According to the Bible: All prophets before Muhammad were Muslims !!

[Britedream]

Seems the only way your "explanation" works is to make sub groups of the word brethren that are not indicated nor even implied.

Do you think God is a stupid when said: ( Glory to God from being that)

Genesis 16:12 "And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren."

 

[McBell]

Do you think God is a stupid when said:

You really want me to psycho analyze your version of god?

 

[Britedream]

You really want me to psycho analyze your version of god?

This is not an answer to my question .

 

[Tumah]

Tumah, please, leave Islam and Judaism out of your mind, and come to the verse with out a bias, if you ever want to understand my point. I will show you, how it can be understood:
The verse from KVJ :



if I were to give the verse above to someone living in mars, and asked him to explain this verse to me, he would say that:

This is your first mistake that I have repeatedly tried to explain to you. Its not a lone verse. It has a context that you're completely ignoring. I don't know how many times I've repeated that and here you are still doing it. I spent so long trying to show you the context that it really hurts that you're still saying this.

"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren."
means: someone is going to raise a prophet for a group "A" from among their brethren group "B".
if I were to say to him, No, He will raise them a prophet from them-self, he will say: you are wrong, group "A" can't be a brethren of itself, if that someone means from themself, He would have said "from among them" instead.

Yes, I understand in English that would not be the right way to speak. However, as I demonstrated for you earlier from Deut. 17:15, this is how the Tanach speaks when it means from among the Jewish people. I will quote the passage again in case you forgot:
"When you come to the land that G-d, your G-d is giving you and you will inherit it and dwell in it and you will say, 'I will put on myself a king like all the nations around me', you shall out on yourself a king whom G-d shall choose him. From among your brothers you shall put for yourself a king. You may not put on yourself a strange man who is not your brother."

As you may not know from Jewish history, G-d did in fact choose the kings through the prophets a number of times and each time, it was a Jew. So this phrase "from among your brothers" when used in Tanach, clearly means from among your Jewish brothers.

then, he will go on to say: the prophet will be like you. That someone will put the words in his mouth; means that prophet will say all what that someone whisper to him.

This is true, except the "like you" and the "and I will give My words in his mouth" are two separate statements. The prefix used is called a "vav hachibur" and its used to connect to otherwise unrelated statements into a sentence. So its saying, "The prophet will be like you. And I will put My words in his mouth."1

Now this also is what I have shown you; Ishmaelite and Israelite are brethren:

Actually, this is referring to the children of Keturah, who were also his brothers. You may be aware that the children of Keturah and the children of Ishamel lived in the same area and intermarried. You can google some bible maps to see that for yourself. It was Esau's children in the Sinai peninsula, Ishamel's and Keturah's in the Arabian peninsula and Jacob's children eventually settled in the region previously inhabited by Canaan and the nations of his children much later. So "his brothers" are referring to the nations of his brothers children. This was actually noted by your tiger friend, when he pointed out that Midian and Ishmael are used interchangeably in the Tanach and quoted from the book of Jubilees. Midian of course, being one of the children of Keturah.

This is also indicated by Gen. 25:17-18
"And these are the years of the life of Ishamel ... and he was gathered into his nation. And they dwelt from Havilah until Shur, that is on the face of Egypt coming towards Ashur. On the face of his brothers, he dwelt."

Ashur (Assyria) is one of they grandchildren of Keturah. So its saying he lived between the Ku****es and the children of Keturah, which basically includes most of the entire Arabian peninsula.

The key points in the explanation are:

1- The 12 tribes were with Moses at that time, and addressed as single racial entity; " raise them" , so one can't be a brethren of himself . God said among their brethren, not among them; "them" encompasses all the Israelite who were with Moses at that time.

So to be respond concisely.
When Moses was speaking to the Jews, he referred to them as a single entity. However, the verse you're quoting is when Moses was repeating over what G-d said to him. In that verse, G-d speaks about the Jews as a multiplicity.
And as I explained above and demonstrated from a verse in the previous chapter, the Torah clearly uses "their/your brothers" to mean "from among you" and not to mean someone outside the nation. Additionally, "from their midst" and "from your midst" would rule out this possibility as well. As does the context of the whole chapter.

