Adam and Eve as a Myth

[greentwiga]

Does anyone really know when the story of Adam and Eve was written.
And then.....when was Genesis written.....by who ?
~
Just curious...mind you !
~
`mud

The problem with that question is it runs afoul of the history of writing. The books of Moses were written, for the most part around 1400 BC, just at the dawn of alphabetic writing, probably ProtoSinaitic. Some of Genesis might have been written in another script, eg Hieroglyphics or Cuneiform. The Story of Noah, for example occurred about 3,000 BC, (using Sumerian dating) right near the invention of Cuneiform. It might have been a couple of hundred years later that Cuneiform had evolved enough to allow the writing of stories. So, although Moses wrote Genesis in its modern form (except editorial glosses. Lets not get sidetracked by debating how much it was edited)

It is only the story of Adam and Eve that truly predates writing. Depending on who you talk to , it could have been somewhere between 4,000 Bc and 10,000 BC. Now, we have the original storyteller and any changes that might have occurred as it was passed down.

There are two ancient traditions or cultures of storytelling. Sumerian adapts the basic story to fit new sensibilities. For example it it moved to a new city with a different supreme God, the names were changed. Semitic has a tradition of demanding exact reproduction. It is only in this tradition that Adam or Seth could be said to be the original "writer."

Only if the story was so changed could one say a different redactor was the true writer (say someone living around 400 BC) Later redactors would have gotten little details wrong, such as the age of domestication of certain plants of animals or the age of inventions. Notice, for example that sewing is mentioned in the story of Adam and
Eve, a technology that was invented way before 10,000 BC. Accuracy reduces the chance that Adam and Eve was a later myth.

 

[outhouse]

The books of Moses were written, for the most part around 1400 BC,

wrong

this is almost one of the mnore ignorant remarks ive seen here.

Israelites as aculture didnt even start until after 1200 BC


the first five books were in a complete state of evolution for hundreds and hundreds of years.


the first legends were collected around 920 BC to 1000 BC at the earliest, and at this time they did not look anything like what we have today.


I dont know where you recieved your missinformation, but you should not post such blatant garbage.

Some of Genesis might have been written in another script, eg Hieroglyphics or Cuneiform.

false again.

parts found in genesis were taken from pervious Mesopotamian cultures that wrote in Cuneiform. There first man was Adamu who came from dirt. Some of these people ended up migrating tio Israel bringing these other influences with them. this is a known fact and not up for debate.

although Moses wrote Genesis in its modern form

this is also FALSE

Moses never inked a word, the first five books again, were written over hundreds of years after 1000 BC

as amatter of fact no schola today claims moses wrote a word, amd most claim him to be a literary creation.

It is only the story of Adam and Eve that truly predates writing.

false agin

. Accuracy reduces the chance that Adam and Eve was a later myth.

False again.

its straight mythology according to all scholars today, not only that we know it was influenced by Mesopotamians.

Semitic has a tradition of demanding exact reproduction

scholars would claim this as ignorant.

We see a very clear picture of the evolution of the first five books over hundreds of years and content redacted to meet the changing needs of the changing culture.

 

[`mud]

NEXT !!
~
`mud

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The problem with that question is it runs afoul of the history of writing. The books of Moses were written, for the most part around 1400 BC, just at the dawn of alphabetic writing, probably ProtoSinaitic.

 

[greentwiga]

Instead of a face slap, what is wrong with taking the Torah literally. Moses would have written in the script he knew. At the time of David, it would have been copied in the script then in existence, ancient Hebrew. At the time of the captivity, it would have been copied in a more modern form of Hebrew. The words would have been the same, just the letters would have looked different.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Instead of a face slap, what is wrong with taking the Torah literally.

Other than it being laughably ignorant, nothing.

Moses would have written in the script he knew.

Written what? When? Based on what tradition? Justified by what evidence?

