Christian view of Abraham?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I guess I don't feel like contributing to the moderator's income by continuing to click on trolly BS like this thread.

I'm tired of how the moderator removes every troll on DCUM - except for the Christian-hating trolls. In that case, he removes any jpegs that might offend the poor Christian-hating trolls. I think I won't be contributing any more to his income here, either.

We just prefer well-rounded evidence.

How is that being trollish?

Should I keep returning to World Book Encyclopedias dating back to the 70s when I want to research a topic?

God's word is timeless, plus we have modern day theologians and Christian novelists to explain what we don't understand

based on the bible

What other texts are used as evidence?

[Anonymous]

God made his word so compelling that it endures. It also confounds those who don't come to him like a child. The word is understandable to the low IQ and the weak. The high IQ with wisdom and clarity of children get it. The frustrated should ignore the word and figure out what they are going to do about inevitable death.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:God made his word so compelling that it endures. It also confounds those who don't come to him like a child. The word is understandable to the low IQ and the weak. The high IQ with wisdom and clarity of children get it. The frustrated should ignore the word and figure out what they are going to do about inevitable death.

fantastic

sharing this with friends

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God made his word so compelling that it endures. It also confounds those who don't come to him like a child. The word is understandable to the low IQ and the weak. The high IQ with wisdom and clarity of children get it. The frustrated should ignore the word and figure out what they are going to do about inevitable death.

fantastic

sharing this with friends

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I guess I don't feel like contributing to the moderator's income by continuing to click on trolly BS like this thread.

I'm tired of how the moderator removes every troll on DCUM - except for the Christian-hating trolls. In that case, he removes any jpegs that might offend the poor Christian-hating trolls. I think I won't be contributing any more to his income here, either.

We just prefer well-rounded evidence.

How is that being trollish?

Should I keep returning to World Book Encyclopedias dating back to the 70s when I want to research a topic?

God's word is timeless, plus we have modern day theologians and Christian novelists to explain what we don't understand

based on the bible

What other texts are used as evidence?

The evidence is in your heart, if you open it to the Lord.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the poster at 23:11, and it was asked subsequently, "Where did Abraham say Jesus was to come and be His Savior, though?"

I will also answer this as though it's a straight-up question. The Bible does not record God saying verbatim to Abraham that he must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved. But Abraham believed God, and the Bible is clear that in the Old Testament, there were many believers in the LORD God who looked ahead to the promise of the Messiah, and the New Testament records this faith as what saved before the advent of Christ.

If you can suspend your desire to shout, "That's cosmic child abuse!" try reading Genesis 22 and glean from it the lesson that it is meant to provide. This is the recounting of God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, on Mount Moriah. This was done to illustrate the level of faith that Abraham had in the promises of God, which I demonstrated Scripturally in my previous post is held up as an example for all of mankind that we are made right through God by our faith. I for one am extremely grateful for this illustration that provides part of the confidence I have in my own salvation in Christ.

Regarding the sacrifice of Isaac, when Abraham was taking his son up the mountain, Isaac asked where the sacrifice was, and Abraham responded that "God will provide himself" the sacrifice. And if you recall that God had promised that Abraham would have many descendants through Isaac, the Bible in Hebrews 11 states that though Abraham was leading his son up to sacrifice him, "Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead" and thus keep His promise to him.

In short, Abraham thought he was heading to sacrifice his beloved son, whom he expected God to raise from the dead.

If you can't see in this story a foreshadowing of God's sacrifice of His own Son and of the resurrection of Christ, then you are willfully looking the other way.

Incidentally, when God did provide the sacrifice -- a ram on the top of Mount Moriah -- so that Abraham did not actually sacrifice Isaac, the ram was found in a thicket of thorns. This foreshadows the crown of thorns that was thrust on Jesus's head before the crucifixion.

The Bible is truly a beautiful book.

This is a beautiful example of how people can make the bible mean anything they want it to mean. You'd think God could have found another way of foreshadowing the crucifixion that didn't disgust and confuse so many people. You'd think he'd find a way to save humanity besides the crucifixion -- sacrificing his own son, but it sounds like sacrifice was his thing -- as it was for so many ordinary mortals during those times.

No, the problem is that your post is a beautiful example of what happens when you read parts of Bible out of context. Read as a whole, it's pretty hard to miss what Bible says this episode is meant to prefigure and describe. The entire Bible is about Christ.

Have you mentioned this theory to any of your Jewish friends?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the poster at 23:11, and it was asked subsequently, "Where did Abraham say Jesus was to come and be His Savior, though?"

