Biblical Prophecies About Muhammad
Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Interfaith Dialogue
Forum Description: It is for Interfaith dialogue, where Muslims discuss with non-Muslims. We encourge that dialogue takes place in a cordial atmosphere on various topics including religious tolerance.
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4110
Printed Date: 26 November 2024 at 7:08am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Biblical Prophecies About Muhammad
Posted By: ak_m_f
Subject: Biblical Prophecies About Muhammad
Date Posted: 23 March 2006 at 11:41am
|
by
Dr. Jamal Badawi In the name of Almighty God, the Merciful, the Compassionate �Those who follow the Apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own Scriptures, in the Torah and the Gospel�� (Quran 7:157; Trans.: Yusuf Ali) Reference to the Bible Is it justifiable for Muslims to quote the Bible or quote from it? There appears to be two common and extreme misconceptions about the Muslims� attitudes towards the Bible: a) that Muslims base their faith in full or in part on the Bible; b) that Muslims reject the Bible in toto and accept no single word of it. For Muslims the Qur�an is the last but not the only holy book revealed by Allah to mankind through His messengers. It is, however, the only holy book which remained intact from the time of its revelation until the present time. Not only is the full text of the Qur�an available, but it is also available in the full and exact form as uttered by Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) at the time of its revelation and in the original language in which it was revealed (Arabic). No addition, deletion, or interpolation found its way into the Qur�an. For Muslims, the Qur�an is the only remaining authoritative and authentic revelation available to mankind; authoritative because an objective study of the Qur�an clearly shows its divine origin; and authentic because of the conclusive evidence that it remained intact and was transmitted to us as it was revealed without being mixed with human and philosophical ideas and doctrines. As such, Muslims do not need any other scriptures to base their faith on, either in full or in part. On the other hand, it is erroneous to think that Muslims reject the Bible in toto and do not accept a single passage of it. There are at least two reasons for this: a) One of the main articles of faith in Islam is the belief in all prophets and messengers sent before the advent of the last of them, Prophet Muhammad. This also necessitates believing in the holy books revealed to those prophets in the original forms of their revelation; b) According to the Qur�an all prophets were Muslims (i.e. those who consciously and lovingly submitted to the will of Allah), what they taught was nothing but earlier versions of Islam (conscious and loving submission to Allah) and their sincere followers were Muslims as well. The fact that the transmission of earlier revelations, prior to the Qur�an suffered from inaccuracies and misinterpretations does not justify a total and categorical rejection of such scriptures. There are bound to be some passages and portions of the Bible whose essence, if not wording, need not be rejected by Muslims. Criterion of Acceptance What is the Muslim basis or criterion for accepting or not accepting portions or passages from the Bible? The Qur�an itself provides such criterion: �And unto you have We revealed the Scripture with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watch over it .... � (the Qur�an 5:48) This emphasizes two main aspects of the Qur�an: a) The Qur�an confirms those teachings or passages of previous scriptures which remained intact. b) The Qur�an is the last, complete, authoritative and authentic revelation. It is the final arbiter and the only criterion to correct any inaccuracy or misinterpretation which might have occurred in the transmission of scriptures. It helps in discovering human additions to or interpolations of previous revelations, even as it reveals possible deletions which might have taken place through the centuries prior to its revelation (the Qur�an). Indeed one of the names of the Qur�an is al-Furqan (the criterion which distinguishes between right and wrong, truth and falsehood). It follows therefore that a Muslim has no reason to reject the essence of any passage in the Bible if such a passage is confirmed by the Qur�an. For example, we read in the New Testament a reiteration of one of the Ten Commandments: �And Jesus answered him. The first of all commandments is hear, 0 Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord� (Mark 12:29) A Muslim who reads this passage in the Qur�an can find no objection to its essence. After all the Qur�an confirms: �Say He is Allaah, the One and Only (God)� (The Qur�an 112:1) If, however, a Muslim reads in the Bible (or other previous scriptures for that matter) accusations of major moral sins levied against great prophets or doctrines which are totally negated in the Qur�an, the Muslim accepts only the Qur�anic version as the original unadulterated truth, revealed by Allah (God). Likewise if the Bible (or other scriptures) contains apparent prophecies about the advent of Prophet Muhammad, and if the Qur�an confirms that fact, then there is nothing unusual or objectionable in referring to such prophecies. Qur�anic Reference to Prophecies Is there any conclusive Qur�anic basis for claiming that the Bible did contain prophecies about the advent of Prophet Muhammad? The original revelations given to prophets in the past contained a complete and clear profile of the advent of Prophet Muhammad. Even in its present form(s) the Bible still contains several such prophecies as will be shown in the forthcoming chapters. It is useful, however, to start off by documenting the above statement. Describing true believers, the Qur�an states: �Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel which are with them). He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawfu1 for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Men those who believe in him, and honor him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.� (The Qur�an 7:157). This �ayah (passage) indicates that the characteristics as well as the teaching of that �Apostle, the unlettered Prophet� were mentioned in the �Torah� and the �Gospel�. Quoting the Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him), the Qur�an states: �And when Jesus, son of Mary said: 0 children of Israel: Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who will come after me, whose name is praised one. Yet when he has come unto them with clear proofs, they say: This is mere magic. (The Qur�an 61:6). An interesting aspect of this �ayah is that it indicates that in the original revelation uttered by Prophet Jesus, even the name of the long-awaited messenger was given: Ahmad, which is another name of Prophet Muhammad. This issue will be further discussed later on. Name or Signs? Turning to the Bible, some may hasten to ask: I read the Bible several times, but never saw the name Muhammad. What is the justification for the title �Muhammad in the Bible?� Many Christian theologians find no difficulty in pointing out what they consider as clear prophecies of the advent of Jesus. Where in the Old Testament does the name Jesus appear? Nowhere� The main question is whether or not the profile of �that prophet� to come was materialized, and who fits that profile? The profile of Prophet Muhammad was so clear to many Jews and Christians among his contemporaries that many of them embraced Islam and accepted him as the fulfillment of numerous Biblical prophecies. Ever since, there have been many others who arrived at the same conclusion. Further questions pertaining to the possible mention of Muhammad�s name will be discussed later. Biblical Prophecies About Jesus Does that previous discussion mean that all prophecies which were believed to have been fulfilled in Prophet Jesus were actually fulfilled in Prophet Muhammad instead? There is no reason to rule out the possibility that some of the Old Testament Prophecies were in fact fulfilled in Prophet Jesus. This does not constitute a problem for the Muslims. On the authority of the Qur�an alone, the Muslims accept Jesus as a legitimate and major prophet of Allah. The same was reiterated in the sayings of Prophet Muhammad. There are, however, several Old Testament prophecies which were for a long time misinterpreted so as to apply to Jesus. Such prophecies do in fact refer to Prophet Muhammad. One such prophecy is in Deuteronomy 18:18 to be discussed later. Analysis and reinterpretation of such prophecies should in no way reflect negatively on the honoured status of Prophet Jesus in the hearts of Muslims. It is rather a revelation of the truth which would have been proclaimed by Jesus himself if he were among us today. Main Elements in Muhammed�s Profile. What then are the elements of the �profile� of Prophet Muhammad as depicted in the Bible? That profile includes six crucial