Quote
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 ????!!!!
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.

Quote
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
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...

Quote
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.
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.

Quote
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
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.

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