Just stop it! :slap:

 

[javajo]

I believe the Bible. Jesus mentioned Adam and Eve when he talked about divorce and how it came with the Law because of the hardness of men's hearts, but that it was not so in the beginning. Jesus mentions Noah as well as the Flood. Jesus' lineage is traced to Adam in the book of Luke. Interesting thing there, is before the destruction of the Temple and genealogical records in 70 AD, every Levite Priest could prove he came from the tribe of Levi, one of the twelve sons of Abraham, who lived only nine generations from Noah and Noah lived only nine generations from Adam. That, to me, is very significant as well as all the other genealogies in the Old Testament and Christ's in Mathew going back to Abraham. Just think, it is pretty well accepted that Abraham was a real person and the father of the Hebrew nation, and he was only 18 generations from Adam. Also, the Bible states that sin was passed to all men through Adam but by Jesus we may be made righteous, so not to believe in Adam is to deny the whole New Testament theology. Also, some scientists say we all came from a common set of parents from somewhere in the middle east.

 

[outhouse]

Just think, it is pretty well accepted that Abraham was a real person and the father of the Hebrew nation, and he was only 18 generations from Adam

False

no credible historian would ever claim this.


its only accepted as mythology to scholars

 

[javajo]

False

no credible historian would ever claim this.


its only accepted as mythology to scholars

I don't think so. Most historians or scholars agree that Abraham and Christ did indeed exist in history. They may not believe the stories associated with them, but they do believe they existed. There is no evidence Abraham did not exist, but there is evidence that he did. He came from Ur, a city of the Chaldese, a people archeologists have confirmed existed in Abraham's time. Also, not only do the Jews name him as their father through the line of Isaac, but the Muslims or Arabs do as well through the line of Ishmael and they even worship the House of Abraham today. And of course Christians believe he existed and Jesus believed he did as well. For Christians we strongly believe in Abraham as we believe the promise was not to Moses through the Law, but to Abraham because of his faith in God which God counted unto him for righteousness, the same way we are saved today, through faith. God also promised Abraham that through his seed (singular), Jesus Christ, all nations would be blessed, thus anyone, Jew or Gentile could be freely saved through faith in Christ, from Galatians 3:

6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
9So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.


11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ;

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

Also, Abraham is in every genealogy in the Bible and in Hebrews 11 great Hall of Faith Chapter. Every Jew knew they came from Abraham, it was a given, and still is.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I don't think so. Most historians or scholars agree that Abraham and Christ did indeed exist in history.

Why the foolish lie?

Historicity and origins

Nothing in the Genesis stories can be related to the history of Canaan of the early 2nd millennium: none of the kings mentioned are known, Abimelech could not have been a Philistine (they did not arrive until centuries later), Ur would not become known as "Ur of the Chaldeans" until the early 1st millennium, and Laban could not have been an Aramean, as the Arameans did not become an identifiable political entity until the 12th century. Joseph Blenkinsopp, Emeritus Professor of Biblical Studies at the University of Notre Dame has asserted that the narrative of Abraham originated from literary circles of the 6th and 5th centuries BCE as a mirror of the situation facing the Jewish community under the Babylonian and early Persian empires. Blenkinsopp describes two conclusions about Abraham that are widely held in biblical scholarship: the first is that, except in the triad "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob," he is not clearly and unambiguously attested in the Bible earlier than the Babylonian exile ; the second is that he became, in the Persian period, a model for those who would return from Babylon to Judah. Beyond this the Abraham story (and those of Isaac and Jacob/Israel) served a theological purpose following the destruction of Jerusalem, the Temple and the Davidic kingship: despite the loss of these things, Yahweh's dealings with the ancestors provided a historical foundation on which hope for the future could be built. There is basic agreement that his connection with Haran, Shechem and Bethel is secondary and originated when he became identified as the father of Jacob and ancestor of the northern tribes; his association with Mamre and Hebron, on the other hand (in the south, in the territory of Jerusalem and Judah), suggest that this region was the original home of his religion. [wiki]

To claim that "Most historians or scholars agree that Abraham ... did indeed exist in history." is either pathetically ignorant or disgustingly dishonest and thoroughly irresponsible in either case.

 

[javajo]

Why the foolish lie?To claim that "Most historians or scholars agree that Abraham ... did indeed exist in history." is either pathetically ignorant or disgustingly dishonest and thoroughly irresponsible in either case.

Believe everything you read on wiki? It is neither of what you say, but it is the truth. There is no credible historian who would be foolish enough to deny the historic human person of Christ. Ur of the Chaldees was indeed an ancient city from the time of Abraham.

