Plainbibletruth's Posts

Nairaland Forum › Plainbibletruth's Profile › Plainbibletruth's Posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 (of 29 pages)

Christianity Etc › Re: A Comparison Between Jesus And Muhammad by plainbibletruth: 8:51pm On Jul 08, 2015

mustymatic:
SHOW WHERE THEY'VE SINNED.
Don't think that jus cos u seek for forgiveness means u hav sinned

You seem to be forgetting something here: You were the one that first made the statement that they never sinned. So it is your responsibility to prove it, not push it at me. You're the one to SHOW HOW THEY NEVER SINNED. Once you do that the issue should be resolved.

Besides, my major point is still this: Jesus is the ONLY PERSON who ever lived who had ALL these unique attributes together to make him the MOST UNIQUE and supernatural person who ever lived.

Other prophets may have exhibited one thing or the other that Jesus did. But NONE of them combines ALL in one person.

Do you dispute this?

Christianity Etc › Re: A Comparison Between Jesus And Muhammad by plainbibletruth: 9:51am On Jul 08, 2015

mustymatic:
Muhammad pbuh never sinned, Ibrahim, Yusuf, Mary, Etcetera

Mustymatic, are you being sincere or is it that you want to just respond?

Can you show clearly how "Muhammad pbuh never sinned, Ibrahim, Yusuf, Mary, Etcetera"?

But also note what I said previously:
Other prophets may have exhibited one thing or the other that Jesus did. But NONE of them combines ALL in one person.

Do you now see that he is the ONLY PERSON who ever lived who had ALL these unique attributes together to make him the MOST UNIQUE and supernatural person who ever lived?

Christianity Etc › Re: A Comparison Between Jesus And Muhammad by plainbibletruth: 8:27am On Jul 08, 2015

mustymatic:
No brother, what are the uniqueness, we Muslims believe he perfomed miracles by the will of his Creator, other prophets before him did, so what are you saying? he was given birth without having a father, Adam had neither father nor mother, why don't you worship him too, how miraculous is that? Jesus is not beyond other prophets..
The quran doesn't in anyway contradict itself.
peace!

I'm not just pointing at ONE area but stating that NO SINGLE person COMBINES all these unique attributes together. Jesus Christ was the ONLY ONE who had ALL these attributes IN ONE PERSON.

Adam sinned. Jesus was sinless. That makes him uniquely different from Adam.
In fact no other person or prophet matched him in this uniqueness. Is there one?

Other prophets may have exhibited one thing or the other that Jesus did. But NONE of them combines ALL in one person.

Do you now see that he is the ONLY PERSON who ever lived who had ALL these unique attributes together to make him the MOST UNIQUE and supernatural person who ever lived?

3 Likes 1 Share

Christianity Etc › Re: A Comparison Between Jesus And Muhammad by plainbibletruth: 11:35pm On Jul 07, 2015

mustymatic:
Uniqueness means to hav no equal right?
here's what The quran says
Surah Aal-e-Imran, Verse 59ً:ُ
Verily, in the sight of God, the nature of Jesus is as the nature of Adam, whom He created out of dust and then said unto him, "Be" - and he is.
So your answer is NO!

All humans have flesh but some excel in one area or the other more than most. For example, majority cannot do the 100 meters dash in 10 seconds. If I asked you if the man who does 100 meters in less than 10 second is extraordinary (has no equal) in that respect, what would your answer be?

In the same Jesus had human nature like Adam but was still above and beyond other humans, unique regarding his sinlessness in addition to his combined uniqueness in supernatural birth, supernatural life and supernatural end of his human life.

So, unless you are saying that this single verse you quoted invalidates all the other ones about Jesus' uniqueness or that the Quran is contradicting itself, you really have to accept the FACT of his uniqueness unless you want to disregard the Quran or even disbelieve it.

1 Like

Christianity Etc › Re: A Comparison Between Jesus And Muhammad by plainbibletruth: 10:45am On Jul 07, 2015

mustymatic:
Do you believe in the quran now?

It is a historical document. Whether it is based on facts and worthy of acceptance is another matter.

( Just as Shakespeare's 'Julius Caesar' is. Whether an incident there should be accepted as right or wrong is another matter)

For those who claim to hold on to it, the issue is whether that accept it's statements about the uniqueness of Jesus regarding his sinlessness in addition to his combined uniqueness in supernatural birth, supernatural life and supernatural end of his human life.

