اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Burninglight
The passage in the Quote
عرض للطباعة
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Burninglight
The passage in the Quote
Very good replies Pandora. I would like to add or qualify one thing you said for our Muslim brothers and that is about when Jesus died, the curtain (veil) inside the Temple that separated the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place tore from top to bottom (Exodus 26:33; Matthew 27:51) (Exodus 26:33; Matthew 27:51; Mark 15:38; Luke 23:45). This tearing signified that man now had unimpeded access to God. The clarifier is that we only have this unimpeded access through Christ Jesus. I know you know this, but they might not.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة pandora
Now since this thread is open topics on our faiths, and we are limited to only three posts, I would like to comment on the forgotten Holy Spirit thread. This thread is a typical example of Muslims accusing their Christian brothers of exactly what Islam or they're doing; for instance, the Holy Spirit is not forgotten by Christians; it was forgotten by Allah and his slave messenger. Allah never mentions the Holy Spirit as being God or the third person of the trinity to Christians; instead, he implies himself as the third person and Mary as the second. If the Bible has forgotten the Holy Spirit, the Quran trumps the Bible on that, LOL. He calls the Holy Spirit Gabriel. At least we know from our Scriptures that the Holy Spirit is God, and not and angel. As I mentioned, the tri unity of God cannot be explained, nor are we commanded by God to explain Him. For all I know, the Holy Spirit could be the relationship between the father and the son.
Jesus said, if you hate your brother, you are a murderer. Why? Is hating someone the say as murder? Yes, it is! When we hate we kill a relationship. The relationship is just as important as the people having the relationship. God's relationships are spiritual and holy. This is just a thought on my part; I could be wrong, but I believe I see in part as through a glass darkly, but when that which is perfect is come (Jesus), I will see clearly and know even as I am known!
Peace and blessing to all
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة pandora
Actually the fact that you did not answer shows me and the readers that either you do not have an answer !!! that is the basic reality of the situation Pandora
Yet even though I answered all questions addressed to me I am now being accused of not answering in the same response where you yourself admitted to ignoring my responses . What an Irony ????!!!!
None and I repeat none of these passages actually states the name moriahاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;Pandora
All these mentions a place without the name and christians and Jews just assumed were Moriah based on their understanding
So the land was still mentioned once in genesis without location with a contradiction
unfortunatlly the samaritans differ on the location , since they do not believe in the first and second books of chronicles so they claim that the actual mountain is the mountain Jerzeem not the current location of the Mosque.
As for your claim that blessed does not mean chosen , I have already addressed this and shown otherwise in the response which you said was unsatisfactory !!! (this shows me that you did not actually read my response )
AS for the only son again , the text said take your only son not your only chosen son !!!! the text is clear here .
And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
Genesis 22: 2
This was before the test before god even revealed that his son was chosen so how could god say take your only chosen son !!!!! especially that Abraham thought at that time that he would be sacrificing his son !!! It does not make anysense : take your only chosen son to sacrifice as a sign of him being chosen !!!!
This interpritation is twisted in order to explain this clear contradiction
The quran never mentioned the name but the Hadeeth did , to negelect one and take the other is forbidden and unaccepted in the Quran itself
God said :
And what Allah restored to His Messenger from the people of the towns - it is for Allah and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and orphans and the [stranded] traveler - so that it will not be a perpetual distribution among the rich from among you. And whatever the Messenger has given you - take; and what he has forbidden you - refrain from. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.
Quran 59: 7
As for Isaiah 21 it concerns three prophecies:
1. The burdon of the desert of the sea
2. The burdon on Durah
3. The burdon on Arabia
These prophecies describe different events about the area , one is the fall of Babylon , second the coming of the messiah as shown by the riders of charriots of asses and the coming of the arabian prophet as the riders of Camels
What you mentioned about 21:7 is part of the burdon of the desert of the sea which describe the fall of babylon
To answer your final question :
This is an islamic - christian debate blogg , everybody presents and debates to prove a point. You and burninglight are debating to prove your point of christianity and we muslims are debating to prove our point , thats how debate bloggs work !!!! why do you think we are participating then !!!!