1. Written records from over 4,000 years ago. Dr. Paolo Matthiae, Director of the Italian Archeological Mission in Syria, "hit an archeological jackpot" in 1975. He discovered "the greatest third-millennium [B.C.] archive ever unearthed." It included "more than 15,000 cuneiform tablets and fragments" and unveiled a Semitic empire that dominated the Middle East more than four thousand years ago. Its hub was Ebla, where educated scribes filled ancient libraries with written records of history, people, places and commerce.[5]
"These early tablets display an ease of expression, an elegance that indicates complete mastery of the cuneiform system by the scribes," said Dr. Giovanni Pettinato, former epigraphist of the Italian Mission, who worked closely with Dr. Matthiae. "One can only conclude that writing had been in use at Ebla for a long time before 2500 B.C."
The Ebla tablets verified the worship of pagan gods such as Baal, Dagan and Asherah "known previously only from the Bible."[5] They mention the name "Abraham" and "Ur of Chaldees" (the Biblical Abraham's birthplace) as well as other familiar cities and places:

"The names of cities thought to have been founded much later, such as Beirut and Byblos, leap from the tablets. Damascus and Gaza are mentioned, as well as two of the Biblical cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah. ... Most intriguing of all are the personal names found on the Ebla tablets. They include Ab-ra-mu (Abraham), E-sa-um (Esau)...."[5]
​

Destroyed and rebuilt several times, Ebla began its final decline around 1800 B.C. Since new generations settled on top of the old ruins, it left behind a many-layered "TEL" (Looks like a flat-topped hill. Capitalized for emphasis) which archeologists will continue to explore for years to come. From: Abraham didn't exist? Moses a myth? Archeological and historical evidence of Biblical accuracy

 

[outhouse]

Believe everything you read on wiki? It is neither of what you say, but it is the truth. There is no credible historian who would be foolish enough to deny the historic human person of Christ. Ur of the Chaldees was indeed an ancient city from the time of Abraham.

1. Written records from over 4,000 years ago. Dr. Paolo Matthiae, Director of the Italian Archeological Mission in Syria, "hit an archeological jackpot" in 1975. He discovered "the greatest third-millennium [B.C.] archive ever unearthed." It included "more than 15,000 cuneiform tablets and fragments" and unveiled a Semitic empire that dominated the Middle East more than four thousand years ago. Its hub was Ebla, where educated scribes filled ancient libraries with written records of history, people, places and commerce.[5]
"These early tablets display an ease of expression, an elegance that indicates complete mastery of the cuneiform system by the scribes," said Dr. Giovanni Pettinato, former epigraphist of the Italian Mission, who worked closely with Dr. Matthiae. "One can only conclude that writing had been in use at Ebla for a long time before 2500 B.C."
The Ebla tablets verified the worship of pagan gods such as Baal, Dagan and Asherah "known previously only from the Bible."[5] They mention the name "Abraham" and "Ur of Chaldees" (the Biblical Abraham's birthplace) as well as other familiar cities and places:

"The names of cities thought to have been founded much later, such as Beirut and Byblos, leap from the tablets. Damascus and Gaza are mentioned, as well as two of the Biblical cities of the plain, Sodom and Gomorrah. ... Most intriguing of all are the personal names found on the Ebla tablets. They include Ab-ra-mu (Abraham), E-sa-um (Esau)...."[5]

​

Destroyed and rebuilt several times, Ebla began its final decline around 1800 B.C. Since new generations settled on top of the old ruins, it left behind a many-layered "TEL" (Looks like a flat-topped hill. Capitalized for emphasis) which archeologists will continue to explore for years to come. From: Abraham didn't exist? Moses a myth? Archeological and historical evidence of Biblical accuracy

abraham was a common name, there is no connection to the abramu and abraham of the bible.

 

[outhouse]

This shows how full of beans the link you posted is.

