Mystic-als
Active Member
hehe I don't think your going to get an answer on that. It might have a troubling effect on some other Rf'ers. But good point.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Ishmael or Isaac
- Thread starter Mystic-als
- Start date
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
It's interesting that, with the way the books (The Bible and The Qur'an) read, both sides of the arguement can be considered equally valid.
In the Qur'an the sacrifice test happens before Issac is born.
37:102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!"
37:112. And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous.
And in the Bible it happens after Ishmael and Hagar are sent away:
Gen 21:12 But God said to him (Abraham) "Do not distress yourself on account of the boy (Ishamel) and your slave-girl (Hagar). Do whatever Sarah says, for Issac is the one through whom your name will be carried on. 13. But the slave-girls son I will also make into a great nation, for he too is your child". 14. Early next morning, Abraham took some bread and a skin of water and, giving them to Hagar, put the child on her shoulder and sent her away.
Gen 22:2 God said, "Take your son, your only son,your beloved Issac, and go to the land of Moriah, where you are to offer him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I shall point out to you.
So the Qur'an can refer to Ishmael as Abrahams only son because Issac was not born yet and the Bible can refer to Issac as Abrahams only son because Ishmael was no longer there with Abraham.
In the Qur'an the sacrifice test happens before Issac is born.
37:102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!"
37:112. And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous.
And in the Bible it happens after Ishmael and Hagar are sent away:
Gen 21:12 But God said to him (Abraham) "Do not distress yourself on account of the boy (Ishamel) and your slave-girl (Hagar). Do whatever Sarah says, for Issac is the one through whom your name will be carried on. 13. But the slave-girls son I will also make into a great nation, for he too is your child". 14. Early next morning, Abraham took some bread and a skin of water and, giving them to Hagar, put the child on her shoulder and sent her away.
Gen 22:2 God said, "Take your son, your only son,your beloved Issac, and go to the land of Moriah, where you are to offer him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I shall point out to you.
So the Qur'an can refer to Ishmael as Abrahams only son because Issac was not born yet and the Bible can refer to Issac as Abrahams only son because Ishmael was no longer there with Abraham.
Mujahid Mohammed
Well-Known Member
How can Issac be the only son when Ishmael is the first born.
So you are saying because Ishmael is not with him he is not his son. I have a friend whose children do not live with him are they still not his children. the problem is the writers tried to take some of the rights given to Ishmael and pass them on the Isaac. Read Deut. 21:15-17. I have a great article on this and will post it insha Allah.
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Mujahid Mohammed said:
Ishmael was Abraham's first born but he was sent away with Hagar. Issac was the only one left. Abrahams only son.
Mujahid Mohammed said:
No, it's not that at all. Ishmael was Abrahams son. As I explained "only son" refers to Issac being the only one left. Besides, Inheritence at that time wasn't governed by the levitical law, the law didn't exist yet. Look at the story of Jacob. He was married to two sisters from the same family however this is expressly forbidden in Leviticus 18:18.
I look forward to reading the article.
Salam
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
The Truth said:
Salam The Truth,
Yes. In truth Abraham did not want to do it. Only after he recieved God's promise that Ishmael would become a great nation did he yield and send them away.
The_Evelyonian said:
Walikum Alsalam,
In Islam as Allah explained it in Quran Abraham didn't argue with God and he never be bothered with Allah's judgment but dirctly obey and he left them in Mecca while it was a desert at that time because God ordered him to do so and later on God inspired Ishmael to kick the ground and pure wonderful water came out of there and the tribes started to gather there (the water which Ishamel when he was a kid found out still going under now and i used to drink from it when i visit Mecca). That was part of a bigger plan which is building the house of God by Abraham and his son Ishmael later on there (in Mecca today, Saudi Arabia), then the time had come for Abraham to sacrifice his son Ishamel when he saw himself doing it in the dream then when he told Ishamel about it, his son answered him.
[35] Remember Ibrahim said: "O my Lord! make this city (Mecca) one of peace and security: and preserve me and my sons from worshipping idols.