Do you believe in the Quran's claim about Jesus' uniqueness?

Christianity Etc › Re: A Comparison Between Jesus And Muhammad by plainbibletruth: 10:36pm On Jul 06, 2015

mustymatic:
Where did you get that?

You now want to pretend not to be following the thread or what?

Jokers!

Ok, go here for some basic lessons:
https://www.nairaland.com/2391643/uniqueness-jesus-quran

Christianity Etc › Re: For My Muslim Brothers! Please I Really Need Answers To This Direly... by plainbibletruth: 9:55pm On Jul 05, 2015

ParrishNorwood:
I am known by many names, and yes, our paths have crossed many times before now, you're just too clueless to notice, until now?

Clueless?

Just wanted to point out your slip.

Remember me mentioning passing of baton?

Christianity Etc › Re: For My Muslim Brothers! Please I Really Need Answers To This Direly... by plainbibletruth: 7:44pm On Jul 05, 2015

ParrishNorwood:
Yeah, I thought I already schooled you on that topic? Clown!

Have our paths crossed before now?

You Registered: July 4th, 2015

You used the word: clown
Similar to some other 'person' I know.

Strikethrough!

Part of the same circle?

Hmm! Interesting!

Christianity Etc › Re: A Comparison Between Jesus And Muhammad by plainbibletruth: 6:19pm On Jul 05, 2015

Going through this:
https://www.nairaland.com/2391643/uniqueness-jesus-Quran
one can see that "the difference is clear!"
Jesus stands head and shoulders above every other human being.

Christianity Etc › Re: For My Muslim Brothers! Please I Really Need Answers To This Direly... by plainbibletruth: 6:10pm On Jul 05, 2015

ParrishNorwood:
https://christ786./2014/08/25/answering-mario-joseph-muslim-imam-convert/

I think his confusion was pretty much summarized there.

And christianity is a joke. Not an insult, an accurate description.

Go here and see this:
https://www.nairaland.com/2410291/which-son-did-god-ask
and decide which is more of a joke.

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 10:33pm On Jul 04, 2015

Matters Arising - 2
1. It is undisputed that Abraham was married to Sarah.
2. It is undisputed that Abraham asked for a son.
3. It is clear that the Quran never directly mentions the name of the intended sacrificial child.
4. It is clear, however, that there is emphasis in the Quran as to the good news of the birth of Isaac - AND WE GAVE HER THE GOOD NEWS OF ISAAC (Q.11:71).
No such emphasis is placed on the birth of Ishmael.
5. It should be obvious that since Sarah (and not Hagar) was the one barren, Abraham’s prayer to God to grant him a righteous son (Q.37:100) could not have been for a son through Hagar.
6. Sarah's comment in Q.11:72 buttresses this.
7. The son born through God's promise - the good news- and miraculous intervention was therefore Isaac. The Covenant was to be perpetuated through him.
8. So, a careful reflection on relevant portions of the Quran points to Isaac and not Ishmael.
9. Historically being FIRSTBORN does not necessarily confer any special status on that one. In many cases even ADOPTED SONS were given position of privilege.
10. If the issue of FIRSTBORN is to be stressed, then it is only logical that the FIRSTBORN of the legitimate wife should have precedence or preference.

2 Likes

Christianity Etc › Re: A Comparison Between Jesus And Muhammad by plainbibletruth: 6:25pm On Jul 03, 2015

parisbookaddict:
Lol.. Like how u floored Rilwayne001 with his own Koran..

See how he couldn't put up a good defence here and is now asking for a thread to be created..Lol!

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 6:12pm On Jul 03, 2015

Demmzy15:
Of course, readers would surely judge because I've done justice. You want me to keep repeating myself like I gat nothing to do?! No! No! No! Dats not possible! I can't repeat myself, check my replies to 'Scholar' it's there!

Hey guy, you never stated why Ishmael was included in the covenant by reason of 'circumcision' alone while other males who were equally circumcised were excluded.
Show us!

1 Like

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 6:06pm On Jul 03, 2015

Demmzy15:
I'm done with this issue, I've answered this similar question so search for my reply. I can't reply myself!

I'm glad other readers can see things clearly and decide for themselves which position is reasonable and which one is not!
They can also see the person who wants to give a clear and simple answer and who it is who wants to 'run for cover'.
Cheers!

