Abram

[paarsurrey]

Abram and Abraham (or Ibrahim) are two different characters.

The Jewish narrators/scribes/clergy had copycatted the story of Abram.
One would like to read the following:

Anyone who has done an ounce of research into the whole Camels issue, already knows that Mesopotamia had domesticated camels long before the Egyptians or anyone else, yet that is not the point! The fact is that evidence clearly indicates that Camels were not domesticated in Egypt until around 1000 BCE and in the Gen, narrative we have the Pharoah giving Abram Camels in return for the prostitution of Abram's wife/sister! This according to all of the leading authorities in the field of biblical and secular Archaeology is an anachronism! In particular, see the work of prof. Finkelstien, Tel Aviv University and Prof. Ze'ev Herzog also of the Tel Aviv University. Even the Conservative Christian Biblical Archaeologist, William F. Albright came to this conclusion. This "new discovery" demonstrates nothing that has not already been known in the past, yet it does not overturn the consensus of Biblical and Achaeological Scholarship at present, which is; the reference to camels is an anachronism (fiction). When evidence comes to light which contradicts the present view, I will be the first to examine it and if it holds weight, I will say, Yes, camels were domesticated prior to the end of the 2nd millenium BCE.

Feb 9, 2012 Post #12 by michaelsherlock
The Genesis Fraud Part 1 | ReligiousForums.com​

Regards

The story of Abram in Torah is a Jewish fabrication.

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Abraham knew God wasn't going to let him go through with it

Abraham did not kill his son.
He never did it.
Did he? Please

Regards

 

[Sleeppy]

He could've offered himself, in your scenario. The story specifically asks for Isaac though. Some truth. Some fabrication.

 

[paarsurrey]

He could've offered himself, in your scenario. The story specifically asks for Isaac though. Some truth. Some fabrication.

I don't get you exactly; Your reply is in response to my post # 41 or # 42? Please
Regards

 

[Sleeppy]

I don't get you exactly; Your reply is in response to my post # 41 or # 42? Please
Regards

Neither.. It's towards the OP.

 

[Kolibri]

Mankind has forgotten. Or they lack faith that God can raise the dead. Abraham reasoned that God's promise to him could not be broken. What promise? The one found at Genesis 21:12 - the chapter prior to the account of him attempting to offer up Isaac.

We get so caught up in thinking this life is all there is, that we never stop to consider that most of mankind will wake up with their identities intact in the not so distant future. For them it would be like they just stepped off a time-travel machine. Recreating a specific individual is not too hard for one that can call all the stars even by name and know exactly where each one is. (Isa 40:26)

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

most of mankind will wake up with their identities intact in the not so distant future

This, right here, is what gets me. Believers all feel that somehow their physical set of memories, experiences, personality, etc. will all be magically transferred to the afterlife. Why is this? To be sure, those things ARE physical manifestations in your brain. I can see why that is hard for a lot of people to grasp, but there IS proof of this. For example, go get some brain damage - enough to change you... entirely. Done. The physical damage has erased parts of you - changed you - made you SOMETHING DIFFERENT. The summation of your "mental person" is INSIDE YOUR BRAIN. It isn't floating around in space alongside your body - it is there in the pith and synapse of the human mind.

And if you did suffer such brain damage, as many have throughout history, then why would you be "fixed" when you reached the afterlife? Why would the original version of you be selected as the one to "carry on" above the brain-damaged version? In other words, what really makes one version of you better than the other EXCEPT IN YOUR OPINION? The answer is "nothing". Neither version is "better", truly. And therein lies the conundrum - even if you were "fixed", then the part of you that reaches the afterlife - the "soul" - ISN'T YOU. YOU were something else - what we would call "brain-damaged". And now you're simply not? That's not you then. And if somehow your consciousness is manifested in the afterlife as some "pure" form of the experiences and memories of all of your time on Earth, then again - that ISN'T YOU. It's something else entirely.

