... the text tells us that Abraham in league with God was able to stop men from sleeping with his wife.
John Smithson wrote:
And why do you present this last idea? If you are going to answer with more supposition, take a pass. I am not interested in suppositional considerations.
I say this because we know the passages that Abraham had a covenant with God. Surely I do not have to give you the passages on this point. We also know from the text that Abraham loved his wife Sarah and wanted no other women. So Abraham was in league with God (in covenant with God), and the result was that they stopped men from sleeping with Abraham's wife.
e.g., Genesis 20:7, "Now therefore restore the man his wife; for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live: and if thou restore her not, know thou that thou shalt surely die, thou, and all that are thine."
David Miller wrote:
Based upon the text, we don't know.
John Smithson wrote:
The other day you your knowledge of this event led you cahrge me with blasphemy. Glad to see you soften up a little,
I haven't changed anything about what I said. I caution you about surmising evil motives on the part of Abraham that are not established by the text. Making false charges against a man who is in covenant with God is dangerous.
John Smithson wrote:
Your argument, such as it is, comes from your interpretation of the silence of scripture.
No, my argument is that there are so many opposite ideas to yours that are not contradicted by Scripture that you ought to have pause when accusing Abraham of being WILLING for men to sleep with this wife. Being willing to share your wife and being willing to tell men that your wife is your sister are two different things.
John Smithson wrote:
For me and my house, we will stick with what has been said in the text.
I am just trying to help you do that. :-)
John Smithson wrote:
Your's in not a textual argument, It is a philosophical one. Suppositional.
In context, I was illustrating to you how an opposite philosophical position was not contradicted by the text. Whether you accept my suppositions is not the point. Recognizing that there is no contradiction in the text is the point. Such would mean that your supposition, that he was willing to share his wife, goes beyond what is written in the text.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