PS
Another strikethroughs?

2 Likes

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 5:59pm On Jul 03, 2015

Demmzy15:
Which superior position?! You want me to be saying the same thing over and over again?! O boy I no get time, understand my position by reading by posts from the beginning!

Let's start with this:

You used this Bible passage:
"...Abraham took ..... all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him." Genesis 17:23
to say that Ishmael was INCLUDED in the covenant or "that God has a covenant with Ishmael." because, according to you, "This shows the covenant is about 'circumcision'."

Notice that it was not only Abraham and Ishmael that were circumcised; ALL MALES were circumcised.

So, do you think that EVERY MALE in Abraham's house, simply by virtue of being circumcised AUTOMATICALLY became part of God's covenant with Abraham?

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 12:30pm On Jul 03, 2015

[quote author=Demmzy15 post=35434879][/quote]Apparently when you are faced with SUPERIOR position on an issue you 'run for cover'. And strikethroughs are your best defence!
grin

1 Like

Christianity Etc › Re: Contradictions Analyzed:bible And Quran. by plainbibletruth: 12:27pm On Jul 03, 2015

malvisguy212:
No muslim is able to defend the quran?

They need to 'consult' with one another and their higher authorities before they can put on any defence.

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 12:18pm On Jul 03, 2015

[size=5pt]

Demmzy15:
We'll see.

We need to understand this story together and I'll explain step by step!

God speaks about his covenant

This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee: Every man child among you shall be circumcised. Genesis 17:10

This shows the covenant is about 'circumcision'.

Then when we go further, God explains more

But my covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee at this set time in the next year. Genesis 17:21

Going Further

And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him. Genesis 17:23

COMMENT

I must direct your attention to verse 10 above, where God says "this is my covenant ... every man child among you shall be circumcised". In verse 23 we learn that Ishmael, who was 13 years old at that time (Yeeiii!!!) was immediately circumcised. Therefore, the Bible says -- in plain Hebrew -- that God has a covenant with Ishmael.

Isaac was not yet born!

But wait a minute. A complication enters into the picture in verse 21. Here, God says "But my covenant will I establish with Isaac".

We can't be sure if indeed this is what the Bible says except the source is revisited. Let's take a tour to the Hebrew world, a sister language to Arabic.

Genesis 17:21

V'et b'risee a-keem et Yitzchak

Translating from b'risee you'll get "my covenant will I establish with Isaac". But the problem lies when we're to translate v'et , the translators translated it as 'But', which is not true.

The Hebrew prefix "V-" (vav) is defined by Langenscheidt's Hebrew Dictionary as a conjunction, meaning "and, and therefore, also, then, yet".

So we can see deliberate mistranslation on the part of the translators. Just with the changing of this words it has totally affected the context and meaning.

"And my covenant will I establish with Isaac"...

... which has a vastly different meaning than:

"But my covenant will I establish with Isaac"...

The former translation says that there is a covenant -- perhaps even of land! -- with Ishmael, AND there is also such a covenant with Isaac.
The latter translation says that there is a covenant -- of some poorly-defined sort -- with Ishmael, BUT the "real" covenant -- especially that part involving the land -- is exclusively with Isaac!

Even if the word of God is clear and unambiguous, we can't still trust the translators. Please I want you to research on this also!

The Torah has you know has different versions which totally contradict each, they were written in totally different years with different authors. They include Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS), Septuagint (LXX), Masoretic Text (MT), Samaritan Torah(ST) all written in different eras with some earliest dating to be 9th century AD(approximately 200 years after Prophet Muhammad)

If I start listing the contradictions, no one would gerrout from here. Dem too plenty wallahi!

Ibrahim's Supplication to Allah when He brought Isma`il to Makkah
Allah mentions here, while bringing forth more evidences against Arab polytheists, that the Sacred House in Makkah was established on the worship of Allah alone, without partners. He also states that Ibrahim, who established the city, has disowned those who worship others besides Allah, and that he begged Allah to make Makkah peaceful and secure, Tafsir Ibn Kathir

[/size]

Even if you choose to put AND instead of BUT you cannot deny the fact that there is a SPECIFICITY to the covenant as regards Isaac.

