Isaac or Ismael?

[kenzo0]

Isaac or Ismael whom Abraham sacrificed?
The son of Sara, or the son of Hagar?
Two of them were blessed, but only one of them who received God's promises.


edited with thanks to muslimsoldier4life:
not sacrificed but ALMOST sacrificed..

 

[smaneck]

Isaac or Ismael whom Abraham sacrificed?
The son of Sara, or the son of Hagar?
Two of them were blessed, but only one of them who received God's promises.

Then I would say the one who didn't receive God's promises was sacrificed.

 

[kenzo0]

Then I would say the one who didn't receive God's promises was sacrificed.

 

[football5680]

The obvious answer would be Isaac. God led the Israelites who were the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob out of Egypt and into the promised land, fulfilling what God promised to Abraham.

 

[Arthra]

Genesis 2:22 has


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.
.....................................

Ishmael was the only son of Abraham for what? fourteen years.

Genesis 16:16


And Abram was fourscore and six years old, when Hagar bare Ishmael to Abram.

So Abraham was eighty six when Ishmael was born.

Genesis 21:5


And Abraham was an hundred years old, when his son Isaac was born unto him.

 

[muslimsoldier4life]

Last I check, neither one was sacrificed. If you're asking which one was taken to be used as a sacrifice, for us Muslims it's Ishmael. Jews and Christians say it's Isaac.

 

[kenzo0]

Last I check, neither one was sacrificed. If you're asking which one was taken to be used as a sacrifice, for us Muslims it's Ishmael. Jews and Christians say it's Isaac.

ooops... thanks for corrected me, brother..

yes you're right... but, may I ask you which surah/ayah in the Quran that answer my question above, bro?

 

[Masihi]

Isaac or Ismael whom Abraham sacrificed?
The son of Sara, or the son of Hagar?
Two of them were blessed, but only one of them who received God's promises.


edited with thanks to muslimsoldier4life:
not sacrificed but ALMOST sacrificed..

If I came across this question only with the knowledge that Gd dealt with Israel for 1500 years following Gds encounter with Abraham and that this dealing involved moses, 40+ prophets as well as Christ, and that the line of Ishmael is silent for 2000 years since Abraham, I would answer Isaac. Logical?

 

[smaneck]

Last I check, neither one was sacrificed. If you're asking which one was taken to be used as a sacrifice, for us Muslims it's Ishmael. Jews and Christians say it's Isaac.

Exactly. Baha'u'llah writes:

"Consider: all those who believe in past Scriptures think of Isaac as the Sacrifice; likewise, the people of Qur'án confirm this station for Ishmael. It is clear and evident to every possessor of insight and every religious person that no one was, outwardly sacrificed; all agree that an animal was sacrificed. So, ponder upon this: Why is it that a person who hath gone to the altar of sacrifice for the Beloved and yet hath come back alive, is adorned with the raiment of 'Sacrifice of God' and accepted as such? There is no doubt that this is so because of the Word of God. Therefore, the criterion for the manifestation of all names and for confirmation and fulfillment of all stations is dependent upon the Word of God. Likewise, there is no doubt, that the Inaccessible, Unknowable [God] doth not talk as He is, and hath always been, sanctified from such conditions; rather, He speaketh through the tongue of His Manifestations.Thus the Torah issued from the tongue of Moses. The same is true of other Holy Scriptures: all were revealed by the tongues of Prophets and Messengers but, the real Speaker in all these Holy Books is the One true God.... It is now, therefore, established and confirmed that the station of 'Sacrifice of God' was, according to past Books, given to Isaac by Abraham and that very same station is, according to Divine Revelation, Ishmael's in the Qur'ánic Dispensation."

 

[smaneck]

If I came across this question only with the knowledge that Gd dealt with Israel for 1500 years following Gds encounter with Abraham and that this dealing involved moses, 40+ prophets as well as Christ, and that the line of Ishmael is silent for 2000 years since Abraham, I would answer Isaac. Logical?

One reason for their 'silence' may well have been they didn't have a writing system until shortly before Muhammad. Even during Muhammad's time it was only partially developed. But there were Arab Prophets. They are mentioned in the Qur'an.