I will also answer this as though it's a straight-up question. The Bible does not record God saying verbatim to Abraham that he must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved. But Abraham believed God, and the Bible is clear that in the Old Testament, there were many believers in the LORD God who looked ahead to the promise of the Messiah, and the New Testament records this faith as what saved before the advent of Christ.

If you can suspend your desire to shout, "That's cosmic child abuse!" try reading Genesis 22 and glean from it the lesson that it is meant to provide. This is the recounting of God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, on Mount Moriah. This was done to illustrate the level of faith that Abraham had in the promises of God, which I demonstrated Scripturally in my previous post is held up as an example for all of mankind that we are made right through God by our faith. I for one am extremely grateful for this illustration that provides part of the confidence I have in my own salvation in Christ.

Regarding the sacrifice of Isaac, when Abraham was taking his son up the mountain, Isaac asked where the sacrifice was, and Abraham responded that "God will provide himself" the sacrifice. And if you recall that God had promised that Abraham would have many descendants through Isaac, the Bible in Hebrews 11 states that though Abraham was leading his son up to sacrifice him, "Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead" and thus keep His promise to him.

In short, Abraham thought he was heading to sacrifice his beloved son, whom he expected God to raise from the dead.

If you can't see in this story a foreshadowing of God's sacrifice of His own Son and of the resurrection of Christ, then you are willfully looking the other way.

Incidentally, when God did provide the sacrifice -- a ram on the top of Mount Moriah -- so that Abraham did not actually sacrifice Isaac, the ram was found in a thicket of thorns. This foreshadows the crown of thorns that was thrust on Jesus's head before the crucifixion.

The Bible is truly a beautiful book.

This is a beautiful example of how people can make the bible mean anything they want it to mean. You'd think God could have found another way of foreshadowing the crucifixion that didn't disgust and confuse so many people. You'd think he'd find a way to save humanity besides the crucifixion -- sacrificing his own son, but it sounds like sacrifice was his thing -- as it was for so many ordinary mortals during those times.

No, the problem is that your post is a beautiful example of what happens when you read parts of Bible out of context. Read as a whole, it's pretty hard to miss what Bible says this episode is meant to prefigure and describe. The entire Bible is about Christ.

Have you mentioned this theory to any of your Jewish friends?

Actually, yes. And I have Jewish friends who are Christian. The entire New Testament (with perhaps the exception of Luke, who wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts) was written by Jews. Jesus was a Jew. The first believers at Pentacost were Jews. Much of the early church was composed of Jews. According to the Bible, which, again, was written by Jews, Christ is the fulfillment of the Jewish law and the foretold Messiah. Those who are Jewish and reject Christ are no different than anyone else who rejects Christ in terms of their unbelief. Paul, who was an influential Jewish religious leader who persecuted the early church until his conversion (Acts 9), wrote in 1 Corinthians 1: "For indeed Jews ask for signs, and Gentiles search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."

The question you posed doesn't mean too much from a Biblical standpoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the poster at 23:11, and it was asked subsequently, "Where did Abraham say Jesus was to come and be His Savior, though?"

I will also answer this as though it's a straight-up question. The Bible does not record God saying verbatim to Abraham that he must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved. But Abraham believed God, and the Bible is clear that in the Old Testament, there were many believers in the LORD God who looked ahead to the promise of the Messiah, and the New Testament records this faith as what saved before the advent of Christ.

If you can suspend your desire to shout, "That's cosmic child abuse!" try reading Genesis 22 and glean from it the lesson that it is meant to provide. This is the recounting of God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, on Mount Moriah. This was done to illustrate the level of faith that Abraham had in the promises of God, which I demonstrated Scripturally in my previous post is held up as an example for all of mankind that we are made right through God by our faith. I for one am extremely grateful for this illustration that provides part of the confidence I have in my own salvation in Christ.

Regarding the sacrifice of Isaac, when Abraham was taking his son up the mountain, Isaac asked where the sacrifice was, and Abraham responded that "God will provide himself" the sacrifice. And if you recall that God had promised that Abraham would have many descendants through Isaac, the Bible in Hebrews 11 states that though Abraham was leading his son up to sacrifice him, "Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead" and thus keep His promise to him.

In short, Abraham thought he was heading to sacrifice his beloved son, whom he expected God to raise from the dead.

If you can't see in this story a foreshadowing of God's sacrifice of His own Son and of the resurrection of Christ, then you are willfully looking the other way.

Incidentally, when God did provide the sacrifice -- a ram on the top of Mount Moriah -- so that Abraham did not actually sacrifice Isaac, the ram was found in a thicket of thorns. This foreshadows the crown of thorns that was thrust on Jesus's head before the crucifixion.

The Bible is truly a beautiful book.

