Eid Mubarak (6 Viewers)
- Thread starter «ƒÕ®zå JüV€»
- Start date
"The prohibition is based on the aim of the purification of one's nature....The pig is naturally lazy and indulgent in sex, it is dirty, greedy and gluttonous. It dislikes sunlight and lacks the spirit and will to "fight." It eats almost anything, be it human excreta or anything foul and unwholesome. Amongst all animal flesh, pork is the favoured cradle of harmful germs. Pork also serves as a carrier of diseases to mankind. It is for this reason that its flesh is not suitable for consumption.
Some people have argued that the "modern pig" reared in farms is given only clean foods, therefore, its flesh should be consumable. The answer is that you may feed the pig on clean, wholesome food, but you can't change its nature. It is still a pig. A pig is not a plant and you cannot change it by bud-grafting."
Also, the fat content in pork is more than any other meat (beef, mutton etc.) and it takes longer to digest.
Cows, Chicken on the other hand, won't naturally eat anything harmful. They only would eat harmful things when forced to (to prevent starvation). this of course leades to stuff like the mad cow desease...etc.
Some people have argued that the "modern pig" reared in farms is given only clean foods, therefore, its flesh should be consumable. The answer is that you may feed the pig on clean, wholesome food, but you can't change its nature. It is still a pig. A pig is not a plant and you cannot change it by bud-grafting."
Also, the fat content in pork is more than any other meat (beef, mutton etc.) and it takes longer to digest.
Cows, Chicken on the other hand, won't naturally eat anything harmful. They only would eat harmful things when forced to (to prevent starvation). this of course leades to stuff like the mad cow desease...etc.
++ [ originally posted by Majed ] ++
it was about his other son, Ismail. (as Sidz already mentioned
)
it was about his other son, Ismail. (as Sidz already mentioned
)
Genesis 22:1-2
"Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, "Abraham!" "Here I am," he replied. Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about."
(bolds mine)
++ [ originally posted by McFarlando ] ++
Isnt the christian religion also supposed to eat meat (whats the word)Spareingly? [/Q
Gray? Im think its one of those looked over things in the bible
Isnt the christian religion also supposed to eat meat (whats the word)Spareingly?
[/QGray? Im think its one of those looked over things in the bible
Correct.
This is quite long, but please bare with me, it's really quite worth the effort:
sorry gray, but he had two sons and even the bible mentions it. i will show everything in this post.
Ibrahim's (Abraham's) wife, Sarai (later named Sarah) couldn't have a son. So Abraham had his first son from Sarah's servant called Hager (**not adultry since back then polygamy was common. In one verse the bible even shows this: [Genesis 28:9] "so he went to Ishmael and married Mahalath, the sister of Nebaioth and daughter of Ishmael son of Abraham, in addition to the wives he already had. ") Anyhow, back to topic, Abraham's only son was called Ishmael. Later on, God blessed Sarah with a son named Isaac.
Here's a verse from the bible that names both sons:
[Chronicles 1:28]
"The sons of Abraham: Isaac and Ishmael."
....
In The Qura'n:
Back to the sacrificing story, what you've is not the way the story goes in Islam. In Islam, Ibrahim (Abraham) had a dream that he should sacrifice his son Ismael (He wasn't ordered for real by god to do it). So he went off to do it. I'll give you the versus, but first i'll explain the verses that are before and after, because they're needed in the argument for who the son was. Starting from verse [37:83 of the Qur'an], it talks about Ibrahim's [PBUH] Story when he destroys the shrines that his father and villagers used to pray to and Ibrahim questioned them on how they worship what their ancestors have carved? Then the sequence goes later on and talks about Ibrahim's dream.
[37: 100] "My Lord! grant me of the doers of good deeds." (Ibrahim wanted a son)
[37:101] "So We gave him the good news of a boy, possessing forbearance. (notice the name hasn't been mentioned - i will explain below)
[37:102] "When he grew enough to work with him, he said, "My son, I see in a dream that I am sacrificing you. What do you think?" He said, "O my father, do what you are commanded to do. You will find me, GOD willing, patient."
[37:103] "They both submitted, and he put his forehead down (to sacrifice him)."
[37:104] "We called him: "O Abraham."