elements: The lineage of the prophet, His characteristics, The location from which he was to come, The revelation which was to be given to him, Events which were to take place in his lifetime, and The time when he was to come. Lineage of �That Prophet� Prophet Abraham: Common Father Jews, Christians, and Muslims claim a common father, Prophet Abraham, the patriarch of monotheism. What does his family tree look like? A simple look at it may help show some of the key figures in the Abrahamic family tree. Abraham married Sarah From their union they had in their progeny the following prophets: Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon, and Jesus. Abraham married Hagar. From their union they had in their progeny the following prophets: Ishmael and Muhammad. According to the Bible, Abraham was first named to Sarah who happened to be a barren woman and bore him no children (Genesis 16:1). In the chronology of the Book of Genesis, God made an important promise to Abraham, even before any child was born to him: �And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing. And I will bless them that bless thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. � (Gen. 12:2-3) In a later chapter in the Book of Genesis (Gen. 16) we are told that Sarah gave Abraham a handmaid (Hagar) to be his wife, in the hope that she may bear a child to Abraham. Hagar did bear Abraham�s first child whose name, Ishmael (peace be upon him), meaning �God hears�, was given by the angels (Gen. 16:11). For the following fourteen years, Ishmael was Abraham�s only child. After the birth of Ishmael and before the birth of Isaac, God�s promise to bless the families of the earth through Abraham�s descendants was repeated: �As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. � (Gen. 17:4) Another pleasant surprise was in store for Abraham. In his old age, his first wife Sarah was to bear him another child, Isaac (peace be upon him) (Gen. 21:5). The Bible tells us that because of jealousy, Sarah asked her husband Abraham to cast out Ishmael and his mother Hagar (Gen. 21:10) who subsequently dwelt in the wilderness of �PARAN� (Gen. 21:21). God�s promise to bless the descendants of Abraham was indeed realized. Through Abraham�s second son Isaac came the Israelite prophets, including Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon and Jesus (peace be upon them all), the last Israelite prophet. Fulfillment of God�s promise through the Israelite branch of Abraham is clearly and abundantly articulated in the Bible. How was that promise fulfilled through the Ishmaelite branch of the Abrahamic family tree? Or was it fulfilled at all? Or has it yet to be fulfilled? To start with, God does not renege on His promises, nor does he forget, them. It is interesting to note that while the Bible contains elaborate details about the Israelite branch, the Ishmaelite branch is virtually ignored. With the exception of a few references here and there, the Bible is virtually silent on the Ishmaelites. If it is accepted that God does not renege on His promises (a prerequisite of faith for any believer in God) then we are left with two possibilities: a. that such a promise of blessing which included the Israelites had been fulfilled; b. that it is yet to be fulfilled. It is well known that out of the descendants of Ishmael came the last great prophet of monotheism, Prophet Muhammad, whose followers constitute nearly one-fifth of the total world population in all corners of the earth. After blessing the descendants of Isaac, the Israelites, for centuries with the spiritual leadership, and after many lapses and rebellions against God on their part, a final chance was given to them through the mission of the last Israelite prophet, Jesus. When Jesus too was rejected, it was now time in God�s plan to fulfill His promise to the Ishmaelite branch as well, the branch which remained obscure until it was made a �great nation� through the mission of the well-known Prophet Muhammad, a descendant of Abraham through Ishmael. That shift of prophethood and spiritual leadership to the Ishmaelite branch of Abraham�s descendants brought to completion the centuries-old promise of God to bless the families of the earth through Abraham, the father of monotheism and patriarch revered by Jews, Christians and Muslims. To any unbiased mind, the above evidence alone suffices to show the connection between such great prophets as Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad If such prophecies about the advent of Prophet Muhammad are that obvious, how is it that millions of Bible readers could not come to such a conclusion? Putting other reasons aside for now, it seems that combination of erroneous notions and misinterpretations are partly responsible for this situation. Let�s analyze some of these notions. Objections to the Inclusion of Ishmael in God�s Covenant with Abraham Were Ishmael and his descendants excluded from God�s promise and covenant? A common, yet erroneous, answer to this question is yes. A number of reasons are given: Ishmael was not a legitimate son of Abraham. According to the commentators of The Interpreter�s Bible: �Ishmael, like Isaac, is a descendant of Abraham; but Isaac is the child of ultimate promise, born to Sarah the true wife while Ishmael is born of the slave girl. Though he came of the stock of Abraham, yet it was right that he should be separated from the legitimate son. This argument cannot be supported logically, morally, or even on the basis of the available versions of the Bible itself. Did the alleged state of bondage of Hagar prevent her from being a legitimate wife of Abraham. Why was she not a �true� wife? And if she were not a �true� wife like Sarah, what kind of wife was she? The text of the Bible, not withstanding the possibilities of later insertions or changes, does not make such a claim. In Genesis 16:3, Hagar is described as Abraham�s wife If Hagar was a legitimate wife of Abraham, there are no grounds whatsoever for questioning the legitimacy of her son Ishmael. Indeed the Bible refers to Ishmael as Abraham�s seed. Who was the first born child of Abraham. Even if Hagar was a bondwoman, does that affect the rights and privileges of her son Ishmael? The answer can be found in the Bible itself. In Hebrew traditions, the firstborn son was to have double portions of honour, even inheritance, and that right could not be changed due to the status of his mother. In The Interpreter�s Bible, we read the following commentary on Deut. 21:15-17: �However, the law of the first-born had ancient sanction, and so long as it was accepted justice demanded that mere favoritism not be allowed to deprive the eldest son of his rights. It should be noted that God does not subscribe to human attitudes of ethnic or racial superiority or exclusivism, much less the submergence of spiritual and human qualities of mankind because of a certain unfortunate state of bondage. The fallacy of Ishmael�s inferior status owing to his mother�s �inferior� social status is not only contrary to the Judaic law (e.g. Deut. 21:15-17), it is also contrary to the moral, humanitarian and universal nature of God�s revelation cherished by any believer in Him. b) Only Isaac was the son of promise and covenant. Sometimes reference is made to the following verses in the Book of Genesis: �But My Covenant will I establish with Isaac� (Gen. 17:2) �For in Isaac shall thy seed be called� (Gen. 21:12) An interesting question is raised here: Is it possible that the writer(s) of this book (Genesis) inserted such statements to favor his own clan, himself being an Israelite? According to The Interpreter�s Bible: �Many Israelites did not want a God who would be equally the God of all nations on the earth. They did not want one who would be impartial Holiness. They wanted a God who would be partial to them. So we read in Deutoronomy of demands for a complete extermination of all non-Israelitish peoples of Palestine (Deut. 7:2) and as to the carrying out of that injunction read the harsh sentences of Deut. 20:10-17. The possibility of insertions introduced to the supposedly �original� text of revelation is a matter that many Biblical scholars readily admit, including those scholars who are earnest believers in Christianity such as the editors of and contributors to The Interpreter�s Bible. For example, the word �Egyptian� which appears in Genesis 16:3 in reference to Hagar is suspected to be an insertion and that Hagar was indeed a Bedouin and not an Egyptian woman. In addition to such a possibility, if not likelihood, of insertions in Gen. 17:21 and 21:12, they do not in themselves conclusively exclude Ishmael from the promise and covenant of God. Both verses could be understood to refer to the relatively �near� future extending over centuries during which the covenant of God and the seeds of prophethood were to be mainly in the Israelite branch of Abraham�s family. Such limitation, however, does not mean or imply the exclusion of the descendants of Ishmael for good When these two verses (Gen. 17:12 and 