In any case, the question of who inherited Abraham's promise of Palestine and who was sacrificed are really two different questions. If Ismael had to give up his birthright in order that Isaac might inherit and ended up being expelled from his home for that purpose then in a very real sense he was the one sacrificed. So my response to Kenzo was not entirely facetious.

Incidentally, the Palestinian people for the most part are not descendants of Ismael. They were originally Aramaic speakers who came to speak Arabic after the Arab invasions. For the most part they are likely Samaritans, descendants from the northern kingdom of Israel. What is today the State of Israel would have therefore been their original territory. The Kingdom of Judah's territory, incidentally was located in what we now call the Gaza Strip.

Maybe they should just trade territories and everything will be as it was.

 

[football5680]

Genesis 2:22 has


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.
.....................................

Ishmael was the only son of Abraham for what? fourteen years.

Genesis 16:16


And Abram was fourscore and six years old, when Hagar bare Ishmael to Abram.

So Abraham was eighty six when Ishmael was born.

Genesis 21:5


And Abraham was an hundred years old, when his son Isaac was born unto him.

I didn't quote the bible because the bible is clear on this issue.

But God said to him, "Do not be so distressed about the boy and your slave woman. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. (Genesis 21:12)

 

[smaneck]

But God said to him, "Do not be so distressed about the boy and your slave woman. Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. (Genesis 21:12)

And thus Ismael was sacrificed.

 

[Masihi]

Does anyone think Gd allowed the accounts of Christ and his sayings to be changed?

"I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven." - Mathew 8.11

"But about the resurrection of the dead--have you not read what God said to you, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob' ? He is not the God of the dead but of the living." When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching. - Mathew 22.31

 

[smaneck]

Does anyone think Gd allowed the accounts of Christ and his sayings to be changed?

"I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven." - Mathew 8.11

"But about the resurrection of the dead--have you not read what God said to you, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob' ? He is not the God of the dead but of the living." When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching. - Mathew 22.31

So what are you saying? That your god isn't the God of Ismael as well?

If so, your god is too small.

 

[muslimsoldier4life]

Does anyone think Gd allowed the accounts of Christ and his sayings to be changed?

Bible's been edited over the centuries. So yes, pretty sure it's been allowed by the Church.

 

[Masihi]

Bible's been edited over the centuries. So yes, pretty sure it's been allowed by the Church.

That conclusion is a necessary one for you, in order to bring you comfort as a muslim. And that conclusion came after you announced shahada, not before.

""46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. 47 I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your forefathers ate the manna in the desert, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." - John 6

 

[football5680]

And thus Ismael was sacrificed.

What makes you come to that conclusion. Ishmael was sent away and wasn't sacrificed.

So Abraham got up early the next morning, prepared food and a container of water, and strapped them on Hagar's shoulders. Then he sent her away with their son, and she wandered aimlessly in the wilderness of Beersheba. (Genesis 21:14)

Next Chapter

He said, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” (Genesis 22:2)

Ishmael was sent away and the only son Abraham still had was Isaac. It also says his name.

 

[smaneck]

Bible's been edited over the centuries. So yes, pretty sure it's been allowed by the Church.

There is not much evidence that the sayings of Jesus Himself were edited. These were often much better remembered than the circumstances in which He said things. For instance, one gospel account has Jesus giving the Beatitudes up on a mountain top, another account has Him giving them from a boat. But the content of the Sermon remains the same in both gospels.

There is a reference to the Trinity that got tacked on to one of John's Epistles which you can find in the King James Bible, but when it was realized this was not in the earlier manuscripts it was removed from later translations.

 

[smaneck]

What makes you come to that conclusion. Ishmael was sent away and wasn't sacrificed.

Apparently you missed my point. For a man to have to send his first born son into exile is most definitely a sacrifice. Yes, I realize that the Bible has it that Abraham later attempted to sacrifice Isaac, but the Bible is written by Isaac's descendants, after all.

 

[LoAmmi]

Apparently you missed my point. For a man to have to send his first born son into exile is most definitely a sacrifice. Yes, I realize that the Bible has it that Abraham later attempted to sacrifice Isaac, but the Bible is written by Isaac's descendants, after all.

Except that isn't quite what happened. The text reports that Sarah's request greatly distressed Abraham but that HaShem told him to listen to Sarah and that from Ishmael would come a great nation. HaShem basically promised to ensure Ishmael was alright.