In the Bible Abraham is called to Sacrifice his son...

Ellen Brown said:

I was always taught that it was Abraham's sacrifice. Wasn't it actually Isaac's sacrifice?

Click to expand...

arthra said:

There's a good question raised whether it was Isaac at all.. and the Qur'an suggests both Abraham and His son were agreed rather than the son being uninformed.. anyway I'll share this:

The Qur'an also refers to the sacrifice of Abraham..and it is a different account from that mentioned in the Bible..It's found in Surih As-Saffat 37:100-105. In this case after Abraham relates a vision He had to His son they concurrently agree...

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!"
37:103

So when they had both submitted their wills (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),

The above is a translation by A. Yusuf Ali ... a widely read translation.

Now consider the Genesis account...in chapter 22

Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

2 Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

3 Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. 4 On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. 5 He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.”

6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, 7 Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”

“Yes, my son?” Abraham replied.

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”

8 Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.

Two things are fairly clear from the above verses.. "Take your son your only son whom you love - Isaac-.." Ishmael was the first child of Abraham by several years...before Isaac was born. There's an inconsistency there you'll note.

The other issue is that in the Genesis account the child is unaware of what is to occur..that is, his being sacrificed... while the Qur'an indicates a concurrence between Abraham and His son.

Click to expand...

Brickjectivity said:

The victory is a detail, but the over arching theme of peace making is not a detail. It is a plot point that at every turn the righteous choose peace. Abram lets the Pharoah sleep with his own wife. He refuses property and slaves from Bera and gives 10% of everything that he owns to Melchizedek. He takes from no one. He bows to strangers. His problem with Ishmael is that Ishmael is warlike. That is also Isaac's problem with Esau. It is also Jacob's problem with Levi and Reuben, both of whom lose their importance in the family.

Thanks for the links. The first link is interesting but horribly misguided. Its geeking out about warfare as if this was the story of Alexander the Great. Its says nothing about Melchizedek, conflates LORD and God, clarifies nothing, completely overlooks the significance of the sandal thong dismissing it as a 'Merism'. Does it not see that this is about kidnapping and the evils of Bera which Abraham doesn't wish to be a part of? If not then what is Abram's objection to Bera? That is an enormous oversight for this to call itself a scholarly resource. 'Biblewise' my foot. Ridiculous excuse for not knowing what Abram was speaking about. The thongs (most likely) refer to the slaves, the people. Sodom was a city that captured people and enslaved them, something which Abram did not do and was against doing. Kidnapping is also against Torah. For this reason Sodom was wicked, and the cry against the city of Sodom reached the nostrils of the LORD. This page was an effort someone made to fill the air with sound, and I appreciate that but it completely missed the point of the story. In so doing it was a cat chasing its tail and never got anywhere.

It totally missed the entire concept of Abram, Abraham, father of many tribes, the concept of freedom in Judaism and the Exodus etc. It vaguely recognizes that the kings are oppressors but fails to identify casting off oppression is the point of the victory.

Click to expand...

Good-Ole-Rebel said:

There is always inconsistency between the Bible and the Koran. But there is no inconsistency here in the Bible concerning Isaac being the 'only son'. 'Only son' speaks to the covenant son. The one in whom the covenant and the promises in it are passed. Same is true with Jesus Christ, the 'only Son' of God. (John 3:16) Yet God has other sons. (Gal. 4:7) (Rom.8:14) But Jesus Christ is the covenant Son. Good-Ole-Rebel

Click to expand...

Good-Ole-Rebel said:

'Only son' speaks to the covenant son. The one in whom the covenant and the promises in it are passed.

Click to expand...

arthra said:

Well thanks "Ole Rebel" for your post.... I have to confess to being a new rebel rather than an old one. But I hope we can share our thoughts here!

- Art

Click to expand...

Jayhawker Soule said:

And you know this based on ... ?

Click to expand...