FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  Who is OnlineWho is Online   Join! (free) Join! (free)  
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
  • Welcome
  • Guest

  • Main Menu
  • Sticky Articles
  • Open Support Tickets
Ishamel or Isaac almost-sacrificed?
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT Forum Index -> The Qur'an
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
All_Brains
Master Administrator
Master Administrator


Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 632



Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 8:32 pm    Post subject:  Reply with quote

Hello Ahmed and Brainout

It's very interesting to see you both discussing and comparing the bible and quran.

I think you too are very similar in the way you're interpreted the book to remove all man-made fables and nonsense.

Ahmed wants to be only a Muslim and Brainout wants to be only Christian. No Shi'ah, no Sunni, no Catholic and no Lutheran.

Great stuff guys and way to be civilised about it!
_________________
A little boy prayed for a bike. Then he realized God doesn't work that way so he stole a bike and asked for forgiveness.
www.all-brains.blogspot.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
brainout
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 275


Location: Houston
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AhmedBahgat wrote:
Hello brainout

Iím sorry mate, I only edited for the typos, I accept that the Bible said that the angles convince Hagar to return to Sarah, but we were never told when was that, also the story of Hagar and Ismael at Bir Shiba was ehen Ismael was months old not bloody 14-16 years old, I believe firmly in every word that I put down and I believe firmly that I have proven my case, the main highlights are:

1) the corruption of the story of Ismael and Hagar in Bir Sheba
2) the 3 mistakes of calling Isaac the ONLY SON

now letís leave it to the public, btw I donít get involved in a ping pong game of arguing, I always try to put all what I need to say in one comment, hence my long threads

Cheers


Ahmed, none of your contentions are accurate, though I'm sure they were sincere, and you had a rough week. Problem is, anyone reading the texts you quote in their full context (which you leave out or were too tired to read), will see that you didn't read properly. I'm really not trying to rebut you, but rather to show why and what you misread. The issue isn't proven in what you posted. You need to re-read it and revise what you wrote. Well, after you get enough sleep. Believe me, I empathize. I re-edited my own post to you over 20 times!

Thought you'd want the opportunity to re-read and correct what you posted. But if you don't, that's fine. People will read and decide for themselves.
_________________
God needs no defending, and always begs the premise. †For belief of any kind, always needs self-auditing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
brainout
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 275


Location: Houston
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:03 pm    Post subject: To katlike: Caring and not caring. Reply with quote

Katlike, neither Ahmed Bahgat nor I wanted to engage in this Isaac versus Ishmael debate. The point is Abraham's faithfulness, not which son was nearly-sacrificed. Both of us concluded that we are being too lazy if we don't flesh this out. You didn't see the other posts in the FFI forum on our going back-and-forth about whether we should get into the details here. I didn't paste those comments in, because our hemming and hawing wasn't germane. So I can only assure you that caring about doing one's homework is the motive, not some battle over whether our faith will be trashed if it's one or the other son of Abraham. Neither of us has a faith so fragile, as that. It was a due diligence question, not a defend-God question. God needs no defending.
_________________
God needs no defending, and always begs the premise. †For belief of any kind, always needs self-auditing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
AhmedBahgat
Golden Member
Golden Member


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 671


Location: Australia
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

brainout wrote:
AhmedBahgat wrote:
Hello brainout

Iím sorry mate, I only edited for the typos, I accept that the Bible said that the angles convince Hagar to return to Sarah, but we were never told when was that, also the story of Hagar and Ismael at Bir Shiba was ehen Ismael was months old not bloody 14-16 years old, I believe firmly in every word that I put down and I believe firmly that I have proven my case, the main highlights are:

1) the corruption of the story of Ismael and Hagar in Bir Sheba
2) the 3 mistakes of calling Isaac the ONLY SON

now letís leave it to the public, btw I donít get involved in a ping pong game of arguing, I always try to put all what I need to say in one comment, hence my long threads

Cheers


Ahmed, none of your contentions are accurate, though I'm sure they were sincere, and you had a rough week. Problem is, anyone reading the texts you quote in their full context (which you leave out or were too tired to read), will see that you didn't read properly. I'm really not trying to rebut you, but rather to show why and what you misread. The issue isn't proven in what you posted. You need to re-read it and revise what you wrote. Well, after you get enough sleep. Believe me, I empathize. I re-edited my own post to you over 20 times!

Thought you'd want the opportunity to re-read and correct what you posted. But if you don't, that's fine. People will read and decide for themselves.



Hello mate

again, there will be no editing to what to I posted, I have no problem that you use your bible to porve your allegation that it was Isaac and not Ismael, however don't ever dare to use the Quran is prove such lie, the Quran is a book that is not like the Bible, everyone can see that by just looking at the story in both of them above

Cheers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
brainout
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 275


Location: Houston
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All_Brains wrote:
Hello Ahmed and Brainout

It's very interesting to see you both discussing and comparing the bible and quran.

I think you too are very similar in the way you're interpreted the book to remove all man-made fables and nonsense.

Ahmed wants to be only a Muslim and Brainout wants to be only Christian. No Shi'ah, no Sunni, no Catholic and no Lutheran.

Great stuff guys and way to be civilised about it!


Thanks, All-Brains. When Ahmed and I first met in the "Proof Koran is from Iblis" thread, we both went to fisticuffs. But then I saw the care he takes with Koran, and how he's Koran only, Arabic only, and that really impresses me. I wish Christians were that passionate about the Bible. We all need to get away from the religion, the people, and "just the facts, m'am." And those "facts" for us, are our BOOKS. Smile

I've really got to do my secular work now. I've played games in delaying it, and God doesn't like that. I've been bad, k? Need to go to work. I hope not to come in much next week. Will only give short replies to any new posts, here or at FFI. Sorry! Wish I could be here and there instead!
_________________
God needs no defending, and always begs the premise. †For belief of any kind, always needs self-auditing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
brainout
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 275


Location: Houston
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay, Ahmed. I'm done, too. Enjoy!

By the way, when my email told me about new posts to the threads I'm watching at FFI, I cruised to see what other new topics there were. One is called "Ishmael", and is at: "Ishmael" thread under "Quran and Hadith" section

Not saying I agree or disagree with it, but just wanted to thread in anything relevant here. Bye...
_________________
God needs no defending, and always begs the premise. †For belief of any kind, always needs self-auditing.


Last edited by brainout on Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:59 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
AhmedBahgat
Golden Member
Golden Member


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 671


Location: Australia
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello Brainout and all

I'm not done yet, I read you comment and found nothing to reply to, you may read this please:

Clearly, the Arabs outnumber the Jews. There are more than 100 million Arabs in the world, and less than 10 million Jews.

Throughout the Book of Genesis, God promises Abraham that his descendants will be of great multitude. God says that he will make Abraham a great nation (Genesis 12:2). God says that the descendants of Abraham shall be as numerous as the dust of the Earth, (Genesis 13:16), and shall be in number as the stars of the sky (Genesis 15:5). God says that Abraham will be a father to many nations (Genesis 17:4) and that his descendants will have the land of Canaan (Genesis 17:8). God makes similar promises about Hagar, Ishmael and Isaac. He tells Hagar that her descendants shall be a great multitude (Genesis 16:10). God tells Abraham that Sarah will be a mother of nations (Genesis 17:16). He says to Abraham that Ishmael will beget 12 princes (Genesis 17:20).

The descendants of Ishmael are of a great multitude, numbering more than 100 million today, the descendants of Isaac have waxed and waned and have been found and lost over the centuries. The descendants of Isaac only had their own kingdom for a brief period in history, and then only long after Isaac had died and many generations had passed. Before then, they were slaves in Egypt. Later, they were conquered by the Babylonians and again taken into slavery. Even when they had their own kings, some of their kings, such as Ahab and Ahaz, worshipped Ba'al and not God (1 Kings 16:32 and 2 Chronicles 28:2).

The key to the dispute comes at Genesis 22:17, when God says to Abraham: I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heavens and the sand that is on the seashore.

Isaac was 14 years younger than Ishmael. When Abraham took his son to be sacrificed, that son appears to have been about 13. God several times refers to Abraham's son as his only son

Did God make a mistake?? Did God not know that Abraham had two sons: Ishmael and Isaac?

If God did promise Isaac that his descendants would be in number as the dust of the Earth, as the stars in the sky, and as the sand in the seashore, this was a false promise which has not been fulfilled.

Another promise that was not fulfilled, if indeed it was made, was the promise to give Isaac all of the Land of Canaan. The Arabs, the descendants of Ishmael, have occupied Canaan from that day to this. Canaan is the valley on the right and left banks of the Jordan River. Today, the Right Bank is controlled entirely by Arabs. More than 90% of the population of the Left Bank is Arab as well. The Jews only recently re-arrived as rulers of part of that area after an absence of nearly 3,000 years.

The sons of Ishmael became kings immediately. The Bible says that they lived in a land East of Egypt (Genesis 25:18). It was a caravan from the tribe of Ishmael that took Joseph to Egypt (Genesis 37:25 and 39:1). Since Ishmael was 14 years older than Isaac, and since Isaac was 60 years old before his first and only sons were born, it is apparent that by the time that the 12 tribes of Israel got off to their big start, the tribes of Ishmael had long been well established.

The Bible contains many obvious errors and inconsistencies. Starting from Genesis, it first says that Enoch and his son Mathushael and his son Lamech were direct descendants of Cain along the male line (Genesis 4:18). It later says that Enoch and his son Methuselah and his son Lamech were direct descendants of Seth along the male line (Genesis 5:21-25). Both could not be true, except in the unlikely event that there were two identical sets of persons with these names.

Isaac was not even capable of finding himself a wife. When Isaac was 40 years old and still unmarried, his then 140-year-old father, Abraham, sent a servant to find a wife for Isaac (Genesis 24). After the dutiful servant brought a wife to Isaac, it took Isaac another 20 years before he was able to make her pregnant. Rebecca, the wife of Isaac, first and last gave birth when Isaac was 60 years old and Rebecca was probably about 36 (Genesis 25:26).

Except for Isaac, none of the other patriarchs of the Bible seemed to have any trouble finding women and in conceiving children with them. Perhaps according to the corrupt Bible Isaac was a closet gay, who never came out.

By a simple substitution of the name Ishmael for the name Isaac in just four places in Genesis 22:2-7, all of the prophecies become true. As the passages would then state, the rulers and descendants of Ishmael did become the rulers and kings of the area. The descendants of Ishmael did quickly multiply and become in number as dust of the Earth, stars in the sky or sand on the seashore.

Can you please reply to this?

Cheers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
brainout
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 275


Location: Houston
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ahmed,

Your point about multitude: it's not restricted to the Arabs and physical sons of Abraham. Everyone leaving in the Exodus was included as well, and 2/3rds of them were "mixed multitude" -- not of Abraham's descendants. Again, I'm sorry, but you need to do more homework before you opine on this. Not saying you should do it, but you're not researching the meaning BIBLE provides, before you opine on what BIBLE says.

You point about "only son" -- is flat INCORRECT. Bible never says that Isaac is the only progeny of Abraham. Isaac is the only LEGITIMATE son, by Sarah, his wife. But not the only child from his loins. Again, you don't do your homework on what BIBLE means by what it says. Ishmael is prominently mentioned in detail throughout the Old Testament, his family line traced, etc. Um, so anyone reading your assertion of "only son" will understand you didn't do your homework, when they read Bible and see the story there. Are you sure you don't want to revisit the issue? Your call.

The Abrahamic covenant is to be fulfilled in Messiah, i.e., the land grant covenant. It was made conditional upon Messiah in 2 Samuel 7, to David. So it is not fulfilled yet because Messiah hasn't returned yet. Again, you've not done your BIBLE homework, and so you don't interpret what it says correctly. You have to read more -- well, you don't have to, but it's like you read a sentence or two and miss the rest of the context. Here, all the covenants are fulfilled in Messiah, why else do you think the Jews are at the Wailing Wall? The Temple doesn't get rebuilt either, until Messiah comes. That's in Daniel 9. So see: you can't just ASSume meaning until you know the full database.

No dispute on the tribes of Ishmael being older. But you infer wrongly from that, because your premise ignores most of what's said about the Abrahamic promise, i.e., back in Genesis 15, pre-Hagar, Abraham was promised that his sons would go into slavery for 400 years -- THOSE SONS are the sons of the promise God made, context is clear. So Ishmael's progeny are NOT sons of that promise, and they did NOT go into slavery for 400 years. Again, you're not doing your homework. Sorry to keep rebutting you, but what other choice do I have?

"Isaac was not even capable of finding himself a wife." Come on, Ahmed -- Isaac was a DUTIFUL son, and his father Abraham insisted on him finding her from BELIEVERS, not from the horrid Canaanites who were around. So the servant obeyed, and Isaac obeyed. To say Isaac was INCAPABLE is rude and unbecoming of you. He islam'd to his father's wishes. Sight-unseen he married Rebekah. You must be very tired, to be so rude to someone your Koran praises. The rest of your post is alike rude and provably false, so I'll stop replying here. You're tired. We all get nasty when we're tired. Sleep on it, rethink. We can always revisit this later. I won't be back here for at least a few days. Too much printing to do on a case which has to go out before December 1.
_________________
God needs no defending, and always begs the premise. †For belief of any kind, always needs self-auditing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
AhmedBahgat
Golden Member
Golden Member


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 671


Location: Australia
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

brainout wrote:
Okay, Ahmed. I'm done, too. Enjoy!

By the way, when my email told me about new posts to the threads I'm watching at FFI, I cruised to see what other new topics there were. One is called "Ishmael", and is at: "Ishmael" thread under "Quran and Hadith" section

Not saying I agree or disagree with it, but just wanted to thread in anything relevant here. Bye...



Hello mate

Yeh i have seen it too, it's nothing but crap really, so I will pass on it

Cheers
_________________
And say: Truth has arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is bound to perish.
[The Quran ; 17:81]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
AhmedBahgat
Golden Member
Golden Member


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 671


Location: Australia
Add Karma

rated by members
Add Comment
Show Comments


online/offline
PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2007 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good morning Brainout

I would like to reply to one point only for now, I'm still reading your replies:

brainout wrote:
Ahmed,
You point about "only son" -- is flat INCORRECT. Bible never says that Isaac is the only progeny of Abraham.



Mate, please don't be desperate

God is talking to Ibrahim and said YOUR ONLY SON ISAAC, God is aware 100% that Ibrahim has another son, if a human was talking in that passage I might have given your argument some merit however Allah is talking and Allah knows well that Ismael is a legitimate son to Ibrahim, so your desperate attempt must be dismissed

brainout wrote:
Isaac is the only LEGITIMATE son, by Sarah, his wife.


Your flawed and desperate refute works for me too, Isamel is the only legitimate son by Hagar his wife, uness you think that Ismael was the son of a whore or something?

brainout wrote:
But not the only child from his loins. Again, you don't do your homework on what BIBLE means by what it says. Ishmael is prominently mentioned in detail throughout the Old Testament, his family line traced, etc. Um, so anyone reading your assertion of "only son" will understand you didn't do your homework, when they read Bible and see the story there. Are you sure you don't want to revisit the issue? Your call.


Please stop accusing me of not doing my home work, here it is again and a child should get it:

1) At one point of time Ibrahim had ONE legitimate son through his wife Hagar, that son is Ismael

2) At a second point of time Ibrahim had two legitimate sons one through his wife Hagar (Ismael) and the other through his wife Sarah (Isaac) - See last paragraph below

3) Allah said to Ibrahim (Your only Son Isaac) as alleged in Genesis

No 3 above contadicts the clear cut fact obtaned from 1 & 2 that Isaac can never be called the only son of Ibrahim, IT IS A CLEAR CUT LIE, PLEASE WAKE UP

Please note, both of should be careful calling Isaac a legitimate son of Ibrahim, this is because the corrupt Bible is telling us that Ibrahim and Sarah were half brother and sister something that I don't believe, this means accoridng to the bible allegation that Isaac is not a legitimate son rather a child through illegal relationship

Salam


_________________
And say: Truth has arrived, and Falsehood perished: for Falsehood is bound to perish.
[The Quran ; 17:81]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FREE FAITH, EXPRESSION AND THOUGHT Forum Index -> The Qur'an All times are GMT + 11 Hours
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4
 
 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum