Lets not go round in circles on this issue.. I will leave it with. You have not answered all of my questions to my satisfaction. You have expressed your opinion and expect me to agree...!

Why have you introduced the beliefs of the Samaritans? I thought we were talking about people of the book.. i:e Jews and Christians? There was no love lost between the Jews and Samaritans and you should be surprised that they held a different point of view from the Jews of the time. You are speculating here... You can read the rest of the article the link is at the bottom.. Should you wish. I do not see the relevance of the beliefs of Samaritans where it pertains to the question of Temple Mount.

Additional grounds for animosity between the Israelites and Samaritans were the following:


1. The Jews, after their return from Babylon, began rebuilding their temple. While Nehemiah was engaged in building the walls of Jerusalem, the Samaritans vigorously attempted to halt the undertaking (Nehemiah 6:1-14).


2. The Samaritans built a temple for themselves on “Mount Gerizim,” which the Samaritans insisted was designated by Moses as the place where the nation should worship. Sanballat, the leader of the Samaritans, established his son-in-law, Manasses, as high priest. The idolatrous religion of the Samaritans thus became perpetuated.


3. Samaria became a place of refuge for all the outlaws of Judea (Joshua 20:7; 21:21). The Samaritans willingly received Jewish criminals and refugees from justice. The violators of the Jewish laws, and those who had been excommunicated, found safety for themselves in Samaria, greatly increasing the hatred which existed between the two nations.


4. The Samaritans received only the five books of Moses and rejected the writings of the prophets and all the Jewish traditions.


From these causes arose an irreconcilable difference between them, so that the Jews regarded the Samaritans as the worst of the human race (John 8:48) and had no dealings with them (John 4:9). In spite of the hatred between the Jews and the Samaritans, Jesus broke down the barriers between them, preaching the gospel of peace to the Samaritans (John 4:6-26), and the apostles later followed His example (Acts 8:25).


Read more: https://www.gotquestions.org/Samarita...#ixzz3BRSIMg5t

It is my belief the Bible records Gods words and intentions. On that basis there is no contradictions and no ambiguity. It clearly says what it says. Obviously you do not respect the Bible and seek to twist the words to your own interpretation to suit your agenda. It's not working. At least from my standpoint.

Your posts are too long, if I miss something I apologise. I do not use a PC and scrolling up the screen is tiresome if posts are long it's possible I may unintentionally miss something.

Seriously... You think the miracle surrounding the birth of Isaac carries no significance??? Isaacs birth was decided by God.. Without Gods divine intervention Isaac would not have been born. Ishmael, on the other hand.. Was born from Abrahams lack of faith in Gods promised provision of a son and Sarah's impatience. If God willed that Ishmael born through mans actions then there would have been no need for Isaac to ever exist. God could have made Ishmael the child of promise. God did no such thing.. God does not need to lay out His plan for mankind word for word as God has no need to answer to us His creation. Yet, everything we are and will ever be is part of that plan, Ishmael has a part to play and that is why he was blessed. God fulfilled His promise to Abraham in regards to Ishmael. No where does God promise prophets will come from his linage.

I do wish you would read it in context... I shall address the points you have highlighted, if you still require further detail then you will have to make another post.in order from

1. ***Abraham said to God, "Oh that Ishmael might live before You!*** Abraham, realising that the covenant was to be established in another branch of his family... Isaac.. felt worried for his son Ishmael, whom he considered as necessarily excluded, note.. Ishmael was Abrahams only son up to this point and there is no doubt he loved him as a father would love a son. Out of divine mercy and love God delivers the prophecy which contains an answer to the prayer and wish of Abraham...

2. ***As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I will bless him, and will make him fruitful and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall become the father of twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation*** The object of Abraham's prayer was, that his son Ishmael might be the head of a prosperous and potent people. Abraham knew that it was not Gods will that Ishmael would be part of the covenantal promise but still hoped good things for his son. Which God provided. God by His actions in enabling Isaac to be born had already decided Ishmael was to be excluded. No prophets would come from Ishmael.

3. ***And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring."*** yes! make a nation, even a great nation. This greatness could also imply great in number... Which for sure the evidence can be seen today. No where does God promise that prophets will come from Ishmael.