reminder
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;محمد سني 1989
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;محمد سني 1989
Also
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ; اسلامي عزي
That is right; I know the answer. but it only works for me; you need to find out for yourself, and I told you how to do it. This has been addressed. Stop trying to bait me into areas that I have not been designated by God to explain to anyone. Can we agree to disagree? Probably not with you, because you cannot even agree on what we agree on; namely that God is one without partners or associates.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
peace
I think you are confusing this thread with another!!!اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Burninglight
Sorry, but I really think I have given you answers both here and other threads where you have demanded them of me... And my friend.. You have NOT answered all my questions. You have been very selective with your answers. To be honest, I'm not prepared to play these games of yours.. It's bad enough being restricted to only three threads at a time for reasons I do not understand. That you continue to waste time going over the same points.. Even having been given answers (which I have done to the best of my ability) you are still prevaricating!! I will leave it to readers to make up their minds... I find my face is increasingly not bothered.اقتباس:
Actually the fact that you did not answer shows me and the readers that either you do not have an answer !!! that is the basic reality of the situation Pandora
Yet even though I answered all questions addressed to me I am now being accused of not answering in the same response where you yourself admitted to ignoring my responses . What an Irony ????!!!!
Based on their understanding, their understanding of the scriptures, which has to be based on something. Which I would take as an authority over your own...اقتباس:
None and I repeat none of these passages actually states the name moriah
All these mentions a place without the name and christians and Jews just assumed were Moriah based on their understanding
just read Genesis in its entirety and see what conclusion it leads you to... Or Kings..or Ezra or any of the others mentioned in the article. As to what the Samaritans may have believed then that's all fine.. As a Christian I have faith in the Bible and the accounts within. As it's primarily the Bible is what you have issue with surely that should be of primary consideration.اقتباس:
So the land was still mentioned once in genesis without location with a contradiction
unfortunatlly the samaritans differ on the location , since they do not believe in the first and second books of chronicles so they claim that the actual mountain is the mountain Jerzeem not the current location of the Mosque.
Yes your response on this matter I found unsatisfactory. Your pondering on what God should or should not have said is immaterial.. We have to deal with what we have when God was giving Abraham the sign of the covenant, namely circumcision, Abraham asked God that the covenant would be placed on Ishmael.اقتباس:
As for your claim that blessed does not mean chosen , I have already addressed this and shown otherwise in the response which you said was unsatisfactory !!! (this shows me that you did not actually read my response )
AS for the only son again , the text said take your only son not your only chosen son !!!! the text is clear here .
And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
Genesis 22: 2
This was before the test before god even revealed that his son was chosen so how could god say take your only chosen son !!!!! especially that Abraham thought at that time that he would be sacrificing his son !!! It does not make anysense : take your only chosen son to sacrifice as a sign of him being chosen !!!!
This interpritation is twisted in order to explain this clear contradiction
Genesis 17:17-18 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, “Shall a child be born to a man who is one hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?” 18 And Abraham said to God, “Oh, that Ishmael might live before You!”
Abraham knows the difficulty that it will be for he and Sarah to have a child... Their age was against them. This is what brought about his impatience in the first place, leading him to sleep with Hagar, which gave him Ishmael. Remember that God had told Abraham that he would be blessed and a father of many nations. Abraham got impatient, and took matters into his own hands.
The covenantal blessings are not to be upon Ishmael, but Isaac, whom Sarah will give birth to. When Abraham asks God to allow Ishmael to be the one in which those covenantal blessings flow, God rejects his request.
Genesis 17:19 Then God said: “No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him.”
God says no. He will not have His chosen people come from a union that was conceived in sin. He wants His line to come from those He has chosen. The people of God are always His work, not man’s work. Therefore He tells Abraham that it will be through Sarah that the covenantal blessings will come...It is through this line that the Messiah will come and redeem the chosen throughout the world. God will not have fallen man adding to His plan of redemption. Even though Abraham was a friend of God, it is God’s work that brings about this redemption and Isaac. God is showing that when it comes to His will and plan, He can work through a couple that are far past the age of childbearing.
Genesis 18:11-12 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, well advanced in age; and Sarah had passed the age of childbearing. 12 Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, “After I have grown old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?”
The text is telling us that Sarah no longer had the ability to have children. A miracle will have to be performed in order for her to have children. God will have to take something that is dead and make it alive. He will have to bring her womb to life again for her to have a child. God is the One that gave Sarah and Abraham the ability to have Isaac. Again, it is His plan that will be carried out in His way, not Abraham’s supplemental plan. God has a purpose and a plan for His chosen at all stages, and no, mankind cannot thwart that plan... No matter what you think to the contrary.