[37:105] "You have believed the dream. We thus reward the righteous."
[37:106] "That was an exacting test indeed."
[37:107] "We ransomed him by substituting an animal sacrifice." (him here refers to Ismael) (** Note: this is why we sacrifice an animal in Eid Al-Adha )
[37:108] "And we preserved his history for subsequent generations."
[37:109] Peace be upon Abraham."
[37:110] We thus reward the righteous."
[37:111] He is one of our believing servants."
Notice Ismael's name wasn't mentioned in these verses (but incase you're woundering, his name was aknowledged many times in the Qur'an in other chapters).... well, the story (in sequence) goes on and then in next verse goes:
[37:112] "And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous."
meaning that he was born after Ibrahim "almost sacrificed" him
This clearly shows that the Qur'an refers to Ishmael as the one who was almost sacrificed. Isaac was born after all this happened.
.................
Now, In the Bible...
You're really going to find this interesting Gray!! [/b]
please read (remember i said the bible has been altered, well here's a an example of one of the mistakes):
As you mentioned, from Genesis 22:2,
"Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about."
We believe that the name in bold is one of the alterations made in the bible long ago I guess to cut off any form of relationship of Abraham PBUH with Arabia and Mohammed PBUH. (Mohammed PBUH is the decendant of Ishmael) Because a couple of verses ahead, God promises to make the son into a great nation. "
[Genisis 22:18] "Lift the boy up and take him by the hand, for I will make him into a great nation."
We believe that the Bible was once a valid book of God. We beleive that the verse origionaly had the name "Ishmael" not Isaac.
Now, after knowing the possible reason for the alteration, here's some proof in these two verses from the bible:
Genesis 16:16
"Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore him Ishmael."
Genesis 21:5
"Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him."
Here it is evident from that Ismael was fourteen years old at the birth of Isaac , and must have been offered for sacrifice before Isaac was born because Abraham had been asked to sacrifice his only son; after Isaac’s birth of course the words ‘your only son’ would be totally inappropriate and against reality!
If your wondering that maybe Ishmael died sometime and the Isaac became an "only son," then i'm afraid that doesn't work either because here's another verse from the Bible that say they were both alive when Abraham PBUH had died because they burried him
Genesis 25:9
"Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, east of Mamre, the field which Abraham purchased from the Hittites. There Abraham was buried, with Sarah his wife"
So, it is obvious that the word Isaac mentioned in the passage above (indicated by italics) was inserted in place of Ismael.
sorry gray, but he had two sons and even the bible mentions it. i will show everything in this post.
Ibrahim's (Abraham's) wife, Sarai (later named Sarah) couldn't have a son. So Abraham had his first son from Sarah's servant called Hager (**not adultry since back then polygamy was common. In one verse the bible even shows this: [Genesis 28:9] "so he went to Ishmael and married Mahalath, the sister of Nebaioth and daughter of Ishmael son of Abraham, in addition to the wives he already had. ") Anyhow, back to topic, Abraham's only son was called Ishmael. Later on, God blessed Sarah with a son named Isaac.
Here's a verse from the bible that names both sons:
[Chronicles 1:28]
"The sons of Abraham: Isaac and Ishmael."
....
In The Qura'n:
Back to the sacrificing story, what you've is not the way the story goes in Islam. In Islam, Ibrahim (Abraham) had a dream that he should sacrifice his son Ismael (He wasn't ordered for real by god to do it). So he went off to do it. I'll give you the versus, but first i'll explain the verses that are before and after, because they're needed in the argument for who the son was. Starting from verse [37:83 of the Qur'an], it talks about Ibrahim's [PBUH] Story when he destroys the shrines that his father and villagers used to pray to and Ibrahim questioned them on how they worship what their ancestors have carved? Then the sequence goes later on and talks about Ibrahim's dream.
[37: 100] "My Lord! grant me of the doers of good deeds." (Ibrahim wanted a son)
[37:101] "So We gave him the good news of a boy, possessing forbearance. (notice the name hasn't been mentioned - i will explain below)
[37:102] "When he grew enough to work with him, he said, "My son, I see in a dream that I am sacrificing you. What do you think?" He said, "O my father, do what you are commanded to do. You will find me, GOD willing, patient."