[36] "O my Lord! they have indeed led astray many among mankind; he then who follows my (ways) is of me, and he that disobeys me, but Thou art indeed Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
[37] "O our Lord! I have made some of my offspring (Ishamel in his mother) to dwell in a valley without cultivation, by Thy Sacred House (in Mecca city, Saudi Arabia "now") ; in order, O our Lord, that they may establish regular Prayer: so fill the hearts of some among men with love towards them, and feed them with Fruits: so that they may give thanks.
[38] "O our Lord! truly Thou dost know what we conceal and what we reveal: for nothing whatever is hidden from Allah, whether on earth or in heaven.
[39] "Praise be to Allah. Who hath granted unto me in old age Isma'il and Ishaq: for truly my Lord is He, the Hearer of Prayer!
[40] "O my Lord! make me one who establishes regular Prayer, and also (raise such) among my offspring O our Lord! And accept Thou my Prayer.
[41] "O our Lord! cover (us) with Thy Forgiveness, me, my parents, and (all) Believers, on the Day that the Reckoning will be established!" (Surah "Abraham" 14)
Now to the story of the sacfice in another Surah ....
[102] Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I see in vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (the son) said: "O my father! do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one practising Patience and Constancy!" ( Quran 102:37)
This is the whole story from the beginning and the conversation between Abraham and his son Ishmael in Mecca ..
[100] "O my Lord! grant me a righteous (son)!"
[101] So We gave him the good news of a boy ready to suffer and forbear.
[102] Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I see in vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (the son) said: "O my father! do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one practising Patience and Constancy!"
[103] So when they had both submitted their wills (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),
[104] We called out to him, "O Ibrahim!
[105] "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
[106] For this was obviously a trial,
[107] And We ransomed him with a momentous sacrifice:
[108] And We left (this blessing) for him among generations (to come) in later times:
[109] "Peace and salutation to Ibrahim!"
[110] Thus indeed do We reward those who do right
[111] For he was one of Our believing Servants.
Then after that ....
[112] And We gave him the good news of Ishaq - a prophet - one of the Righteous.
[113] We blessed him and Ishaq: but of their progeny are (some) that do right, and (some) that obviously do wrong, to their own souls. (Surah 114)
There was 2 good news, the first was was shamael whom he shall sacfice and the other news is prophet Ishaq "peace be upon them all".
Peace and blessing,
The Truth
Mujahid Mohammed
Well-Known Member
If it is not that then what is it. Issac cannot be the only son. He would have to be the first born. If he were the only one left then the other one should be dead right. Listen to the words the translator used. It is all in context if you want me to understand you put it in English I do speak it. you have not explained "only son" in reference to what I said. He can never be the only son. As I said if my friend is seperated from his kids are they still not his kids. Anyways in reference to levitical law All the Prophets lived under the laws of God and they are the best of humanbeings. Now the bible says Lot had sex with his daughters and concieved children. the bible also says that 2 people in the geneology of Jesus were born in a similar manner. There are many stories of Prophet commiting attrocities and horrible sins. Now how can this be. The Quran says the Prophets were guides, to show people the best of character and how to worship god. they never commited major sins. The bible says Jesus was harsh when he spoke to his mother "woman what have i to do with thee" The quran says no he was kind to his mother. There are many flaws in the bible in terms of scriptural evidence and it is hard to take evidence from something that is still a work in progress.The_Evelyonian said:
tomorrow if I have time
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Salam Mujahid Mohammed,Mujahid Mohammed said:
If you insert the word "remaining" into the verse you'll understand the meaning of "only son"
Gen 22:2 God said, "Take your son, your only [remaining] son, your beloved Issac, and go to the land of Moriah, where you are to offer him as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I shall point out to you.
This is the context in which the term "only son" was used. It's not meant to say that Ishamel was not Abrahams son. It's saying that Isaac was the only one still with Abraham. Ishmael would not have to be dead for Isaac to be the only one left.
Yes, your friends children are still his children. I was never disputing the fact that Abraham was Ishmaels father.