As for Ismael, he WILL be blessed. God tells Abraham this....
Genesis 17:20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard you. Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall beget twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation.
He is blessed because he is Abraham’s son. God does that as a favor to Abraham. The man will grow and twelve princes will come from him, and he will be a great nation. In this instance, given God has already been clear in His rejection of Ishmael as the child of the covenantal promise ... A great nation.. Could imply greatness in numbers. You have to think what constitutes greatness and is it what you see happening in Islamic lands today..
Genesis 17:21 But My covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this set time next year.”
Also consider... that when God initially tells Abraham of the coming child, He says that Sarah will be the mother of kings and many nations.
Genesis 17:16 And I will bless her and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her.”
Whereas Ismael will father twelve princes and one nation, Sarah will be the mother of many nations and many kings, showing covenantal supremacy in God’s election of them. So...While Ishmael is blessed, he is NOT of the chosen line of God. It is through the line of Isaac that the covenant blessings pass. This is what God’s word says and we need to rest upon it. The Samaritans were rejected because of their revisionist history, As I must reject your revisionist ideas of what you feel God should have said to make things clearer for yourself. It's clear... It's there... The fault is not with The Lord but within yourself because you don't choose to understand it. It has to come down to choice.. Because really it is not difficult to understand.
Also it shows us that those outside of covenantal blessings are not completely ignored by God. He may not extend His eternal blessings to them by bringing them into the covenant, but He still blesses them in life. Ishmael was blessed by God. He had his good things in life. That's not to be sniffed at.
Peace
Honestly it does not.. It is what it claims to be an account of the fall of Babylon. Jesus as Messiah has no connection with a chariot of asses.. Does it not say chariots of camels? Whereas Prophet Mohammed most certainly rode a camel is there evidence he ever rode a chariot pulled by camels? Or in this instance the use of metaphors may be acceptable to you.اقتباس:
As for Isaiah 21 it concerns three prophecies:
1. The burdon of the desert of the sea
2. The burdon on Durah
3. The burdon on Arabia
These prophecies describe different events about the area , one is the fall of Babylon , second the coming of the messiah as shown by the riders of charriots of asses and the coming of the arabian prophet as the riders of Camels
What you mentioned about 21:7 is part of the burdon of the desert of the sea which describe the fall of babylon
no need to be uppity... I was simply curious as to why you feel to seek to destroy another's faith. Personally, it's not important to me weather you accept or reject what I say.. More often rejection is the way I see.. :) I simply seek to dispel some misconceptions some muslims have about Christians and Christianity and the Bible. I've learnt quite a lot during my time here, and I have to say it was a cause of some personal sadness to be discriminated against with this new rule about limiting the number of posts we can contribute to. I don't see why it's necessary and it's certainly not conducive to fostering any mutual understanding. Still... As the saying goes your forum ..your rules.. I expect the reasons behind it are clear to muslims. Sad though .. Very sad.اقتباس:
To answer your final question :
This is an islamic - christian debate blogg , everybody presents and debates to prove a point. You and burninglight are debating to prove your point of christianity and we muslims are debating to prove our point , thats how debate bloggs work !!!! why do you think we are participating then !!!!
Peace unto you.
I really don't know what I can add here to what's been said already...God said to Moses in :اقتباس:
First god blessed Abraham and told him he would be a great nation :
Now The Lord said to Abram, "Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you.
And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing
. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse; and by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves." (Genesis 12:1-3 RSV)
So Abraham's blessing and greatness comes from his decendents by blessing Abraham and blessing themselves (this is what muslims say five times a day during prayer : the prayer goes like this God bless Muhammed and his family as you have blessed Abraham and his family .....)
So a great nation blesses Abaraham , also they :
6 Observe them carefully, for thus will
you give evidence of your wisdom and intelligence to the nations
, who will hear of all these statutes and say,
'This great nation is truly a wise and intelligent people.'
