*************
M*W: Sometime in the 15th century BCE, the story of Avram and Sarai and their journeys was first told. It was during a time of famine in ancient Palestine when Avram and Sarai set out to return to their royal house in Egypt. As they neared the royal palace, Avram feared he might be killed if Pharaoh took a liking to Sarai, his good-looking wife, so Avram came up with a lie saying that Sarai was his sister. When Pharaoh saw the fair Sarai, he took her into his royal house and married her, for which Avram was awarded sheep, oxen, donkeys and servants (Hagar being one of them). Then the plagues hit Pharaoh's house and, of course, Pharaoh blamed Avram for it. They were sent back to Canaan with many nice gifts. Pharaoh wanted to especially please Sarai, the knock-out sister-wife of Avram, so he specifically gave Sarai Hagar as her own handmaid. Sarai must have been one hot cookie in Pharaoh's bed, because when they got back to their primary tent, Sarai realized she was pregnant with Isaac.

Now, the bible would have us believing that Ishmael was born first then along came Isaac some 13 years later, but when one reads the ancient history of this story, Sarai would have had to have been knocked up by Pharaoh first, because she was not given Hagar until they left Pharaoh's royal house! This then begs the question: Who was the real father of Isaac?

The writers of Genesis tried to make it sound as if there had been years on end between Avram's and Sarai's return to Canaan from Egypt. The biblical writers also made a point to state that Sarai was unable to conceive. We are told that Avram was 86 when Ishmael was born. Then another 13 years passed before Avram's and Sarai's names were changed. With the changing of their names to Abraham and Sarah, it appears that Sarah conceives another child! Who was this child of Sarah's third pregnancy? Who did Hagar give birth to? Why is these bible stories so convoluted? If Ishmael is 14 years older than Isaac, who was the child Sarai and Pharaoh conceived?
This story is not mentioned in the Quran.

According to Ahmed Osman in Christianity: An Ancient Egyptian Religion, "the literal sense of the Hebrew text in this verse does not necessarily mean that Isaac was Abraham's physican son, but that he was the adoptive father. It is also significant that, from this time, and even to the present day, a child cannot be regarded as a Jew, no matter who the father may have been, unless the mother is herself Jewish."

That brings us to the question: Was Isaac a prince of Egypt? Osman also states, "Nonbiblical sources point to the fact that, in the case of Isaac, Abraham -- who had seven other sons (Ishmael by Hagar, and six by another wife, Keturah) -- was to be regarded as the ADOPTIVE father. The Talmud preserves a tradition that nobody who knew Abraham believed that Isaac was his son."

The Babylonian Talmud, by Isidore Epstein, London, 1952, says, "On the day that Abraham weaned his son Isaac, he made a great banquet, and all the peoples of the world derided him, saying: 'Have you seen that old man and woman who brought a foundling from the street, and now claim him as their son...?'"

Who was Isaac, and by whom was he conceived? Who was Ishmael, and by whom was he conceived? Who was adopted and who was not? Who was the Pharaoh who fathered Isaac?

There are just too many inconsistencies between the Old Testament and the Torah and Talmud.

There are just too many inconsistencies between the Old Testament and the Torah and Talmud.

Funny how many Christians use the Talmud to prove that Jesus performed miracles (even though it doesn't prove that), but then they throw it out the window when it disproves or challenges their core beliefs.

There are just too many inconsistencies between the Old Testament and the Torah and Talmud.

Have you checked the inconsistencies in non-religious works of humans in approximately the same period? Did you find no inconsistencies in those works, thus making the religious works stand out for you somehow?

For someone who claims not to believe in god or religion, you sure do a lot study and work on it. Why?

Baron Max

Medicine Woman:

Very intriguing post!

It does indeed seem like Abraham was a cuckold raising another man's son.

It is also significant that, from this time, and even to the present day, a child cannot be regarded as a Jew, no matter who the father may have been, unless the mother is herself Jewish."

This is what I like best about the Jewish faith. I have never understood why it is not the norm.

Because we are not so weak-willed as to give our women over to kings to impregnate?

That we expect our women to not screw around?

Because we are not so weak-willed as to give our women over to kings to impregnate?

That we expect our women to not screw around?

There is never any doubt about the mother, is there?

No indeed. But we expect to kill the man who beds our women and to expell the bastard from our households, not rely on the religion of the woman.

No indeed. But we expect to kill the man who beds our women and to expell the bastard from our households, not rely on the religion of the woman.