This is a beautiful example of how people can make the bible mean anything they want it to mean. You'd think God could have found another way of foreshadowing the crucifixion that didn't disgust and confuse so many people. You'd think he'd find a way to save humanity besides the crucifixion -- sacrificing his own son, but it sounds like sacrifice was his thing -- as it was for so many ordinary mortals during those times.

No, the problem is that your post is a beautiful example of what happens when you read parts of Bible out of context. Read as a whole, it's pretty hard to miss what Bible says this episode is meant to prefigure and describe. The entire Bible is about Christ.

Yeah, only stupid, unintuitive people can't see that the the seemingly horrid Isaac story is really a foreshadowing of the coming of Christ -- the Prince of Peace! God expects his followers to be more clever and more willing and able to see his intent through the stories in the Bible that are truly awful if you are so naive as to take them literally. How could a person miss something as obvious as that?

Of course, some things God did mean literally -- like Christ being his son who will grant eternal salvation if you believe in him. And people who develop true faith will be able to tell which is which.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the poster at 23:11, and it was asked subsequently, "Where did Abraham say Jesus was to come and be His Savior, though?"

I will also answer this as though it's a straight-up question. The Bible does not record God saying verbatim to Abraham that he must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved. But Abraham believed God, and the Bible is clear that in the Old Testament, there were many believers in the LORD God who looked ahead to the promise of the Messiah, and the New Testament records this faith as what saved before the advent of Christ.

If you can suspend your desire to shout, "That's cosmic child abuse!" try reading Genesis 22 and glean from it the lesson that it is meant to provide. This is the recounting of God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, on Mount Moriah. This was done to illustrate the level of faith that Abraham had in the promises of God, which I demonstrated Scripturally in my previous post is held up as an example for all of mankind that we are made right through God by our faith. I for one am extremely grateful for this illustration that provides part of the confidence I have in my own salvation in Christ.

Regarding the sacrifice of Isaac, when Abraham was taking his son up the mountain, Isaac asked where the sacrifice was, and Abraham responded that "God will provide himself" the sacrifice. And if you recall that God had promised that Abraham would have many descendants through Isaac, the Bible in Hebrews 11 states that though Abraham was leading his son up to sacrifice him, "Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead" and thus keep His promise to him.

In short, Abraham thought he was heading to sacrifice his beloved son, whom he expected God to raise from the dead.

If you can't see in this story a foreshadowing of God's sacrifice of His own Son and of the resurrection of Christ, then you are willfully looking the other way.

Incidentally, when God did provide the sacrifice -- a ram on the top of Mount Moriah -- so that Abraham did not actually sacrifice Isaac, the ram was found in a thicket of thorns. This foreshadows the crown of thorns that was thrust on Jesus's head before the crucifixion.

The Bible is truly a beautiful book.

This is a beautiful example of how people can make the bible mean anything they want it to mean. You'd think God could have found another way of foreshadowing the crucifixion that didn't disgust and confuse so many people. You'd think he'd find a way to save humanity besides the crucifixion -- sacrificing his own son, but it sounds like sacrifice was his thing -- as it was for so many ordinary mortals during those times.

No, the problem is that your post is a beautiful example of what happens when you read parts of Bible out of context. Read as a whole, it's pretty hard to miss what Bible says this episode is meant to prefigure and describe. The entire Bible is about Christ.

Have you mentioned this theory to any of your Jewish friends?

Actually, yes. And I have Jewish friends who are Christian. The entire New Testament (with perhaps the exception of Luke, who wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts) was written by Jews. Jesus was a Jew. The first believers at Pentacost were Jews. Much of the early church was composed of Jews. According to the Bible, which, again, was written by Jews, Christ is the fulfillment of the Jewish law and the foretold Messiah. Those who are Jewish and reject Christ are no different than anyone else who rejects Christ in terms of their unbelief. Paul, who was an influential Jewish religious leader who persecuted the early church until his conversion (Acts 9), wrote in 1 Corinthians 1: "For indeed Jews ask for signs, and Gentiles search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."

The question you posed doesn't mean too much from a Biblical standpoint.

But it means something to a lot of present day Jews, who I don't think would agree with your analysis. What do your non-christian Jewish friends think of your theory?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I guess I don't feel like contributing to the moderator's income by continuing to click on trolly BS like this thread.

I'm tired of how the moderator removes every troll on DCUM - except for the Christian-hating trolls. In that case, he removes any jpegs that might offend the poor Christian-hating trolls. I think I won't be contributing any more to his income here, either.

We just prefer well-rounded evidence.

How is that being trollish?

Should I keep returning to World Book Encyclopedias dating back to the 70s when I want to research a topic?

