Did Abraham ever really exist?

Lone12
..the notion,
that "Horus was crucified , had 12 disciples, etc",
or that "Osiris was the shepherd",

tells *nothing* about the presumed Invalidity of the Lord -

since Evel *stole* those Attributes - ahead of Time.

man,
dont you knów that the spiritual world is 10 steps ahéad of us ???

- yet yóu go try "prove" things in linear time..?

lol...

I love it when they forget who created evil..... their god of 'love'

reply to post by wildtimes


I know that the bible isn't just some sci fi novel because I've read it and its far too boring.

Large parts of it are very very very boring reviews and lists of the family tree of ancient Israel and the laws they followed and what happened to people who didn't follow them. Yes there's more than just that, but it's way too dull to just be fiction.

Plus the later stories do have evidence, especially cultural ties with other nations like Ethiopia via Solomon, which they too have documented. Hell, they claim to have the Ark hidden away!

reply to post by Lone12

- in LINEAR time, yes, the sequence was like that.

But that is soooo Irrelevant.

what does that prove ?

- Absolutely Nothing.

WHAT???!!

It proves that ALL of the stories in the Bible already existed!

How on EARTH is that "irrelevant"? What does it prove???!! That the Bible is NOT AN ORIGINAL WORK.

winnar

Lone12
..the notion,
that "Horus was crucified , had 12 disciples, etc",
or that "Osiris was the shepherd",

tells *nothing* about the presumed Invalidity of the Lord -

since Evel *stole* those Attributes - ahead of Time.

man,
dont you knów that the spiritual world is 10 steps ahéad of us ???

- yet yóu go try "prove" things in linear time..?

lol...

I love it when they forget who created evil..... their god of 'love'

- obviously, you ve No Clue what means 'love'.

Love rests on Free will

- if someone Resists the other, there cannot be love.

so
do you have a child ?
a lil boy or girl ?

did she get adolescent yet ?

and started to Hate you ?

now YOU CREATED HER - didnt you????????????

..such Lousy comment
lousy, 1-dimensional thinking

because of that Lousy thinking, you get the wrong premisses !

reply to post by Beavers


Read a book about the ark once I think it was by Graham hancock (may be wrong) and my beef with it was why don't they just show the world If it is the real ark then they will have many more converts.
Good story though.

adjensen
Because it presents an opinion as fact, which is always a dangerous approach to the truth, in my opinion.

Dan didn't exist in Abrahams time ... but the story of Abraham says it did.
So that's wrong. How is that 'opinion'?? I think that's pretty much fact.

Islam says that Abraham built the Kaaba.
But there is a 1000 year difference between when Abraham lived and when the Kaaba was built.
How is that 'opinion.?? I think that's pretty much fact.

Abraham supposedly is afraid his wife is too pretty to be around Pharoah.
But she's a very old lady at that time. How is that 'opinion'??

There is nothing to prove that Abraham existed except Jesus words -
'before Abraham I Am' ...
How is that opinion? If there are any facts that prove Abraham existed ... please post them.
I'd love to see it.

reply to post by Beavers

I know that the bible isn't just some sci fi novel because I've read it and its far too boring.

LOL!! Well, ya know...they maybe didn't have the imaginations we do now - now that we know what we know about things...

(Yes, it's boring. I've tried and tried again...can't get through it...yawn).

FlyersFan
Which is more likely ...

It doesn't matter which is more likely, because each one is possible and, without evidence that Moses DID steal them, one cannot come to a conclusive decision in favour of either one.

Put another way, by the laws of physics and the state of the universe, it is almost infinitely more likely that the state of reality today should be absolute nothingness -- if prior to the big bang, you'd have been asked whether that event would result in anything, you'd be 99.9999 (repeat a bazillion times) percent likely to say nothing would exist, and yet here we are.

reply to post by Lone12

..such Lousy comments
lousy, 1-dimensional thinking

because of that Lousy thinking, you get the wrong premisses !

Says you.

"Lousy comments" because we don't believe the Bible is infallible or original?
Care to back up your dismissive assessment? What are the 'correct' premises?

wildtimes
reply to post by Lone12

 

- in LINEAR time, yes, the sequence was like that.

But that is soooo Irrelevant.

what does that prove ?

- Absolutely Nothing.

WHAT???!!

It proves that ALL of the stories in the Bible already existed!

How on EARTH is that "irrelevant"? What does it prove???!! That the Bible is NOT AN ORIGINAL WORK.

- dream on.

- if yóu went to prison
because someone has Set You Up

and there came a person,
who RESCUED you, out of prison -

wouldnt that person have to dive into your case ?????

negotiate with those who set you up ????

Now tell me,

how the *** you can say then, that this person "derived his rights from your murderers" ??

reply to post by Lone12

Again, WHAT?? I have no idea what you are talking about. Read your post 3 times...
doesn't make sense in the context of this thread.

"dream on"? What is that supposed to mean?

FlyersFan

adjensen
Because it presents an opinion as fact, which is always a dangerous approach to the truth, in my opinion.

Dan didn't exist in Abrahams time ... but the story of Abraham says it did.
So that's wrong. How is that 'opinion'?? I think that's pretty much fact.

The line quoted there was in response to the whole "Moses stole the Ten Commandments" thing, not Abraham.

No, there is no evidence (that I'm aware) that Abraham existed, apart from the mentions in the books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, but I wouldn't really expect there to be. He's just one guy who died thousands of years ago, and wasn't particularly notable when he died, anyway.

reply to post by Lone12

I just can't follow what you guys are going on about.

Wildtimes is right - the Old Testament is not an original piece of work.

Other than that ... what are you guys talking about????

wildtimes
reply to post by Lone12

 

I have no idea what you are talking about.

thats right : you DONT.

- yet you feel capable enough to comment on threads like this.

reply to post by FlyersFan


What's your source for the Kaaba being built in 1000BC? Wiki (reliable, I know) suggests 2130BC?

reply to post by adjensen

Ah okay ... there has been flipping back and forth and I'm starting to get lost in the
conversation I think. Okay ... got it ....

FlyersFan
reply to post by Lone12

 

I just can't follow what you guys are going on about.

Wildtimes is right - the Old Testament is not an original piece of work.

Other than that ... what are you guys talking about????

"not original"....?

you kidding me..?

and you actually MEAN what you say here ??

...hopeless this...

wildtimes
reply to post by Lone12

 

..such Lousy comments
lousy, 1-dimensional thinking

because of that Lousy thinking, you get the wrong premisses !

Says you.

"Lousy comments" because we don't believe the Bible is infallible or original?
Care to back up your dismissive assessment? What are the 'correct' premises?

my mistake, WT, i referred to the previous poster, but you responded before my edit showed - excuses

reply to post by Lone12

thats right : you DONT.

- yet you feel capable enough to comment on threads like this.

Then, explain it....!
Yes, I feel PLENTY capable of commenting on threads like this. Is that a problem for you?

EDIT: So...who are you claiming doesn't get it??

Now I'm even more confused.