7 For what great nation is there that has gods so close to it as the LORD, our God, is to us whenever we call upon him?
8 Or what great nation has statutes and decrees that are as just as this whole law which I am setting before you today?”
Deutronomy 4: 6-8
So a great nation in the bible is one which worships god alone and has the law of god and glorifies Abraham and blesses him which applies to the arabs in the prophecy of genesis
Going to see how this applies to Ishmael from what you said :
"But God said to Abraham, "Be not displeased because of the lad and because of your slave woman; whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your descendants be named. And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring." (Genesis 21:12-13 RSV)
Also :
Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish My covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. As for Ishmael, I have heard you; behold, I will bless him and make him fruitful and multiply him exceedingly; he shall be the father of twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation." (Genesis 17:19-20 RSV).
It is not me who is nitpicking from the bible , you need to read the passage carefully and compare it together
The same phrase used by god to Abraham is used to Ishmael .
Exodus 3:6
6 And he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God.
God did not mention Ishmael... Another reason to suppose that the blessing of Ishmael was not the same as the covenantal blessing of Isaac.
اقتباس:
Concerning
the only son
Isaac or Ishmael i' invite you to read this :
Abraham: One God, Three Wives, Five Religions
Frances Worthington
I shall check it out. Do you think the opinion of Frances Worthington is greater than scripture?
again I'm not sure what it is you want me to address here... And you of course are entitled to your opinion as I am to disagree with it.اقتباس:
@
Pandora : are you the Burninglight's spokeswoman
????
about the Moriah ' s land the exact location is doubtful ---
unknown location
---
about "Temple Mount" ; sorry I do not believe in the existence of any temple in this blessed land ( Jerusalem )
Peace unto you
I have Already addressed all your questionsاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة pandora
What something!!!! and what about the different understanding of this passage such as the understanding of the Samaritans !!! Is their understanding based on something!!!!اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ; pandora
This is speculation there is no proof here
I did so as the Samaritans who also belief in Genisis and the first five books which composes the Torah and still reach to the conclusion that Moriah is not in the temple mount rather it is mountain Jerzeem .اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
Not on what god said rather what is written in the textاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
Second this was not the section I was talking about which you did not answer rather it was what you quoted in response number 38
However I will still address what you said hereاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;محمد سني 1989
Yes we believe the miracle birth of Isaac but what has this to do with anything , god blessed both and brought both to this world to bring prophets from their dicendents and to bring their followers too from their linage. Ishmael is still Abraham's son and he was blessed. This still does not show any superiority remember Moses and Aron were not Joseph's decendents.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
You have to read it within the whole context :اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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."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?"18And Abraham said to God, "Oh that Ishmael might live before You!"19But God said, "No, but Sarah your wife will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him 20"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 context of the passage clearly shows god telling Abraham I have heard you meaning heard your prayer and accepted , So god blessed him and made him a great nation and as I described a great nation before from the bible is one which has a law and worships god and blesses Abraham. This same term god used on Abraham before :
Now The Lord said to Abram, "Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you.Another discription falls into Ishmael too:
And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing
. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse; and by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves." (Genesis 12:1-3 RSV)
"But God said to Abraham, "Be not displeased because of the lad and because of your slave woman; whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your descendants be named. And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring." (Genesis 21:12-13 RSV)This is within the same meaning as above God hears Abraham's request with Ishmael because he is simply the offspring of Abraham
Genesis 18:11-12 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, well advanced in age; and Sarah had passed the age of childbearing. 12 Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, “After I have grown old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?”
The text never said anything about a plan , this is your personal interpritation. As I have showed above God still according to the biblical writers still told that he has heard Abrahamاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
However there is a very big important point which I need to clarify here :
The original King James bible DOES NOT have the word "No" in it the text is simply :
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 (GENESIS 17:19)
What is really ironic too is that in the new international version you got the word "Yes" instead of "No"
Then God said, "Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.GENESIS 17:19
New International version
You could check for your self :
http://biblehub.com/genesis/17-19.htm
So your whole argument which was based on No cannot have an accurate basis
Continue the passage :اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
22When He finished talking with him, God went up from Abraham.23Then Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all the servants who were born in his house and all who were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's household, and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the very same day, as God had said to him 24Now Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.26In the very same day Abraham was circumcised, and Ishmael his sonGenesis 17: 22-26
Genesis 17 which talks about the covenant of circumcission ends here
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
Again you are claming that my objection is to god rather it is to the writers of the bible. AS I said before we believe your scripture is corrupted so when I say that I am objecting somehow it is not on God , God forbid rather on the Jewish writers of the bible . such establishment of covenant only to Isaac seems very doubtfull based on the fact that Abraham also cried for his son Ishmael and that god responded by saying he has heard it and he has blessed his son Ishmael and he will have a great nation plus the idea and the contradiction still places itself when it is stated take your ONLY SON , this no matter what explanation is provided does not remove the contradiction for God did not say take your only son whom I have established the covenant with!!!اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
As for the number of nations well God said :
16And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her.