God's word is timeless, plus we have modern day theologians and Christian novelists to explain what we don't understand

based on the bible

What other texts are used as evidence?

The evidence is in your heart, if you open it to the Lord.

Thanks

I'll keep this in mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am the poster at 23:11, and it was asked subsequently, "Where did Abraham say Jesus was to come and be His Savior, though?"

I will also answer this as though it's a straight-up question. The Bible does not record God saying verbatim to Abraham that he must believe in Jesus Christ to be saved. But Abraham believed God, and the Bible is clear that in the Old Testament, there were many believers in the LORD God who looked ahead to the promise of the Messiah, and the New Testament records this faith as what saved before the advent of Christ.

If you can suspend your desire to shout, "That's cosmic child abuse!" try reading Genesis 22 and glean from it the lesson that it is meant to provide. This is the recounting of God asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac, on Mount Moriah. This was done to illustrate the level of faith that Abraham had in the promises of God, which I demonstrated Scripturally in my previous post is held up as an example for all of mankind that we are made right through God by our faith. I for one am extremely grateful for this illustration that provides part of the confidence I have in my own salvation in Christ.

Regarding the sacrifice of Isaac, when Abraham was taking his son up the mountain, Isaac asked where the sacrifice was, and Abraham responded that "God will provide himself" the sacrifice. And if you recall that God had promised that Abraham would have many descendants through Isaac, the Bible in Hebrews 11 states that though Abraham was leading his son up to sacrifice him, "Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead" and thus keep His promise to him.

In short, Abraham thought he was heading to sacrifice his beloved son, whom he expected God to raise from the dead.

If you can't see in this story a foreshadowing of God's sacrifice of His own Son and of the resurrection of Christ, then you are willfully looking the other way.

Incidentally, when God did provide the sacrifice -- a ram on the top of Mount Moriah -- so that Abraham did not actually sacrifice Isaac, the ram was found in a thicket of thorns. This foreshadows the crown of thorns that was thrust on Jesus's head before the crucifixion.

The Bible is truly a beautiful book.

This is a beautiful example of how people can make the bible mean anything they want it to mean. You'd think God could have found another way of foreshadowing the crucifixion that didn't disgust and confuse so many people. You'd think he'd find a way to save humanity besides the crucifixion -- sacrificing his own son, but it sounds like sacrifice was his thing -- as it was for so many ordinary mortals during those times.

No, the problem is that your post is a beautiful example of what happens when you read parts of Bible out of context. Read as a whole, it's pretty hard to miss what Bible says this episode is meant to prefigure and describe. The entire Bible is about Christ.

Have you mentioned this theory to any of your Jewish friends?

Actually, yes. And I have Jewish friends who are Christian. The entire New Testament (with perhaps the exception of Luke, who wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts) was written by Jews. Jesus was a Jew. The first believers at Pentacost were Jews. Much of the early church was composed of Jews. According to the Bible, which, again, was written by Jews, Christ is the fulfillment of the Jewish law and the foretold Messiah. Those who are Jewish and reject Christ are no different than anyone else who rejects Christ in terms of their unbelief. Paul, who was an influential Jewish religious leader who persecuted the early church until his conversion (Acts 9), wrote in 1 Corinthians 1: "For indeed Jews ask for signs, and Gentiles search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."

The question you posed doesn't mean too much from a Biblical standpoint.

But it means something to a lot of present day Jews, who I don't think would agree with your analysis. What do your non-christian Jewish friends think of your theory?

Have you discussed this with any Biblical scholars?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God sent Jesus into the world as a way shower. When Jesus said "I am the way, the truth, the light, no ones gets to the Father except through me", what more progressive Christians believe He meant was that no one can become closer to God (Source, Love, Creator, First Mover..whatever your name for that Universal good) unless they learn to become more Christ-like. Compassion, Love, Tolerance, Charity.... Those are the qualities that Jesus exemplified. We become closer to our Source (and "heaven") by trying to be more like Him.

However, there are many, many paths to that same end goal.

I see this passage from John 14:6 quoted a lot, but please note that Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the LIFE." Not "light." There's a world of difference in that. We have eternal life through Him, not just enlightenment.

The reality is that we have absolutely no idea what Jesus actually said. We have accounts of what other people think He said based on what they wrote years later. (We have no evidence that Jesus ever wrote anything down.) Those accounts have been picked over and translated more times than we can even begin to know. People chose what to include and what to leave out of the Christian Bible we use today for political reasons and for control. Simple as that.