On your issue with conjunctions and your thoughts to revisit the "source"; do you think the emphasis by God that his covenant will be with Isaac requires ANY CONJUNCTION for anyone to notice the special consideration or mention? Look again, remove the conjunction(s) and ask yourself this question afresh.

If you are honest enough you must admit that the Quran has more contradictions than the Bible. In addition to this,
- it is not chronological
- not arranged in any particular logic
- has more incomplete stories; some starting from the middle and still not concluded at the end
- has incomplete sentences which have to be "filled up" by commentators and translators
- grammatical mistakes
- etc
The Bible on the other hand, has greater clarity in all these areas.

The issue of Abraham taking Ishmael to Mecca is very disputable historically. At what age was Ishmael taken to Mecca by Abraham? Was it before or after Isaac was born? Was Abraham shuttling between the place where he was with Sarah and Mecca to see Hagar and Ishmael?
Because a number of Muslim Arabs wanted to 'connect' with Abraham as their ancestor they chose to emphasize their link to Abraham - Ishmael.
Please I want you to research on this!

It is interesting how you pick and choose from the Bible! Even conjunctions!

If (and that is a big supposition) like you claim

This shows the covenant is about 'circumcision'.

and, like you stated, because Ishmael was circumcised:

Therefore, the Bible says --in plain Hebrew-- that God has a covenant with Ishmael.

when

"Isaac was not yet born!"

it means straightaway that since the Bible also stated that:
"...Abraham took ..... all that were born in his house, and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham's house; and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin in the selfsame day, as God had said unto him." Genesis 17:23
then all these ones should by your 'logic' be INCLUDED in the covenant.
Maybe you should tell us if you believe it is so or not.

So, do you think that EVERY MALE in Abraham's house, simply by virtue of being circumcised AUTOMATICALLY became part of God's covenant with Abraham?

Another thing you have DELIBERATELY AVOIDED is this: After Abraham, God referred to his covenant and the line God chose to do this through was always Isaac's not Ishmael.

You seem to excite yourself with strikethroughs! That must be your way of running away from issues you cannot handle!

2 Likes

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 10:48am On Jul 02, 2015

Matters Arising

I believe the issue of FIRST BORN has been well dealt with: being born first does not necessarily CONFER any special privilege on that one.
Examples have been given of other First Born who became second fiddle.
Therefore using that to argue for Ishmael does not hold water.

It is clear to anyone with a measure of fair-mindedness that Isaac is more emphasized even in the Quran than Ishmael.

There is absolutely NOTHING in Genesis that even faintly suggests that:

"God promises to establish his covenant with all of Abraham's "seed" without exception: "

Blessings, yes, but covenant, no.
In that very passage Abraham brought up the issue of Ishmael BUT God said 'No!' How clear can that get. That is why I had mentioned earlier that those who seek to use the Bible to justify their position shouldn't go there. They'll just simply fall down flat on their faces unless of course they want to use special 'logic' to do that - they'll pick whichever verse or part they choose to and discard or twist the rest.

It is possible for God to "logically (and) practically (.............) command Abraham to sacrifice Isaac" because, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, it is a TEST of Abraham's faith in the first place! Even if Abraham had killed Isaac he was convinced that God would raise him back to life - Hebrews 11:"17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son,
18 of whom it was said, "Through Isaac shall your offspring be named."
19 He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back."
It was because it was supposed to be a test that it had to be the son of promise or the son of the covenant that was involved and not any other.

Those who talk about "inconsistencies", "contradictions", "tampering" etc in the Bible account to justify this Ishmael issue do not appear to me to have specifically shown how. Instead what one finds is that rather than stick to the passage under consideration another unrelated passage is presented by those who want to appear 'knowledgeable' ending up distorting focus.

Unless these so called changes can be clearly proven they remain purely a matter of conjecture.

The "only son" simply means: the only son through whom God's covenant with Abraham was to be established.

Anyone who seeks to rewrite the part of Genesis that specifies through whom God established his covenant will need to ALSO rewrite the entire documentation in the Bible about Israel. If more than Isaac is involved then these people should not just stop at Ishmael but SHOW us how each of the REST of Abraham's sons showcased the covenant.

2 Likes 2 Shares

Christianity Etc › Re: The Uniqueness Of Jesus In The Quran by plainbibletruth(op): 9:19pm On Jun 30, 2015

rabzy:
The Jews didn't kill John, it was Herod an edomite that killed John. John was highly regarded as a prophet even the political and hypocritical pharisees were afraid to deny his prophet-hood.

