of Chaldees did not exist before the 8th Century. The word Chaldes is actually “chesdim” and is the Aramaic word for that territory. Aramaic came into use in the first millennium BCE. So the supposed genealogy of Abraham is a late invention. He could not have existed 3000- 4000 years ago and in fact like the rest of the major figures of the Bible he never existed at all. The story of Abraham is a carefully designed historical fiction which is a myth placed in a somewhat historical setting, the same as the gospels. Notice the chiastic structure of the story of Abraham below:

The Abraham Cycle (Genesis 11-25)
A. Genealogical framework (11:10-32)
B. Migration from Haran; separation from Nahor (([12:1-3] 12:4-5a)
C. Building of altars; land promises (12:5b-9 [13:14-18])
D, "Wife-sister episode (12:10-20)
E. Sodom episode and rescue of Lot (13:1-13)
F. Border agreement with Lot (13:1-13)
G. Covenant of sacrifice ((15:1-21)
X Expulsion and rescue of Hagar (16:1-16)
G. Covenant of circumcision (17:1-27)
F. Sodom episode and rescue of Lot (18:1-19:38)
E. Border agreement with Abimelech (21:22-34)
D. Wife-sister episode (20:1-18)
C. Building of altar (22:6) land secured (22:17b; 23:1-20)
B. Migration to Haran; reunification with Nahor’s line (24:1-67)
A. Genealogical framework ([22:20-24] 25:1-18])

The ages of Abraham and Sarah and the magical birth of Isaac are a clue from from the biblical writers that the story is not to be taken literally. However many Christians think they are are forced to believe this ridiculous story because whoever wrote Galatians mentioned Abraham. The author also says the story is a allegory, a statement that has had Bible “scholars” arguing for 1800 years.

1 Like
16

I could be wrong, but I think it would be hard to tell using genetics when there was a common ancestor. Assuming that the story in Genesis is close to accurate, Hagar would have the 12 children and Sarah only one and only after Jacob is there 13 children from “Israel” and so in theory there would be 25 divergents depending on who they had as wives. But both Arabs and Jews would have the same singular DNA of Abraham. I think you could prove that these groups have a common ancestor and by doing that prove a Abraham existed but if simply one person from either group intermarried I cant see how you could tell if those children came through the Isaac line or the or the Ishmael/Hagar line of princes.

On another note, it appears that Abraham came from Iraq and was told to move to modern day Israel and then left for Egypt. It looks like, if the bible is fairly accurate Abram and those before him traveled a lot and people would live where ever they wanted and when established would call it their land as a homesteader. And Kings were basically mayors of small cities and would fight each other, so title to the middle east cant be based on any of it because that would mean Jewish people would include Arabs and they would own Iraq as much as they own Israel etc.
Whoever tries to create a DNA profile of the Middle east will have to be a genius.

17

Gen 37:25: Then they (Jacob’s sons) sat down to eat; and looking up they saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead, with their camels carrying gum, balm, and resin, on their way to carry it down to Egypt.
Gen 37:28: When some Midianite traders passed by, they drew Joseph up, lifting him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver. And they took Joseph to Egypt.
Gen 25:12: These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, named in the order of their birth: Nebaioth, the firstborn of Ishmael; and Kedar, Abdeel, Mibsam, Mishma, Dumah, Massa, Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah.

According to the Bible the Ishmaelites were cousins to Jacob’s sons since Jacob’s father Isaac and the Ishmaelite’s grandfather Ishmael were brothers. One might wonder why the Ishmaelites would have paid their cousins twenty pieces of silver to buy one of their own relatives or why none these close relatives recognized each other. Also the caravan of Ishmaelites at that time would have been quite small even if it carried the entire twelve tribes of Ishmaelites. All this is just further evidence that Abraham is a fictional character

18

Well I think there is some obvious things. You don’t travel the same as we do today. When Abraham left his family he took his brothers son Lot with him… It suggests back then when you left, you left, and there was an expectation of danger and that it would be a time before you came back. If ever.