Yes but you were speaking of inheritence. The laws regarding inheritence did not exist in the time of Abraham. Younger children were often favored over first-born children (Ephraim and Manasseh).Mujahid Mohammed said:
Lots daughters got him drunk and slept with him after he passed out. No sin can be placed on Lot. Lot's daughters were condemned for what they did.
Which two people in Jesus' genealogy are you refering to?
My Bible reads "Jesus said, "Woman, what do you want with me? My hour has not yet come." The footnote to the verse reads: The usage of "Woman" is an allusion to Gen 3:15.
What do you mean by "work in progress"?
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
The Truth said:Walikum Alsalam,
In Islam as Allah explained it in Quran Abraham didn't argue with God and he never be bothered with Allah's judgment but dirctly obey and he left them in Mecca while it was a desert at that time because God ordered him to do so and later on God inspired Ishmael to kick the ground and pure wonderful water came out of there and the tribes started to gather there (the water which Ishamel when he was a kid found out still going under now and i used to drink from it when i visit Mecca). That was part of a bigger plan which is building the house of God by Abraham and his son Ishmael later on there (in Mecca today, Saudi Arabia), then the time had come for Abraham to sacrifice his son Ishamel when he saw himself doing it in the dream then when he told Ishamel about it, his son answered him.
[35] Remember Ibrahim said: "O my Lord! make this city (Mecca) one of peace and security: and preserve me and my sons from worshipping idols.
[36] "O my Lord! they have indeed led astray many among mankind; he then who follows my (ways) is of me, and he that disobeys me, but Thou art indeed Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
[37] "O our Lord! I have made some of my offspring (Ishamel in his mother) to dwell in a valley without cultivation, by Thy Sacred House (in Mecca city, Saudi Arabia "now") ; in order, O our Lord, that they may establish regular Prayer: so fill the hearts of some among men with love towards them, and feed them with Fruits: so that they may give thanks.
[38] "O our Lord! truly Thou dost know what we conceal and what we reveal: for nothing whatever is hidden from Allah, whether on earth or in heaven.
[39] "Praise be to Allah. Who hath granted unto me in old age Isma'il and Ishaq: for truly my Lord is He, the Hearer of Prayer!
[40] "O my Lord! make me one who establishes regular Prayer, and also (raise such) among my offspring O our Lord! And accept Thou my Prayer.
[41] "O our Lord! cover (us) with Thy Forgiveness, me, my parents, and (all) Believers, on the Day that the Reckoning will be established!" (Surah "Abraham" 14)
Now to the story of the sacfice in another Surah ....
[102] Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I see in vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (the son) said: "O my father! do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one practising Patience and Constancy!" ( Quran 102:37)
This is the whole story from the beginning and the conversation between Abraham and his son Ishmael in Mecca ..
[100] "O my Lord! grant me a righteous (son)!"
[101] So We gave him the good news of a boy ready to suffer and forbear.
[102] Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I see in vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (the son) said: "O my father! do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one practising Patience and Constancy!"
[103] So when they had both submitted their wills (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),
[104] We called out to him, "O Ibrahim!
[105] "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
[106] For this was obviously a trial,
[107] And We ransomed him with a momentous sacrifice:
[108] And We left (this blessing) for him among generations (to come) in later times:
[109] "Peace and salutation to Ibrahim!"
[110] Thus indeed do We reward those who do right
[111] For he was one of Our believing Servants.
Then after that ....
[112] And We gave him the good news of Ishaq - a prophet - one of the Righteous.
[113] We blessed him and Ishaq: but of their progeny are (some) that do right, and (some) that obviously do wrong, to their own souls. (Surah 114)
There was 2 good news, the first was was shamael whom he shall sacfice and the other news is prophet Ishaq "peace be upon them all".
Peace and blessing,
The Truth
Salam The Truth,
The Qur'an places the sacrifice before Isaac's birth and The Bible places it after Ishmael is sent away. This was the point of my original post. That two people arguing over who was almost sacrificed (Isaac or Ishmael) would have an equally valid point of view.
By the way, I read my Qur'an (an english translation) often and enjoy it very much.
