Re: Abraham Existence Proves Noah's Sons Were Real

On Dec 9, 3:01 am, All-seeing-I <ap...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 8, 10:10 pm, Bill <brogers31...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On 8 Des, 08:09, All-Seeing-I <allseei...@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Sincce many of you simply and utterly refuse to accept any kind of
"Textual Evidence" that Noah's son "Ham" existed, let's look at some
Archaeological Evidence. Archaeological Evidence that continues to be
discovered more and more during this century; BTW.

1) The Beni Hasan Tomb from the Abrahamic period, depicts Asiatics
coming to Egypt during a famine, corresponding with the Biblical
account of the plight of the sons of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob'.

2) The doors of Sodom (Tell Beit Mirsim) dated to between 2200-1600
B.C. are heavy doors needed for security; the same doors which we find
in Genesis 19:9. Yet, if this account had been written between 900-600
B.C., as the critics previously claimed, we would have read about
arches and curtains, because security was no longer such a concern
then.

3) Joseph's price as a slave was 20 shekels (Genesis 37:28), which,
according to trade tablets from that period is the correct price for
1,700 B.C. An earlier account would have been cheaper, while a later
account would have been more expensive. Joseph was of course,
Abraham's grandson.

4) David's capture of Jerusalem recounted in II Samuel 5:6-8 and I
Chronicles 11:6 speak of Joab using water shafts built by the
Jebusites to surprise them and defeat them. Historians had assumed
these were simply legendary, until archaeological excavations by
R.A.S. Macalister, J.G.Duncan, and Kathleen Kenyon on Ophel now have
found these very water shafts. David was also a decendent of, Abraham.

If there was a character name Abraham, and we can see from the
Archaeological Evidence there was, then it follows that the geneology
(textual evidence) in the bible is true. This same type of recorded
genelogy (textual evidence) has been used to prove birth and age of
people all through history.

The geneology in the bible says that Abraham was a decendent of Noah,
who had three sons. One of them was named "Ham".

Now. As we saw in the other thread; Ham's tribe can be traced through
language which reveals how Noah's sons repopulated the earth.

.

Since we have established that there was an Abraham, a Noah, and, that
the bible is correct with  it's genelogy of Abraham, we can also
assume the bible is also correct when it describes a "Noah's Flood".

In short, "If anything in the Bible is true, everything in the Bible
is true." Well then things are looking up for Homer and the Ramayana,
too.

That is not exactly what I said.

But if Abraham or Noah or Ham was shown to be actual persons then the
probability of their being an actual flood event goes up.

No it doesn't, as anybody can write anything about anyone down in a
book.

What you need to prop up the flood myth is *not* the verification of
any mythic person, but *evidence that a world-wide flood actually took
place.*

And there is no such evidence.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
skyeyes nine at cox dot net

.

Relevant Pages

  • 9/11 according to the science and the facts
    ... The phrase "conspiracy theory" harbors an ambiguity, ... the official account of the events of 9/11 cannot be sustained. ... Pentagon was not hit by a Boeing 757. ... that sufficient evidence has become available and "settled down", ...
    (sci.med.diseases.lyme)
  • Re: You stupid Mick
    ... Yes, Google WTC collapse ... That's only one credible account. ... Not the evidence surrounding the hit on the Pentagon. ... Care to debate REAL FACTS and PURSUITS? ...
    (rec.org.mensa)
  • Re: U.S. Navy Top Gun Pilot Questions 9/11
    ... Commander Kolstad was a top-rated fighter pilot during ... Eleven years later, Commander Kolstad ... Commander Kolstad is especially critical of the account of American ... personnel' Where is any evidence at all'? ...
    (rec.aviation.student)
  • Re: Any Evidence for Doubting Thomas?
    ... >observations of well-known and well-respected scientists even though ... overwhelming weight of evidence tells us that the earth is ... >> told in the Bible cannot be interpreted as a literal account of events. ... do we NEED more proof that you're arguing religion, not science? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Bad science is still science
    ... Moreover, there is no evidence whatsover in the geological record, the ... On what evidence do you build the "hypothesis" of massive bombardment by ... massive local flood. ... In what way does the scientific explanation for such events fail to account ...
    (talk.origins)