21:12) are examined within the context of other verses in the same book, it becomes evident that the Ishmaelites were included in God�s promise and His covenant with Abraham: i) God�s covenant with Abraham was made before the latter had any children (Gen. 12:2-3). It was reiterated after the birth of Ishmael and before the birth of Isaac (Gen. 17:4); ii) While Gen. 21:12 indicates that in Isaac shall Abraham�s seed be called, the very following verse (Gen. 21:13) calls Ishmael Abraham�s seed; iii) As Isaac was blessed in the same book (Genesis), Ishmael is also specifically blessed and hence is included in God�s promise. �... of the son of the bondwoman (i.e. Ishmael) will I make a great nation because he is thy seed� (Gen. 21:13) The above promise was further confirmed a few verses later: �Arise, lift up the lad, and hold him in thine hand; for I will make him a great nation. � (Gen. 21:18) It may be noted here that when God speaks of �greatness�, He does not speak merely of numbers. �Greatness� in His own criterion is above all founded on faith, spiritual heritage and religious leadership. c) The Son of Promise must be one or the other: Isaac or Ishmael. This is typically expressed in a statement like the following: �Ishmael is set aside as the inheritor of the Covenant. The fact that the (supposed) elder son of Abraham did not become the heir of the divine Promise is accounted for in J2 by Hagar�s f1ight before the child�s birth (Ch. 16), and in E by her expulsion with the child (21:9-21)... One may inquire at this point: i) Why should there be only one child as the heir of the divine promise? Why not both sons in view of the evidence discussed already? ii) What type of divine justice punishes an innocent child because of his mother�s flight before he was even born (especially if that flight was prompted by the jealousy and mistreatment of Sarah)? iii) What type of divine justice (or even common sense) is that which punishes an innocent child because he and his mother were �expelled� to satisfy Sarah�s ego and bless her jealousy? Was Sarah dictating her desires to God, too? Why Were Ishmael and Hagar Taken Away? If Muslims too believe that Hagar, (Abraham�s wife) and her son Ishmael were settled in a different location, what is their version of the story? And how does that version compare to the Biblical version? The Muslim Version Prophet Abraham received instruction from God to take Hagar and her baby Ishmael to a specified barren and lifeless place in Arabia (paran), more specifically to Makkah (Mecca). In the Qur�an, Abraham is quoted: �Our Lord! I have made some of my offspring to dwell in a valley without cultivation by thy sacred house; in order, 0 Lord, that they may establish prayer: So fill the hearts of some among men with love towards them, and feed them with fruits: So they may give thanks.� (The Qur�an 14:37) When Abraham began to leave Hagar and Ishmael alone in such barren wilderness, Hagar cried to him: �Where are you leaving us?� The question was repeated three times but no answer was given by Abraham. Hagar then asked: �Did God ordain you to do this?� Abraham said: �Yes.� In complete faith and trust on God she responded �Then, He will not suffer us to be lost. � When Hagar ran out of water, she started to hasten between two little hills called As-Safa and Al-Marwah in search of water or for any passing traveler. After she hastened seven times without success, she returned to check on her baby (Ishmael) who was crying and kicking the ground with his heels. In this moment of despair and apparent certain death, a spring of water suddenly gushed forth from under Ishmael�s feet. That well later came to be known as the well of Zamzam. Since water is the most crucial element in desert life, some Bedouins began to settle around the well, gradually growing into the most important city in Arabia, Makkah (Mecca). Centuries later, out of the descendants of Ishmael came the last prophet of God, Prophet Muhammad who was born in Makkah (Mecca) some five centuries after the mission of the last Israelite prophet Jesus. It is interesting to note that until the present time, the hills of As-Safa and Al-Marwah are still easily identifiable. Indeed, hastening between these two hills is part of the annual rites of hajj (pilgrimage) performed by innumerable pilgrims every year. This rite is actually performed partly in commemoration of Hagar�s search for water and it dates back to Ishmael, long before the advent of Prophet Muhammad. Likewise, the Well of Zamzam which miraculously gushed forth from under baby Ishmael�s feet is still gushing with water until this time. Hundreds of thousands of pilgrims to Makkah (recently about two million) drink from it annually and many others drink from it year round. The Biblical Version Sarah, Abraham�s first wife was jealous of Hagar and her son Ishmael. She did not want Ishmael to inherit with her son Isaac as Ishmael was the son of the �bondwoman�. She was particularly angry because of what she considered as mockery on the part of Ishmael toward his younger brother Isaac while they were playing together. This incident took place after Isaac was weaned. Abraham obeyed his wife Sarah whose demand of casting out the �bondwoman� and her son was blessed by God who told Abraham to �hearken unto her voice�. One morning Abraham rose up, gave provisions and water to his wife Hagar and put her child Ishmael upon her shoulder, and left them in the wilderness of Beer Sheba in southern Palestine. When Hagar ran out of water, she could not stand sitting there and watching her child die. An angel appeared before her and showed her a spring of water of which she went and brought drink to the lad. The angel further told her �Arise, lift up the lad and hold him in thine hand; for I will make him a great nation�. Ishmael dwelt in the wilderness of �Paran�. He begot twelve sons one of whom was named �Kedar� Similarities Between the Two Versions How does this tradition compare with the Muslim version? There appear to be at least three similarities between the two versions: i) That Hagar and Ishmael were taken away from Palestine and dwelt in the wilderness (of Paran); ii) That Hagar ran out of water and was worried about the life of her son Ishmael; iii) That, unexpectedly, she had access to water which she gave to her son to save his life. Differences Between the Two Versions According to the Muslim version: Hagar and Ishmael were taken away because of a specific divine instruction given to Abraham as part of the divine plan. When the time came, prophethood was to shift from the Israelites to the Ishmaelites, after the rejection of the last Israelite prophet, Jesus, by the Israelites. Hagar and Ishmael were taken to the wilderness of Arabia, specifically to Makkah (Mecca) and not to Beet Sheba. This incident took place before the birth of Isaac and not after, when Ishmael was a baby, which is a further confirmation of the real reason for Hagar and Ishmael�s apparent exile as stated in the first difference. Analysis of Differences Is reconciliation of these differences possible? Let�s focus on the last difference, namely did this incident take place before or after Isaac�s birth? If we were to accept the Biblical version, we would encounter a number of inconsistencies and contradictions. It is abundantly clear from the story in Gen. 21:14-19 that Ishmael was a little baby at the time. Following is the documentation of this statement: According to Gen. 16:16 Abraham was 86 years old when Ishmael was born. And according to Gen. 21:5 Abraham was one hundred years old when Isaac was born. It follows that Ishmael was already fourteen years old when his younger brother Isaac was born. According to Gen. 21:14-19, the incident took place after Isaac was weaned. Biblical scholars tell us that �the child was weaned about the age of three�. It follows that when Hagar and Ishmael were taken away Ishmael was a full grown teenager seventeen years old. The profile of Ishmael in Gen. 21:14-19, however, is that of a small baby and not of a teenager. Why? First: According to The Interpreter�s Bible, the original Hebrew for Gen. 21:14 was �... and put the child upon her shoulder�. The same reading is rendered in the Revised Standard Edition of the Bible. How would a mother carry a seventeen year old teenager �upon her shoulder�? Certainly he was strong enough to carry his mother! Ishmael must have been a baby! Second: In Gen. 21:15 we are told that Hagar �cast� the child under one of the shrubs, Again, according to this Biblical text Ishmael must have been a baby and not a teenager. Third: In Gen. 21:16 we are told that Hagar sat away so that she may not see the death of the child before her own eyes. Is that a profile of a husky seventeen year old teenager who probably was capable of being worried about his mother dying before his eyes? Or is it obviously a profile of a small helpless baby or at most a small child? Fourth: According to Gen. 21:17, the angels told Hagar �arise, lift up the lad�. Is a seventeen year old young man a proper