And Even Josephs Brothers didn’t recognize him until he uncovered himself (likely took off makeup the Egyptians wore. (likely to protect from the sun, which turned into a design etc.) And age and uncut hair would likely make it harder. So if they did not ever meet him and then they couldn’t see a resemblance who knows. They sold him off.

There are tombs and cities and documents and dead sea scrolls etc. all in existence not running contrary to each other. the dead sea scrolls for example wiped out the argument that the Old testament was drastically altered. It shows the doubt does not come from evidence but from prejudiced Atheism and its bent to say not to facts and suggest they are stories for no reason other than they say so.

19

Archaeologists have shown that camels had not yet been domesticated during the time Abraham supposedly lived.

The Israelites were never in Egypt. The Egyptians had a military presence for about 400 years in Canaan which they controlled in order to protect caravans and travelers from bandits The Exodus is a solar myth about the passing over from the sign of Taurus to the sign of Aries. This was explained in detail on another thread here called “Boris Badenoff: Adam and Eve and Astrotheology” where the astrological basis for the story of Adam and Eve is also explained as well as other stories. I suggest you have a look.

There are no tombs of anybody mentioned in the Bible and there are lots of cities, places and a mountain mentioned in the Bible that have never been located. This is because they are metaphors for things that exist in the sky. I don’t think the Old Testament was drastically altered. It’s been drastically misinterpreted, especially by modern people including and especially Bible “scholars.” One reason we diagram the chiasms in the Bible is to see if something may be missing or possibly out of place which would be a good indication that something was either added or subtracted. If you look on my Facebook page, I use a diagram to show that even though the story of the woman caught in adultery in John’s gospel is not present in any of the older manuscripts it was still most likely there in the original text. It was probably misplaced, ruined or accidently skipped by copyists who did make quite a few copying errors.

That’s just wrong. The stories in the Bible are allegories based on astrology. The Bible tells us they are and the biblical writers were not trying to hide this or what they were doing.
Genesis 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years,
Psalm 19:1-4 The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims his handiwork. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night declares knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words; their voice is not heard; yet their voice goes out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world. In the heavens he has set a tent for the sun, which comes out like a bridegroom from his wedding canopy, and like a strong man runs its course with joy. Its rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them; and nothing is hid from its heat.
Romans 10:18 But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have; for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.”

The author of John’s Gospel has Nicodemus visit Jesus at night when the stars, also known as the Sons of God and the Watchers, were clearly visible. Any questions?

20

13 posts were split to a new topic: Geneological Geology

21

The discussion of chiastic structure in the Abraham narrative is potentially fruitful, because it is based on what’s actually in our present text, and not on dubious speculations about the origin or dating or original language of our present text. Indeed, the discussion of such literary features of Biblical texts was the core preoccupation of the scholars who taught me Hebrew Bible.

Note, however, that the artificial character of the narrative which is established by the chiastic structure (I say “established” for the sake of discussion, since I have not yet checked the schema against the actual narrative to make sure it is an accurate representation) does not prove that no historical Abraham existed, any more than the artful dramatic presentation of Socrates in Plato’s dialogues proves that no historical Socrates existed.

That none of the stories in Genesis are “history” in the modern sense, I take for granted, and so need no convincing. The narratives of the Hebrew Bible do not belong to the literary genre that we call “history.” However, the claim that those narratives have no points of contact with real people, cities, etc. is a reckless and irresponsible claim which is rightfully rejected by competent scholars.

4 Likes
22

Not one of these passages has anything to do with “astrology.” Regarding the first two passages, the mere mention of the heavens, the sun, etc. does not make a passage “astrological” in meaning. But even worse, the third passage has nothing to do with the heavens at all! The Greek phrase translated as “to the ends of the world” employs the word oikoumene, and that word, as anyone competent in Greek knows, refers to the inhabited earth, not to the heavens or any heavenly body. Further, the whole context (given by the preceding verses), has nothing to do with heavenly bodies. Overall, then, the exegesis here is without credibility.

