Matriarch Sarah / שרה אמנו - Hazrat Sara AS

You are right, she is suppose to have a different father. I will try and fix it as I am a manager of the page.

It is EXPLICIT that they had the SAME father, but had different mothers.

Genesis 20:12 --
"And moreover she is indeed my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and so she became my wife."

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0120.htm#12

Please DO NOT make this type of changes without asking me first. I typically answer messages within a day.

Shmuel-Aharon Kam,
Curator of Biblical Tree

Actually, you are in the wrong Shmuel-Aharon. I went to three different sources to back up my claim. The Mormons, The Rabbis behind Chabad, and the Catholics all agree that Haran is the father of Mother Sarah.

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/112508/jewish/Sarah.htm

http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13194-sarah-sarai

https://www.lds.org/manual/old-testament-student-manual-genesis-2-s...

Okay the Catholics are at odds with the Rabbis of the Jewish Faiths and the Mormon Church on Sarah's lineage. Shuel-Aharon, you might be a Curator, however, it does not make you always in the right about things.

Robert, there IS a source in the much later Talmud, that makes that statement. The TYPE of specific Talmudic source is a "Midrash". These are only very rarely taken literally. This Midrash, is an exegesis of Genesis 11:29 --

"And Abram and Nahor took them wives: the name of Abram's wife was Sarai; and the name of Nahor's wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah."

The Midrash says that Iscah IS Sarai, and that she was [also] called Iscah, because everyone would talk about how pretty she was. The word "Iscah" is a near-homonym of a word for "talk".

BUT in any case later sources [almost] never trump earlier ones, especially when the earlier source is so explicitly clear.

Also, do the math. Sarah was only TEN years younger than her husband Abraham. This is mentioned a number of times. So how exactly was she, Abraham's NIECE, the daughter of his YOUNGER brother.

I readily admit to errors, but this isn't one of them.

I have one from the Book of Abraham and it is even older than the Talmud. In Abraham 2:14-15 it reads, "So I, Abraham, departed as the L-rd said unto me, and Lot with me; and I, Abraham, was sixty and two years old when I departed out of Haran. And I took Sarai, whom I took to wife when I was in Ur, in Chaldea, and Lot my brother's son, and all our substance that we had gathered, and the sould that we had won in Haran, and came forth in the way to the land of Canaan, and dwelt in tents as we came our way."

Now these two verses give the Rabbis who authored the Chabad and Jewish Encyclopedia their credibility. I KNOW I am in the right. If I have to, I can even look for other sources, but out of Father Abraham's own mouth he stated, his NIECE was his wife.

Also I am giving you a direct quote from the Chabad website:

"The Torah gives us many more details about our father Abraham than about our mother Sarah. But from these details, together with the details we get from our Oral Torah (Talmud, Midrash, etc.), we are presented with a very clear picture of the great personality of Mother Sarah.

Sarah was the daughter of Haran, one of Abraham’s two brothers. Her name at first was Sarai, but when the Almighty later changed Abraham’s name from Abram to Abraham, He also changed Sarai’s name to Sarah. Saran and Sarah both mean “Princess.” She was regarded as one of the greatest princesses in the world (Talmud, Berachot 13a)."

This is the second source to back up my claim and it is paraphrased from the Talmud. Again the Chabad is authored by Rabbis, and Rabbis are considered to credible sources as they are teachers of the law. I also spoke to a Levite who told me, you go by what the Rabbis teach. The Rabbis know what is actually written better than we do.

As I said, PRIMARY sources always come first.

The "Book of Abraham" is non-canonical, and thus we have no reliable version of the text, nor IIRC any original version in Hebrew. If you read, for example, the Book of Jubilees, it is extremely ambiguous, and KNOWN to be wrong in places.

The following is what Wikipedia has to say about the "Book of Abraham". Basically it is junk.

The Book of Abraham is a work produced in 1835 by Joseph Smith [founder of LDS] based, he said, on Egyptian papyri purchased from a traveling mummy exhibition. According to Smith, the book was "a translation of some ancient records [...] purporting to be the writings of Abraham, while he was in Egypt, called the Book of Abraham, written by his own hand, upon papyrus". Smith said the papyri describe Abraham's early life, his travels to Canaan and Egypt, and his vision of the cosmos and its creation.

Rabbis or not, they are MUCH later sources. As I also explained, the simple MATH makes it practically impossible, especially as ALL other births recorded in the period where LATER in life, not earlier.

Joseph Smith did TRANSLATE the Book of Abraham from Egyptian Papyri and the Book of Abraham is considered canonical to the Mormon Faith. Therefore it is considered in a scholarly point of view to be Ancient scripture.