It's exactly like the problem that would be posed if you were somehow able to create an exact copy of yourself (the idea makes me think of end of the movie "The Prestige", which is a good example of the line of thinking I am on) - is that YOU? Is it? I mean really? The answer is no... no it's not. Only you are you - and that doesn't extend beyond your physicality.

 

[Nietzsche]

This, right here, is what gets me. Believers all feel that somehow their physical set of memories, experiences, personality, etc. will all be magically transferred to the afterlife. Why is this? To be sure, those things ARE physical manifestations in your brain. I can see why that is hard for a lot of people to grasp, but there IS proof of this. For example, go get some brain damage - enough to change you... entirely. Done. The physical damage has erased parts of you - changed you - made you SOMETHING DIFFERENT. The summation of your "mental person" is INSIDE YOUR BRAIN. It isn't floating around in space alongside your body - it is there in the pith and synapse of the human mind.

And if you did suffer such brain damage, as many have throughout history, then why would you be "fixed" when you reached the afterlife? Why would the original version of you be selected as the one to "carry on" above the brain-damaged version? In other words, what really makes one version of you better than the other EXCEPT IN YOUR OPINION? The answer is "nothing". Neither version is "better", truly. And therein lies the conundrum - even if you were "fixed", then the part of you that reaches the afterlife - the "soul" - ISN'T YOU. YOU were something else - what we would call "brain-damaged". And now you're simply not? That's not you then. And if somehow your consciousness is manifested in the afterlife as some "pure" form of the experiences and memories of all of your time on Earth, then again - that ISN'T YOU. It's something else entirely.

It's exactly like the problem of being able to create an exact copy of yourself (like in the movie "The Prestige") - is that YOU? Is it? I mean really? The answer is no... no it's not. Only you are you - and that doesn't extend beyond your physicality.

And herein lies the problem known as the 'Ship of Theseus'.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I kind of figured that Abraham realized human sacrifice to God was stupid and turned his own hand away.

"And Abel also presented [an offering] – some of the firstborn of his flock and their fat portions. The Lord had regard for Abel and his offering, .." That is what God likes like many of us. Are we not in the image of God?

 

[Nakosis]

"And Abel also presented [an offering] – some of the firstborn of his flock and their fat portions. The Lord had regard for Abel and his offering, .." That is what God likes like many of us. Are we not in the image of God?

Actually if there was a God, I'd kind of hope that God might be someone we could look up to.

 

[paarsurrey]

God can raise the dead

G-d can raise the dead, if He wants, but He has not raised any dead yet actually, that is the point.

Regards

 

[Aupmanyav]

Well, a pious Hindu lady, Savitri, was able to bring back her husband, Satyavan, from death by impressing the Lord of Death, Yama. All the Hindu Gods and Goddesses can do this, and there are many stories.

"Savitri follows Yama as he carries the soul away. When he tries to convince her to turn back, she offers successive formulas of wisdom. First she praises obedience to Dharma, then friendship with the strict, then Yama himself for his just rule, then Yama as King of Dharma, and finally noble conduct with no expectation of return. Impressed at each speech, Yama praises both the content and style of her words and offers any boon, except the life of Satyavan. She first asks for eyesight and restoration of the kingdom for her father-in-law, then a hundred sons for her father, and then a hundred sons for herself and Satyavan. The last wish creates a dilemma for Yama, as it would indirectly grant the life of Satyavan. However, impressed by Savitri's dedication and purity, he offers one more time for her to choose any boon, but this time omitting "except for the life of Satyavan". Savitri instantly asks for Satyavan to return to life. Yama grants life to Satyavan and blesses Savitri's life with eternal happiness."
Savitri and Satyavan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Kolibri]

This, right here, is what gets me. Believers all feel that somehow their physical set of memories, experiences, personality, etc. will all be magically transferred to the afterlife. Why is this? To be sure, those things ARE physical manifestations in your brain. I can see why that is hard for a lot of people to grasp, but there IS proof of this. For example, go get some brain damage - enough to change you... entirely. Done. The physical damage has erased parts of you - changed you - made you SOMETHING DIFFERENT. The summation of your "mental person" is INSIDE YOUR BRAIN. It isn't floating around in space alongside your body - it is there in the pith and synapse of the human mind.