2- Putting the words in his mouth, meaning the info that the prophet has, did not come from an earlier written source.

That's true. But there is also no reason to interpret it as meaning "Laws" or some such thing as it can equally indicate any sort of prophecy that a prophet says in G-d's name.

Whether you accept it or not that's up to you, but please do not say, the verse does not lend itself to my explanation.

As I've proven above, the verse clearly does not lend itself to your explanation without ignoring context and biblical history. Or I could say, it lends itself as much to your interpretation as alBakarah 2:6 lends itself to my interpretation of people against global warming. Perhaps even less so as your interpretation ignores Biblical phraseology, while my interpretation of alBakarah seems to fit quite neatly with the words of the ayah.

 

[Britedream]

This is your first mistake that I have repeatedly tried to explain to you. Its not a lone verse. It has a context that you're completely ignoring. I don't know how many times I've repeated that and here you are still doing it. I spent so long trying to show you the context that it really hurts that you're still saying this.


Yes, I understand in English that would not be the right way to speak. However, as I demonstrated for you earlier from Deut. 17:15, this is how the Tanach speaks when it means from among the Jewish people. I will quote the passage again in case you forgot:
"When you come to the land that G-d, your G-d is giving you and you will inherit it and dwell in it and you will say, 'I will put on myself a king like all the nations around me', you shall out on yourself a king whom G-d shall choose him. From among your brothers you shall put for yourself a king. You may not put on yourself a strange man who is not your brother."

As you may not know from Jewish history, G-d did in fact choose the kings through the prophets a number of times and each time, it was a Jew. So this phrase "from among your brothers" when used in Tanach, clearly means from among your Jewish brothers.


This is true, except the "like you" and the "and I will give My words in his mouth" are two separate statements. The prefix used is called a "vav hachibur" and its used to connect to otherwise unrelated statements into a sentence. So its saying, "The prophet will be like you. And I will put My words in his mouth."1


Actually, this is referring to the children of Keturah, who were also his brothers. You may be aware that the children of Keturah and the children of Ishamel lived in the same area and intermarried. You can google some bible maps to see that for yourself. It was Esau's children in the Sinai peninsula, Ishamel's and Keturah's in the Arabian peninsula and Jacob's children eventually settled in the region previously inhabited by Canaan and the nations of his children much later. So "his brothers" are referring to the nations of his brothers children. This was actually noted by your tiger friend, when he pointed out that Midian and Ishmael are used interchangeably in the Tanach and quoted from the book of Jubilees. Midian of course, being one of the children of Keturah.

This is also indicated by Gen. 25:17-18
"And these are the years of the life of Ishamel ... and he was gathered into his nation. And they dwelt from Havilah until Shur, that is on the face of Egypt coming towards Ashur. On the face of his brothers, he dwelt."

Ashur (Assyria) is one of they grandchildren of Keturah. So its saying he lived between the Ku****es and the children of Keturah, which basically includes most of the entire Arabian peninsula.


So to be respond concisely.
When Moses was speaking to the Jews, he referred to them as a single entity. However, the verse you're quoting is when Moses was repeating over what G-d said to him. In that verse, G-d speaks about the Jews as a multiplicity.
And as I explained above and demonstrated from a verse in the previous chapter, the Torah clearly uses "their/your brothers" to mean "from among you" and not to mean someone outside the nation. Additionally, "from their midst" and "from your midst" would rule out this possibility as well. As does the context of the whole chapter.


That's true. But there is also no reason to interpret it as meaning "Laws" or some such thing as it can equally indicate any sort of prophecy that a prophet says in G-d's name.


As I've proven above, the verse clearly does not lend itself to your explanation without ignoring context and biblical history. Or I could say, it lends itself as much to your interpretation as alBakarah 2:6 lends itself to my interpretation of people against global warming. Perhaps even less so as your interpretation ignores Biblical phraseology, while my interpretation of alBakarah seems to fit quite neatly with the words of the ayah.

Please go back and read my first statement, in my last post to you.
you couldn't come up with different explanation without omitting words, and separating statements.

The sibling of one man, is brethren to his brother, so all siblings of the sons of Abraham are brethren to Ishmael.