[37:103] "They both submitted, and he put his forehead down (to sacrifice him)."
[37:104] "We called him: "O Abraham."
[37:105] "You have believed the dream. We thus reward the righteous."
[37:106] "That was an exacting test indeed."
[37:107] "We ransomed him by substituting an animal sacrifice." (him here refers to Ismael) (** Note: this is why we sacrifice an animal in Eid Al-Adha )
[37:108] "And we preserved his history for subsequent generations."
[37:109] Peace be upon Abraham."
[37:110] We thus reward the righteous."
[37:111] He is one of our believing servants."
Notice Ismael's name wasn't mentioned in these verses (but incase you're woundering, his name was aknowledged many times in the Qur'an in other chapters).... well, the story (in sequence) goes on and then in next verse goes:
[37:112] "And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous."
meaning that he was born after Ibrahim "almost sacrificed" him
This clearly shows that the Qur'an refers to Ishmael as the one who was almost sacrificed. Isaac was born after all this happened.
.................
Now, In the Bible...
You're really going to find this interesting Gray!! [/b]
please read (remember i said the bible has been altered, well here's a an example of one of the mistakes):
As you mentioned, from Genesis 22:2,
"Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about."
We believe that the name in bold is one of the alterations made in the bible long ago I guess to cut off any form of relationship of Abraham PBUH with Arabia and Mohammed PBUH. (Mohammed PBUH is the decendant of Ishmael) Because a couple of verses ahead, God promises to make the son into a great nation. "
[Genisis 22:18] "Lift the boy up and take him by the hand, for I will make him into a great nation."
We believe that the Bible was once a valid book of God. We beleive that the verse origionaly had the name "Ishmael" not Isaac.
Now, after knowing the possible reason for the alteration, here's some proof in these two verses from the bible:
Genesis 16:16
"Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore him Ishmael."
Genesis 21:5
"Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him."
Here it is evident from that Ismael was fourteen years old at the birth of Isaac , and must have been offered for sacrifice before Isaac was born because Abraham had been asked to sacrifice his only son; after Isaac’s birth of course the words ‘your only son’ would be totally inappropriate and against reality!
If your wondering that maybe Ishmael died sometime and the Isaac became an "only son," then i'm afraid that doesn't work either because here's another verse from the Bible that say they were both alive when Abraham PBUH had died because they burried him
Genesis 25:9
"Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, east of Mamre, the field which Abraham purchased from the Hittites. There Abraham was buried, with Sarah his wife"
So, it is obvious that the word Isaac mentioned in the passage above (indicated by italics) was inserted in place of Ismael.
++ [ originally posted by Majed ] ++
:stress: That took a while!
Note to Fred: This time , the only thing i copy/pasted were the verses and the last paragraph.
:stress: That took a while!
Note to Fred: This time , the only thing i copy/pasted were the verses and the last paragraph.
Okay now your turn to be patient with me
I know that Muslims believe that the Bible supports this by its declaration that Abraham offered his only son (see above verses). Ishmael was Abraham's only son for over 13 years
Muslims believe that scribes later corrupted the original reading from Ishmael to Isaac, right?
Since this idea stems from the Muslim misunderstanding of the phrase "only son", it's necessary to explain what this phrase exactly means in relation to Isaac. I know i was a bit ambiguous before when i said that Abraham had only one son. The Bible shows that the phrase is used to affirm Isaac's unique status, a status based on the following:
- Isaac was the only promised child of Abraham, a fact which the Quran agrees with (Genesis 17:15-21; Surah 11:69-73, 37:112-113, 51:24-30). Ishmael was never a promised child.
- Isaac was conceived miraculously to a barren mother and a very aged father, with the Quran likewise agreeing (Genesis 17:15-17, 18:9-15, 21:1-7; Galatians 4:28-29; Surah 11:69-73, 51:24-30). Ishmael was conceived normally without the need of any miraculous intervention.
- God promised that it would be Isaac's descendants who would inherit the land given to Abraham. (Genesis 13:14-18, 15:18-21, 28:13-14). Ishmael had no part in the inheritance and promise given to Isaac through Abraham.
It is for these reasons that Isaac is called Abraham's only son since God himself reckoned Isaac as the child of promise and blessings, an honor never bestowed upon Ishmael.
Majed, correct me if i'm wrong, but I think the Quran never actually mentions the name of the sacrificial child. If that's true, I don't see the reason for such zealous arguments that it was Ismael rather than Isaac.
++ [ originally posted by McFarlando ] ++
Mikhail religion and scientific explanation dont go hand in hand
Mikhail religion and scientific explanation dont go hand in hand
__________________________________________________________
A) The Quran on Human Embryonic Development:
In the Holy Quran, God speaks about the stages of man’s embryonic development:
We created man from an extract of clay. Then We made him as a drop in a place of settlement, firmly fixed. Then We made the drop into an alaqah (leech, suspended thing, and blood clot), then We made the alaqah into a mudghah (chewed substance)... 1 (Quran, 23:12-14)
Literally, the Arabic word alaqah has three meanings: (1) leech, (2) suspended thing, and (3) blood clot.
In comparing a leech to an embryo in the alaqah stage, we find similarity between the two2 as we can see in figure 1. Also, the embryo at this stage obtains nourishment from the blood of the mother, similar to the leech, which feeds on the blood of others.3
Figure 1: Drawings illustrating the similarities in appearance between a leech and a human embryo at the alaqah stage. (Leech drawing from Human Development as Described in the Quran and Sunnah, Moore and others, p. 37, modified from Integrated Principles of Zoology, Hickman and others. Embryo drawing from The Developing Human, Moore and Persaud, 5th ed., p. 73.)
The second meaning of the word alaqah is “suspended thing.” This is what we can see in figures 2 and 3, the suspension of the embryo, during the alaqah stage, in the womb of the mother.
Figure 2: We can see in this diagram the suspension of an embryo during the alaqah stage in the womb (uterus) of the mother. (The Developing Human, Moore and Persaud, 5th ed., p. 66.) (Click on the image to enlarge it.)
Figure 3: In this photomicrograph, we can see the suspension of an embryo (marked B) during the alaqah stage (about 15 days old) in the womb of the mother. The actual size of the embryo is about 0.6 mm. (The Developing Human, Moore, 3rd ed., p. 66, from Histology, Leeson and Leeson.)
The third meaning of the word alaqah is “blood clot.” We find that the external appearance of the embryo and its sacs during the alaqah stage is similar to that of a blood clot. This is due to the presence of relatively large amounts of blood present in the embryo during this stage4 (see figure 4). Also during this stage, the blood in the embryo does not circulate until the end of the third week.5 Thus, the embryo at this stage is like a clot of blood.
Figure 4: Diagram of the primitive cardiovascular system in an embryo during the alaqah stage. The external appearance of the embryo and its sacs is similar to that of a blood clot, due to the presence of relatively large amounts of blood present in the embryo. (The Developing Human, Moore, 5th ed., p. 65.) (Click on the image to enlarge it.)
So the three meanings of the word alaqah correspond accurately to the descriptions of the embryo at the alaqah stage.
The next stage mentioned in the verse is the mudghah stage. The Arabic word mudghah means “chewed substance.” If one were to take a piece of gum and chew it in his or her mouth and then compare it with an embryo at the mudghah stage, we would conclude that the embryo at the mudghah stage acquires the appearance of a chewed substance. This is because of the somites at the back of the embryo that “somewhat resemble teethmarks in a chewed substance.”6 (see figures 5 and 6).
Figure 5: Photograph of an embryo at the mudghah stage (28 days old). The embryo at this stage acquires the appearance of a chewed substance, because the somites at the back of the embryo somewhat resemble teeth marks in a chewed substance. The actual size of the embryo is 4 mm. (The Developing Human, Moore and Persaud, 5th ed., p. 82, from Professor Hideo Nishimura, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan.)
Figure 6: When comparing the appearance of an embryo at the mudghah stage with a piece of gum that has been chewed, we find similarity between the two.
A) Drawing of an embryo at the mudghah stage. We can see here the somites at the back of the embryo that look like teeth marks. (The Developing Human, Moore and Persaud, 5th ed., p. 79.)
B) Photograph of a piece of gum that has been chewed.
(Click on the image to enlarge it.)