4.***The original King James bible DOES NOT have the word "No" in it the text is simply*** I have no need to check, I notice you quote many times from the KJB. Maybe you feel more comfortable with this version due to its use of archaic language which is similar to the language used in the Quran... Well, I mean when translated into English the language used appears to be similar. A more accurate translation in this case would be NIV. However, yes or no can equally be used here... Either way.. God hears Abraham but has already decided.. The matter was decided long before Ishmael was born.


I don't see the point of spending much time on this as there is no doubt that Ishmael was son of Abraham and was circumcised according to what God decreed... As all males were so circumcised to come under the covenant as it was a required sign. It has nothing to do with being a future prophet.

to my mind your objection is with God on this matter, as I said already.. It's my belief the Bible accurately records this account and from a Biblical perspective it makes perfect sense and there are no contradictions. The contradictions are in your own mind because the Biblical account does not tie in with your belief... Therefore you have to twist things to fit your belief .. When you can't you must cry corruption of the text. With no proof of who, why, when or where that's a pretty poor strategy. It makes no difference to the Bible... It will continue to stand on its own message.

***So god said kings of people , meaning who rule . This refers to actual kings ;*** this is your interpretation. Just to note Jesus was also a King... How great is that..

John 18:36New International Version (NIV)


36 Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.”

Peace unto you

To me it appears you are twisting things again. If the chariots of camels represent the Ishmaelites it does still not make it a prophecy in regards to your prophet. God, often used nations against nations to His will. It is an account of the fall of Babylon.

conquer the land .... Ishmael, i.e. the Arabs) goes forth [to war],.... Sounds warlike references to me.

I appreciate your candour.. But please be honest. I have been a member on this forum since 2012 in two years I have 670 posts to my name in the six months you have made approx half the number of posts and are allowed to post in any number of threads you wish and even edit your posts. I can only post in three threads at any time... And this been recently decided, which after a membership of two years I found most odd!! The difference that shouts at me is the fact you are a Muslim and I am not. Which seems in all intents and purposes religious discrimination. I have never spammed this forum I have always answered posts courteously even when provoked and insulted I at all times try my best to remain polite.. If otherwise I fail my God. If at any time I show rudeness or loose my cool I pray my God forgive me, and would be the first to offer an apology to any member I inadvertently caused offence to.

Anyway, i do find it a cause for sadness that there is not a level field on this forum and it is the only forum I have seen this method in regards to non muslims. But as we say life is not always fair or just.

Peace unto you

Huria, dear... Where have I spammed posts? I am not a new member I have been here two years and still not allowed to even edit my posts for typos or errors? Is one not allowed to complain of a perceived injustice? I accept you make up the rules .. Not you personally.. I talk in general term..I also accept rules are a necessity. However, I think they should be fair and without bias. The latest rules does not seem to be either. It has taken some of the pleasure out of dialogue with members here... And I have had some interesting debates with some very nice muslims. It's just a bit sad to see that go.

Peace.

LOL to your satisfaction!!! I honestly I am not looking for your satisfaction or anybody else , it is merely presenting the facts and the reader will see who has the truth on his side . I actually see most of your responses as absolutely unsatisfactory .

But when you say I have not addressed all your questions it alludes that I ignored your responses which I did not.

First I am not going to debate links

Second the Samaritans are considered people of the book in Islam not just Jews and christians. Also the old christian sects like nestorians and gnostics are also considered people of the book

What does this have to do with our discussion . I already know these facts !!!.

One fact you missed is that the Samaritans do not believe in the book of ezra and chronicles as a matter of fact Ezra peace be upon him is not considered a prophet in the Samaritan religion. There rabbianic ( If I could say so ) holds that the mountain of Jerzim is the actual temple mount

Where did I twist , is it not the bible writers who wrote your only son, is it not the bible writers who did not indicate where was mountain Moriah in Genesis !!!!

[No problem , my posts are usually long because I quote passages from the bible and there jewish and christian interpritations , so next time I will try to make it short

I never said that all I said that the miracolous birth of Isaac is of importance to show a gift from god to Isaac's parents , The miraclous birth is a gift to Sara and Abraham , the same happened with John the baptist it is a gift to their parents and nothing to do with the covenant , John had no covenant related to his offspring.

Your explanation is based on the understanding that Abraham the prophet of God and the highest pariarch has a lack of faith!!!!!
This is were we differ with the bible , we do not believe that Abraham had a lack of faith ever , on the contrary in fact , he always believed in God. He took Hagar as a concubine in Islam as a lawful thing to do at that time which people had wives and concubines. From the context of the bible Abraham also loved Ishmael and god blessed him.

