Quote
Quote Originally Posted by محمد سني 1989 View Post
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.
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.

Quote
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
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.

Quote
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
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.

Quote
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 !!!!
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.

Quote
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
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.

Quote
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.
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.

Quote
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.
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.