object to be �lifted up� by a woman? Or is that a reference to a small child or a baby? Fifth: In Gen. 21:19, we are told that Hagar went to fill the bottle with water �and give the lad a drink�. One would expect a strong young man of seventeen to go and bring water to his mother instead. The above analysis leads to the inevitable conclusion that while the Bible contains some truths as explained earlier, there is also evidence of human additions, deletions, and interpolations which only a subsequent authentic revelation (The Qur�an) could clear. The Islamic version of the story is fully consistent and coherent from A to Z; Ishmael was a baby and Isaac was not born yet when this incident took place. This coherence and consistency are confirmed by centuries-old traditions and even actual locations in Makkah (Mecca) where Hagar and Ishmael settled. This clearly implies that the real reason behind their settlement in Arabia (Paran) was not the dictation, jealousy, ego or sense of racial superiority on the part of Sarah. It was rather God�s plan; pure and simple. It may be relevant to indicate that this issue is not the only instance of inconsistency in respect to Ishmael�s story. The Interpreter�s Bible compares the story of Hagar and Ishmael in Gen. 21:14-19 with that in an earlier chapter (Gen. 16:1-16) and concludes �the inclusion in Genesis of both stories so nearly alike and yet sufficiently different to be inconsistent, is one of many instances of the reluctance of the compilers to sacrifice any of the traditions which has become established in Israel�. The Symbol of God�s Covenant with Ishmael and his Descendants According to Gen. 17:10-14, circumcision was regarded as a symbol of the covenant with God and a sign of purification from polytheism. The significance of circumcision is further reiterated by Christian Biblical scholars who indicate that it is not merely an external act: �This was His own sign and seal that Israel was a chosen people. Through it a man�s life was linked with a great fellowship whose dignity was its high consciousness that it must fulfill the purposes of God.� This picture is completed by referring to Gen. 17:23-27 in which we are told that Abraham took Ishmael and all those males born in his household and circumcised them. Commenting on this, The Interpreter�s Bible admits that the Ishmaelites and other descendants of Abraham were �somehow participating in the Abrahamic covenant�. It is notable that the descendant of Ishmael, Prophet Muhammad, as well as his followers remain until today faithful to this covenant. Circumcision is required of every male Muslim. Using The Interpreter�s Bible�s wording, doesn�t that mean that this was God�s �sign and seal� that the Ishmaelites were also part of God�s covenant in view of their commitment to purify their belief from all forms of polytheism and to restore the pure and true monotheism of their grandfather Abraham? Are they not closer to the Abrahamic covenant than those who sought excuses not to practice circumcision? Surely many nations on earth were blessed through Abraham. Those closest to Abraham, to the purity and universal scope of the monotheism he taught and to the �sign and seal� of his covenant with God are presently found among the followers of Ishmael�s notable descendant Muhammad. Even without this blood relationship, which is undisputed, the more important relationship with Abraham is the relationship of faith in God�s words: �Abraham was not a Jew or Christian; but he was true in Faith, and bowed his will to God�s (was a Muslim) and he joined not gods with God. Without doubt, among people, the nearest of kin to Abraham are those who follow him, as are also this apostle (Muhammad) and those who believe. And God is the Protector of those who have faith.� (The Qur�an 3:67-68) Further Evidence About the Lineage of the Long-awaited Prophet The foregoing discussion is more than enough to demonstrate that the advent of Prophet Muhammad, a descendant of Ishmael, was indeed the fulfillment of the promise made to Abraham and Hagar (Gen. 21:13, and 18). An additional confirmation which leaves no iota of doubt is found in the Book of Isaiah (Ch. 11:1-2): �And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots. And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge, and of the fear of the Lord.� The profile given in this chapter is of someone who will be a prophet, a statesmen and a judge and is of the descendants of �Jesse�. Who is �Jesse�? And who met these descriptions? Some contend that �Jesse� is a reference to David�s father. According to Encyclopedia Biblica, however, we read: �Jesse is contracted from Ishmael. The only one who came from Ishmael�s �stem� who was a prophet, statesmen and judge was Prophet Muhammad. II Characteristics of the Awaited Prophet - A Prophet Like Unto Moses In the Book of Deuteronomy, Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) was quoted as saying: �And the Lord said unto me, they have well spoken that which they have spoken, I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.� (Deuteronomy 18:17-18) Three important elements are included in this prophecy: A prophet will come from among the �brethren� of the Israelites; this prophet will be �like unto Moses�; God will put his words in the mouth of this prophet. Let us look closely at each of these elements: A Prophet From Among the Brethren of the Israelites When these words were spoken, they were addressed to the Israelites. The most notable �brethren� of Israelites (descendants of Abraham through his second son Isaac), are the Ishmaelites (descendants of Abraham through his first son Ishmael). According to the Hebrew Dictionary of the Bible, �Brethren� is the: �Personification of a group of tribes who were regarded as near kinsmen of the Israelites. � The Bible refers to the Israelites as the brethren of the Ishmaelites (e.g. Gen. 16:12, and Gen. 25:18). A Prophet Like Unto Moses It is sometimes contended that the prophet like unto Moses was Jesus. After all both were Israelites and spiritual teachers. Was this prophecy really about Jesus? To start off, Jesus himself was an Israelite, not of the �brethren� of the Israelites. This fact alone suffices to show that this particular prophecy is not about the coming of Jesus but about another prophet �like unto Moses�. That prophet could have been none but Prophet Muhammad. Following is a comparison between a few crucial characteristics of Moses, Muhammad and Jesus which may clarify the identity of �that prophet� who was to come after Moses: Area of Comparison Moses Muhammad Jesus Birth Usual Usual Usual Family Life Married, Children Married, Children No Marriage, or children Death Usual Usual Unusual Career Prophet/Statesman Prophet/Statesman Prophet Forced Emigration (in adulthood) To Median To Medinah None Encounter with enemies Hot pursuit Hot pursuit/Battles No Similar Encounter Results of encounter Moral phys.victory Moral physical victory Moral victory Writing dawn of Revelation In his life time In his lifetime After him (Torah) (Al-Qur�an) Nature of Teachings Spiritual/ Legal Spiritual/Legal Mainly Spiritual Acceptance of leadership Rejected Rejected then accepted Rejected (by most Israelites) (by his people) This table is self-evident. It shows that not only were Moses and Muhammad very much alike in many respects, but it shows also that Prophet Jesus does not fit this particular prophecy. Following are the The birth of Jesus was unusual. According to Christian and Muslim beliefs, he was miraculously born of the virgin Mary. Both Moses and Muhammad were born in the usual manner. Both Moses and Muhammad were married and begot children. There is no similar record of marriage and offspring in the case of Jesus. Both Moses and Muhammad died of natural causes and were buried. The end of the mission of Jesus on earth was unusual; crucifixion according to Christian beliefs and being raised up to heavens without crucifixion according to Muslim beliefs, Both Moses and Muhammad were not only prophets and spiritual teachers in the usual sense, but they were also �heads of states� whose mission included the establishment of a �state� founded on the teachings of their faith No such opportunity presented itself to Prophet Jesus. Moses left Egypt following knowledge of a plot to kill him and went to Median where he was welcomed and assured by Jethro. Muhammad left Makkah (Mecca) following knowledge of a plot to kill him and went to Yathrib which was later called Al-Madinah (Medina). No similar incident was reported about Jesus in his adulthood and after he began his mission as a prophet. Moses encountered his enemies (the Pharaoh�s army) who sought to destroy him and his followers in �hot pursuit�. Muhammad encountered his enemies (the pagan Arabs) who sought to destroy him and his followers in several battles. No such encounter was reported in the case of Jesus. Indeed he was reported to have commanded Simon Peter to put his sword into the sheath when he attempted to defend Jesus at the time of his arrest. Moses� encounter