Nope the context is talking about blessings which Ishmael was blessed , yet no disclusion of Ishmael was included:

"But an uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant." 15Then God said to Abraham, "As for Sarai your wife, you shall not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall be her name.16"I will bless her, and indeed I will give you a son by her. Then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her."

This was Isaac's part , Abraham asks about Ishmael's part and his blessing;

17Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, "Will a child be born to a man one hundred years old? And will Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?"18

Ishmael's blessing as Isaac before him :

And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.

So Abraham was asking about blessings and god heard Abraham and so he will have a great nation one that bows to god and has a law

No not numbers or the nation from Isaac would be reffering to numbers also

great nation from the bible :

And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

Genesis 12: 2


Verses 2, 3. - And I will make of thee a great nation. A compensation for leaving his small kindred. The nation should be great

(1) numerically (Keil, Rosenmüller),

(2) influentially (Kalisch, Inglis),

(3) spiritually (Luther, Wordsworth). And I will bless thee. Temporally (Pererius, Murphy), with every kind of good (Rosenmüller), in particular with offspring (Vatablus); but also spiritually (Rupertus, Bush), in the sense.


Source : pulpit commentary


Another in the bible :

What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the LORD our God is near us whenever we pray to him? And what other nation is so great as to have such righteous decrees and laws as this body of laws I am setting before you today? (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 4:7-8)"



I think you already know that the king james bible is the oldest english translation. Also there is a difference between Yes and No , so when one translation uses No and the other uses Yes there has to be a big question mark raised .


Yes it has nothing to do with our topic and thats my point as a response to yours

No my problem is with the writers of the bible who in order to extremely glorfy their geneology they went into such depths as picturing Abraham as a man with a lack of faith.

This shows a need for cry to help from your part. I wasn't the first to rise such question , You were shown that frances worthington raised this question too. Any man with common sense would raise such question too when you tell him that Ishmael was older than Isaac and the biblical writers wrote Isaac his only son!!!! Surely many before raised this question. Your attempt to shut such questions is asking others to believe while keeping a blind eye to the truth !!!! Just open one eye and keep the other shut !!! You noncontradicting non irrational bible exists only in your fantasy

[/QUOTE]

***So god said kings of people , meaning who rule . This refers to actual kings ;*** this is your interpretation. Just to note Jesus was also a King



Peace unto you[/QUOTE]

That is not my interpritation rather Gill's interpritation of the bible :

kings of people shall be of her; as David, Solomon, and others, and especially the King Messiah.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

As for jesus yes he will establish the kingdom of god when he comes back as we muslims believe. So what you say actually does not surprise me


peace

Where did I twist , I only copied YOUR CHRISTIAN INTERPIRATORS nothing more nothing less!!!!

It does not reference Babylon because the fall of Babylon was a part of the prophecy plus it the prophecy about babylon was mostly included in the first section which is the burdon on the desert by the sea

conquer the land is talking about the muslim conquest of palestine accordong to Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai

peace

so it is not your aim to prove to me the truth and validity of the Quran over the Bible? It is unreasonable to assume from my point of view that your responses address any issues I have with your prophet and Islam? IOW.. Should I be satisfied with the answers you have given. Or is this simply a stage for your arrogance and a media to display your ignorance, rudeness and disrespect. I'm sorry you find most of my responses unsatisfactory, but then I'm not surprised I don't think you actually read them, if you did you would not be repeating yourself over and over again. And ..yes.. Friend you have ignored my questions on numerous occasions.

That's a new one on me!! It explains a lot, not about the Samaritans .. Although I still don't know why you brought them up.. There are less than 700 Samaritans today.. Yet you find their views an authority on Biblical scripture. (The Torah maybe but they would have had no impact on the Gospels / New Testament / Injil.) ....Mind boggling! Regarding the Nestorians and similar sects long gone. It does seem (given their beliefs of the time) that the Quran was a reaction to their "version" of Christianity not the followers of Christ, the biblical Christians.

feel free to ignore it... It was you who introduced the Samaritans into the equation. I was attempting to show there is a long standing animosity between the Jews and the Samaritans.. Unto this day. They do not agree on many points with the Biblical Jews not just the rejection of certain prophets. As a Christian I would take the Bible account and trust in the account as told.. Not that of an early Jewish sect. You believe what you like.

