Jack Sovalot
2023-03-09 01:37:42 UTC
On Wed, 8 Mar 2023 13:53:03 -0800, "Andrew"
read about it and see."
Where do you think it came from?
"all the fountains of the great deep [subterranean
waters] burst open, and the windows and flood
That is a 'theory', or a 'model' of how it may have
happened. It does not claim to be~exactly~how it happened.
But the fact is, evidence says it happened.
circumstances.
the red line. Like our modern society
"The Lord saw that humanity had become thoroughly evil on the
earth and that every idea their minds thought
no laws they violated.
my statutes, and my laws." ~
Because when he was on the mount, he was specifically
told _NOT_ to kill him.
"Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any
thing unto him."
"And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the
knife to slay his son. And the angel of the Lord called
unto him out of heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!”
And he said, “Here am I.”And He said, “Lay not thine
hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him;
for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast
not withheld thy son, thine only son, from Me.”And
Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked; and behold,
behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns. And
Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up
for a burnt offering in the stead of his son."
~ Genesis 22:10-13
Furthermore, the fact that later on Isaac married
Rebecca and had lots of kids should tell you that
Isaac was not killed by Abraham his father, as the
corrupted text states.
It has nothing to do with any corrupted texts. The Abraham legend is
comprised of three separate components, each written at different
times by different authors. The first two, both already centuries
old, were combined after the Assyrian conquest in the late 8th
century BCE when Judea was flooded by refugees from Israel, doubling
its population. In the version in which Abraham kills Isaac, the
northern version, Isaac never reappears. Only the southern version,
lacking any account of that sacrifice, continues with Isaac playing a
prominent role.
When the two legends were combined, the redactor inserted Genesis
22:11-15 and discarded the text he was replacing. Luckily for us, he
took no measures to conceal his edits and so they're quite evident to
linguistic analysis. There was no point anyway, because the original
was already well known, at least among the refugees from the north
who brought it with them.
Of course by that time, the practice of first born sacrifice had been
long discontinued but the Abraham legend derives from when Yahweh
often required it. As does Exodus 22:29. Ezekiel as well cites the
practice in Ezekiel 20:25-26. Nobody back then could deny Yahweh had
ever commanded it, as that fact was too well known.
"If the flood were true <which I believe> then you can
Skeeter, 3/2/23
https://tinyurl.com/mr3wf2cn
I never said where the flood came from.https://tinyurl.com/mr3wf2cn
waters] burst open, and the windows and flood
That is a 'theory', or a 'model' of how it may have
happened. It does not claim to be~exactly~how it happened.
There is no evidence of any flood.
Worldwide fossils that died suddenly and under catastrophicAlthough mute they tell us it happened.
Judgment of God upon the antediluvians, because they crossed
I do believe there was one though.
Why?is getting close to today.
What "red line"?up was always completely evil." ~ Genesis 6:5
God didn't give them any rules they then broke, there were
"Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments,
Genesis 26:5
That's true. He even killed his son Isaac in the original version.
The version you refer to is an obviously corrupted one.That's true. He even killed his son Isaac in the original version.
Because when he was on the mount, he was specifically
told _NOT_ to kill him.
"Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any
thing unto him."
"And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the
knife to slay his son. And the angel of the Lord called
unto him out of heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!”
And he said, “Here am I.”And He said, “Lay not thine
hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him;
for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast
not withheld thy son, thine only son, from Me.”And
Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked; and behold,
behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns. And
Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up
for a burnt offering in the stead of his son."
~ Genesis 22:10-13
Furthermore, the fact that later on Isaac married
Rebecca and had lots of kids should tell you that
Isaac was not killed by Abraham his father, as the
corrupted text states.
comprised of three separate components, each written at different
times by different authors. The first two, both already centuries
old, were combined after the Assyrian conquest in the late 8th
century BCE when Judea was flooded by refugees from Israel, doubling
its population. In the version in which Abraham kills Isaac, the
northern version, Isaac never reappears. Only the southern version,
lacking any account of that sacrifice, continues with Isaac playing a
prominent role.
When the two legends were combined, the redactor inserted Genesis
22:11-15 and discarded the text he was replacing. Luckily for us, he
took no measures to conceal his edits and so they're quite evident to
linguistic analysis. There was no point anyway, because the original
was already well known, at least among the refugees from the north
who brought it with them.
Of course by that time, the practice of first born sacrifice had been
long discontinued but the Abraham legend derives from when Yahweh
often required it. As does Exodus 22:29. Ezekiel as well cites the
practice in Ezekiel 20:25-26. Nobody back then could deny Yahweh had
ever commanded it, as that fact was too well known.