How could Muhammad have possibly known all this 1400 years ago, when scientists have only recently discovered this using advanced equipment and powerful microscopes which did not exist at that time? Hamm and Leeuwenhoek were the first scientists to observe human sperm cells (spermatozoa) using an improved microscope in 1677 (more than 1000 years after Muhammad ). They mistakenly thought that the sperm cell contained a miniature preformed human being that grew when it was deposited in the female genital tract.7
Professor Emeritus Keith L. Moore8 is one of the world’s most prominent scientists in the fields of anatomy and embryology and is the author of the book entitled The Developing Human, which has been translated into eight languages. This book is a scientific reference work and was chosen by a special committee in the United States as the best book authored by one person. Dr. Keith Moore is Professor Emeritus of Anatomy and Cell Biology at the University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. There, he was Associate Dean of Basic Sciences at the Faculty of Medicine and for 8 years was the Chairman of the Department of Anatomy. In 1984, he received the most distinguished award presented in the field of anatomy in Canada, the J.C.B. Grant Award from the Canadian Association of Anatomists. He has directed many international associations, such as the Canadian and American Association of Anatomists and the Council of the Union of Biological Sciences.
In 1981, during the Seventh Medical Conference in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, Professor Moore said: “It has been a great pleasure for me to help clarify statements in the Quran about human development. It is clear to me that these statements must have come to Muhammad from God, because almost all of this knowledge was not discovered until many centuries later. This proves to me that Muhammad must have been a messenger of God.”9 (To view the RealPlayer video of this comment click here ).
Consequently, Professor Moore was asked the following question: “Does this mean that you believe that the Quran is the word of God?” He replied: “I find no difficulty in accepting this.”10
During one conference, Professor Moore stated: “....Because the staging of human embryos is complex, owing to the continuous process of change during development, it is proposed that a new system of classification could be developed using the terms mentioned in the Quran and Sunnah (what Muhammad said, did, or approved of). The proposed system is simple, comprehensive, and conforms with present embryological knowledge. The intensive studies of the Quran and hadeeth (reliably transmitted reports by the Prophet Muhammad’s companions of what he said, did, or approved of) in the last four years have revealed a system for classifying human embryos that is amazing since it was recorded in the seventh century A.D. Although Aristotle, the founder of the science of embryology, realized that chick embryos developed in stages from his studies of hen’s eggs in the fourth century B.C., he did not give any details about these stages. As far as it is known from the history of embryology, little was known about the staging and classification of human embryos until the twentieth century. For this reason, the descriptions of the human embryo in the Quran cannot be based on scientific knowledge in the seventh century. The only reasonable conclusion is: these descriptions were revealed to Muhammad from God. He could not have known such details because he was an illiterate man with absolutely no scientific training.”11 (View the RealPlayer video of this comment ).
_____________________________
Footnotes:
(1) Please note that what is between these special brackets ... in this web site is only a translation of the meaning of the Quran. It is not the Quran itself, which is in Arabic.
(2) The Developing Human, Moore and Persaud, 5th ed., p. 8.
(3) Human Development as Described in the Quran and Sunnah, Moore and others, p. 36.
(4) Human Development as Described in the Quran and Sunnah, Moore and others, pp. 37-38.
(5) The Developing Human, Moore and Persaud, 5th ed., p. 65.
(6) The Developing Human, Moore and Persaud, 5th ed., p. 8.
(7) The Developing Human, Moore and Persaud, 5th ed., p. 9.
(8) Note: The occupations of all the scientists mentioned in this web site were last updated in 1997.
(9) The reference for this saying is This is the Truth (videotape). For a copy of this videotape, please visit this page.
(10) This is the Truth (videotape).
(11) This is the Truth (videotape). For a copy, see footnote no. 9.
If you wish to see the pictures (I suggest you should, it's very interesting...)visit this site:
www.islam-guide.com
___________________________________________________________
There are more amazing scientific revelations in the Qur'an....but as a Medical student, this interests me the most.
No problem ... Just showing both sides... The thing that troubles me is that you barely know the Muslim's side of the argument before you judged. :down:
I had a feeling gray you were just gonna copy something from another site (maybe like this one: http://www.raptureready.us/ishmael.htm ) ... sorry, but have you really thought about the argument in your last post and studied them on your own instead of just taking someone's word for it?