do you have a comprehension problem? What's with this stumbling block over the "only son". It's been dealt with... God decreed that Isaac was the "only son" in question here.. As in the only son of Abraham and Sarah.. Ishmael was NOT Sarah's son as you know full well but the son of her servant Hagar. They wrote the "only son" because it was this "only son" of Abraham and Sarah that was of concern to God in regards to the covenantal promise. Ishmael was only a participant in the covenant in as much all Abrahams seed were. No prophets were said to come from Ishamel.

yes... Don't you just!! Mostly out of context or irrelevant to the point in hand. You also throw in many asides and go off on tangents. To the extent it's confusing what points out of the many raised in one post you wish addressed. Then if one chooses the wrong one.. You're jumping in stamping your feet and throwing your toys out of the pram saying we ignored your question. Consider it's possibly missed amidst the dross.

A gift!!! For what reason? Throughout the Bible we see all prophets .. Men and women.. Chosen by God to suit His divine purpose of that time. Certain prophets, those God had decreed for a certain purpose were chosen before birth... As in the birth was orchestrated by God and not left to mankind. Such as Isaac being chosen by God to carry the covenant. John the Baptist did not mediate a covenant but was preordained a prophet to prepare the way for the Messiah.. Jesus. Which he did.

I am aware of the strange view you have of the biblical prophets. The Bible portrays them realistically as human, as such prone to sin and in deed of Gods redemption. God had promised Abraham that he would have a child with Sarah the child would be named Isaac and would carry the covenant. Firstly.. Abraham doubted this possibility due to their advanced age.. Then he listened to Sarah who in her impatience for the son and not being strong enough in faith to wait for God to provide that which He promised.. A son. By Sarah's encouragement Abraham took Hagar as his concubine and Ishmael was the result. That looks like a momentary lack of faith to me! Yet.. Not only does God forgive Abraham he also blesses his son Ishmael.. Mankind can never deflect God from His purpose. The issue of Hagar being a concubine is irrelevant as you understand it was normal practice at that time. Also the Bible is quite clear that Abraham loved Ishmael so I don't know why you feel the need to reiterate it.

The rest of your post I will get back too...

Peace.

Look... This is getting ridiculous. Let's surmise... No one is denying that Ishmael was blessed by God, and promised great nations would come from him through his descendants. At NO point is Ishmael promised the covenant will go through him. At NO point did God decree a prophet would come from him. Twelve princes .. Yes.. A great nation... Yes. But a prophet NO. It does not matter how great you think the nations of Ishmael are.. Let's face it if you are referring to "Islamic nations" by today's standards there is not much greatness to be found. Define greatness? The Roman Empire was considered great in its time in regards to social cohesion and academia.. They were pagan and died a death.. Like so many other "great nations". You think a great nation is solely one which prays to God and obeys His laws? As muslims do not hold the monopoly on that then other nations NOT descended from Ishmael could also be considered great. If greatness referred to numbers ... Then there may be a point as certainly Ishmael's descendants were prolific.



This is Gods covenantal promise to Abraham... Not Ishmael. It is Abraham who's name is great.. Thus Abrahamic religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam as we all are blessed in one way or another through Abraham... Just as those under the covenant passed on to Isaac are thus blessed.. Jesus was the culmination of a line of prophets through Isaac... The child of promise. Jews see themselves under the Abrahamic covenant through Abraham and adhere to the conditions. Christians see themselves spiritually grafted onto the covenant through Jesus. Muslims I can only see as part of the covenant through Abraham.. Although you do not adhere to the conditions... But you are not part of the covenant through Ishmael as Ishmael was like yourselves was blessed through Abraham not by his own mediation.

Verses 2, 3.

As I said you do not have the monopoly of righteous decrees and laws... And I don't see how your relationship with God is any better than mine as a Christian.

Being the oldest translation does not make it the most accurate. Besides its use of archaic language can be off putting when one has to have an old English dictionary to hand! You may prefer it as the Quran (at least translated into English) is very similar. I prefer a crisper, clearer translation. Besides... When the KJB was originally produced it did not use the wealth of manuscripts to compare as we have now. However.. The revised version covers this aspect. It's down to preference.

That you have an issue with the Biblical scribes is your problem. The Bible is an honest true account of mankind and our relationship with God. You have a different relationship with Allah. Why pray tell... Would the Biblical scribes seek to glorify their genealogy? Of course you realise prophets very often used scribes and did not all write their own accounts. Their revelation was first transmitted orally it was often later committed to written form. What evidence that the scribes employed were any less honest or reliable than those scribes who penned the Quran? They too believed they were dealing with Gods words.

Don't make me laugh!!!! Cry for help.. ROTFL... It's clear as day what the term "only son" implies in the Bible.. That being the only son of Abraham and Sarah...!!!!!!!! For sure Ishmael was older... That has no baring on the fact that God had chosen Isaac as the child of covenantal promise. The fact that Frances Worthington and such like can't grasp this simple plain fact is not the fault of the scripture but their comprehension skills.

Well we agree on one thing.. That Jesus as Lord will return. We may differ on what impact that return will have. As a follower of Christ Jesus it's clear to me.. You have your own hope. I would not trade places with you based on what you have shown me of Islam thus far.

Peace unto you.

There is a big difference between achieving staisfaction and proving you wrong for example.

Satisfaction of the opponant cannot be achieved especially if my opponant or debator is arogant and looks with one eye

Rather what I aim is the presentation of the truth to the reader and proving to you that the Quran is superior to the bible for example
What you are doing is estabishing your satisfaction as an embodyment of the goal of this debate!!! NO you are mixing two different ideas together

Wrong on all accounts , each point of yours I keep in a seperate Quote intentionally to prove that I actually read and respond to every point you are stating
As for repeating Wrong again , one can look at your last response and compare it with mine , he will see that your last response is just restating what you already said before. The fact that you do not have an answer does not give you the right to insult other

BTW you should I also kept a blind eye on some of your responses which you ignored some of what I said , seeing that the responses are long as you stated in your last comment , however now since you clearly creating this false accusations against me , I will remind you of what you missed:

1. The fact that the biblical commentary as brother اسلامي عزي showed that the land of Moriah's location is unknown. This point you said you will come back to later and did not adress it yet
2. The commentary on the contradiction of the your only son passage by Frances Washigton


I do not know if you know some history about the Samaritans but they were far far more than 700 before the Ottoman empire
Actually the Quran addressed all or most of the theological concept of christians at those times whether they still exist or not , it does not matter because in our eyes they are all false so they are no difference than the ones that still continued to our day.

That really does not matter , because the jews and Samaratans actually agree on almost all the first five books of Moses composingthe torah plus the Samaratan book of Joshua , so your personal opinion on saying that you would take the bible as Jews written it , well my question is : on which basis . The samaratans were the same sect as Jews till the babylonian exile !!!! The oldest manuscript of the torah they have is accounted to the grandson of Aron according to their tradition so which one is right???


I have already addressed , where in the context of Genesis 22 did it say your only son from Sarah ,

1Now it came about after these things, that God tested Abraham, and said to him, "Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am." 2He said, "Take now your son, your only son, whom you love, Isaac, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell you."

The question is : Do you have a problem understanding this !!!!

Or else tell me where from the context does it say your only son from Sarah

And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.

Genesis 22: 12

God could have said Your Son Isaac but AGAIN he said your only son !!!!

Tell that to yourself and your friend Burningignorant and let the reader judge who ignored whose responses .


That still does not explain it. Mostly your explanation of John the baptist birth was that because he was a prophet and he predicted Jesus

Well Isaiah predicted Jesus and Mohammed and he did not have a miraclous birth !!!! And most of the prophets are not of a miracolous birth it is not necessary !!!!

Yes a gift to the faith of their parents as what is mentioned in the gospel of Luke :

13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John.
14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and many shall rejoice at his birth.

He was chosen to have the son prophet who will be a partner of jesus and his witness , this is a gift from god to ZAkariah for his faith

So to you only it looks like a lack of faith!!! Personal opinions here are not accepted because we are talking about a prophet and not any prophet but Abraham who was filled with faith to the extent that he would sacrifice his only son whom he loves for the sake of God!!!! How could the patriarch our father Abraham have a lack in faith .

Even from a christian point of view , Abraham took a concubine and married her for him to have a child which is a ligitimate desire so what is the problem , when did god tell him he should not find another wife ????

And according to the bible (emphasis on according) it was Sarah who offered:

(Gen 16:2) The Lord has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my maidservant; perhaps I can build a family through her. Abraham agreed.

Genesis 16:3 So after Abraham had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian maidservant Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife.