Mujahid Mohammed
Well-Known Member
Isn't that part of the problem people keep adding words to make it agree with their own personalized interpretationThe_Evelyonian said:
If the original scripture does not say remaining then it is not remaining.
According to who the author of the verse or the translator. Or you since you are adding remaining when the verse does not say it. Generally the writer is the only persons context who is important.
But the problem is. That verse does not say that. Look we both speak english. If it says in English they only son that is what it means. People are always trying to make it into something it is not. Take the word begotten for example in John 3:16 The word clearly means to sire or it is something that is acribed with sex and no muslim or christian believes God came down and had sex with Mary. Now that is not what the verse means but that is what is said. That is like me saying Oh I hate all purple people and then saying well no I did not really mean that. If what the translator got from the verse is just that then that is what it is. But I guess it depends on which bible you read because as I said the bible is still a work in progress. And you notice in the newer bibles they changed the word begotten to unique or only. But begetton had been abrogated
No you do not have any evidence in the bible about it. But it is well known that the Prophets and Messengers knew these laws. The bible says it too. When Jesus told the disciples in John 16 I believe when he had many things to tell them but they could not bear it but when the spirit of truth comes, HE will guide you into all truth. So he knew but his people were not ready to follow or recieve the message entirely. We are talking about Abraham and rules implemented within his immediate family not outsiders if I told my children hey this is what you will get when I die. Can they argue with me. Just because society may not accept the rule does not mean it doesn't apply or is not real.
the man was drunk. Allah says he does not give prophethood to drunkard, murders, adulteres, thieves etc. He give it only to the best of mankind to be the best example. The whole idea that a prophet who was saved by God commited a major sin and allowed this to happen. But this is the bibles idea of truth and rational.
Read Gen 38:13-30, then read Math 1:3
If you have a good relationship with your mom. Go walk in the room and say Woman, what do you want with me. Please, I am curious as to her response. The words are supposedly what he said. No Jew I know talks to his mother this way. No prophet in Islam talks to people in general let alone their mother this way. This is along with many others the problem with the scriptures. Giving horrible qualities to the best of mankind. God chose them to be examples to follow I would never follow a man claiming to be God or whatever they say if he spoke this way to his mother. That is the same way Jesus according to the sciptures addressed the prostitutes. Is she not more than they. Does she not deserve some sort of respect from the one she gave birth to and raised.
The constant revisions and alterations. The KJV for example the original had 80 books. Now it has 66. The NKJV is not like the KJV I have. It is constantly changing and people are still trying to make improvements. That is what is meant work in progress for if it were complete they would be no need to add to it. Do artist keep adding lyrics to songs. Do they change the lyrics once people have learned them. If it is complete there would be no need for change. That is one of the miracles of the Quran it has not changed where the bible has. Look at the Catholic version and the Protestant. One version needed to improve the other. I hope this helps peace.
The_Evelyonian said:
Walikum Alsalam ...
I agree with you that both can be equally valid point of view to the followers any particular religion but we can't neglect the fact that there is even evidence from the bible itself that Ishaq can't be the one.
By the way, I read my Qur'an (an english translation) often and enjoy it very much.
I'm glad that you are enjoying reading and understanding Quran.
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Salam Mujahid Mohammed
The reason I added the word "remaining" was to try and make the verse clearer. This is not a new practice. Many english translations of the Bible and the Qur'an do the same thing in various places (usually the added words are in Italics). As for what you said about the authors context is the only one that matters I agree with you 100% but the problem is I cannot go back and ask Moses what he meant when using the term only son, therefore my interpretation is all I have. My interpreation is this: That Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Issac. God demanded Abraham sacrifice one of them. The Bible calls Issac the "only son". This taken at face value is impossible because of Ishmael who is also Abrahams son. According to the Bible Ishmael was not present at the time when God demanded the sacrifice. I've heard several different explanations and the only one to me that makes sense is that only son means only remaining son.
As for the prophets being the best of mankind, I do believe that, but the prophets were also human. Humans make mistakes. Lot wasn't a drunkard. His daughters got him drunk. Lot really didn't have any say in the matter.