So god said kings of people , meaning who rule . This refers to actual kings ;
and she shall be a mother of nations; of the twelve tribes of Israel; of the two nations of Israel and Judah:
kings of people shall be of her; as David, Solomon, and others, and especially the King Messiah.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Great nation supresedes many nations since there were no mention of greatness one can say so !!!
peace
First the jews understood it much differently than you do :اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة pandora
the jewish book the secrets of Rabbi Shimon :
ince he saw the kingdom of Ishmael that was coming, he began to say: "Was it not enough what the wicked kingdom of Edom has done to us,
but [we deserve] the kingdom of Ishmael too?
" At once Metatron, the foremost angel (sar ha-penim), answered him and said: "Do not fear, son of man,
for the Almighty only brings the kingdom of Ishmael
in order to deliver you from this wicked one (Edom).
He raises up over them (Ishmaelites) a prophet according to His will and He will conquer the land for them
, and they will come and restore it to greatness, and a great dread will come between them and the sons of Esau." Rabbi Simon answered him and said: "How [is it known] that they are our salvation?" He (Metatron) said to him:
"Did not the prophet Isaiah say that 'he saw a chariot with a pair of horsemen etc.'? Why did he put hte chariot of asses before the chariot of camels when he should rather have said 'a chariot of camels and [then] a chariot of asses,' because when he (Ishmael, i.e. the Arabs) goes forth [to war], he rides upon on a camel, and when the kingdom will arise by his hands he rides upon an ass? [
Given that he said the reverse of this], the chariot of asses, since he (the Messiah) rides upon an ass,
shows that they (the Ishmaelites, represented by the chariot of camels
) are a salvation for Israel, like the salvation of the rider on an ass (i.e. the Messiah)."
Source : (Simon ben Yohai, Secrets, 78-79 [pp. 309-310]
Rabbi Shimon bin Yohai is one of the fundimental and honered rabbis in the maintsream Jusaism (Not just The kabbala)
As for Chariots :
A chariot with a couple of horsemen; rather, a troop of horsemen riding two and two. This is exactly how a cavalry force was ordinarily represented by the Assyrians. Chariots are not intended either here or in ver. 9. They were not employed by the Persians until a late period of their history (see 'Ancient Monarchies,' vol. 4. pp. 113, 122). A chariot of asses, and a chariot of camels; rather, men mounted on asses and on camels. It is well known that both animals were employed by the Persians in their expeditions to carry the baggage (Herod., 1:80; 4:129; Xen., 'Cyrop.,' 7:1, etc.). But neither animal was ever attached to a chariot.
Source : pulpit commentary
Also see:
And he saw a chariot with a couple of horsemen - This passage is very obscure from the ambiguity of the word רכב rekeb - 'chariot.' Gesenius contends that it should be rendered 'cavalry,' and that it refers to cavalry two abreast hastening to the destruction of the city. The word רכב rekeb denotes properly a chariot or wagon Judges 5:28; a collection of wagons 2 Chronicles 1:14; 2 Chronicles 8:6; 2 Chronicles 9:25; and sometimes refers to the "horses or men" attached to a chariot. 'David houghed all the chariots' 2 Samuel 8:4; that is, all the "horses" belonging to them. 'David killed of the Syrians seven hundred chariots' 2 Samuel 10:18; that is, all "the men" belonging to seven hundred chariots. According to the present Masoretic pointing, the word רכב rekeb does not mean, perhaps, anything else than a chariot strictly, but other forms of the word with the same letters denote "riders or cavalry." Thus, the word רכב rakâb denotes a horseman 2 Kings 9:17; a charioteer or driver of a chariot 1 Kings 22:34; Jeremiah 51:21. The verb רבב râbab means "to ride," and is usually applied to riding on the backs of horses or camels; and the sense here is, that the watchman saw "a riding," or persons riding two abreast; that is, "cavalry," or men borne on horses, and camels, and asses, and hastening to attack the city.