with his enemies ended with a military and moral victory. His enemies drowned and Moses and his followers were saved. Muhammad�s encounters with his enemies ended with his final military and moral victory over them. He and his followers reentered Makkah (Mecca), the center of plotting against him. Impressed with his truthfulness and magnanimity, the great majority of his former enemies chose to become Muslims and were among his ardent supporters. Jesus� victory against his enemies was only a moral victory which did not involve an immediate military victory over them at the same time. The teachings revealed to Moses were available in a written form in his lifetime. The Qur�an revealed to Muhammad was fully written down in his lifetime and under his supervision. The teachings of Jesus were not committed to writing in his lifetime. Even the earliest Gospel was written down many years after him. Unlike any other prophets from the lineage of Abraham, the revelation given to Moses and Muhammad contained comprehensive codes of law, in addition to the spiritual and moral elements of their teachings. The teachings of Jesus were almost entirely spiritual. Indeed Jesus never claimed to bring a new law, nor even to abrogate the existing Old Testament Law. He simply added a spiritual and human touch to the concept of law, which by his time had been reduced to the level of lifeless and at times hypocritical formalism. �Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill�, Jesus was quoted as saying. After initial resistance and skepticism by his people, Moses was accepted by his people as a prophet and a leader in his lifetime, notwithstanding certain lapses (such as the worship of the golden calf). After initial resistance, Muhammad was enthusiastically accepted as a prophet and a leader in his lifetime. Until the end, however, and with the exceptions of a few followers, Jesus was rejected by his people (the Israelites). Who was then the �Prophet like unto Moses�? God Will Put His Words in the Mouth of that Prophet Generally speaking, this description may apply to any messenger of God who is communicating God�s message to mankind. While that message may come in �written tablets� as is believed to have been the case with Moses, the specific wording of the above verse is a vivid description of the type of revelation received by Muhammad. Angel Gabriel used to come and dictate to him specific portions of the Qur�an which were then repeated by Prophet Muhammad exactly as he had heard them. Muhammad�s own thinking or authorship were not involved in any way in what he uttered. The words of God (The Qur�an) were �put into his mouth�. As the Qur�an itself described: �He (Muhammad) does not speak of his own desire, it is no less than a revelation sent down to him. � (The Qur�an 53:3-4) Numerous passages in the Qur�an command Muhammad in such terms as Qul (say), Thakkir (remind), Nabbi� (inform). Other passages in the Qur�an start with such expressions as wa qala Rabbukum (and your Lord said ...). Still in other passages it reads wa yas�aloonaka ... qul (and they ask you (0 Muhammad) ... say ...). The above analysis fits not only Deuteronomy 18:18, but is also consistent with the subsequent verses. For example Deuteronomy 18:19 reads: �And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him. � It is interesting to note that 113 out of the 114 Surahs (chapters) of the Qur�an starts with Bismillahir-rahmanir-raheem (In the name of Allah (God), Most Gracious, Most Merciful). The very first passage of the Qur�an revealed to Prophet Muhammad reads: �Read in the name of your Lord who created ... � (The Qur�an 96:1) Following the teachings of Prophet Muhammad, there is no other community of believers who starts almost every action in their daily lives with this formula �In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful�. It should be noted here that the Arabic term �Allah� is not only the Arabic equivalent of �God�, but it is also the personal name of God. To say �In the Name of Allah� is a far clearer fulfillment of the prophecy �... he shall speak in My name� (Deuteronomy 18:19), than other common expressions such as �In the name of God� or �In the name of the Father�. A fair question at this point is this: Since virtually anyone can presume to speak �in the name of God�, what criterion should be used to distinguish between a genuine prophet and messenger of God and other false prophets who may also presume to speak in the name of God? The answer to this question was clearly given in the concluding verses of Chapter 18 of the Book of Deuteronomy: �And if thou say in thine heart, how shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously; thou shall not be afraid of him.� (Deuteronomy 18:21-22) It is a fact that not a single prophecy made by Prophet Muhammad proved to be inaccurate in the least degree. Every prophecy he made about the near future at his time did come to pass. Examples of these a) The prophecy that Muslims were to conquer the two �super-powers� of their time; the Persian and Byzantine empires. This prophecy was made when Muslims were so few and weak that to prophecy their mere physical survival would have sounded too hopeful! b) A prophecy that Suraqah (a man who was about to kill Prophet Muhammad during the later�s journey to Madinah (Medina) after the pagans plotted to kill him) would become a Muslim, participate in the Muslim army conquering the Persian Empire and would actually have access to the Emperor�s crown and place it over his head! Not only did this prophecy appear to be a virtual impossibility when it was made, but its fulfillment was so perfect and complete as if the Prophet was looking eye-to-eye at the scene which took place years after his death. The fact that Suraqah did become a Muslim, lived long enough to participate in the conquest of Persia, that the Muslims came out victorious, that Suraqah had access to the Emperor�s crown and actually wore it, can hardly be regarded as a coincidence or a self-fulfilling prophecy. Surely the chances are nil that numerous such prophecies, all in the minutest detail described by Prophet Muhammad, happened by accident! Nor can such 100% accuracy every time and at all times emanate from any other than a true and genuine prophet using the criterion stipulated in Deuteronomy 18:21-22. III Other Characteristics of �That Prophet� An equally interesting and most revealing profile of Prophet Muhammad is found in the 42nd chapter of the Book of Isaiah. Let us examine some of these characteristics: The One in Whom God�s soul delights is called the servant of God (V. 1), His elect (V. 1) and His Messenger (V. 19). Translated into Arabic these titles read �Abduhu warusooluhul-Mustapha�. Surely all prophets were indeed servants, messengers and elects of God. Yet no prophet in history is as universally called by these specific titles as is Muhammad. The testimony of faith by which the person enters into the fold of Islam reads: �I bear witness that there is no deity but Allah and I bear witness that Muhammad is His servant and messenger.� Virtually the same formula is repeated five times a day during the call to prayers, five times a day immediately before the beginning of prayers (iqamah), nine times a day during the minimum mandatory prayers, several more times if the Muslim performs additional recommended prayers (s ). The most common title of Prophet Muhammad since his mission until today is Rasoolullah (the messenger of God). The Qur�an gives him this title. During his lifetime he was addressed as such by his followers. The voluminous collections of hadith (Prophet Muhammad�s sayings) are narrated typically in these forms: �I heard the Messenger of Allah say ...�, �The Messenger of Allah said or replied ...�. He shall not fail nor be discouraged till he has set judgment in the earth (V. 4), he shall prevail against his enemies (V. 13) and shall bring judgment to the Gentiles (V. 1). In comparing the lives and missions of Jesus and Muhammad, it becomes readily clear that in the case of Jesus he expressed on more than one occasion how disappointed he was in the Israelites� rejection of him. Nor did Jesus live long enough on Earth to prevail over his enemies (beyond the moral victory which is a common victory for all prophets). On the other hand, we find no trace of Prophet Muhammad�s discouragement even in the most critical moments of his mission. In one year his beloved and supporting wife Khadijah died following 25 years of successful marriage; his uncle Abu-Talib, who was instrumental in protecting him from the fury of the pagan Arabs also died. These two tragedies were combined with the fact that his followers constituted only a small persecuted and tortured group. Under such trying circumstances, Muhammad went to the city of at-Taif to invite people to Islam and seek their support in his struggle against paganism. He was rejected, mocked at and stoned to the point of bleeding. In spite of all this he was never �discouraged� to use Isaiah�s term (V. 4): �0 Allah! Forgive my people for they do not know what they�re doing� was his utterance. When Angel Gabriel offered him the chance to retaliate by destroying their city, he refused in the hope that out of the descendants of these wicked people would come those who would worship God, and come they did! After this bitter struggle, Muhammad �prevailed against his enemies�, established a strong community of believers who indeed �brought judgment to the Gentiles�, especially in the Persian and Byzantine Empires. Many such Gentiles were guided to Islam while others suffered defeats. As such he was truly �a light of the Gentiles� of the whole world. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street (V. 2). Not only was this a distinct characteristic and mark of decency of Muhammad�s, it was indeed the embodiment of the revelation given to him. In the words of the Qur�an: �Be modest in thy bearing and subdue thy voice. Lo! the harshest of all voices is the voice of the ass. � (The Qur�an 31:19) �Allah loveth not the utterance of harsh speech save by one who has been wronged.� (The Qur�an 4:148) �The Isles shall wait for his law. � The only prophet who came, after this prophecy was made (Isaiah�s time) with a complete and comprehensive code of law was Prophet Muhammad. The law revealed to him spread to all corners of the earth, even in many remote isles and to the farthest deserts. He will be sent �to open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house� (V. 7). Many of those who were opposed to the truth and bitterly fought Muhammad ended up among the most devout believers. Their blindness to truth was cured. Those who lived in the darkness of an unholy life came to the light of truth completed through the mission of Muhammad. No wonder the Qur�an describes itself as �Nooram-mubeena� or light manifest. Describing the Qur�an, God addresses Prophet Muhammad: �A book which we revealed unto you, in order that you may lead mankind out of the depths of darkness unto light by the leave of their Lord to the way of Him, the exalted in power, worthy of all praise.� (The Qur�an 14: l. Emphasis added) God�s glory will not be given to another (V. 8). The greatest glory a person receives from God is to be entrusted as His messenger to mankind and receive His glorious revelation. Not only did this apply to Prophet Muhammad, but it uniquely applied to him as the last messenger and prophet of God. Truly God�s glory (revelation of scriptures) was not given and will not be given to another prophet after Muhammad, as he is the �seal� of all prophets. It is already about 1400 years since Muhammad was sent and the Qur�an was revealed to him. Yet we hear of no genuine prophet of the magnitude and influence on humanity to be compared with such figures as Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. Nor do we hear about another post-Qur�anic (glory) or holy book that has influenced mankind to such a degree. Sing unto the Lord a new song, and his praise from the end of the earth ...(V. 10). A new song may be a reference to a new scripture in a language other that the language of the Israelite scriptures. This interpretation seems consistent with a more explicit mention of someone who will be speaking to people (including the Israelites) in �another tongue� Isaiah 28:11). This explanation seems to fit closely with the second half of the same verse Isaiah 42:16) which speaks of the praise of God �from the ends of the earth�. Only in the case of Islam do we find this prophecy realized in amazing accuracy. In all ends of the earth, five times every day the praise of God and of His last messenger, Muhammad, is chanted from the minarets of hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of mosques around the world. Additionally, frequent praise of God and Muhammad by millions of devout Muslims is made on daily basis. It is even a part of the required five daily prayers to include the praise of Abraham and his descendants and of Muhammad and his descendants. This is known as �As-Salatul-Ibrahimiyyah�. This person to come is connected with the Arabs, and specifically with the descendants of Ishmael (who settled in Makkah and its environs). Verse 11 to the 42nd chapter of Isaiah leaves absolutely no doubt about the identity of �that prophet�: �Let the wilderness of and the cities thereof lip up their voice, the villages that Ke�dar does inhabit: let the inhabitants of the rock sing, let them shout from the top of the mountains. � Isaiah 42:11) According to the Book of Genesis, Ke�dar was the second son of Ishmael (Gen. 25:13). The best known prophet who came from Ishmael�s descendants is Muhammad. His enemies (who were of his own clan!), who were misled by their leaders or mighty men (as described in Isaiah 21:17) ultimately embraced Islam and were embraced by it. Indeed they had reason to �lift up their voice�, to �sing� praise of God, and �shout from the top of the mountains�. is that possibly a reference to the shouting of: �Here I come (for your service) 0 Allah. Here I come. Here I come. Were is nor a partner with You. Here I come. Verily yours is the Praise, the blessings and sovereignty. Were is no partner besides you�. This �shouting� is chanted annually by multitudes of Muslims from all over the world from Mount �Arafat as part of the annual rites of hajj (pilgrimage). The 42nd chapter of Isaiah is indeed a fascinating one. It is not a casual or ambiguous reference to that servant and messenger of God who was to come centuries later. It is rather a comprehensive profile which not only fits Prophet Muhammad but fits no one else. After all, the chapter relates this profile to Ke�dar son of Ishmael and no other descendants of Ishmael fits these descriptions but Muhammad (peace be upon him). |
Replies:
Posted By: ak_m_f
Date Posted: 24 March 2006 at 1:57pm
| I know its long, please read it if you are interested |
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 8:11am
|
ak_m_f, Yes, your post is long. Too long to respond to point by point. I would suggest that anyone interested should read the rebuttals to Mr Badawi's article. They can simply google: Is Muhammad foretold in the Bible? Read the articles from sites that are not Islamic and you will see how Muhammad is not foretold in the Bible and why and you will also see Mr. Badawi's errors. |
Posted By: ak_m_f
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 8:30am
|
please post the link.
|
Posted By: ak_m_f
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 8:51am
|
Dr. Jamal Badawi
Dr. Jamal Badawi was born and raised in Egypt, and it was in Cairo that Dr. Badawi started his career as a student. He received his bachelors from Ain Shams University (Cairo, Egypt). Upon receiving the degree, he headed for America, and enrolled in Indiana University (Bloomington, IN) where he received both his Masters and doctorate in the department of Business Administration. Upon completing his education, Dr. Badawi began working right away and still is quite active in the Muslim community. Currently, Dr. Badawi is the director of the Islamic Information Foundation (Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada), which is a non-profit foundation seeking to promote better understanding of Islam by Muslims and non-Muslims. He is also working in his own field in Business Administration, as a Professor of Management at St. Mary University (Halifax). He is also a cross-appointed faculty member in the Departments of Religious Studies and Management, at St. Mary University. Previously, Dr. Badawi has taught a course on Islam at Stanford University (California). Along with all these commitments, Dr. Badawi is a member of the Fiqh Council of North America, a part of the Islamic Society of North America, a member of the Consultative Council of North America, and a member of the Juristic Council of North America. Dr. Badawi is a highly sought after lecturer here in North America and abroad. He is an excellent orator on various pertinent topics, especially Islam and Christianity. He is also very active in journalism and broadcasting. He has researched, designed, and presented a 350 1/2 hour segment television series on Islam, which was shown on many TV stations in Canada, the US, and other countries, as well. Some titles of his published works are: Selected prayers, Gender Equity in Islam, Muhammad in the Bible, Status of Women in Islam, Polygamy in Islamic Law, Islam: A Brief Look, Muslim Woman�s Dress According to the Qur�an and the Sunnah and Islamic Ethics. |
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 9:07am
|
Katherine, Your links and post are deleted. This is the place to learn about Islam. Therefore, I hope you would learn Islam here following forum guidelines. Please do not post link of anti-islam web sites here, that goes against forum guidelines. Peace |
Posted By: ak_m_f
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 9:22am
|
I dont know about other websites but answering-islam is the biggest anti-Islamic website, based on taking quran out of context and Islam bashing.