Now, God didn't say " he shall dwell in the presence of his brethren.", for you to single out one brother, but God said
"he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.", so you had to omit the word "All" in order to make your explanation acceptable. The statement you believed it to be separate, is under the verse 18:18, but you have to think of it as a separate one, due to your bias.

So you did not come up with unbiased explanation. my explanation still stands.

 

[Neo Deist]

Haha. I was laughing all the way till the "illiterate fisherman" part... come on, now, really?

What? It's true...

 

[Tumah]

Please go back and read my first statement, in my last post to you.
you couldn't come up with different explanation without omitting words, and separating statements.

The sibling of one man is brethren to his brother, so all siblings of the sons of Abraham are brethren to Ishmael.

Now, God didn't say " he shall dwell in the presence of his brethren.", for you to single out one brother, but God said
"he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.", so you had to omit the word "All" in order to make your explanation acceptable. The statement you believed it to be separate, is under the verse 18:18, but you have to think of it as a separate one, due to your bias.

So you did not come up with unbiased explanation. my explanation still stands.

Not one brother, six brothers. The six sons of Keturah and their children dwelt with Ishmael and his children. The sons of Keturah were Ishmael's brothers through his father. They were also sent away from Abraham's house. They lived with Ishmael in the Arabian peninsula. Isaac didn't live in the Arabian peninsula, he lived in what was then called Canaan. Therefore we can determine that when the verse says, "he will dwell in the face of all his brothers" its referring to those brothers that he actually lived in the same land as.
It could be that "all his brothers" it means "all his brothers that were sent out of Abraham's house" or "all his brothers that lived in the Arabian peninsula" or "all the brothers that were merchants like him". I don't know. One thing it certainly can't mean is that all the sons of Abraham lived together, since they clearly did not. The verse clearly described Abraham sending Ishmael out and sending the sons of Keturah out. Isaac remained. So they didn't live together. And later as well, Isaac's children came to live in the lands of Canaan and Ammon, while Ishmael's children remained in the Arabian peninsula. Its not far from each other, that is true. But they are also not the same place.

You just can't read the verse on its own without seeing if the event its describing actually happened. It didn't so it must mean something slightly different.

I have completely ignored the Jewish interpretation to the verse, besides for once mentioning a bit of it in passing. Until now, all the proofs I have brought to you for interpretation were all from other instances of similar phraseology in the text itself, grammatical rules or biblical history. To me it seems as though you have completely ignored all those facts in favor of coming to a conclusion that favors Muhammad. You have repeatedly completely ignored contextual evidence that I've brought, even though I worked so hard in spelling out the clear progression of the chapter for you, in favor of isolating the verse out of its context to impose a meaning to it that is not even born out by the phraseology of the verse itself. As I've continued to show to you from another verse in the previous chapter. Which you've continued to ignore as well.
It kind of seems as though, rather than prove your point or disprove my point, you're hoping that if you repeat the same material enough times, I'll agree with you. So you just ignore most of the points I make and tell me again to ignore my biases, while barely addressing anything I say. If I make an itemized point by point list, will it help you?

 

[Britedream]

Not one brother, six brothers. The six sons of Keturah and their children dwelt with Ishmael and his children. The sons of Keturah were Ishmael's brothers through his father. They were also sent away from Abraham's house. They lived with Ishmael in the Arabian peninsula. Isaac didn't live in the Arabian peninsula, he lived in what was then called Canaan. Therefore we can determine that when the verse says, "he will dwell in the face of all his brothers" its referring to those brothers that he actually lived in the same land as.
It could be that "all his brothers" it means "all his brothers that were sent out of Abraham's house" or "all his brothers that lived in the Arabian peninsula" or "all the brothers that were merchants like him". I don't know. One thing it certainly can't mean is that all the sons of Abraham lived together, since they clearly did not. The verse clearly described Abraham sending Ishmael out and sending the sons of Keturah out. Isaac remained. So they didn't live together. And later as well, Isaac's children came to live in the lands of Canaan and Ammon, while Ishmael's children remained in the Arabian peninsula. Its not far from each other, that is true. But they are also not the same place.

You just can't read the verse on its own without seeing if the event its describing actually happened. It didn't so it must mean something slightly different.

I have completely ignored the Jewish interpretation to the verse, besides for once mentioning a bit of it in passing. Until now, all the proofs I have brought to you for interpretation were all from other instances of similar phraseology in the text itself, grammatical rules or biblical history. To me it seems as though you have completely ignored all those facts in favor of coming to a conclusion that favors Muhammad. You have repeatedly completely ignored contextual evidence that I've brought, even though I worked so hard in spelling out the clear progression of the chapter for you, in favor of isolating the verse out of its context to impose a meaning to it that is not even born out by the phraseology of the verse itself. As I've continued to show to you from another verse in the previous chapter. Which you've continued to ignore as well.
It kind of seems as though, rather than prove your point or disprove my point, you're hoping that if you repeat the same material enough times, I'll agree with you. So you just ignore most of the points I make and tell me again to ignore my biases, while barely addressing anything I say. If I make an itemized point by point list, will it help you?

it's not an issue of could be or may be , if God wanted to single a brother, God would have said "he shall dwell in the presence of his brethren.", that will include all his brother siblings. So please, don't assume things.

 

[Tumah]

it's not an issue of could be or may be , if God wanted to single a brother, God would have said "he shall dwell in the presence of his brethren.", that will include all his brother siblings. So please, don't assume things.

I don't know what you're talking about "single a brother". The verse you quoted says "he will dwell in the presence of all his brothers". The verse I quoted has him in the Arabian peninsula among all his other half-brothers from Keturah, along with a repeat of the verse you quoted. When it says about about Ishmael, "he will dwell in the presence of all his brothers" it obviously is referring to all his brothers from Keturah, not Isaac since neither Isaac nor his children ever lived with Ishmael.

I will quote it for you again, in case you forgot it:

Prophecy ↓
Gen. 16:12
"And he will be a wild man, his hand in everything and the hand of everyone in him. And on the face of all his brothers, he shall dwell."

Fulfillement ↓
Gen. 25:17-18
"And these are the years of the life of Ishmael ... and he was gathered into his nation. And they dwelt from Havilah until Shur, that is on the face of Egypt coming towards Ashur. On the face of his brothers, he dwelt."
Jacob & sons obviously not being anywhere near them having been in various small cities in Canaan and later Egypt.

The region of Havilah is somewhere towards the south of the Arabian peninsula or its western coast. Shur is a desert somewhere in the Sinai peninsula or its environs. Together, Havilah and Shur basically cover the border of Egypt on the side one would travel were one heading towards Ashur (Assyria) from Egypt. Which means that "on the face of his brothers" probably means that the Ishmaelite tribes (ie. from his sons) probably lived along the northern boundary of the Arabian peninsula, while the tribes of the children of Keturah, lived south of him within it.

Point being, the verse you were quoting to prove that the Tanach calls Ishmael the brother of Israel is invalid.

 

[Britedream]

I don't know what you're talking about "single a brother". The verse you quoted says "he will dwell in the presence of all his brothers". The verse I quoted has him in the Arabian peninsula among all his other half-brothers from Keturah, along with a repeat of the verse you quoted. When it says about about Ishmael, "he will dwell in the presence of all his brothers" it obviously is referring to all his brothers from Keturah, not Isaac since neither Isaac nor his children ever lived with Ishmael.

I will quote it for you again, in case you forgot it:

Prophecy ↓
Gen. 16:12
"And he will be a wild man, his hand in everything and the hand of everyone in him. And on the face of all his brothers, he shall dwell."

Fulfillement ↓
Gen. 25:17-18
"And these are the years of the life of Ishmael ... and he was gathered into his nation. And they dwelt from Havilah until Shur, that is on the face of Egypt coming towards Ashur. On the face of his brothers, he dwelt."
Jacob & sons obviously not being anywhere near them having been in various small cities in Canaan and later Egypt.

The region of Havilah is somewhere towards the south of the Arabian peninsula or its western coast. Shur is a desert somewhere in the Sinai peninsula or its environs. Together, Havilah and Shur basically cover the border of Egypt on the side one would travel were one heading towards Ashur (Assyria) from Egypt. Which means that "on the face of his brothers" probably means that the Ishmaelite tribes (ie. from his sons) probably lived along the northern boundary of the Arabian peninsula, while the tribes of the children of Keturah, lived south of him within it.