You already stated that but yet this does not explain why the passage which blessed Abraham and Isaac was also used on Ishmael

Your explanation of great nation contradicts the bible's explanation in Deut and Genesis to the Israelites and Abraham, So your explanation does not mean anything

I will also make this clear When god said according to the writers of the bible he will establish his covenant with Isaac , he still said to Abraham that he has heard his prayer to Ishmael

It is that simple , I will not quote the passages you could find them above

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة ;pandora

This is Gods covenantal promise to Abraham... Not Ishmael. It is Abraham who's name is great.. Thus Abrahamic religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam as we all are blessed in one way or another through Abraham... Just as those under the covenant passed on to Isaac are thus blessed..Jesus was the culmination of a line of prophets through Isaac... The child of promise. Jews see themselves under the Abrahamic covenant through A

Again you are taking part of the passage only :

nd I will make

of thee a great nation

, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

Genesis 12: 2

Of thee meaning of Abraham of his linage a great nation not just his name . This great nation will be blessed as the passage also indicate

So the passage used here on Abraham was the same used on Ishmael , the blessing and the greatnessof the linage NOT JUST the name (I am not saying that the name is not blessed focus on this)

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة ;pandora

As I said you do not have the monopoly of righteous decrees and laws... And I don't see how your relationship with God is any better than mine as a Christian.

This does not answer my response . This statement is a clear way of avoiding the obvious answer

This passage shows what greatness of a nation is

The orginal KJV did not contain the words Yes or No in the passage nor their interpritations or equil in 16th century english like the word Nay . So the delema and the question still exists why would they add such contradictory words on different biblical versions !!!!

One evidence is simply we do not know their names nor do we know the names of whom orally transmitted it while in the Quran we have all the names of the writers during the time of the prophet and Abubakr and Uthman and the names of whom orally memorized it and transmitted it through a chain of oral transmission

LOL you are struglling . You are being cornered and debunked. Go to any person and tell them that you will take your only son for dinner , he or she will understand it in only ONE way , the boy is your only son and has no siblings thats what common sense says , however the christian fantasy world would defer to try to get out of this embaraccing situation

And based on what you and all other christians I have come accross to I would definatly not even consider trading places , for I fear for what the reprecssions would be on the afterlife which would come from worshipping humans and trinitarian roman concepts

peace

God heard Ishmael is not the same as Ishmael heard God. Prophets hear God and prophets can be ignorant about certain things just like every day people. We don't make a god out of people just because they have the ministry of prophet hood. But when a prophet says something like God said, and God didn't say, that prophet was stoned in the Bible days. Prophets are not gods, but that is what you make them when you elevate them above other people as a better creation of God. Doing that is nothing short of idolatry, ignorance and deception for lack of better words. You by your ignorant comments appear to do this.
Being a great nation doesn't mean a godly nation or one that does God's will. America is a great nation that isn't doing God's will, but God 's will will be done. The trinity is not a term used in the Bible, but the concept is there. There is only one God and He is The Trinity. The trinity is a beautifully coined term to express God the father, Son and Holy Spirit. Jesus said, I and the father are one. Trinity is a beautiful mystery. He is the one and only God you don't know!!!

Those that write with their own hands saying this is from Allah weren't Christians. There is nothing the Quran says about the NT Bible, Islam borrowed from, as being corrupted.

Peace

BTW, it is written: "Great peace have they which love thy law and nothing should offend them." If I get offended by what someone says, I would try loving God's law more. Saying a prophet is ignorant like Jesus was ignorant about the day and our of the father's return is not an insult. But what you said about Paul being a Satan worshipper was obviously an attempt at being, insulting. The difference between me and you is I wasn't trying to be insulting, but you were, and God knows the difference between us. You do not promote Islam in a good light. I hope other Muslims can see this about you! Pandora has you pegged good.

Peace

There is a sying in Arabic about situations like this its translation goes something like this:

She has accused me of her problem which is in her , (it sounds much more poetic in Arabic)

You have accused me of being ignorant while with a closer look on what you said first we see that it is actually you

When did I say god heard Ishmael !!!??? tell me

this was what I quoted :


his indicating Abraham not ishmael .

Do not put words on my mouth which I did not say

Pandora already steted this and I already answered her from what the bible said about a great nation in Deut and Genesis plus pulpit's commentary on the bible

I already answered this in its own thread do not mix up threads . Repeating a thing does not make it right rather shows your attempt to convince yourself of a certain ideology

Already Answered this in its own thread. The verse said that the people of the scriptures changed god's words and christians are part of the people of the scripture. So do not interpirate the Quran without knowing its meaning