Sorry gray, but the phrase in the bible is clear. Why would "only son" maean anything except "only son?" It makes little sense to use these specific words to show any form of status. Admit gray that even you thought that Abraham had no other son (read your previous post) because you understood the inistial meaning as it should be.
why the ambiguity in the bible? If meaning can be twisted so much, no wonder there are so many versions of the bible! (after translation and after kings).
Point One:
Have you even read the verses in the Qura'n which you've just quoted? (i doubt it...some guy in some site typed it up because it talks about a relevant topic... if you read the verses, you'll see that it in no way say OR implies that "Isaac was the only promised child of Abraham")
Surah 37 (which i've already quoted above) is merely a sequential summary of Ibrahim's life.
1. It starts with his trouble with his people
2. Then it talks about the good news he received of a young boy.
3. Then it talks about the sacrifice.
4. Then (in verse 112,113) it talks about the good news of A son named Isaac! (read verses above)
If the first son (name not mentioned, but clearly implied) who was about to be sacrificed was Isaac, then why would the Qura'an repeat itself AFTER the sacrifice story and say "we gave him the good news of Isaac.
You also say in Surah11:69-73. i dont even know why this person even included this verse. The verse only talks about the three angels whom came to Ibrahim. These Angels (in the form of humans) gave Sarah the good news of Isaac.
Surah 51:24-30 briefly talks about the same thing with the 3 angels.
All these verses say nothing AT ALL that Isaac was "the only promissed child!" They mentioned that Isaac is a prophet, one of the rightous. This is something that we dont deny. We believe Isaac was indeed a great prophet.
Point Two:
Yes the Qur'an agrees. Your quoting the same verses above. Isaac is indeed unique. after all, he is one of the prophets! but this shouldn't degrade Ishmael at all. After all, Noah, Ibrahim, Jacob, Isaiah, Josheph and the rest were all born normally!!
Isaac's people were to be great. You could link this with Isaac's special status, that's fine, but it in no way does it relate to the clear phrase "your only son!"
Point Three:
Genisis 13:14-18:
"14 The LORD said to Abram after Lot had parted from him, "Lift up your eyes from where you are and look north and south, east and west. 15 All the land that you see I will give to you and your offspring [1] forever. 16 I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your offspring could be counted. 17 Go, walk through the length and breadth of the land, for I am giving it to you."
18 So Abram moved his tents and went to live near the great trees of Mamre at Hebron, where he built an altar to the LORD."
Look in a dictionary under the word offspring, you'll see that it could be plural also. yet ic could be either one of Isaac or Ishmael!
Genisis 15:18-21
" On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the river [4] of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates- 19 the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, 20 Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, 21 Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites."
since when has the word: "decendants" meant: "the second son!"
Genisis 28:13-14
" 13 There above it [5] stood the LORD , and he said: "I am the LORD , the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac. I will give you and your descendants the land on which you are lying. 14 Your descendants will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south. All peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring"
I hope you can clear this part for me Gray... I understand that the phrase "i'm am the lord.." was directed towards Jacob (the son of Isaac), could you explain why it says: "the god of your father abraham?" as his grandfather was Abraham.
anyhowm back to topic, first of all: This was A DREAM that Jacob had.
second of all, the phrase "ALL people will be blessed through you and your offspring." sure it gives Isaac and Jacob a special status. we beleive so too. After all, the Prophet Joseph was also Isaac's grandson. i think there were many more prophets from them too.
I'd like to explain this: Isaac was indeed blessed and his special status is worth mentioning, but this shouldn't degrade Ishmael any. In the Bible, It says Ishmael will be blessed too.
[Genisis 17:20] :
"And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation"
Also, Ishmael was indeed included in the covenant, because he was circumcized as well.
[Genisis 17:9-14]
"9 Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner-those who are not your offspring. 13 Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."
[Genisis 17:26]
" 26 Abraham and his son Ishmael were both circumcised on that same day."
So Ishmael was also blessed.