Point being, the verse you were quoting to prove that the Tanach calls Ishmael the brother of Israel is invalid.

I am very clear on this, I have said:

"The sibling of one man is brethren to his brother, so All siblings of the sons of Abraham are brethren to Ishmael."

Israel is the son of Isaac, and Isaac and Ishmael are the sons of Abraham, so all the son of Isaac and their siblings are brethren to Ishmael.

when God says "All", God means All.

 

[gnostic]

Because the messengers of Allah told the truth. Moses/Musa peace be upon him foretold the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him.
There is no doubt about this.

Ok then who can be A prophet like Moses??

A prophet that came with Law and victory?
Moses came with victory against the Egyptian Polytheists, and he received law.
Muhammad gained the upperhand against the Makkan Polytheists, and Allah sent him with law.

Thank you,
There are a lot of explanations and interpretation to this matter, but please let us go, for now, from the literature to the reality, by looking at the reality, we see:

1- Jews believe no prophet has risen among them like Moses.

2- The prophecies in Jews have ended with a certain prophet.

Based on these two premises, one can reasonably conclude that the prophet must be out of (not from them)the Israelite, but in their brethren; the Ishmaelite, if the prophecy to be true.

However, if you feel this in an odd with your conclusion, please point out where did I go wrong based on these two premises.

First, the prophecy I'm talking about is the one in Deuteronomy 18:18, where God said a prophet; not prophets.

Second, Moses not only spoke to God, but brought a book.

The other points is addressed by the quote above from the King James version.

so I don't believe your respond resonates with the point that I raised.

Actually, you two (Britedream and Servant_of_the_One1) are reading the verse out-of context.

You are both ignoring the whole chapter (chapter 18), by cherry-picking a couple of verses, without considering all the verses in question.

The whole chapter is talking about the new land they were about to enter, the land of Canaan.

Although the book sit between Numbers and Joshua, this book Deuteronomy was written in the 2nd half of 7th century BCE, but like other books in the Torah, the authorship was traditionally attributed to Moses, not actually written by Moses. All Deuteronomical "history" were written around this time. But leaving the authorship of the Deuteronomy aside, the book was supposed to be set in Moses' final years, where he was giving Israelites some final instructions before he die, before the Israelites invade Canaan.

But getting back you, britedream and servant, not reading Deuteronomy 18 as a whole.

Moses was giving instruction about what should do went they enter Canaan.

Deuteronomy 18:1-8 were instruction for the Levites. Of all Jacob's 12 sons, the descendants of Levi will not be given territory, like that of descendants of the other 11 brothers of Levi. As the Levites will live among other descendants of Jacob, serving as priests to the 12 tribes.

That Moses instruction (1 to 8) to the Levites and other Israelites, about the special rights given to the Levites before entering Canaan.

Then this instruction is followed by the 2nd instruction in Deuteronomy 18:9-14, about the Israelites not to follow the foreign practices of augers, soothsayers, diviners, people who talk to the dead (mediums) and sorcerers, when they take the land from the Canaanites.

The 3rd instruction - Deuteronomy 18:15-22 is they should follow the next prophet and leader, Moses' successor when they entered Canaan, because Moses knew that he cannot lead them further. Hence, verses 15 and 18, speaking of a prophet being chosen "among them" would be their contemporaries, in their generation: this mean they should listen to the prophet who would lead them into Canaan - Joshua.

Joshua is the obvious candidate to be the new leader and prophet, when they entered the land of Canaan. Who else would these Israelites listen to?

Moses said to them:

15 The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet from among your own people, like myself; him you shall heed.

Moses is telling the Israelites before him, that was one among them will be chosen, and they should listen to him as they did him.

So how can the Israelites standing before Moses, "heed" Muhammad's words, when he wasn't born yet?

This is confirmed in verse 18 that a prophet would be chosen in Moses' time, not nearly 2000 years later:

18 I will raise up a prophet for them from among their own people, like yourself: I will put My words in his mouth and he will speak to them all that I command him;

How can these Israelites of Moses' time heed any command of Muhammad, when Muhammad wasn't even born, yet?

It doesn't make sense in this verse for Israelites in Moses' to follow command or listen to anyone who don't exist for nearly 2000 years.