You're an anachronism, more suited to Saudi Arabia than the USA.:p

I'm down with Saudi hand-cutting and executions, not so much the anti-singing and the women -completely- covered.

After all, I do like boobies.

Baron M*W was a very devoted Catholic woman, untill she visited the Vatican! She bascally became an atheist here on Sciforums! ;)

But Med Woman was probably never a Christian, as the Bible says that God will never allow one of his children to leave Him. (But she could be a real Christian who is just now being a rebellious child, like the prodigal son.)

OR....the Bible could have lied to you.

But Med Woman was probably never a Christian, as the Bible says that God will never allow one of his children to leave Him.

It's obvious you've never read:
http://ffrf.org/books/lfif/

IAC: But Med Woman was probably never a Christian, as the Bible says that God will never allow one of his children to leave Him. (But she could be a real Christian who is just now being a rebellious child, like the prodigal son.)

*************
M*W: Then why did god allow so many religions other than christianity if he would "never allow one of his children to leave him?"

I assume I was a true christian. I have papers from the RCC that claims I was a christian. If I really wasn't a christian, then all the better for me.

If you couldn't tell that you were a Christian then you weren't.

You're statement about the other religions makes no sense.

IAC: If you couldn't tell that you were a Christian then you weren't.

You're statement about the other religions makes no sense.

*************
M*W: Okay, let's go back in time, shall we? I converted to Roman Catholicism. I took instructions for a year. I was tested and quizzed by several priests in my parish to make sure I knew the stuff. I was baptised and married into the Roman Catholic faith. I ate, lived and breathed it. I taught catechism for a number of years. My children were all baptised practically before they took their second breath. I was a serious student as well as teacher of Roman Catholicism. I never missed Mass. I visited many of the holy shrines in Europe, including the Vatican. I met Pope John Paul II on his first day as Pope in The Vatican. I was in his very first audience. My family received a special blessing from the new pope and we have the signed documents to prove it. I was sincere in my faith, I was ardent in my role as a catechist, and I was a true christian in my beliefs. I could not begin to understand any form of religion other than that to which I had been led.

You can say I was not sincere, because you really don't know me. If what you said is the truth, that god won't let anyone go who is sincere, then that proves there is no free will. We always have a choice -- god or no god. There was a time when I refused to read anything that was contrary to my church's teachings. Then I found out otherwise. I willfully and knowingly chose NOT to be a christian. Just as ardently as I taught christianity, I believe I am as fervently teaching antichristianism. That is my lot in life. It's my calling. Christianity is a false philosophy with fictional characters in a fairy tale scenario. It doesn't really exist except in the minds of the ignorant.

When I think about the true christian I used to be, I get chills -- not the good kind. I'd rather be dead than be a christian. It is the most evil creation known to man.

Medicine Woman:

Very intriguing post!

It does indeed seem like Abraham was a cuckold raising another man's son.

*************
M*W: I've done a bit of reading into the Eighteenth Dynasty, and it seems that Tuthmosis III was the Pharaoh David... yes, Pharaoh David. David was also known as King Abimelech, and it is he who took Abraham's wife Sarah to wife and conceived Isaac! Some 30 years later, Isaac joined the Egyptian army under his biological father King David. Does this also mean that Isaac was Solomon's step-brother? Who knows? Isaac pulled an Abraham on Abimilech and poor old Abimilech was fooled twice that Sarah was Abraham's sister and Rebekah was Isaac's sister. Maybe Abimilech was just a fool for a pretty woman.

www.egyptcx.netfirms.com/who_was_father_isaac.htm

I hope this link works. The other information comes from Ahmed Osman's chronology of the Eighteenth Dyansty in Moses and Akhenaten: The Secret History of Egypt at the Time of the Exodus.

Comments?

Hey Med Woman, you say that David and Solomon lived circa 1300 B.C., and that they lived before Moses, so what date do you give for Moses?

You mention Abraham as also an historical figure, so when do you say he lived, according to the advanced knowledge of Med Woman. (This oughta be good.)

Hey Med Woman, you say that David and Solomon lived circa 1300 B.C., and that they lived before Moses, so what date do you give for Moses?

You mention Abraham as also an historical figure, so when do you say he lived, according to the advanced knowledge of Med Woman. (This oughta be good.)

*************
M*W: I provided you with the chronology of the Eighteenth Dynasty which shows there was more than one Moses. Which Moses were you referring to? The Eighteenth Dynasty covers the years 1575 BC to 1308 BC. I'll even do the math for you. That makes the Eighteenth Dynasty span some 267 years. Which Moses are you referring to in the 267 year span?