With a couple of horsemen - The word 'couple' (צמד tsemed) means properly a "yoke or pair;" and it means here that the cavalry was seen "in pairs, that is," two abreast.
A chariot of asses - Or rather, as above, "a riding" on donkeys - an approach of men in this manner to battle.Asses were formerly used in war where ............And a chariot of camels - A "riding" on camels. Camels also were used in war, perhaps usually to carry the baggage (see Diod. ii. 54; iii. 44; Livy, xxxvii. 40; Strabo, xvi. 3). They are used for all purposes of burden in the East, and particularly in Arabia.
Source : Barne's notes on the bible
So chariots simply means riders on camels and donkeys
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
I was very reluctant to answer or respond to this part simply because I felt it is not my place to answer , I usually tend to avoid responding to anything that has to do with the mediator of the forum. But since you are applying it to religous reasons I have to respond. Every single new member whether Muslim or Christian in this forum should exceed a certain amount of responses to have his post posted , this also applied to me , I have been here since February and I only got updated recently because I have exceeded a certain amount of responses.Again the rules apply to all members.
peace
I have already addressed this aboveاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة pandora
but what did the writers of genesis write your only son Isaac!!!!! Ishmael was older , Frances never went against the bible rather asked a simple legitemate questionاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
peace
Since February? How many posts or responses have you made before you got updated to post directly without limitation to 3 threads if you even received that limitation? Your silence will confirm Pandora's comment.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
peace
brotherمحمد سني 1989 is not anew member ; he is a distinctive one !!!!اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Burninglight
the distinctive member is allowed to post directly .
ملف مرفق 14014
stop complaining please.
What does one have to do to become a distinctive member? This is not a complaint; it is a question as my last post was that didn't get answered.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة *اسلامي عزي*
Peace
I just want to add regarding the forums rules, there are limits when you start but the limit of the posts, I am sure because you two are spamming the whole forum, it is nothing to do with you been Christians, because you are implying that, and playing the victims here.
It is forum etiquette that people post reasonable amount, and do not spam the whole place, either religious or not, I use to be in a forum ( not faith based ) and new members who do that get banned., because you are not giving the chance to others to respond.
I am normal member here now after been limited to posts etc but I don’t go spamming the whole forum, if you look at the sticky threads all of them, has burninglight name last lol, I guess you guys forced the management to implement the 3 threads rule, so as my brother moderator said Stop complaining!
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...!اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
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.اقتباس:
What something!!!! and what about the different understanding of this passage such as the understanding of the Samaritans !!! Is their understanding based on something!!!!
This is speculation there is no proof here
I did so as the Samaritans who also belief in Genisis and the first five books which composes the Torah and still reach to the conclusion that Moriah is not in the temple mount rather it is mountain Jerzeem .
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: http://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.اقتباس:
Not on what god said rather what is written in the text
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.اقتباس:
Second this was not the section I was talking about which you did not answer rather it was what you quoted in response number 38
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.اقتباس:
However I will still address what you said here
Yes we believe the miracle birth of Isaac but what has this to do with anything , god blessed both and brought both to this world to bring prophets from their dicendents and to bring their followers too from their linage. Ishmael is still Abraham's son and he was blessed. This still does not show any superiority remember Moses and Aron were not Joseph's decendents.
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 fromاقتباس:
You have to read it within the whole context :
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."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?"18And Abraham said to God, "Oh that Ishmael might live before You!"19But God said, "No, but Sarah your wife will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him 20"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 context of the passage clearly shows god telling Abraham I have heard you meaning heard your prayer and accepted , So god blessed him and made him a great nation and as I described a great nation before from the bible is one which has a law and worships god and blesses Abraham. This same term god used on Abraham before :
Now The Lord said to Abram, "Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you.Another discription falls into Ishmael too:
And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great, so that you will be a blessing
. I will bless those who bless you, and him who curses you I will curse; and by you all the families of the earth shall bless themselves." (Genesis 12:1-3 RSV)
"But God said to Abraham, "Be not displeased because of the lad and because of your slave woman; whatever Sarah says to you, do as she tells you, for through Isaac shall your descendants be named. And I will make a nation of the son of the slave woman also, because he is your offspring." (Genesis 21:12-13 RSV)This is within the same meaning as above God hears Abraham's request with Ishmael because he is simply the offspring of Abraham
Genesis 18:11-12 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, well advanced in age; and Sarah had passed the age of childbearing. 12 Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, “After I have grown old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?”
The text never said anything about a plan , this is your personal interpritation. As I have showed above God still according to the biblical writers still told that he has heard Abraham
However there is a very big important point which I need to clarify here :
The original King James bible DOES NOT have the word "No" in it the text is simply :
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 (GENESIS 17:19)
What is really ironic too is that in the new international version you got the word "Yes" instead of "No"
Then God said, "Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.GENESIS 17:19
New International version
You could check for your self :
http://biblehub.com/genesis/17-19.htm
So your whole argument which was based on No cannot have an accurate basis
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.اقتباس:
Continue the passage :
22When He finished talking with him, God went up from Abraham.23Then Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all the servants who were born in his house and all who were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's household, and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the very same day, as God had said to him 24Now Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. 25And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin.26In the very same day Abraham was circumcised, and Ishmael his son[COLOR=#001320][FONT=Trebuchet]Genesis 17: 22-26
Genesis 17 which talks about the covenant of circumcission ends here
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.اقتباس:
Again you are claming that my objection is to god rather it is to the writers of the bible. AS I said before we believe your scripture is corrupted so when I say that I am objecting somehow it is not on God , God forbid rather on the Jewish writers of the bible . such establishment of covenant only to Isaac seems very doubtfull based on the fact that Abraham also cried for his son Ishmael and that god responded by saying he has heard it and he has blessed his son Ishmael and he will have a great nation plus the idea and the contradiction still places itself when it is stated take your ONLY SON , this no matter what explanation is provided does not remove the contradiction for God did not say take your only son whom I have established the covenant with!!!
As for the number of nations well God said :
16And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her.
So god said kings of people , meaning who rule . This refers to actual kings ;
and she shall be a mother of nations; of the twelve tribes of Israel; of the two nations of Israel and Judah:
kings of people shall be of her; as David, Solomon, and others, and especially the King Messiah.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
Great nation supresedes many nations since there were no mention of greatness one can say so !!!
peace
***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.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
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.اقتباس:
I was very reluctant to answer or respond to this part simply because I felt it is not my place to answer , I usually tend to avoid responding to anything that has to do with the mediator of the forum. But since you are applying it to religous reasons I have to respond. Every single new member whether Muslim or Christian in this forum should exceed a certain amount of responses to have his post posted , this also applied to me , I have been here since February and I only got updated recently because I have exceeded a certain amount of responses.Again the rules apply to all members.
peace
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
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
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.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة huria
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 .اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة pandora
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 linksاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 !!!.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 !!!!اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
[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 shortاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
Your explanation is based on the understanding that Abraham the prophet of God and the highest pariarch has a lack of faith!!!!!اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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:اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
"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 alsoاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 .اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
Yes it has nothing to do with our topic and thats my point as a response to yoursاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 fantasyاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
[/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!!!!اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة pandora
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.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
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.اقتباس:
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
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.اقتباس:
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
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.اقتباس:
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 !!!!
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.اقتباس:
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
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.اقتباس:
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.
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.اقتباس:
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.
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.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
اقتباس:
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
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.
اقتباس:
Verses 2, 3.
اقتباس:
- 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)"
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.اقتباس:
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 .
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.اقتباس:
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.
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.اقتباس:
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
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.اقتباس:
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
Peace unto you.
There is a big difference between achieving staisfaction and proving you wrong for example.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة pandora
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 statingاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 empireاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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???اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
I have already addressed , where in the context of Genesis 22 did it say your only son from Sarah ,اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 .اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
That still does not explain it. Mostly your explanation of John the baptist birth was that because he was a prophet and he predicted Jesusاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 .اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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.
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة pandora
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
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
Again you are taking part of the passage only :
nd I will makeof 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)
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
This does not answer my response . This statement is a clear way of avoiding the obvious answerاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 !!!!اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 transmissionاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;pandora
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 situationاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;
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 conceptsاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة ;
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.اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
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:اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Burninglight
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 :
اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
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 bibleاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة محمد سني 1989
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 ideologyاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Burninglight
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 meaningاقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Burninglight