And Muhammad certainly did lead the Israelites into Canaan. The Israelites of Moses' time certainly couldn't follow any command of Muhammad.

And (to Britedream) why would you assume that the prophet would be an Ishmaelite, who was never among them?

The Ishmaelites weren't brothers of Israelites. If you have actually read Genesis, that another name for Jacob, was "Israel", given to him when he returned to Canaan, after living in Haran for nearly two decades. Jacob's brother was Esau, who was supposedly ancestor of the Edomites. If any people were brethren to the Israelites, it would be the Edomites, not the Ishmaelites.

But verse 15 and verse 18 weren't talking about any Ishmaelite or any Edomite prophet. The prophet would be a fellow-Israelite, who would lead them into Canaan.

Furthermore, Britedream. Why do think the King James Version is authoritative? The KJV is just one of many English translations.

Moses then relay further instructions (eg Deuteronomy 19) for the Israelites living in his time, on what they should do after they have invaded and settled in Canaan.

In Joshua 1:5, God said to Joshua, that he will be with Joshua as he was with Moses...

5 No one shall be able to resist you as long as you live. As I was with Moses, so I will be with you; I will not fail you or forsake you.

...meaning that Joshua would be Moses' successor, as the one will lead the Israelites into Canaan, just as Moses led the previous generation out of Egypt.

When Joshua gave instruction to the Israelites about crossing the Jordan and invading Canaan, they responded at the end of the chapter with:

16 They answered Joshua,"We will do everything you have commanded us and we will go wherever you send us. 17 We will obey you just as we obeyed Moses; let but the LORD your God be with you as He was with Moses! 18 Any man who flouts your commands and does not obey every order you give him shall be put to death. Only be strong and resolute!"

They will obey and follow Joshua's orders as they have obeyed and followed Moses' orders, sort of fit in with verses 15 & 18, quite nearly, don't you think?

I think you two should actually read the whole chapter, instead of twisting a verse out of context, to suit your agenda, which is to shamelessly and dishonestly promote your prophet. It is very apparent to everyone what you are both doing.

 

[gnostic]

I am very clear on this, I have said:

"The sibling of one man is brethren to his brother, so All siblings of the sons of Abraham are brethren to Ishmael."

Israel is the son of Isaac, and Isaac and Ishmael are the sons of Abraham, so all the son of Isaac and their siblings are brethren to Ishmael.

when God says "All", God means All.

As I said in my previous post, Ishmael wasn't a sibling of Jacob or Israel, Esau was Jacob's brother and twin.

Ishmael was only a half-brother of Isaac, while Esau was a full brother of Jacob/Israel.

In any case, Deuteronomy 18 makes no reference to any Ishmaelite at all.

Deuteronomy 18, as of other chapters are full of instructions and guides for the Israelites when they enter the land of Canaan. The Ishmaelites have no roles to play in the invasion and settlement of Canaan.

Why would these Israelites in Moses' and Joshua's time would listen to any command of someone who weren't born yet?

Try reading the whole chapter, and not twist a couple of verses.

 

[McBell]

This is not an answer to my question .

I cannot answer your question as asked.
Since I do not believe the verse you quoted came from any god...

Interesting you did not answer my question.

 

[Tumah]

As I said in my previous post, Ishmael wasn't a sibling of Jacob or Israel, Esau was Jacob's brother and twin.

Ishmael was only a half-brother of Isaac, while Esau was a full brother of Jacob/Israel.

In any case, Deuteronomy 18 makes no reference to any Ishmaelite at all.

Deuteronomy 18, as of other chapters are full of instructions and guides for the Israelites when they enter the land of Canaan. The Ishmaelites have no roles to play in the invasion and settlement of Canaan.

Why would these Israelites in Moses' and Joshua's time would listen to any command of someone who weren't born yet?

I've been trying to explain to him almost every single thing you've said here, multiple times to no avail.

 

[gnostic]

Tumah, please, leave Islam and Judaism out of your mind, and come to the verse with out a bias, if you ever want to understand my point. I will show you, how it can be understood:
The verse from KVJ :



if I were to give the verse above to someone living in mars, and asked him to explain this verse to me, he would say that:

"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren."
means: someone is going to raise a prophet for a group "A" from among their brethren group "B".
if I were to say to him, No, He will raise them a prophet from them-self, he will say: you are wrong, group "A" can't be a brethren of itself, if that someone means from themself, He would have said "from among them" instead.

then, he will go on to say: the prophet will be like you. That someone will put the words in his mouth; means that prophet will say all what that someone whisper to him.

Now this also is what I have shown you; Ishmaelite and Israelite are brethren:



The key points in the explanation are:

1- The 12 tribes were with Moses at that time, and addressed as single racial entity; " raise them" , so one can't be a brethren of himself . God said among their brethren, not among them; "them" encompasses all the Israelite who were with Moses at that time.

2- Putting the words in his mouth, meaning the info that the prophet has, did not come from an earlier written source.


Whether you accept it or not that's up to you, but please do not say, the verse does not lend itself to my explanation.

Again, you are using KJV.

What make you think everyone required to read KJV?

KJV is neither the best, nor the most accurate English translation.

If you cannot read the Tanakh in Hebrew, then tried the NJPS (New Jewish Publication Society, 1985...or was that 1986, can't remember which year it was published).

But whether you are reading KJV or some modern translations, none of them say anything about Deuteronomy 18:15 or 18:18 the prophet being an Ishmaelite or Muhammad. Whether you see "brethren" or "among you", it doesn't even imply "Ishmaelite" or "Muhammad". You are simply interpolatiing.

You do understand what interpolation mean, don't you?

You are adding things or meanings that are not there.

Deuteronomy 18 was Moses giving instructions to Israelites, living in his time and that of Joshua's. These Israelites cannot possibly heed any command by someone who was born yet.

1. Moses gave instruction to the Israelites about the Levites being priests will live among them, but not having their own tribal land (18:1-8).
2. Moses gave them another instruction (18:9-14), which forbid them to practise religious customs of the Canaanites, when they have settled in this land.
3. The 3rd instruction is to follow the commands of the next prophet - Joshua - who will be chosen to lead them across the Jordan.

If anyone should leave Islam and Judaism aside, and read what the whole chapter is actually saying, it is you.

You are cherry-picking a few verses, twisting them with interpolation of your own making, clearly in attempt to promote Islam and your prophet.

Talk about double standard and total lack of integrity, britedream. You tell someone to leave Judaism out of it, but clearly you can't do the same with Islam.

I am not Jewish, Christian or Muslim...me being agnostic, and I have read the verses, all 22 of them in Deuteronomy, as a literature that I am analysing, and I really don't see your claim to be valid.

If anyone is bias, it is you, britedream. You scholarship with the biblical text is seriously lacking and bias.

 

[gnostic]

I've been trying to explain to him almost every single thing you've said here, multiple times to no avail.

I know.

I have actually started a thread about Deuteronomy 18, years ago, I realised back then that you cannot reason with Muslims, once they have brainwashed by Muslim propaganda.

The Qur'an say nothing about Deuteronomy 18 at all. This is just recent propaganda, started by some silly Muslims, who like to cherry-pick verses. It is all about ego, not actual scholarship.

 

[Britedream]

I've been trying to explain to him almost every single thing you've said here, multiple times to no avail.

Please do not appeal to someone else post to reply to me. in my post #110 above, if you beleive any of the statements is false, please say why.

 

[gnostic]

Please do not appeal to someone else post to reply to me. in my post #110 above, if you beleive any of the statements is false, please say why.

He gave you reasons why your statements are false.

You are just refusing to see reasons in explanations that tumah have already given you.

And some of my points were already explained to you by tumah. Tumah told you to read the whole chapter, and see the consistency in each of Moses' instructions.

The consistencies are, they are all related to what they should do when they settled in the land of Canaan.

All you did was ignored tumah's explanation, and continued to twist the verses you have cherry-picked with this stupid thing about Ishmaelite in KJV quote.

Just because you are biased doesn't mean everyone else is.

My suggestion is read post 111. Better yet, how about you read from verse 1 to 22. If you understood the complete chapter as a whole, and actually understanding, people won't you are ignorant, or worse, dishonest.

 

[gnostic]

Do you think God is a stupid when said: ( Glory to God from being that)

Genesis 16:12 "And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren."

Sorry, but what do Genesis 16:12 have to do with Deuteronomy 18:18?

It is like you comparing an orange with a doorknob. These two verse are not mutually inclusive.

Are you saying that Muhammad is Ishmael's reincarnation?

As far as I understand Genesis about Ishmael, Ishmael lived in the wild, not in any city. Muhammad has always lived in a city. Muhammad actually lived in two cities. Muhammad was always a city boy, apart from those times, when he was leader of Muslims raiding and robbing caravans, like some brigands or pirates.

 

[Tumah]

xcd

I am very clear on this, I have said:

"The sibling of one man is brethren to his brother, so All siblings of the sons of Abraham are brethren to Ishmael."

Israel is the son of Isaac, and Isaac and Ishmael are the sons of Abraham, so all the son of Isaac and their siblings are brethren to Ishmael.

when God says "All", God means All.

Of course Isaac and Ishmael are technically half-brothers. But the Tanach seems to exclude Isaac from the brotherhood of Ishmael and the sons of Keturah as I explained above where the verse says "all" but in its fulfillment, doesn't include Isaac's progeny.
We see from the fulfillment verse, that the prophecy of him dwelling with his brothers meant "in his lifetime" (as the fulfillment verse states that he had lived among his brothers) which not only clearly excludes Israel, but also excludes Isaac neither of whom lived near Ishmael and the sons of Keturah. Any explanation of the prophecy of him living among his brothers, has to be understood in the context of the way the prophecy was fulfilled, because that's obviously what the prophecy intended.

And all that is tangential as I've already proven that when the verse says "from your brothers" it means "Jews" based on the verse in the chapter before.

Don't try to force into the verse your own understanding. You have to read the text and see what its telling you, not tell the text what you want it to say.

Again, here is a summary of the problems you need to deal with in your interpretation, that you have so far not rebutted:

1. Context - The context the verse was made in, doesn't indicate a prophecy about future events as much as guidance about living in Israel. A prophecy about Muhammad at this point would be incongruous with the message of the passage.

2. Context - The verse clearly states at the beginning of the passage that Moses is telling them something relevant to when they enter the land of Israel. A prophecy about Muhammad at this point would be incongruous with the time-frame and place the passage is discussing.

3. Comparison - The context of the verse places the "prophet" as an alternative to the "diviner". People who performed divination did so to learn the future, not to learn new laws. In this context, a prophecy about Muhammad as a "bringer of Law" would be incongruous with the comparison being made.

4. Contextual Phraseology - The Tanach is known to use a singular form of a word to indicate a category or collection of things. See Lev. 11:9 where the words "scale" and "fin" are in singular. Obviously a fish with fins and scales will have more than one fin and one scale. In the context of a prophet to guide the Jews while living in the land, this word is probably meant to be understood in the plural - a collection of prophets who will guide them for the duration of their time in the land.

5. Phraseology - The words "from your brothers" is clearly used in other contexts (Deut. 17:15) to indicate that the speaker means "from one of you" and not "from someone outside of you." This seems to be how the Tanach uses this phrase in this type of context. It excludes the possibility of Muhammad being the prophet.

6. Qualification - The first qualifier used for the prophet is "from your midst". As the Jews are the ones being spoken to, "your midst" indicates, "from the midst of the Jews". Muhammad did not live with a Jewish community. As you know, he was born in to the Banu Hashim clan of the Quraysh tribe. This is not in the midst of the Jews.

7. Lack of Qualifier - When the verse says, "like me/you (Moses)" the verse gives no indication as to what facet of Moses the following prophet would have. Choosing "a bringer of law" has no basis and is nothing more than self-serving interpolation.

8. Qualification - The verse says the the prophet would be "for you/them (Jews)". According to Islam, Muhammad was not sent for the Jews but for the whole world. Although the whole world includes Jews, the verse here seems to be excluding 'the whole world' and specifying "for you (Jews)".

9. Phraseology - The words "I will give My words in his mouth" make no indication as to the type of prophecy, the prophet would receive. There is no indication here that the prophet would bring a new law and indeed all the prophets began their prophecy with "So said G-d" and did not bring new laws.