I'm not discounting the Bible. I hold it very sacred. However, there are many other sacred texts with value. I'm certainly NOT discounting the importance of Jesus Christ. I may be a progressive Christian, but I am a Christian. I believe God sent Jesus into our world to be a light. A way shower. An example of all that is good and right and sacred. His death was the ultimate act of selfless love and self-sacrifice. From that we learn of our own importance to our Creator and the power of love.

Christians who believe that everyone who does not "believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior" (I know that phrase all too well....I was raised in the Southern Baptist Church) are going to hell are missing the entire point of Christianity. I was taught from a very young age that Christians were the only ones going to heaven. Screw the people living in other countries who were raised to believe differently. Forget the people living in the middle of a rain forrest who worship nature. The Jews? All of them damned to eternal torment. Sorry, but there is nothing Christ-like about that mentality.

When the angel appeared to the Shepherd in the story of Christ's birth, he said "Fear not, for I bring you great joy which will be to ALL people". ALL people. Not just a select few who happen to sit in the front row of a Baptist Church. That type of Christianity has done more to damage humanity than any other religion on the face of the earth. The next time you hear someone rant about "radical Islam", remember that Christians have an embarrassing past as well.

It's way past time for humanity to let go of the ridiculousness of divisive religious beliefs. There are many, many paths. None of them is greater than another. Christ recognized the divinity in every single person He encountered. People who claim to follow Him should strive to do the same.

This is the best post I've seen yet on Christianity in the entire religion forum. It annoys me when I hear people tell me that I can not enter into Heaven until I recognize that Jesus in my savior. Jesus is not my savior and I believe I can still get into Heaven. In my religion Jesus is a prophet. I do not worship him but he is as important to me as any other prophet or messenger. So I would follow his teachings as I would follow Moses or Muhammad's teachings. In my opinion, they all lead us to our Creator.

[Anonymous]

Atheist OP asks a theological question about Christianity's views on Old Testament personages.

Numerous PPs give responses to theological question.

Atheist OP rejects all responses because they are based on Bible and not on non-Biblically based texts.

Christianity is based on the Bible, ergo its theology is based on the Bible, particularly when it concerns personages appearing in the Bible.

Here's a riddle: How does one answer a Christian theological question about Biblical personages with a response based strictly on non-Biblical influenced texts?

This is like asking a question about people's rights in America and refusing to accept any answer based on texts that reference the Constitution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Atheist OP asks a theological question about Christianity's views on Old Testament personages.

Numerous PPs give responses to theological question.

Atheist OP rejects all responses because they are based on Bible and not on non-Biblically based texts.

Christianity is based on the Bible, ergo its theology is based on the Bible, particularly when it concerns personages appearing in the Bible.

Here's a riddle: How does one answer a Christian theological question about Biblical personages with a response based strictly on non-Biblical influenced texts?

This is like asking a question about people's rights in America and refusing to accept any answer based on texts that reference the Constitution.

No one is saying that you don't use the bible as a source. However, true sources are often cross-referenced in other sources. No true believer on these threads has cited anything other than lines from the the bible and theories from modern day theologians who also have cited from the bible. So the reasoning becomes cyclical.

However, in terms of Abraham, Catholics (the Vatican) have an interest in part of the land, too, as the Cenacle is believed to be the site of the Last Supper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Atheist OP asks a theological question about Christianity's views on Old Testament personages.

Numerous PPs give responses to theological question.

Atheist OP rejects all responses because they are based on Bible and not on non-Biblically based texts.

Christianity is based on the Bible, ergo its theology is based on the Bible, particularly when it concerns personages appearing in the Bible.

Here's a riddle: How does one answer a Christian theological question about Biblical personages with a response based strictly on non-Biblical influenced texts?

This is like asking a question about people's rights in America and refusing to accept any answer based on texts that reference the Constitution.

No one is saying that you don't use the bible as a source. However, true sources are often cross-referenced in other sources. No true believer on these threads has cited anything other than lines from the the bible and theories from modern day theologians who also have cited from the bible. So the reasoning becomes cyclical.

However, in terms of Abraham, Catholics (the Vatican) have an interest in part of the land, too, as the Cenacle is believed to be the site of the Last Supper.

Wow, you are obtuse.

A question about the theology of Biblical personages can only be answered in reference to the Bible and theology based upon that. This reasoning is NOT circular (I think that's the term you are thinking of).

If you are continuing to insist that the Bible cannot be used as a source because there are no non-Biblical works contemporary to the Bible that cite the Bible, give it up. Accounts of Abraham were written down for the first time more than two and a half millenia ago at a time when few could write and writing materials were very friable. It is a ridiculous demand that shows ignorance of the conditions of the time.

BTW, PPs have offered many thoughtful posts explaining the Biblical theology of Abraham