And if you did suffer such brain damage, as many have throughout history, then why would you be "fixed" when you reached the afterlife? Why would the original version of you be selected as the one to "carry on" above the brain-damaged version? In other words, what really makes one version of you better than the other EXCEPT IN YOUR OPINION? The answer is "nothing". Neither version is "better", truly. And therein lies the conundrum - even if you were "fixed", then the part of you that reaches the afterlife - the "soul" - ISN'T YOU. YOU were something else - what we would call "brain-damaged". And now you're simply not? That's not you then. And if somehow your consciousness is manifested in the afterlife as some "pure" form of the experiences and memories of all of your time on Earth, then again - that ISN'T YOU. It's something else entirely.

It's exactly like the problem that would be posed if you were somehow able to create an exact copy of yourself (the idea makes me think of end of the movie "The Prestige", which is a good example of the line of thinking I am on) - is that YOU? Is it? I mean really? The answer is no... no it's not. Only you are you - and that doesn't extend beyond your physicality.

In all 9 specific cases of resurrection in the Bible, each and every one reported the person coming back to life in a way in which they recognized themselves. In the specific case you are referring to, this does not really hold much weight when you consider who of us is who we were 5 years ago? Added experiences and what we focus on with our hearts mold us. What we will find in these cases is what will be loving to those individuals that suffered harm to their own identities, they will be who they were without any major defects, free to grow with free access to their hopes and aspirations from both before the brain damage and after. This is similar to what it would be like for a downs syndrome person being resurrected without the physical handicap. They will be able to recognize themselves, but they won't stay trapped in a body that will continue to be genetically damaged.

Will it be it an immediate removal of the damage or will it be gradual? That remains to be seen as Jesus healed people in both ways depending on emotional needs of the person involved. (Mark 7:32-35; 8:22-25)

It is not like Jesus, who God has authorized to raise the dead does not understand what it feels like to live with a big part of your life missing from one's memories. Philippians 2:7 tells us that in order to become human he first emptied himself. Jesus likely did not remember his pre-human life in a first person way till his baptism when "the heaven was opened up" to him. (Matthew 3:16; Luke 3:21) Immediately afterwards he went into the wilderness for 40 days fasting. This would have been providential if he was reintegrating both parts of his life. Satan did not approach Jesus to tempt him till after the 40 days of fasting were up, presumably to try to exploit the physical weakness. What was Jesus mediating on during that time in preparation for the 3 1/2 years that laid in front of him?

 

[Kolibri]

G-d can raise the dead, if He wants, but He has not raised any dead yet actually, that is the point.

Regards

"Is anything too extraordinary for Jehovah?" - Genesis 18:14

Before hearing about or seeing any examples of resurrections in times past, Abraham reasoned that it was a certainty that Jehovah would do that for Issac so that Jehovah's promise to provide offspring by means of Issac would not go unfulfilled. (Hebrews 11:19)

What examples do we have to look to? In pre-Christian times we have 3 examples recorded for us.

The son of the widow in Zar'e-phath. (1 Kings 17:17-24)
The son of a Shu'nam-ite woman. (2 Kings 4:32-37)
A man that was hastily thrown onto Elisha's bones. (2 Kings 13:20,21)

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

In all 9 specific cases of resurrection in the Bible, each and every one reported the person coming back to life in a way in which they recognized themselves.

Of course they did - because this is the literary manifestation of the narrow view from ignorance of a person who does not understand the fundamentals of which I am speaking. Point being: ANYTHING can happen in a story.

In the specific case you are referring to, this does not really hold much weight when you consider who of us is who we were 5 years ago?

The change you are talking about that happens over time is PHYSICAL. That was my whole point. What you are then going on to talk about are the supernatural properties of something that is a physical attribute.

...they will be who they were without any major defects, free to grow with free access to their hopes and aspirations from both before the brain damage and after.