Note the difference between this fanciful claim, which is not based on the text, and the claim about the chiastic structure in the Abraham story, which is text-based. The remarks about the Abraham story are potentially scholarly material, whereas the claim that the above passages are “astrological” in meaning is sub-scholarly and will be convincing only to those who do not read texts carefully.

1 Like
24

Poor teaching is worse than no teaching at all.

Do you have some real evidence that Socrates existed? How did these long speeches of his get recorded? This kind of dialogue proves either the dialog or the person speaking or both are fictional. This is the same way we know that the major characters in the Bible and their conversations are fiction. It’s hard to prove non-existence. The person making the positive claim has the burden of proof. Go ahead, prove Abraham existed. Or at least provide some evidence that he did.

If they don’t know the Bible is based on astrology then they are incompetent scholars. Their days are numbered, the party’s over. You can stop bringing them up. I don’t care about these “scholars” and outside their little circle, no one else does either. Except you.

Well they clearly have something to do with astronomy. The stars and planets are the Sons of God mentioned in the Bible as are the Watchers in Enoch. It’s simply nuts to think the ancients did not stare at the night sky, make observations and then make up allegorical stories based on what they saw. Every ancient culture did this and to claim that the ancient Hebrews and Christians did not is ridiculous. Pope Leo had to order the Christians to stop worshiping the sun in the 5th Century.

For you maybe, but you are beholding to views you’ve been pre-conditioned and indoctrinated to believe no matter what the evidence. Just stop with the Greek. I gave you more chances than I gave my first wife. You proved way beyond a reasonable doubt you can’t read a word of Koine Greek.

I showed you many examples of parallels to Homer and examples of astrotheology in the Bible. Other people a lot smarter than you see these things. Take off the religious blinders and you’ll see them clearly then to.

25

That’s off by 60 to 100 million years. Homo sapiens have existed for about 300,000 years or 300 thousand years. Archaeologists Erez Ben-Yosef and Lidar Sapir-Hen of Tel Aviv University released a new study that dates the arrival of the domesticated camel in the eastern Mediterranean region to the 10th century B.C. That’s about 1000 years after the supposed time of Abraham, according archeologists best friend, the Bible.

What are the names of these cities? Name 'em and claim 'em. Where are Sodom, Cana, Gethsemane, Golgotha, Sychar? You should be more concerned about what cities archaeologists haven’t found.

How would Moses know that the earth was covered with water? Where did all this water go? And how do you “know” Moses even existed. There’s no record of him anywhere but the Bible. When the earth was formed days only lasted bout 4 hours and the earth was spinning so fast that there were tidal waves about 10,000 feet high. This is recorded in the geological record. However there’s no evidence for the Noah flood in the geological record or anywhere else.

Science is a method, not a body of data.

That’s ridiculous. The people who wrote the Bible didn’t know that the continents of North America, South America, Australia, Antarctica even existed. They didn’t know germs existed, let alone that they caused diseases. So much for their “knowledge” of geology. The transition from land to water of the whale is well documented by a series of intermediate fossils, many of which are known from Pakistan and India. Whales, dolphins, and porpoises belong to the order of cetaceans which were aquatic mammals. Early cetaceans were amphibious, and their ancestors were terrestrial artiodactyls, similar to small deer. I’m pretty sure the ancients who wrote the Bible were unaware of all this. After all they believed the earth was flat with a dome over it. Many Christians today believe that as well, you know because the Bible tells them so.

Why would God give people knowledge 6000 years ago but not today? And how did God pass this knowledge to humans anyway? Why would God give knowledge to one desert tribe and not give it to anybody else? How come China was farther advanced than the Hebrews or Christians if the Bible has all this special knowledge? When Marco Polo visited China in 1271, he found a place far more technologically advanced than anywhere in Western Europe. The Chinese were 200 years ahead of the Christians in Europe. They had already invented the abacus, canals and locks, gunpowder and fireworks, kites, paper money, the spinning wheel, printing presses, roads and hotels, suspension bridges, porcelain, movable sails and rudders, the crossbow, the compass, stirrups, the umbrella, metal clocks, alcohol and on and on. Marco Polo and the Europeans had never seen or even dreamed of these things. Not only that the Chinese were centuries ahead of the Christians in astronomy, physics, chemistry, meteorology, seismology, technology, engineering and mathematics ALL of which trace their origins to China. I guess the Chinese were just smarter than the Christian God.