The key words are "exceptional and unsubstantiated claims" "misinformation"




Ebla tablets - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The application of the Ebla texts to specific places or people in the Bible occasioned controversy, focused on whether the tablets made references to, and thus confirmed, the existence of Abraham, David and Sodom and Gomorrah among other Biblical references.[8] The sensationalist claims were coupled with delays in the publication of the complete texts, and it soon became an unprecedented academic crisis.[2] The political context of the modern Arab–Israeli conflict also added fire to the debate, turning it into a debate about the "proof" for Zionist claims to Palestine.[8] Among the most notable claims were that the attested presence of "yā" in Eblaite names was a supposed form of Yahweh (a claim that has since been shown to be purely speculative);[11] the election of local kings, claimed to be uniquely reminiscent of practices in early Israel – and a mythological introduction to a hymn to the creator deity at Ebla, said to be akin to the account of creation in Genesis.[2] However, much of the initial media excitement about supposed Eblaite connections with the Bible, based on preliminary guesses and speculations by Pettinato and others, is now widely deplored as generated by "exceptional and unsubstantiated claims" and "great amounts of disinformation that leaked to the public".[12] The present consensus is that Ebla's role in biblical archaeology, strictly speaking, is minimal.[2]

 

[javajo]

abraham was a common name, there is no connection to the abramu and abraham of the bible.

I agree, it was a common name, but it was a name.

The present consensus is that Ebla's role in biblical archaeology, strictly speaking, is minimal.[2]

Yet it has a role, perhaps less minimal than the author alleges. Nevertheless, Abraham is written about all through scripture and is and was accepted by Jews, Muslims and Christians as an historical person. I mean, when Jesus and the religious leaders discussed Abraham, nobody ever said Abra-WHO? They all knew he was their father and the Levites traced their family tree back to him, they had to to be able to prove they were Levites. But, if you want to believe Abraham did not exist, knock yourself out. Do you have any proof he did not exist?

 

[outhouse]

from jays post

Joseph Blenkinsopp, Emeritus Professor of Biblical Studies at the University of Notre Dame has asserted that the narrative of Abraham originated from literary circles of the 6th and 5th centuries BCE as a mirror of the situation facing the Jewish community under the Babylonian and early Persian empires


and this is not disputed by any credible historian or scholar.


javajo you do know that Israelites as a culture did not exist prior to 1200 BC dont you?

at 1200 BC they were still basically Canaanites that started settling in the highland, and in the next two huindred years many semetic people from all over the area migrated and joined these displaced Canaanites, many were from Mesopotamia and even a few from Egypt.

These are facts. not up for debate

 

[javajo]

from jays post

Joseph Blenkinsopp, Emeritus Professor of Biblical Studies at the University of Notre Dame has asserted that the narrative of Abraham originated from literary circles of the 6th and 5th centuries BCE as a mirror of the situation facing the Jewish community under the Babylonian and early Persian empires

and this is not disputed by any credible historian or scholar.

The writings are contained in the Dead Sea Scrolls which are from right around the time of Christ or a few years before.

javajo you do know that Israelites as a culture did not exist prior to 1200 BC dont you?

at 1200 BC they were still basically Canaanites that started settling in the highland, and in the next two huindred years many semetic people from all over the area migrated and joined these displaced Canaanites, many were from Mesopotamia and even a few from Egypt.

These are facts. not up for debate

1200 or 1254 BC is accurate, yes. However, I believe they came out of Egypt and brought Joseph's bones with them, like God's Word says.

 

[outhouse]

The writings are contained in the Dead Sea Scrolls which are from right around the time of Christ or a few years before.

which doesnt have anything to do with abrahams historicity

1254 BC

where do you pull that date from. ????


it has no historicity at all for anything.

I believe they came out of Egypt and brought Joseph's bones with them, like God's Word says

god wrote nothing

and the exodus has no valid or credible historicity, according to historians, they claim that no such event ever took place.


So what your saying is, you dont believe historians or people educated in history, in favor of how ancient men wrote their theology.?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Believe everything you read on wiki?

No.

It is neither of what you say, but it is the truth.

Evidence.

There is no credible historian who would be foolish enough to deny the historic human person of Christ.

What does the historicity of Jesus have to do with my comment?

Ur of the Chaldees was indeed an ancient city from the time of Abraham.

And there are, indeed farms and tornadoes in Kansas, but that in no way constitutes evidence of the Wizard of Oz.

You claim: "Most historians or scholars agree that Abraham ... did indeed exist in history." Defend the claim.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

There is no credible historian who would be foolish enough to deny the historic human person of Christ.http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/08/archeology.htm

Biblical scholars, perhaps; historians, not necessarily. The debate is ongoing.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Biblical scholars, perhaps; historians, not necessarily.

Perhaps?

Based on what/​

Not necessarily?

Based on what?​

What is the justification of these equivocations?