Genealogical Abraham

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.


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

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.

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.

Geology comments moved to new Geneological Geology thread.

1 Like

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.

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.


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

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.


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

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.

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.

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.

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