Thanks for setting the records straight!
I guess Confirmer still has some learning to do.

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 9:02pm On Jun 30, 2015

I see that our friends have REFuSEd to answer questions they know clearly show the weakness of their position.

The ONLY son that Abraham had with his CHOICE wife Sarah is Isaac. Even in the Quran Abraham's relationship with Sarah is the one projected; not any other least of all between him and Hagar.

Why anyone would therefore downplay the child of promise, born through divine intervention, by these two and choose to go with one who was born normally by the maid, beats the imagination, except that these guys have a "logic" they work by. That 'logic' discard clear facts, supernatural hand of God and specific declarations by God. That 'logic' chooses tradition over all other. It's a 'logic' that runs on preconceived notions rather clear evidence.

For example, "we gave him.......Isaac" and "we blessed him and Isaac" surely ought to indicate to any perceptive mind that there is more to this than the normal or ordinary.

What many have chosen to do is to re-write history. But somehow history has included in the Quran evidence of the supernatural here and there that should make the discerning SEE the truth. And only the truth sets free.

2 Likes 1 Share

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 8:58pm On Jun 30, 2015

DravenCreighton:
Jcross19

I have been banned from the islam for muslims section, I don't know what I did or who I offended, I will respond you as soon as the ban is lifted Gods willing if I remember.

Maybe you should change your name to something more 'Islamic'?
wink

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 1:10pm On Jun 30, 2015

[size=5pt]

Demmzy15:
This what I call self denial, you haven't refuted anything. You just keep hanging on a branch which is loose. Even Encyclopedia Judaica states contrary.

Of course I pointed out where it did say so in the Qur’an with tangible and reliable explanations, but you choose to reject because your arguments have crumbled!

Lie! The Bible's account is very confusing and contradicting, if we revisit it, you'll be shooting yourself on the foot.

Read the verse and understand, I equally agreed to the good news. One was ultimately greater than one, which was Ishmael's birth. The verse 99-102 speaks about Abraham asking for a son in which he was granted. From 103 down to 111 speaks about the supposed sacrifice. Verse 112 shows another good news with 'the conjunction' AND(which means in addition to), so the verse 112 starts with AND(in addition to the other good news)-he was given Isaac. So simple!

Not my business, I'm here to answer the question the OP raised at the heading of the thread.

All Prophets of God are righteous men, Ishmael was righteous and then was given to Abraham. Same as Isaac, the verse 112 talks about Isaac as "one of the Righteous." The son to be sacrificed was Ishmael!

[/size]

Demmizy, what is self denial. What haven't I refuted? What loose branch am I hanging on to? What contrary thing did Encyclopedia Judaica state and why do you want to claim it as your authority?

Are you saying the Quran said so or that you used "tangible and reliable explanations" to claim that Quran said so. If it is so plain quoting it again shouldn't be a problem.

The Bible account is quite clear. The Bible is VERY chronological, UNLIKE the Quran, so following a story or trend in the Bible is more straightforward. So don't even go there.

The conjunction you now want to use in justifying your claim occurs in a number of places in the chapter so why single it out here?

We are not talking about "All Prophets of God (who) are righteous men" I'm saying the passage specifically talks of 'the righteous son' Abraham asked God and God gave to him that was later asked to be sacrificed!

If the son was not SPECIAL why would the test come up for Abraham to sacrifice him?

Like I've pointed out:
It is clear from the Quran that Abraham asked for a son.
It is also clear that Sarah was involved.
It is clear that the Quran states that: "we gave him.......Isaac" and "we blessed him and Isaac"
In all these you clearly see Isaac mentioned.

If Abraham and Sarah are involved who is their son? Obviously Isaac.

So can we find Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael in ALL these? The simple answer is: No

Did the Quran explicitly state that it cannot be Isaac? The simple answer again is: No.

1 Like

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 11:33am On Jun 30, 2015

[size=5pt]

Demmzy15:
99. He said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me
100. "O my Lord! Grant me a righteous (son)!"
101. So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son.
102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!"
103. So when they had both submitted (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),
104. We called out to him "O Abraham! ...
105. "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" - thus indeed do We reward those who do right. Qur’an 37

Points You Should Consider

. It is well known that Abraham(P) got his first child in his old days (more than 80 years old). By all means, when he was given the news of his first son, Ishmael(P), the news were great and not only good. It seems reasonable to think that the news of having his second son, Isaac(P) would be equal or less because in the first time the surprise factor has certainly increased his happiness.