I don't mean to be derogatory with this - but what you say here is quite ridiculous. No one knows this. There isn't even a shred of proof, or even testimony given to such an idea. We're not talking about resurrected individuals here - we're talking about the state of a being transferred to the afterlife. So, people having near-death experiences and being "resurrected" after a fashion DOES NOT COUNT.

 

[Kolibri]

I don't mean to be derogatory with this - but what you say here is quite ridiculous. No one knows this. There isn't even a shred of proof, or even testimony given to such an idea. We're not talking about resurrected individuals here - we're talking about the state of a being transferred to the afterlife. So, people having near-death experiences and being "resurrected" after a fashion DOES NOT COUNT.

Biblically, without a resurrection of some kind, there is no after-life.

 

[Ingledsva]

"And Abel also presented [an offering] – some of the firstborn of his flock and their fat portions. The Lord had regard for Abel and his offering, .." That is what God likes like many of us. Are we not in the image of God?

And after being humiliated for no reason, - Cain offered the highest meat offering available - Human Sacrifice.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

*
Actually, - originally the Hebrew practiced Human Sacrifice.

I think the Abraham story is meant to show this is no longer required.


Exodus 22: 29 –Thou shalt not delay TO OFFER the FIRST of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: THE FIRSTBORN OF THY SONS SHALT THOU GIVE UNTO ME.

Leviticus 27: 28, 29 Notwithstanding NO devoted thing, that a man shall devote unto the Lord of all that he hath, BOTH OF "MAN" and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy unto the Lord.29 - None devoted, which shall be devoted of men shall be redeemed; BUT SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH.


*

 

[Kolibri]

Exodus 22: 29 –Thou shalt not delay TO OFFER the FIRST of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: THE FIRSTBORN OF THY SONS SHALT THOU GIVE UNTO ME.

Samuel and Samson were examples of how these firstborn were to sacrificed to Jehovah. It was not done by blood-letting.
Instead, the children were "brought up in the discipline and admonition (or, "instruction; guidance." Lit., "putting mind in.") of Jehovah." (Eph 6:4)
They were set on the path of dedicated service to their God.

Leviticus 27: 28, 29 Notwithstanding NO devoted thing, that a man shall devote unto the Lord of all that he hath, BOTH OF "MAN" and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy unto the Lord.29 - None devoted, which shall be devoted of men shall be redeemed; BUT SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH.

There was a major difference between things "devoted" and things "sanctified." Things "devoted" could not be redeemed whereas things "sanctified" could be bought back. (see Le 27:19,27,30,31)
The reason for devoting could mean either a life of service or death depending on the circumstances.

Devoted to death:
"When the Canaanite king of A'rad, who dwelled in the Neg'eb, heard that Israel had come by the way of Ath'a-rim, he attacked Israel and carried away some of them as captives. So Israel made this vow to Jehovah: 'If you give this people into my hand, I will without fail devote their cities to destruction." - Numbers 21:1,2

Devoted to a life of service - dead to a culturally normal way of life:
"Then Jeph'thah made a vow to Jehovah and said: 'If you give the Am'mon-ites into my hand, then whoever comes out of the door of my house to meet me when I return in peace from the Am'mon-ites will become Jehovah's, and I will offer that one up as a burnt sacrifice." - Judges 11:30,31

His daughter was the one then ended up 'devoted'. She did not die as one condemned, but lived on as a single woman living a life a full-time service to Jehovah. (Judges 11:38-40)

With this understanding this verses in Leviticus could be rendered this way:

"But no devoted thing that a man devotes unconditionally (or "devotes to destruction.") to Jehovah from his belongings may be sold or bought back, whether from mankind or animals or the field he possesses. Every devoted thing is something most holy to Jehovah. Furthermore, no condemned (or, "devoted.") person who is set apart for destruction may be redeemed. He should be put to death without fail." - Leviticus 27:28,29

 

[Thief]

G-d can raise the dead, if He wants, but He has not raised any dead yet actually, that is the point.

Regards

I believe the dead rise in the hour of the last breath.....in spirit.

You anticipate participation?...or will you follow your dust into the box....into the ground
Eternal darkness is real enough.