Board index ‹ Specific Bible verses, texts, and passages ‹ Genesis

[The Juice]

I was curious what christians thought about abraham. Most scholars are pretty unanimous us agreeing he didn't at least not as described in the bible. I'm inclined to think this has a bit of a domino effect on the rest of the bible. If the Israelites are just emergent from the Canaanites doesn't that throw everything out of wack? The lineage to Jesus and the Israelites connection to God for example? I find it hard to take Jesus and the Gospels seriously if the whole build up to Jesus was largely fabricated.

I'd be interested to hear peoples thoughts on the matter! Thank you!

[jimwalton]

Yes, I believe he existed, and yes, I believe it matters. There's very little way to prove that he did. Even if we found a shard that said "Abraham" on it, people would say, "How do you know it's YOUR Abraham?" Even if they found an inscription that said, "Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" on it, people would say, "How to you know it's YOUR Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?" I don't know how anyone would ever accept proof for them. Since Abraham was a Bedouin, and not a king, and never lived in a city, nor held an official position of any kind, and lived 4,000 years ago, why would you expect there were any artifacts for him? You must realize that the further we go back in time, the fewer artifacts we have (especially specific ones [names, places, and events]). And what would you expect those artifacts would be? But I believe there's credible evidence in the veracity of the Genesis text about them, with its corroboratable cultural information.

And I think it matters because the covenant is not based in fiction; it's God's revelation of Himself to His historical people, and its historicity is important to its veracity.

> Most scholars are pretty unanimous us agreeing he didn't at least not as described in the bible. I'm inclined to think this has a bit of a domino effect on the rest of the bible.

Yeah, it doesn't influence me much that what a group of scholars say. There was a time when scientists and scholars thought the world was flat and the Earth was the center of the solar system. Affirmation by a majority of scholars, especially when they are claiming to prove a negative case (Abraham didn't exist) is fairly meaningless.

> If the Israelites are just emergent from the Canaanites doesn't that throw everything out of wack?

I think so, yeah.

> The lineage to Jesus and the Israelites connection to God for example?

Exactly. Even though even if Abraham weren't real it wouldn't disqualify Jesus from being part of His Israelite evolutionary heritage, though if Abraham isn't real, neither is Isaac or Jacob (Israel).

> I find it hard to take Jesus and the Gospels seriously if the whole build up to Jesus was largely fabricated.

I agree.

Here are some reasons I take Abraham to be historical:

• The name Abrum is affirmed in Old Assyrian texts from the same era. It was a place name, but that would show that Abram's lineage could be associated with the region of Syro-Mesopotamia, as the Bible says.
• The details of the Genesis account during the life of Abram (Abraham) are astoundingly accurate and fit perfectly with the era and the region (things like Hittite contracts, the war of Genesis 14, the people groups around, descriptions of religious practices, etc.). If Genesis were written during the exile, as some claim, these details would have been unknown to them. We know about them because we're digging up stuff from the era that had been hidden for a millennium before the exile.
• Abraham and later Isaac are said to have made a treaty with King Abimelech, and Jacob made a treaty with his father-in-law, Laban. Over 90 treaty documents have been found, dating from 2600-600 BC, and these treaties take distinctive form from culture to culture and generation to generation, with oaths, curses, and stipulations being given different emphases and presented in different orders. The ones with Abimelech and Laban fit exactly the region and eras that Genesis puts them in, and not at all the later or earlier ones. Later writers would not have known this. It speaks to the historicity of the text.

[Unmannered]

Also, the Bible lists all these beefs Abraham's crew got involved with, millenia before we began to study honor culture.

It's fascinating.