Hey Med Woman, you say that David and Solomon lived circa 1300 B.C., and that they lived before Moses, so what date do you give for Moses?

You mention Abraham as also an historical figure, so when do you say he lived, according to the advanced knowledge of Med Woman. (This oughta be good.)

*************
M*W: A lot of work goes into creating threads and answering posts. Obviously, you don't take what I write seriously, and I certainly don't expect everyone to, but if you're only asking questions as a frivolity, then I don't want to waste my time answering you. I would much rather discuss these topics with someone who has a serious interest in ancient history.

I'm trying to figure out your timeline, so according to you, David and Solomon lived at around 1300 B.C., when do you say Abraham and Moses lived?

I'm trying to figure out your timeline, so according to you, David and Solomon lived at around 1300 B.C., when do you say Abraham and Moses lived?In trying to figure out the timeline do what you’ve done with the Biblical timeline:

Assume it to be true, then adjust what ‘day’, ‘month’, ‘year’ means to fit into what you already want to believe is truth and in relation to the usual meanings of these words.
Presto!!!!
Instant success.

When you adjust reality and your sensual experience with it to fit into your beliefs, then anything is possible.

But, for God’s sake, do not do the reverse. That’ll be….blasphemy.

C' mon Med Woman, you say that David and Solomon lived circa 1300 B.C., and that Moses lived sometime after that, but you won't say when you think Moses lived, and you say Abraham lived, but you won't say when, so you're obviously just cobbling this together as you go along.

The Bible is an historical account, the best ancient accounting of ancient history ever recorded, this is why with new archaeological finds, the Bible is always vindicated, but Med Woman, on the other hand, is making up history to try to jibe with her hypothesis that Jesus is the Sun, the Sun which created himself, so tell me who's out there?

Oh I see Med Woman, in the opening post you say that Abraham lived circa 1500 B.C., and you say that David and Solomon lived circa 1300 B.C., and Moses after that, so when do you say Moses lived, 600 B.C.?

I'm trying to figure out your timeline, so according to you, David and Solomon lived at around 1300 B.C., when do you say Abraham and Moses lived?

*************
M*W: First, it is not "my" timeline. It's the timeline as established by Alan H. Gardiner in Egypt of the Pharaohs, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1961.

Dates cover the years of their reign, not birth and death.

Avram* c1813BC-1638BC
David** c1490BC-1436BC
Solomon*** c1405BC-1367BC
Moses**** c1367BC-1350BC
---
*Avram, Egyptian royal house of Pharaoh Abimelech through marriage to his sister Sarai, aka Abraham, b 1813BC, d1638BC

**David, Egyptian Pharaoh aka Tuthmosis III, Solomon's great grandfather

***Solomon, Egyptian Pharaoh aka Amenhotep III, Moses' grandfather

****Moses, aka Aminidab at birth, Amenhotep IV, and Akhenaten, Moses b1393BC d1305BC during Pharaoh Horemheb's reign. Moses was married to Nefertiti and took two more wives after her death. Moses was considered to be bisexual. He had feminine characteristics such as breasts and a bulging abdomen. Scientists believe he suffered from Froelich's syndrome
---
Pharaoh Tutankhamun c1360BC-1339BC was Moses' son. It is believed he died from an infection incurred from a broken leg.

The book of Genesis indicates that Abraham lived circa 2000 B.C., then Moses circa 1400 B.C., then David and Solomon circa 1000 B.C., so how and why did they get it so "wrong?"

The book of Genesis indicates that Abraham lived circa 2000 B.C., then Moses circa 1400 B.C., then David and Solomon circa 1000 B.C., so how and why did they get it so "wrong?"

**************
M*W: When you go back that far, you should give or take a few hundred years either way. Who said the bible was copied correctly by the Hebrew scribes? After all, the ancients were Egyptian and the OT was copied down by Hebrew scribes. The language differences are enough to cause human errors. I gave you the timeline of the biblical scholars. You should, therefore, direct your questions to them. I cannot think for them nor answer your questions for them.

Nice back-tracking like a crawfish.

Nice back-tracking like a crawfish.
*************
M*W: Just because you don't agree with scholarly research doesn't mean it is wrong. You are not capable of doing research on your own, and what you've been taught isn't accurate. You are a waste of time and don't belong here. Get lost!

The vast majority of scholars go with the timeline which I laid out, yours is obviously untenable for the illogic of its ramifications, so who's a waste of time?

But, Med Woman, at least you proved your point that you don't believe the Old Testament is good history, way to go.