Insulting any religion to give yourself credibility is wrong!

The Book of Abraham is an auto-biography written by our forefather, Abraham and translated by Joseph Smith, Jr. in 1835 (1st Prophet of the LDS Church). Joseph Smith, Jr. bought from a traveling mummy exhibition several papyri which contained the works of the Patriarchs: Abraham and his great-grandson, Joseph.

As far as the Rabbis go, they have been teaching that Sarah was the daughter of Haran since Abraham and Sarah herself.

The next time you decide to insult a religion, make sure it isn't with someone who knows their religion.

The earlier sources STILL override the later sources, INCLUDING the rabbis.

The earliest source disagrees with you and you owe me an apology for your bigotry. The Book of Abraham predates the Torah and Talmud. I get it, you think know everything because you're a curator, well you don't. I'm beginning to find you totally intolerant and I refuse to pander any further to a bigot.

The claim that the Book of Abraham predates the Torah is a claim that I think is not believed outside the Mormon community.

This is not a statement about the Mormon community, it's a statement about how the rest of the world percieves a particular article of Mormon faith. And as far as I can tell, it is true.

I'm sorry, I see no reason to accept expressions of outrage about true statements as a reason to change my position.

I have spoken already to Geni and their recommendation is to change Matriarch Sarah's parentage to unknown. The outrage I expressed was towards Shmuel's reference to the Book of Abraham being "junk" or at least to the Wikipedia page. After listening to Geni,I think to save everyone from being mired in controversy it would be best to go with Geni's recommendation.

I also failed to mention Geni also recommended that a curator note get placed to show the variants on Matriarch Sarah's lineage.

Robert Thomas Wood, here is a link to the official LDS website, with the Book of Abraham. Chapter 2. Verse 2 DOES say that Abraham's brother Nahor, married his niece, Milcah, as it also says in Genesis 20:29.

Can you please point out where it mentions Sarah parentage?

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/2?lang=eng

In the mean time I had updated the Curator's Note as requested.

Abraham 2:14-15

Also I just found in Genesis 11:29 where it says Matriarch Sarah was the daughter of Haran.

http://biblehub.com/genesis/11-29.htm

Matriarch Sarah / שרה אמנו is my grandson Joshua's 74th great grandmother.

MANY commentaries argue on yisca and sarah/sarai... everything is is, then...

Parshat Noach, Pasuk Chaf Tes

Eli Rubin, I'm aware of the Midrash and commentaries. Accepting the Midrash at face value is always tricky.

Look at it this way, we know
* Abraham was 10 years older than Sarah.
* Haran was younger than Abraham.

So according to the Midrash. Haran was born, got married and had Sarah, by the time that Abraham was TEN?? According to this chapter people were having their first child were at least thirty years old.

http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0111.htm

Shmuel-Aharon Kam (Kahn / שמואל-אהרן קם (קאן

How do you know that Haran was younger than Abraham? From the listing of the names? That does not prove birth order. Maybe Haran was older than Abraham?

Yes, listing order is practically always the birth order.

If we want to be pedantic, getting back to Eli's use of non-Biblical sources, the Talmud (Sanhedrin 69b) says he was the younger brother.

The listing order is not always the birth order. Witness cases where siblings are listed in a different order in different places, such as Noah's sons and Tselophchad's daughters.

I am also very surprised that you suggest Sanhedrin 69b as a source, because that is where the Talmud says that Iscah is Sara, which you are refuting. I am not sure how you can take the one statement of Talmud but not the next.

And the Talmud then refutes the proof that the listing was in birth order and suggests that they are listed in order of wisdom instead

Perhaps take a look at Sanhedrin 69b if you haven't already

I am NOT using the Talmudic source.
I always try using the earlier sources, and the Torah explicitly says, multiple times, that Sarah was Abraham's half-sister.

Where are the multiple times? Bereishit 20:12. Where else?

Genesis 12:13
Say, I pray thee, thou art my sister; that it may be well with me for thy sake, and that my soul may live because of thee.'

Genesis 20:12
And moreover she is indeed my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and so she became my wife.

Thanks Shmuel.

12:13 is a request to say something for the sake of saving life, rather than a statement of fact.

Those who proclaim the view that Sarah = Iscah are of course aware of those sources, and find their way around them.
The context of 20:12 is that Avraham is still trying to save his life, and what he says must be understood in that context.

In the 2nd, they are already PAST the danger. So it IS a statement of fact.

Again, often a Midrash does NOT come to state fact, but to teach us something. That is the literal meaning of the word Midrash, "something that is learned FROM the text", not necessarily to explain it.