I already said that and explained it above! :stress:
... Just showing both sides... The thing that troubles me is that you barely know the Muslim's side of the argument before you judged. :down:I had a feeling gray you were just gonna copy something from another site (maybe like this one: http://www.raptureready.us/ishmael.htm
) ... sorry, but have you really thought about the argument in your last post and studied them on your own instead of just taking someone's word for it?Sorry gray, but the phrase in the bible is clear. Why would "only son" maean anything except "only son?" It makes little sense to use these specific words to show any form of status. Admit gray that even you thought that Abraham had no other son (read your previous post) because you understood the inistial meaning as it should be.
why the ambiguity in the bible? If meaning can be twisted so much, no wonder there are so many versions of the bible! (after translation and after kings).
Point One:
Have you even read the verses in the Qura'n which you've just quoted? (i doubt it...some guy in some site typed it up because it talks about a relevant topic... if you read the verses, you'll see that it in no way say OR implies that "Isaac was the only promised child of Abraham")
Surah 37 (which i've already quoted above) is merely a sequential summary of Ibrahim's life.
1. It starts with his trouble with his people
2. Then it talks about the good news he received of a young boy.
3. Then it talks about the sacrifice.
4. Then (in verse 112,113) it talks about the good news of A son named Isaac! (read verses above)
If the first son (name not mentioned, but clearly implied) who was about to be sacrificed was Isaac, then why would the Qura'an repeat itself AFTER the sacrifice story and say "we gave him the good news of Isaac.
You also say in Surah11:69-73. i dont even know why this person even included this verse. The verse only talks about the three angels whom came to Ibrahim. These Angels (in the form of humans) gave Sarah the good news of Isaac.
Surah 51:24-30 briefly talks about the same thing with the 3 angels.
All these verses say nothing AT ALL that Isaac was "the only promissed child!" They mentioned that Isaac is a prophet, one of the rightous. This is something that we dont deny. We believe Isaac was indeed a great prophet.
Point Two:
Yes the Qur'an agrees. Your quoting the same verses above. Isaac is indeed unique. after all, he is one of the prophets! but this shouldn't degrade Ishmael at all. After all, Noah, Ibrahim, Jacob, Isaiah, Josheph and the rest were all born normally!!
Isaac's people were to be great. You could link this with Isaac's special status, that's fine, but it in no way does it relate to the clear phrase "your only son!"
Point Three:
Genisis 13:14-18:
"14 The LORD said to Abram after Lot had parted from him, "Lift up your eyes from where you are and look north and south, east and west. 15 All the land that you see I will give to you and your offspring [1] forever. 16 I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your offspring could be counted. 17 Go, walk through the length and breadth of the land, for I am giving it to you."
18 So Abram moved his tents and went to live near the great trees of Mamre at Hebron, where he built an altar to the LORD."
Look in a dictionary under the word offspring, you'll see that it could be plural also. yet ic could be either one of Isaac or Ishmael!
Genisis 15:18-21
" On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the river [4] of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates- 19 the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, 20 Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, 21 Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites."
since when has the word: "decendants" meant: "the second son!"
Genisis 28:13-14
" 13 There above it [5] stood the LORD , and he said: "I am the LORD , the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac. I will give you and your descendants the land on which you are lying. 14 Your descendants will be like the dust of the earth, and you will spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south. All peoples on earth will be blessed through you and your offspring"
I hope you can clear this part for me Gray... I understand that the phrase "i'm am the lord.." was directed towards Jacob (the son of Isaac), could you explain why it says: "the god of your father abraham?"
as his grandfather was Abraham.anyhowm back to topic, first of all: This was A DREAM that Jacob had.
second of all, the phrase "ALL people will be blessed through you and your offspring." sure it gives Isaac and Jacob a special status. we beleive so too. After all, the Prophet Joseph was also Isaac's grandson. i think there were many more prophets from them too.
I'd like to explain this: Isaac was indeed blessed and his special status is worth mentioning, but this shouldn't degrade Ishmael any. In the Bible, It says Ishmael will be blessed too.
[Genisis 17:20] :
"And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation"
Also, Ishmael was indeed included in the covenant, because he was circumcized as well.
[Genisis 17:9-14]
"9 Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10 This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12 For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner-those who are not your offspring. 13 Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14 Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."
[Genisis 17:26]
" 26 Abraham and his son Ishmael were both circumcised on that same day."
So Ishmael was also blessed.
I already said that and explained it above! :stress: