Did Muslims get it right about Yahawah's test of Abraham?

A

Arcane

Guest
Jewish and Christian scholars believe Yahawah commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, but ask any Muslim and he will tell you Yahawah commanded Abraham to slay Ishmael, his other son and Isaac's older brother by 13 years.

Now the Book of Genesis says Isaac's name specifically, but Islamic scholars believe this to be a translation error, for in the Quran God gave Sarah, Abraham's wife, a revelation in which He promised Abraham the birth of Isaac, and Jacob after him. Since Abraham only had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac, it can be implied that Jacob must be Isaac's son.

If Yahawah promised Abraham Isaac and Jacob, then that would exclude the possibility of Him commanding Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, because without Isaac there is no Jacob. That only leaves the possibility that God commanded Abraham to sacrifice Ishmael.

In addition, the Book of Genesis says Yahawah commanded Abraham to "sacrifice his only son, Isaac." Yet Isaac could never have been Abraham's only son for Ishmael was the older brother of Isaac.

Did I convince anyone?
 
Do we have the very first Bible that was ever written?

If not, perhaps there were some mistakes in translations or in simply miscopying the names and terms?

Baron Max
 
Arcane said:
Jewish and Christian scholars believe Yahawah commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, but ask any Muslim and he will tell you Yahawah commanded Abraham to slay Ishmael, his other son and Isaac's older brother by 13 years.

Now the Book of Genesis says Isaac's name specifically, but Islamic scholars believe this to be a translation error, for in the Quran God gave Sarah, Abraham's wife, a revelation in which He promised Abraham the birth of Isaac, and Jacob after him. Since Abraham only had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac, it can be implied that Jacob must be Isaac's son.

If Yahawah promised Abraham Isaac and Jacob, then that would exclude the possibility of Him commanding Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, because without Isaac there is no Jacob. That only leaves the possibility that God commanded Abraham to sacrifice Ishmael.

In addition, the Book of Genesis says Yahawah commanded Abraham to "sacrifice his only son, Isaac." Yet Isaac could never have been Abraham's only son for Ishmael was the older brother of Isaac.

Did I convince anyone?
Click to expand...

Nope.:D Because Ishmael was a bastard child - a product of the handmaden Hagar. True, he was Abraham's child also but not the one promised to Abraham through Sara's vision. That was Isaac and he was the one that God used to 'spread the seed of Abraham.'
 
"That was Isaac and he was the one that God used to 'spread the seed of Abraham.'"

EXACTLY!! why would Yahawah ask Abraham to sacrifice Isaac if He already promised him Isaac's son, the one man who's offspring become the 12 tribes of Israel, God's chosen people, the children of Isreal, whatever..????
 
Actually, islamic theology is famous for postulating the proposition of a God free from all logic. It would be entirely in keeping with the belief in a god that must recreate all existence each moment, or personally take hand in all matters of reality from the striking of a match to the movement of a oxygen particle. The Quranic god is a very fickle being: "had he so chosen" is the phrase I'm thinking of.

Additionally, the Quran is essentially a distant rewrite of the Talmud and Bible; coming well after either of the other texts, it's clear that the Quran would be in error.

Best,

Geoff
 
Arcane said:
"That was Isaac and he was the one that God used to 'spread the seed of Abraham.'"

EXACTLY!! why would Yahawah ask Abraham to sacrifice Isaac if He already promised him Isaac's son, the one man who's offspring become the 12 tribes of Israel, God's chosen people, the children of Isreal, whatever..????
Click to expand...

You're wasting your time addressing all these rational atheists. Baron's is the best answer you're going to get, he's a theist, so he's the least likely to be sidetracked by "reason" lol:D
 
it probably hasnt, but maybe the first one was copied incorrectly. they wrote Isaac instead of Ishmael when they were translating it.
 
But then you would have the problem of trying to convince the Jews that they are "actually" Ishmaelites, and the Arabs that they are "actually" Jews, now how would that work? Should the Jews takeover Arabia, and the Arabs take over Israel? I don't see how that could work.
 
Read-Only said:
Nope.:D Because Ishmael was a bastard child - a product of the handmaden Hagar. True, he was Abraham's child also but not the one promised to Abraham through Sara's vision. That was Isaac and he was the one that God used to 'spread the seed of Abraham.'
Click to expand...

*************
M*W: Technically, Ishmael was not a bastard child. Abraham had many wives and concubines, and all children born of those women were not considered to be bastard children. Abraham had many children older and younger than Ishmael with many wives, but of course they don't teach this in Sunday school.

Contrary to popular belief, Abraham and Sarah were brother and sister, not uncommon for children of pharaohs.

Also, there was a little insestuous hanky-panky going on down in Egypt when Abraham and Sarah went to see the pharoah. It's not clear if the pharaoh was actually Sarah's biological father or not, but that could be worse (unless you're Egyptian). Anyhoo, Abraham got a bunch of sheep from the pharaoh, and Sarah got laid and conceived Isaac. (Again, they don't teach this in Sunday school).

The whole premise that Isaac was a great Hebrew patriarch is a bunch of malarky. Technically, Isaac was Egyptian as was Ishmael. (They don't teach this in Hebrew school either).

The story of Abraham, Sarah and the boys, was originally based on an ancient archetype of the Constellation of Aries (the ram), so consequently the story is pure myth.

BTW, why would anyone believe anything taught in Sunday school?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top