River

-Doctor X

you are attempting to make me look like a fool. The Humphrey study is a seriously controversial study that msnbc.com reported on around Feb or Mar of 2003. And the "4,000 year " thing was cited as a guesstimate to show that it would be hard to recover it considering that It didnt happen in recent times or " archaelogy -friendly " areas. I think you missed my point. Besides I dont trust Biblical geneology so , I really dont know when Abraham came about, if he existed. I am not a fool. I am a medical student with an anthropology/psychology background. Traditional, mainstream , orthodox ways of looking at things doesnt interest me.


Well, peace. It is better that we dont get into a flame war.
And frankly, it doesn't bother me if you take me seriously or not. Some people do. Some people dont .Thats life.

-River

ON HIATUS

River

[QUOTE]Originally posted by River
[B]-Doctor X

you are attempting to make me look like a fool. The Humphrey study is a seriously controversial study that msnbc.com reported on around Feb or Mar of 2003. And the "4,000 year " thing was cited as a guesstimate to show that it would be hard to recover it considering that It didnt happen in recent times or " archaelogy -friendly " areas. I think you missed my point. Besides I dont trust Biblical geneology so , I really dont know when Abraham came about, if he existed. I am not a fool. I am a medical student with an anthropology/psychology background. Traditional, mainstream , orthodox ways of looking at things doesnt interest me. Well, peace. It is better that we dont get into a flame war. And frankly, it doesn't bother me if you take me seriously or not. Some people do. Some people dont .Thats life.

-River

ON HIATUS

Doctor X

River:

No, I am merely demonstrating a reasonable response to your opinions.

Which hardly qualifies as peer review. Indeed, since you mention medicine, MSNBC rather recently misrepresented a patient as being in a coma for a number of years.

He was not, by definition.

Popular news media cares more for attracting attention--"controversial" studies such as was JFK executed on order of Star Fleet Command--attract attention.

The problem is that the study is contradicted by peer-reviewed information--to rehabilitate Humphrey, you must repond to such evidence which is contained in the references I alluded to.

Irrelevant. The date is inconsistent with peer-reviewed data and is, therefore, misleading.

Now some progress.

The genaologies--a sure cure for insomnia--serve a purpose to retroject a "person" and connect him to a mythic past--not to mention "explain things." They are significant from that respect, tedious though they be.

Yet, you admit uncertainty of the existence of Abraham. That is good. If he did not exist, it rather undercuts the authority of texts, such as the Koran, that refer to him. Why would a messenger of an all-powerful-all-knowing deity refer to someone who never existed?

Unfortunately, that is completely irrelevant to a discussion on religion. I have not called you a fool, but I did have to question your standards of analysis in the field of religion. Let me be blunt, often it is scientist who are the easiest to fool because they do not believe they can be fooled.

Scientists deal with "certainties"--drugs and bugs generally do not make things up! Drugs and Bugs do not have personal biases.

However, one of the problems with medical research is biases. "Bias" is not necessarily a bad thing in that some evil guy in a lab-coat is trying to hide something. Scientist want to cure Malignant Rectal Itch . . . and their desire for a cure may color their perspective.

Furthermore, a quick purusal . . . perusal . . . review of quackery will demonstrate what happens without critical thinking.

Now, you have to apply the same level of mistrust and skepticism to religion.

I do not think you a fool. If I did, I would not bother corresponding with you. Truth be told, you are at least responding to objections I have.

I am also under no misconception that I will "convince you" of something like . . . you should abandon Islam and . . . I do not know . . . become an Amway Distributor. What you believe is your business.

However, I do want you to appreciate what scholarship in religion and classics and all of that involves. You cannot expect others to follow your contentions if you do not address the scholarship.

Let me pretend I believe in homeopathy.

I am fine so long as I limit my belief to myself, homeopathy pages, and I do not try to cure my Malignant Rectal Itch with a 1,000,000 dilution of cyanide. . . .

However, I enter a page on medical discussion. Suddenly, I have to justify my belief based on the science. For those who are not asleep reading this, you, frankly, cannot.

No, River, I am not trying to engage you in a flame-war . . . or even obliquely insult you . . . an I apologize . . . again . . . if my prose wanders a "trifle on the harsh side of strict." However, scholarship is serious business.

I do not "like" it that we cannot travel close to, let alone faster than, the speed of light.

I would "like it" if physicists are wrong. If I wander about , I can find lots of pages and books that support my "dislike."

The problem is they do not address the physics. Unfortunately, the universe does not care what I like or dislike.

If it did, I would be too busy with my torrid affair with Uma Thurmon to be engaged in this.

--J.D.

Soul Invictus

I second that! I wonder if EstherRose is going to join in the fray, or will Magus55 do the tango alone...

River

-Doctor X


You might argue that Abraham doesn't exist. But I "believe" he does exist. I believe my choice is both rational and logical. Perhaps you are familiar with the Biblical Abraham (pbuh), who lived mostly around Hebron and his father's name is Terah. This story is correct in some departments but not very detailed in others. The Islamic Ibrahim (pbuh) lived mostly around Mecca, and his father's name is Azar. In Islam, he worshipped Allah alone, and there is no evidence in the Qur'an to show that he worshipped the man made gods as well. Unfortunately (for scholarship purposes) , Saudi Arabia does not allow Excavation or Archaelogy in many areas because of their religious significance. I believe it will be difficult to find solid evidence of Abraham with our modern technology. Heck, we cant even locate living persons like Usama or Mulla Umar, with our most sophisticated equipments. Besides I believe the Kaaba is evidence itself for Prophet Abraham ( as well as the fossilized footprint beside it)...and the story of the Kaaba and Ishmael is well known even before Islam....and was not ad hoc imminent to Islam.

River

-Doctor X


There are numerous groups ( Jews , Christians, Muslims) who trace their lineage back to Abraham. Possibly even (Hindus and Buddhists) if Brahma happens to be Abraham's mythological counterpart. So , I believe He did exist. Perhaps, though he bears little or no resemblance to the version of him that exists today. Or Perhaps this " Abraham" was more generic...kinda like How scientists labelled "Eve" and the 33 daughters of mitochondrial descent.

Doctor X

River:

Unfortunately, believing in something does not make it true.

Yet you have offered no rebuttal or even evidence that you have considered the textual and archaeological evidence against his existence.

Thus:

That is merely a claim without evidence on your part and it is contrary to known evidence.

How very convenient . . . we should "assume" evidence exists because we cannot confirm it? By that argument the Vatican has evidence that Mohammed was a yak-gelder who lived in Dresden . . . but, sorry, they will not let you look at it. . . .

Worse, it is contradicted by evidence we have.

I guess I should call this "argument to limitation." With all due respect it is akin to argument for flim-flam--a "life force" is readily detectable by a dowsing rod, yet, for some reason "modern science" [Boo. Hiss.--Ed.] cannot detected it.

The next is a false analogy:

Methinks the videotapes alone and photographs demonstrate they existed.

As is the Shroud of Turin for Jesus? Funny what critical examination can do to a relic. This may explain why entities that depend on relics do not like to allow independent examination of said relics.

Then, by that criteria we should believe the Babylonian creation myth is true?

In all seriousness, I cannot expect you to change or even examine your beliefs and assumptions. However, if you wish to convince people on a debate forum such as this, you have to offer something more than that. I have recommended a number of references to start to familiarize yourself with the evidence and issues. I can only recommend you avail yourself of them otherwise you are wasting people's time.

--J.D.

River

-Doctor X


It is odd how clear cut prophecies of Abraham from Genesis has been fulfilled or in the process of...


In the Bible G-d directs the childless father Abram to look at the stars and count them...and so shall be his descendents . Now we understand that Ibrahim is the Biblical patriarch for many peoples. Judaism numbers 18 Million.....Christianity numbers 1.9 Billion and Islam numbers 1.6 Billion followers. Thus , he is truly the father of many as his name " Abraham" indicates.


In the Bible, G-d says " And G-d promised Ishmael a Great Nation". This Muslim Nation was great in its Heyday and was symbollically the Child of Ishmael, spanning 3 continents and over a Millenia in Duration.


In the Bible, it says something like "we shall multiply Ishmael's seed". It is True Islam, which traces descent to Ishmael, is the fastest growing religion in the World with a population doubling rate of 2 decades. Thus in 2 decades it will be the largest religion in the world with 3 billion followers.


The Bible says " And Ishmael shall be a wild man at odds with everyone around him". Islam seems to be put on the spot by Jews , Evangelical Christians and militant Hindus as well as Buddhists. .....interesting..


I find it hard to disbelieve in a character whose prophecies have come true....


I definitely believe in Abraham because " Muhammad says so"....for I know Muhammad spoke the truth.....and if Muhammad embodies the characteristics of Prophets before him.....the encyclopedia Britannica calls Muhammad the "most successful of all religious personalities". The fact Muhammad succeeded against all odds...makes me have even more faith in Prophets that came before him. Perhaps if Muhammad's example did not exist...I would have some doubt about the earlier prophets...maybe thinking they are imaginary or sumthin'.

-River

Doctor X

River:

An the emperor of Japan traces his lineage back to a god.

Maybe I should become Japanese. . . .

It is funny, a recent issue of the JBL [Journal of Biblical Literature.--Ed.] examined the use of genaeologies in the OT. The author noted the general opinion by students that they are tedious and painful. However, genaologies served . . . and still serve . . . a social and political purpose. They ground one in history and give a person a "right" to whatever regard he claims. The accuracy does not necessarily matter.

Incidentally, that the various genaologies to Abraham conflict and are incompatable with one another should not, of course, disuade someone from trusting them?

Anyways, a study of the OT genaologies [ZzzzzzzZZZzzzzzZZzzz.--Ed.] demonstrates the attempt to "justify" the political order of things--especially an order that may not have existed.

Genaologies also have a syncretic function in that they help take over another religion by placing your founding figure as an important part of it.

--J.D.

[Edited to correct excretable grammer.--Ed.]

River

-Doctor X


Like I said earlier " I believe that Abraham exists"....It is belief. That is why I did not concentrate too much on Abraham, but rather on figures like Muhammad who I know exists...and there is little or no evidence to say contrary.


I have shown you why I believe Abraham exists here b/cuz you insisted upon it . Perhaps I utilized "argumentam ad ignorantium" and stuff but I believe my belief has some logic to it. I know I can not provide evidence for it ...but I can provide evidence for Muhammad and even some weird evidence for Jesus..and so I usually concentrate on latter day Prophets.