26

Geology comments moved to new Geneological Geology thread.

1 Like
27

It goes to my point. The common view of the uneducated that argue against Creationism is that these layers are a systematic deck of cards showing evolution step by step. And that fossils are all through them showing how a simple form became a complex form. When its not true at all. My point at the beginning is that the world was under water. All of it. And the Bible says that. Genesis 1:9-11. He separates the waters from the land and plants grass. The American Dream. A grass lawn.
I think its something special that these guys who had no plane, no drill, No sense of the world were able to right a fairly tale to some here and yet have more accurate information about the way the world was than people being taught in school today.

28

That’s either not clear or not accurate. No one claims the fossil record is complete, much less that the entire history of evolution is represented in any single location. If you can cite the claim we might sort that out.

In any case, the fossil record is not evidence for evolution due to its completeness. It’s evidence because the appearance of fossils in the geologic column fits the nested hierarchy of Common Descent, a prediction from evolution. We can test those prediction in a scientific manor.

If that’s a claim about Noah’s flood, there have been many previous discussions in these forums. We even had some posts from @grmorton before he passed.

2 Likes
29

No, maybe I come across as sure of myself. that could be from having employees in the past having to lead rather than follow.

30

Nope. Are you claiming that you are more educated on this subject than we are?

Nope. Evolution routinely makes things simpler.

Of course not, which is why you are making those false attributions!

You forgot to admit being wrong about virtually everything about evolution and geology, Scott.

3 Likes
31

The Bible also says that vegetation was on the earth BEFORE the sun and moon existed. Apparently God doesn’t know about photosynthesis. It ain’t necessarily so. It ain’t necessarily so. The things that you’re liable to read in the Bible It ain’t necessarily so.- From the George Gershwin song, Ain’t Necessarily So

32

I think this story of Abraham having to sacrifice his son, reflects the fundamental truth of raising a child, by committing your child to something.
Because God is essentially saying to Abraham: You have to put your child in risk of death to live for a certain set of values.
Then Abraham has enough faith to say, I trust that God is not going to kill my child but I am committing to this set of values so I am in fact putting my child at risk of death.
You are putting your child in the world and the world is a dangerous place.
But you are doing so on behalf of your family, your God and a broader purpose.
This is what it means to be I think a fighter or a soldier or an emissary for the Christian values.
I am willingly putting my child in more danger by raising him with certain Christian values then he would otherwise be.
Because in certain areas of the world (and maybe the West in the near future), Christians are in a lot more danger than they otherwise would be.
But that’s the point, I’m saying to my child, I pre-commit you to this struggle and to this set of values and that does put you at additional risk but that’s also what gives your life meaning.
But that’s because I believe that this set of values is worth committing to.
And throughout church history, God doesn’t always provide the ram in a thicket. Sometimes the kids die. That is the reality of life and also the reality of committing to any set of values that are worth committing to.

33

There is a great example of not reading something or not reading the chapter. If you cherry pick you will be wrong. But right up front verse 3 God creates light. when they say And in english its as if they are saying as well as. He creates this same light 3 times if you read it wrong. later in vs. 5 he is dividing light from darkness, in vs. 14 the 4th day he is creating lights to divide the day from the night.
still If you do read it in order No, the light day and night was created before the plants… You may have heard wrong.

34

No, the story is a parallel to the story of Agamemnon sacrificing his daughter. The biblical writer used the story in Homer to demonstrate that the Hebrew God is superior to the Greek gods and Abraham superior to Agamemnon because Isaac lives and Iphigenia dies as a sacrifice. Just about every story and narrative in the Bible was taken from the Iliad and the Odyssey and those stories are all astrological myths. And this means so to are the tales in the Bible.

35

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.