. More to the point, using the same argument as the opposition, one can safely say that the sacrificed was described as forbearing and steadfast in the Qur'ân and if we search the whole Qur'ân we will find the name of Ishmael(P) associated to patience and steadfastness and not Isaac(P)!

. Indeed verse 21:85 (in red) reads
"And (remember) Ishmael, Idris, and Zulkifl, all (men) of constancy and patience".

The points DravenCreighton mentioned were very clear, lemme try and explain better!

There are two distinct news contained in the verse, the birth of Isaac happens after the supposed sacrifice was to be done(even the Bible shows that). When you go a little further to verse 112-113 of the same Chapter, you'll find the second news. One happened before Isaac was born and the other was the good news of Isaac's birth.

107. And We ransomed him with a momentous sacrifice:
108. And We left for him among generations (to come) in later times:
109. "Peace and salutation to Abraham!"
110. Thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
111. For he was one of Our believing Servants.
112. And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous.
113. We blessed him and Isaac: but of their progeny are (some) that do right, and (some) that obviously do wrong, to themselves.

So Qur’an 37: 99-113 shows 2 distinct favours, here is a full recap. The favor with Ishmael(when Isaac wasn't even born) is in red emphasis and that of Isaac is in blue:

[b]9. He said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me!
100. "O my Lord! Grant me a righteous (son)!"
101. So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son.
102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!"
103. So when they had both submitted (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),
104. We called out to him "O Abraham! ...
105. "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" - thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
106. For this was a clear trial-
107. And We ransomed him with a momentous sacrifice:
108. And We left for him among generations (to come) in later times:
109. "Peace and salutation to Abraham!"
110. Thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
111. For he was one of Our believing Servants.
112. And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous.
113. We blessed him and Isaac: but of their progeny are (some) that do right, and (some) that obviously do wrong, to themselves.[/b]

[/size]

The issue with you guys is that you want to point people to something not clearly in the passage. What is happening is that you are using what you have been told to 'interpret' the passage. You're stamping your preconceived notions on the passage.

Where in the passage did it say that:

"the birth of Isaac happens after the supposed sacrifice was to be done(even the Bible shows that)."

?
Nowhere!

The Bible account is very clear and everything had to do with Isaac.

Can't you see that verses 101 and 112 are both referring to "the good news"? The first one talked about the son without mentioning a name. The second now then specifically mentioned the name of the son - Isaac.

Have you answered all the questions I raised with Draven and come up with a different conclusion? I don't think so.

So again, like I said:
What should be OBVIOUS to you is that it was 'the righteous son' Abraham asked God and God gave to him that was later asked to be sacrificed! And that son was Isaac!

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 10:05am On Jun 30, 2015

Demmzy15:
Would you read it if I do?!

I read Draven's own post which I responded to above; didn't I?

Reading is no issue, is it?

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 8:31am On Jun 30, 2015*

[size=5pt]

DravenCreighton:
Argument? This isn't an argument, this is a comedy show. Read:

99. He said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me!
100. "O my Lord! Grant me a righteous (son)!"
101. So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son.
102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!"
103. So when they had both submitted (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),
104. We called out to him "O Abraham! ...
105. "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" - thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
106. For this was a clear trial-
107. And We ransomed him with a momentous sacrifice:
108. And We left for him among generations (to come) in later times:
109. "Peace and salutation to Abraham!"
110. Thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
111. For he was one of Our believing Servants.
112. And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous.
113. We blessed him and Isaac: but of their progeny are (some) that do right, and (some) that obviously do wrong, to themselves.

It is very obvious that, in this passage, there are two distinct good news, the first one about a forbearing son (the one to be sacrificed) and the second one about Isaac(P). Thus, the sacrificed cannot be Isaac(P) at least not according to the Qur'ân. But, once again, plainbibletruth avoided (willingly?) to quote the full passage and this is frequently his way of doing things.

Indeed verse 21:85 reads
"And (remember) Ishmael, Idris, and Zulkifl, all (men) of constancy and patience".

[/size]

If this is how much you can come up with I can only smh!

First, you did not show where the name of Ishmael was mentioned in the Sura 37 you quoted.

Secondly, you are quoting ONE passage, and in spite of the fact that the passage NEVER said so, you now INGENIOUSLY come up with the statement that:
"It is very obvious that, in this passage, there are two distinct good news"

If it is 'obvious' shouldn't we see it? Are you the one to create the obviousness?

Even if it is obvious that there are two distinct 'good news', what in the passage makes you think they are not related to the same one person?

What is obvious, mr man, is that Isaac's name is SPECIFICALLY mentioned. Ishmael' name is not.

However so as to make it 'obvious' you then turn to another ENTIRELY DIFFERENT passage where Ishmael is mentioned and you quote it WITHOUT SHOWING how that passage relates to the first where his name was never mentioned. What a 'logic'!

It is clear from the Quran that Abraham asked for a son.
It is also clear that Sarah was involved.
It is clear that the Quran states that: "we gave him.......Isaac" and "we blessed him and Isaac"

If Abraham and Sarah are involved who is their son? Obviously Isaac.

So can we find Abraham, Hagar and Ishmael in ALL these? The simple answer is: No

Did the Quran explicitly state that it cannot be Isaac? The simple answer again is: No.

Does this your quote:

"Indeed verse 21:85 reads
"And (remember) Ishmael, Idris, and Zulkifl, all (men) of constancy and patience".

have anything to do with Ishmael being either the promised son or the one intended for sacrifice or connected to Sura 11 or Sura 37?
The answer again is: No

So please take my points one by one and show the world how I avoid 'full passage' and how the entirely different passage you took adds to the one we are looking at to make it "FULL".

What should be OBVIOUS to you is that it was 'the righteous son' Abraham asked God and God gave to him that was later asked to be sacrificed! And that son was Isaac!

1 Like

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 7:27am On Jun 30, 2015

DravenCreighton:
He's a confused man. He insists on teaching muslims how to interpret the Quran, lol! He once quoted a verse for me and because the verse spoke of Isaac and Jacob but not Ishmael he says it means Ishmael was not a prophet, lol! Christian logic. The guy is a clown.

Demmzy15:
The verse you stated doesn't support your view, Isaac is a Prophet and his birth is a glad tiding. The verse didn't lay any emphasis on the sacrifice in which God used to test Abraham, it's Ishmael not Isaac!

It's really simple. If you claim it is Ishmael show us.

Bad-mouthing is not what wins arguments it's good reasoning.

Now since you're criticizing my 'Christian logic' I ask you to use your 'Islamic logic' to answer: where did the Quran state that it was Ishmael? Show us!

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 10:18pm On Jun 29, 2015

Demmzy15:
It's Ishmael not Isaac.

You saw Isaac stated in the verse I quoted didn't you?

1 Like

Christianity Etc › Re: The Uniqueness Of Jesus In The Quran by plainbibletruth(op): 8:20pm On Jun 29, 2015

Another point of agreement between the Qur'an and the Bible on the life of Jesus - the Second Coming of Jesus.

The plain teaching of the Qur'an and the Bible about Jesus is that the man Jesus is definitely not at the level of common humanity.

The two books agree on the second coming of Jesus. The Qur'an is backed by many Hadith on this point. Surah 43:61 is a text that is generally used to buttress this fact:
"And (Jesus) shall be a sign for (the coming of) hour (of Judgement)."

From the Bible:
"Then will appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory". Matthew 24:30

We can safely say that the second coming of Jesus to carry out the Day of Judgment is a fact that Qur'an and the Bible both agree on.

This again puts him head and shoulders above all other men in position - a uniqueness with the privilege of majesty and glory.

Indeed no one compares with him!

2 Likes

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 8:29am On Jun 29, 2015

DravenCreighton:
I'm just saying, why not quote the verses so everyone can see what they say, just saying.

Isaac, as the promised miraculously born child who was later intended for sacrifice, is specifically named in the Bible and the Quran. Ishmael, on the other hand, is not mentioned as such a one. It is Muslim scholars who INFER the name of Ishmael as the intended son for sacrifice.

Even the oldest Islamic tradition claim that the son intended for sacrifice was Isaac. It was much later, when the figure of Ishmael was more firmly established as the forebearer of a number of the Arab people, that Isaac, as the intended sacrifice, was jettisoned for Ishmael.

See this:
Sura 11:69-73

Sahih International
And certainly did Our messengers come to Abraham with good tidings; they said, "Peace." He said, "Peace," and did not delay in bringing [them] a roasted calf.

But when he saw their hands not reaching for it, he distrusted them and felt from them apprehension. They said, "Fear not. We have been sent to the people of Lot."

And his Wife was standing, and she smiled. Then We gave her good tidings of Isaac and after Isaac, Jacob.

She said, "Woe to me! Shall I give birth while I am an old woman and this, my husband, is an old man? Indeed, this is an amazing thing!"

They said, "Are you amazed at the decree of Allah ? May the mercy of Allah and His blessings be upon you, people of the house. Indeed, He is Praiseworthy and Honorable."

I hope quoting this verse has pacified you.

1 Like

Christianity Etc › Re: Which Son Did God Ask Abraham To Sacrifice? by plainbibletruth(op): 11:46pm On Jun 28, 2015

DravenCreighton:
I just love it when christians make claims about the Quran but refuse to actually quote the verses they speak of.

Are references quoted not enough?

Christianity Etc › Re: Contradictions Analyzed:bible And Quran. by plainbibletruth: 11:32pm On Jun 28, 2015

Confirmer:
Bro sorry but I have a life outside Nairaland and it seems you are giving a blind eyes to the indisputable evidence I have given you. I want you to answer these questions objectively; who was being tried by God, Abraham or Sarah? Who passed the test Adam or Sarah?
I have answered the answer whether Hagar upgraded to Abraham's wife or not in a post just above this. You didn't bother quoting any bible verse in your argument but relied on your reasoning and logic above the biblical verses.
According to the Quran, it was much later after he passed the test that he was blessed with Isaac Quran 37:100-113

I don’t know what your life outside NL has to do with a simple observation.

You use the word ‘logic’ a number of times in your posts. Yet instead of LOGICALLY presenting your positions you end up obscuring issues by moving from one thing to another instead of FOCUSING on the particular matter on hand.

Confirmer, if you want to use the biblical account to support your position then you must be ready to accept and use every part of it.

First, notice that it was Sarah that gave her maid to Abraham. Now, after this how was Hagar referred to? Look at what God said in Genesis 17: 19 –
“ Then God said, “Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him.”
God NEVER referred to Hagar as Abraham’s wife.

Again using the portion you quoted did Hagar refer to Sarah as her co-wife or mistress? Is that instructive?
“So Sarai, Abram’s wife, took her Egyptian maid Hagar and gave her to her husband Abram as a wife. Abram had been living ten years in Canaan when this took place. He slept with Hagar and she got pregnant. When Hagar learned she was pregnant, she looked down on her mistress.”

Look at the following:
Genesis 21: 9-10 “But Sarah saw that the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham was mocking, and she said to Abraham, “Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac.”
Genesis 21: 11-13 “The matter distressed Abraham greatly because it concerned his son. 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. I will make the son of the slave into a nation also, because he is your offspring.”
NOTICE the words Sarah and God used – ‘whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham’, ‘that slave woman’, ‘your slave woman’

So if you must use the Bible then the honest thing to do is to accept the position it has presented.

Someone has pointed out to you that being the FIRST son does not necessarily confer any special status on the individual; at least not in the Bible – the story of Esau and Jacob is there for you to see and numerous others. (Btw, it would be good to see how the Quran treated Esau/Jacob issue in relation to who is first or second). No one is saying here that Ishmael is not Abraham’s son. The issue is: who has been given a position of privilege?

The Bible position here is “it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.”
Take it or leave it.

There is nothing in that portion of the Quran you quoted that says "it was much later after he passed the test that he was blessed with Isaac". Nothing! You are relying on your reasoning and logic here. grin

The truth is this: the Bible and the Quran specifically name Isaac; on the other hand it is Muslim scholars who INFER the name of Ishmael as the intended son.

Even the oldest Islamic tradition claim that the son intended for sacrifice was Isaac. It was much later, when the figure of Ishmael was more firmly established as the forebearer of a number of the Arab people, that Isaac, as the intended sacrifice, was jettisoned for Ishmael.

1 Like 1 Share

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 (of 29 pages)