Regarding the newer versions of the Bible. Newer editions are released in order to help people who can't understand the older ones. The NKJV is written in a simpler form of english than the KJV. I own several different versions of the Bible and the core message of each hasn't changed even if the words have. Now the missing books that are contained in the original KJV are known as the Apocrypha. Catholics believe that these books are holy where as Protestants do not. That is why most Catholic Bibles contain them and most Protestant Bibles do not.
(My apologies for being away so long)
The reason I added the word "remaining" was to try and make the verse clearer. This is not a new practice. Many english translations of the Bible and the Qur'an do the same thing in various places (usually the added words are in Italics). As for what you said about the authors context is the only one that matters I agree with you 100% but the problem is I cannot go back and ask Moses what he meant when using the term only son, therefore my interpretation is all I have. My interpreation is this: That Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Issac. God demanded Abraham sacrifice one of them. The Bible calls Issac the "only son". This taken at face value is impossible because of Ishmael who is also Abrahams son. According to the Bible Ishmael was not present at the time when God demanded the sacrifice. I've heard several different explanations and the only one to me that makes sense is that only son means only remaining son.
As for the prophets being the best of mankind, I do believe that, but the prophets were also human. Humans make mistakes. Lot wasn't a drunkard. His daughters got him drunk. Lot really didn't have any say in the matter.
Regarding the newer versions of the Bible. Newer editions are released in order to help people who can't understand the older ones. The NKJV is written in a simpler form of english than the KJV. I own several different versions of the Bible and the core message of each hasn't changed even if the words have. Now the missing books that are contained in the original KJV are known as the Apocrypha. Catholics believe that these books are holy where as Protestants do not. That is why most Catholic Bibles contain them and most Protestant Bibles do not.
(My apologies for being away so long)
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Salam The Truth,
Well, I believe the evidence against Isaac is a matter of interpretation but I do admit that my understanding is not, and never will be, complete.
Peace be with you
The Truth said:Walikum Alsalam ...
I agree with you that both can be equally valid point of view to the followers any particular religion but we can't neglect the fact that there is even evidence from the bible itself that Ishaq can't be the one.
Well, I believe the evidence against Isaac is a matter of interpretation but I do admit that my understanding is not, and never will be, complete.
Peace be with you
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
john313 said:
Mujahid Mohammed
Well-Known Member
According to the bible. But the testimony may or may not be true. If Ishmeal is the first born how can Issac be the only. If they meant only remaining son he would have said it. But the fact is he had more than one. And i would have to question whether or not the writer was accurate in what he took from whichever of the 250,000 manuscripts. The validity is lost due to the many unknown. Some christians tell me Moses wrote the old testament. why is it in third person. Who is this imaginary person narrating the story if it is not Moses. how did he write his obituary. And adding the word remaining now you are doing what many others have done add words to the text.The_Evelyonian said:
Yes humans do make mistakes. And the prophets are not above that, but God as said many times does not give prophethood to drunkards, murderers, ones who commit incest worshipping other Gods etc. BASICALLY COMMITING MAJOR SINS. They may make mistakes but it is never major. It may be they should have done this and should have done that. How is it the best of mankind the ones's whom God chose commits these horrible things. God could not have created a better example is that not within his power. How could he allow these people to be the examples of mankind. Surely the most wise would have chosen the best of his creation those who would abstain from these things.
Regarding the newer versions of the Bible. Newer editions are released in order to help people who can't understand the older ones. The NKJV is written in a simpler form of english than the KJV. I own several different versions of the Bible and the core message of each hasn't changed even if the words have. Now the missing books that are contained in the original KJV are known as the Apocrypha. Catholics believe that these books are holy where as Protestants do not. That is why most Catholic Bibles contain them and most Protestant Bibles do not.
(My apologies for being away so long)[/quote]
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Salam Mujahid Mohammed,
I'm sorry but I feel our discussion on Issac and Ishmael has reached a stalemate.
This verse in Al-Qasas recounts Moses accidently killing an Egyptian. I believe that accounts like this in both the Bible and Qur'an serve to show that the prophets were indeed human beings who made mistakes and not perfect individuals.
Peace.
I've already answered this.Mujahid Mohammed said:
The validity of all religious writngs can always be called into question but that is beside the point and will just lead to useless fighting.Mujahid Mohammed said:
I'm sorry but I feel our discussion on Issac and Ishmael has reached a stalemate.
My understanding is that Moses wrote the First 5 books of the Old Testament and Joshua was the one who wrote Moses' obituary at the end of Deuteronomy.Mujahid Mohammed said:
[28:15] Once he (Moses) entered the city unexpectedly, without being recognized by the people. He found two men fighting; one was (a Hebrew) from his people, and the other was (an Egyptian) from his enemies. The one from his people called on him for help against his enemy. Moses punched him, killing him. He said, "This is the work of the devil; he is a real enemy, and a profound misleader."Mujahid Mohammed said:
This verse in Al-Qasas recounts Moses accidently killing an Egyptian. I believe that accounts like this in both the Bible and Qur'an serve to show that the prophets were indeed human beings who made mistakes and not perfect individuals.
Peace.
Laila
Active Member
Why do muslims believe Ishmael was the child of sacrifice?
According to the Noble Quran the sacrificed cannot be Isaac.
Read Surah 37 verses 99-113 or see the article Quran and Ishmael, posted on this site.
In verse 101 the good news of a boy ready to suffer and forbear is Ishmael. Ishmael was born to Abraham when Abraham was 86 years old (Gen. 16:16). Isaac was born when Abraham was 100 years old (Gen 21:5). Ishmael was therefore 14 years older than Isaac. During his first 14 years Ishmael was the only son of Abraham; at no point was Isaac the only son of Abraham.
You cannot deny the fact that Ishmael was the first born of Abraham, biologically Abraham was the father of Ishmael regardless of the mother.
After the sacrifice, good news of Isaac was given. It is very obvious that, in this passage, there are two distinct good news, the first one about a forbearing son (the one to be sacrificed) and the second one about Isaac (verse 112). Therefore the sacrificed cannot be Isaac.
The sacrificed was described as forbearing and steadfast in the Quran and if you search the whole Quran you will find the name of Ishmael associated with patience and steadfastness and not Isaac.
Surah 21: verse 85;
"And (remember) Ishmael, Idris, and Zulkifl, all (men) of constancy and patience"
According to the Noble Quran the sacrificed is Ishmael.
In the Biblical version of the story: "sacrifice your only son, Isaac" or "sacrifice your firstborn son, Isaac" is not logical since Isaac was neither the only son nor the first born.
According to the Noble Quran the sacrificed cannot be Isaac.
Read Surah 37 verses 99-113 or see the article Quran and Ishmael, posted on this site.
In verse 101 the good news of a boy ready to suffer and forbear is Ishmael. Ishmael was born to Abraham when Abraham was 86 years old (Gen. 16:16). Isaac was born when Abraham was 100 years old (Gen 21:5). Ishmael was therefore 14 years older than Isaac. During his first 14 years Ishmael was the only son of Abraham; at no point was Isaac the only son of Abraham.
You cannot deny the fact that Ishmael was the first born of Abraham, biologically Abraham was the father of Ishmael regardless of the mother.
After the sacrifice, good news of Isaac was given. It is very obvious that, in this passage, there are two distinct good news, the first one about a forbearing son (the one to be sacrificed) and the second one about Isaac (verse 112). Therefore the sacrificed cannot be Isaac.
The sacrificed was described as forbearing and steadfast in the Quran and if you search the whole Quran you will find the name of Ishmael associated with patience and steadfastness and not Isaac.
Surah 21: verse 85;
"And (remember) Ishmael, Idris, and Zulkifl, all (men) of constancy and patience"
According to the Noble Quran the sacrificed is Ishmael.
In the Biblical version of the story: "sacrifice your only son, Isaac" or "sacrifice your firstborn son, Isaac" is not logical since Isaac was neither the only son nor the first born.
The_Evelyonian
Old-School Member
Salam Laila
The point of my original post was that two people debating the near-sacrifice using the Bible and Qur'an would have an equally valid point of view. The Qur'an places the near-sacrifce before Isaacs birth and the Bible places it after Ishmaels departure.
I have at no time tried to debate Ishmaels parentage. Both Holy Books agree that Abraham is Ishmaels father.
The Noble Qur'an very clearly states that the near-sacrifice happened before Isaacs birth. Therefore, according to the Qur'an, the child in question could NOT have been Isaac and must have been Ishmael because he was Abrahams only son at the time.
The Holy Bible very clearly states that the near-sacrifice happened after Ishmael is sent away. Therefore, according to the Bible, the child in question could NOT have been Ishmael and must have been Isaac because he was the only son with Abraham at the time.
I've spent time on this thread argueing over those two words "only son" and have come to only one conclusion. Only God's knowledge is complete. If it was Ishmael, okay. If it was Isaac, okay. The story of Abrahams faith is no less valid simply because the identity of the child is in question. The point of the story remains the same. Abraham's faith was tested when God asked him to sacrifice his only son. Abraham obeyed, the child was spared, and Abraham was blessed for his faith.
All I can do is pray to God for guidance and pray that God will lead me to the truth.
Peace be with you
The point of my original post was that two people debating the near-sacrifice using the Bible and Qur'an would have an equally valid point of view. The Qur'an places the near-sacrifce before Isaacs birth and the Bible places it after Ishmaels departure.
I have at no time tried to debate Ishmaels parentage. Both Holy Books agree that Abraham is Ishmaels father.
The Noble Qur'an very clearly states that the near-sacrifice happened before Isaacs birth. Therefore, according to the Qur'an, the child in question could NOT have been Isaac and must have been Ishmael because he was Abrahams only son at the time.
The Holy Bible very clearly states that the near-sacrifice happened after Ishmael is sent away. Therefore, according to the Bible, the child in question could NOT have been Ishmael and must have been Isaac because he was the only son with Abraham at the time.
I've spent time on this thread argueing over those two words "only son" and have come to only one conclusion. Only God's knowledge is complete. If it was Ishmael, okay. If it was Isaac, okay. The story of Abrahams faith is no less valid simply because the identity of the child is in question. The point of the story remains the same. Abraham's faith was tested when God asked him to sacrifice his only son. Abraham obeyed, the child was spared, and Abraham was blessed for his faith.
All I can do is pray to God for guidance and pray that God will lead me to the truth.
Peace be with you
Laila
Active Member
The_Evelyonian said:Salam Laila
The point of my original post was that two people debating the near-sacrifice using the Bible and Qur'an would have an equally valid point of view. The Qur'an places the near-sacrifce before Isaacs birth and the Bible places it after Ishmaels departure.
I have at no time tried to debate Ishmaels parentage. Both Holy Books agree that Abraham is Ishmaels father.
The Noble Qur'an very clearly states that the near-sacrifice happened before Isaacs birth. Therefore, according to the Qur'an, the child in question could NOT have been Isaac and must have been Ishmael because he was Abrahams only son at the time.
The Holy Bible very clearly states that the near-sacrifice happened after Ishmael is sent away. Therefore, according to the Bible, the child in question could NOT have been Ishmael and must have been Isaac because he was the only son with Abraham at the time.
I've spent time on this thread argueing over those two words "only son" and have come to only one conclusion. Only God's knowledge is complete. If it was Ishmael, okay. If it was Isaac, okay. The story of Abrahams faith is no less valid simply because the identity of the child is in question. The point of the story remains the same. Abraham's faith was tested when God asked him to sacrifice his only son. Abraham obeyed, the child was spared, and Abraham was blessed for his faith.
All I can do is pray to God for guidance and pray that God will lead me to the truth.
Peace be with you
Hi Seeker of truth,
If we pray for enlightenment surely God will guide us to the truth. I agree with you in that only God has knowledge over all things. I was just putting my view across as a Muslim, explaining what we believe and why. If you feel totally comfortable with what you believe you should go with it. Listen to your heart, it will certainly speak to you (not to be taken literally).
God bless.