|
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 10:38am
You asked for the links and they were not all from answering-islam. Answering-Islam is a site that answers the articles such as the one you posted. Answering-Islam also has a policy that if they present any untruth about Islam and it is pointed out to them, they will either correct the mistake or delete it. Nevertheless, I could address any of prophecies mentioned in your article. Pick one and I'll give it a shot. |
ak_m_f wrote:Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 10:53am
go for it kath  ---i must check out that website youre talking about------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: ak_m_f
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 12:04pm
|
how you know kath fredi? |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 12:26pm
|
akmf- what on earth makes you think i know this person? and why are you implying i do? kindly explain yourself ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: ak_m_f
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 12:54pm
you reffered to her as "kath" this implies that you know her, know her enough to call her �kath�. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 1:38pm
|
this is silly - i also call ahmadjoyia "ahmad" - do i know him too? ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 4:10pm
Calm down, ak_m_f, I don't know fredi. I have to assume that he or she tried to nickname me by calling me "kath." People do that you know. I, for instance, might call you AK. I assure you that no one has ever called me Kath. Calling me Kath does not imply that he or she knows me. I insist on Katherine. Now which point in the Doctor's article would you like me to address? Please choose one. "The prophet like Moses," perhaps? I have printed out your post and will go over it tonight and work up a response to the Prophet like Moses as soon as I am able, unless I hear from you that you would like to discuss a different prophecy. Tomorrow I have a business appointment that will require my time for the day, so as soon as I receive the prophecy you want to discuss, I will work on it and get it to you as soon as I am able. You do want to discuss the article, don't you? Thank you so very much. Peace |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 03 April 2006 at 4:58pm
|
ok then, let me get the ball rolling on this. badawi states in your quotation - "some contend that 'jesse' is a reference to davids father. according to encyclopedia biblica, however, we read: 'jesse is contracted from ishmael'" ---------------this however is a complete lie --------i have pasted below the relevant entry for "jesse" in the encyclopedia biblica, which is only partially successful, due to the problem of hebrew characters, so youll have to look up the encyclopedia yourself if you dont believe my interpretation of it JESSE (+d+5. ,5 2 ; contracted from hKk.�?[ seeN AMES, 521; or from W3K, ABISHAI? cp Icabodfrom Ahi-cabod [so Marquart, Fundamente, 24 ; seealso Ex?. T 10 526a (�gg)] ; for anotber view seeJ EZEBEL ; in many MSS of I Ch. 213 �V�e ; IECCAI[BAQL], LEUUL [K]), son of Obed and father of David(see DAVID, 5 I).first of all "hKk."" represents "ishmael" in hebrew characters. note the question mark after the name. in other words, they dont know if jesse is contracted from ishmael. they are only suggesting it as a possibility. then look at the second line. it says "or from W3K, abishai?" - W3K represents abishai in hebrew characters, the english transliteration is given, then we have another question mark. here they are suggesting another possibility, that jesse is a contraction of abishai. and yet badawi makes out that that the thing is definite, even going so far to imply that the jesse in question is not the father of david, but is in fact ishmael and yet even if he was correct, even if it was a reference to ishmael, this would have nothing to do with muhammad, as muhammad was not ishmaels descendant. ishmael went with his mother to live in the wilderness of paran, see genesis 21: 21, which is in the sinai peninsula, nowhere near mecca. this can be easily ascertained by referring to numbers 10: 12, 12: 16, 13: 3, 26 and deuteronomy 1: 1, which refer to the wanderings of the children of israel on their way from egypt to the land ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 04 April 2006 at 5:21am
Fred, This is what I have on the wilderness of paran: Paran is the area where Israel camped after leaving Sinai on their way to Canaan (Num.10:12; 12:16); the spies were sent into Canaan from there (Num.13:3,26); David went there after the death of Samuel (I Sam.25:1); and when Hadad the Edomite revolted against Solomon, he stopped there on his way to Egypt (I Kings 11:18). All of these clearly show that Paran could not be as far south as Mecca. PARAN. A wilderness situated in the eastern central region of the Sinai peninsula, north-east from the traditional Sinai and south-south-east of Kadesh, with the Arabah and the Gulf of Aqabah as its eastern border. It was to this wilderness that Hagar and Ishmael went after their expulsion from Abraham's household (Genesis 21:21). It was crossed by the Israelites following their exodus from Egypt (Numbers 10:12; 12:16), and from here Moses dispatched men to spy out the land of Canaan (Numbers 13:3, 26). The wilderness was also traversed by Hadad the Edomite on his flight to Egypt (1 Kings 11:18). El-paran, mentioned in Genesis 14:6 as on the border of the wilderness, may have been an ancient name for Elath. Mount Paran of the Song of Moses (Deuteronomy 33:2) and of Habakkuk 3:3 was possibly a prominent peak in the mountain range on the western shore of the Gulf of Aqabah. An ancient map may help: http://www.bible.ca/maps/maps-the-exodus.htm This is where Hagar and Ismael went after Abraham sent them away. |
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 04 April 2006 at 9:50am
|
Greetings ak_m_f, This comment as well as others of the same vein are incorrect and self-serving. And believe in what I reveal, confirming the revelation which is with you... Surat-ul Baqara
(2):41 And when there comes to them a Book
(Qur'an) ftom God, confirming
what is with them... Surat-ul Baqara (2):89 ... yet they reject all beside, even
if it (Qur'an) be truth confirming
what is with them. Surat-ul Baqara (2):91 And when there came to them an apostle
(Muhammad) of God confirming
what was with them... Surat-ul Baqara (2):101 And before this (Qur'an) was the Book
of Moses as a guide and a mercy; and this book (Qur'an) confirms (it) in the Arabic tongue. Surat-ul Ahqaf (46):12 And this is a book (Qur'an) which We
have seat down, bringing blessings and confirming
(the revelations) which came before it. Surat-ul An'am (6):92 To thee (Muhammad) We sent the
scripture (Qur'an) in truth confirming
the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety. Surat-ul Maida
(5):48 And
He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this (the
Qur'an) as a guide to mankind.
Surat-u Ali-Imran (3):3 It was We who revealed the Law (to
Moses); therein was guidance and light.
Surat-ul Maida (5):44 We sent him (Jesus) the Gospel;
therein was guidance and light.
Surat-ul Maida (5):46 We did reveal to Moses the book after
We had destroyed the earlier generations, (to give) insight to men, and guidance and mercy, that they might receive admonition. Surat-ul Qasas (28):43 These are basically the same
revelations found in the Bible. They
are signs from God and must be believed upon in faith, as the Qur'an says: Then those who reject faith in the Signs of God will suffer the severest penalty, and God is exalted in might, Lord of retribution. Surat-u Ali-Imran (3):4 Those who reject the Book and the (revelations) with which We sent Our apostles: but soon shall they know, - when the yokes (shall be) round their necks, and the chains; they shall be dragged along in the boiling fetid fluid; then in the Fire shall they be burned. Surat-ul Mumin (40):70-72 It
was only with Muslim Ibn-Khazem, who died in Cordoba in 1064, that the charge
of falsification of the Bible was born. 3. It would be virtually impossible for the Jews to have changed their Scriptures without the Christians knowing about it. After all the Jewish Scriptures were the Scriptures that the early Christians used as their own Scriptures. 4. The Bible was copied and in circulation in the 200's AD; this included not only Greek manuscripts but copies of those manuscripts into many, many languages. This is at least 400 years prior to the completion of the Qur'an. So the Qur'an commends the Scriptures that the Christians and Jews had in their possession at the time of Muhammad. More to come tomorrow. |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 04 April 2006 at 11:52am
|
Well there are so many directions in which one can go to reply the basic questions are that being projected here, I would start with the assertions of bro Fredi on link of Prophet Ismail with Prophet Mohammad and concommitently with Sis Katherine's allusion as wilderness of Paran could be anywhere but not including Mecca. For this they have taken support of various biblical references and modern map of the area with superimposed ancient territory. Whatever their source of info, however, probably the source didn't update it with the latest archaeological findings. Here is a link for such an update where they assert that the traditional location of Mt. Sianai is not the same as their findings prove it to be, but in close vicinity of Suadi Arabia, where Mecca city is. http://www.baseinstitute.org/Sinai_1.html - http://www.baseinstitute.org/Sinai_1.html With this new information, I think, its time to revise all biblical doctrines that my Christian and Jewish brothers have built up till now. Now to link the case of 'wilderness of Paran' with mecca, the work has already been done at ***. I hope this shall serve you well for all you need to ask, God's Willing. Peace. Br. Ahmad, if it was not allowed for someone to site the link to the one website here, you should not site the link to it's counter website here either.
|
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 04 April 2006 at 1:31pm
|
katherine - if what youre saying is correct, then its taken them till 1064 to find out what is actually in the bible! ahmad - i did get your link before it was removed and will look at it with a view to evaluation ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 04 April 2006 at 3:34pm
|
|
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 7:10am
|
Dr. Badawi thinks that the expression
"their brethren" in Deuteronomy 18:18 means the brethren of the
Ishmaelites. Ishamel and Isaac were
half brothers and could be considered "brethren." But in this case (Deut 18:18) if we are
truly to discover the real identity of the prophet who would be like Moses, we
must consider the expression in its context.
God said, "I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among
their brethren." Of whom is God speaking when he speaks of
"them" and "their"? When we go back to the first two verses
of Deuteronomy 18 we find the answer: "The Levitical priests, that is, all the tribe of Levi, shall have no portion or inheritance with Israel ... they shall have no inheritance among their brethren". Deuteronomy 18.1-2. It is abundantly clear from these two verses that "they" refers to the tribe of Levi and that "their brethren" refers to the remaining eleven tribes of Israel. This is an inescapable fact. No honest method of interpretation or consistent method of exposition can possibly allow that Deuteronomy 18.18 refers to anyone else than the tribe of Levi and the remaining tribes of Israel. Let's examine the only possible exposition of the prophecy that can lead to a correct interpretation and identification of "their brethren". We need only accentuate the relevant words from Deuteronomy 18.1-2 to discover the only possible conclusion that can be drawn. The text reads: "The tribe of Levi shall have no inheritance with Israel. They shall have no inheritance among their brethren. Therefore the only logical interpretation of Deuteronomy 18.18 can be: "I will raise up for them (that is, the tribe of Levi) a prophet like you from among their brethren (that is, one of the other tribes of Israel)". Throughout the Old Testament we often find the expression "their brethren" meaning the remaining tribes of Israel as distinct from the tribe specifically referred to. Look at this verse as an example: But the children of Benjamin would not listen to the voice of their brethren, the children of Israel. Judges 20.13 Here "their brethren" is specifically stated to be the other tribes of Israel as distinct from the tribe of Benjamin. In Deuteronomy 18.18, therefore, "their brethren" clearly means the brethren in Israel of the tribe of Levi. Again in Numbers 8.26 the tribe of Levi is commanded to minister to "their brethren", that is, the remaining tribes of Israel. In 2 Kings 24.12 the tribe of Judah is distinguished from "their brethren", once again the remaining tribes of Israel. (Further scriptures proving the point are Judges 21.22, 2 Samuel 2.26, 2 Kings 23.9, 1 Chronicles 12.32, 2 Chronicles 28.15, Nehemiah 5.1 and others). In Deuteronomy 17.15 we read that Moses on one occasion said to the Israelites "One from among your brethren you shall set as king over you; you may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother". Only an Israelite could be appointed king of Israel - "one from among your brethren" - no foreigner, be he Ishmaelite, Edomite or whoever he may be, could be made King of Israel because he was not one of "their brethren", that is, a member of one of the tribes of Israel. At this stage, therefore, we have a fatal objection to the theory that Muhammad is foretold in Deuteronomy 18.18. He was an Ishmaelite and accordingly is automatically disqualified from being the prophet whose coming was foretold in that verse. The prophet was obviously to come from one of the tribes of Israel other than the tribe of Levi. God said he would raise up a prophet for the Levites like Moses from among "their brethren", that is, from one of the other tribes of Israel. Jesus was descended from the tribe of Judah (Matthew 1.2, Hebrews 7.14). He is therefore ably qualified to be the prophet who would be raised up from among the brethren of the Levites. More to come. |
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 7:16am
|
Dr. Badawi compared Muhammad to Moses in his article where he saw
similarities. He failed to compare Jesus to Moses where there are
also similarities. Here are some for your consideration: 1. Great Lawgiver for his nation. Jesus taught on his own authority the laws of God and raised observance of those laws to a new and higher level (Matthew chapters 5, 6 & 7): He taught as an authority and the people were amazed (Matthew 7:28-29); He selected and taught the two greatest laws (Matthew 22:35-40); He gave a new commandment (John 13:34-35); and at the very end of His teaching and leadership on earth, He delivered orders to His followers regarding "all that I have commanded you." (Matt. 28:19-20) 2. One of the Two Men who were commissioned by God to make laws for the Israelite nation. The approval of Heaven on both was shown by great signs and miracles. At the time of Moses there was the Exodus from the hand of ancient Pharaoh, feeding with manna and quails and with water from the rocks. At the time of Jesus there was healing crippled, blind, deaf, speechless and epileptics. He even threw demons out of people. Many dead people were raised back to life and health (also see Matt. 27:52-52); feeding of 5000 and of 4000 men, plus women and children. 3. Had His Face Glow With Light, but it faded away (Exodus 34:29-35 and 2nd Corinthians 3:12-13). The face of Jesus shined like the sun (Matthew 17:1-5) and is still shining like the sun while in heaven (Revelation 1:9-19). 4. Deliverer of His Brethren who would Follow Him Out of Physical Slavery then he gave them the law. Jesus came and gave law and commandments to His followers. Then He delivered them and other followers around the world out of the spiritual slavery of sin and Satan. 5. Was Born into a Situation When his Brethren were being Oppressed by Pharaoh. Jesus was born into the time when the pagan idolatrous Roman empire was oppressing His brethren. 6. Was Born in a Country where a Man, Pharaoh, was Worshiped as God. When Jesus was born the ruling Romans worshiped Caesar as God. 7. Grew up in a Country where the King, Pharaoh, was Afraid that the Slaves would Revolt. Jesus grew up where King Herod, "the Great," was afraid the descendants of those very same slaves would revolt. 8. Was Nursed a Short Time at His Birthplace, Then was Moved for His Safety. The infant Moses was placed in a floating basket in the Nile (Exodus 2 and Acts 7:20). Jesus was nursed a short time in Bethlehem and then was taken to Egypt for safety (Matt. 2). 9. Was Nursed by His Own Mother while the Official Government Policy was to Try Kill Him. King Herod tried to kill the infant Jesus (Matt. 2). 10. Father was a Mystery to the General Public. The Father of Jesus and the facts of His virgin birth were a mystery to the general public (Luke 1). 11. Was Adopted into the Royal Family of Pharaoh. Jesus was adopted by His step-father, Joseph, into the royal family line of King David and Solomon (Matt. 1). 12. Rejected being Kingly in Life-style (Hebrews 11:23-29). Jesus did not have the life-style of royalty (Matt. 4:8-11; John 6:15 & 18:36). 13. Lived in Egypt. Jesus lived in Egypt as an infant (Matt. 2:13-21). 14. Came Out of Egypt to Serve God and be A Lawgiver and Leader. Jesus came out of Egypt to be a lawgiver and leader. 15. 40 Years was Tested in Wilderness. Jesus was tested 40 days in the wilderness and had approximately 40 months of public teaching and miracle working. 16. 40 Days Fasting (Exodus 34:28). Jesus fasted 40 days (Matt. 4). 17. A Shepherd of sheep. Jesus is the Great Good Shepherd of His followers (John 10:11-16). 18. The White Hand of Leprosy (Exodus 4:6-7). Jesus healed many different people of leprosy (Luke 17:11-19). 19. Asked that the great Sin of His People be Forgiven (Exodus 32:31-32). Jesus asked that the great sin of His people be forgiven (Luke 23:34). 20. Had the cloud of God and the voice of God as a witness of his authority (Numbers 11:24-25). Jesus had the cloud of God and the voice of God as a witness of His authority (Matthew 17:24-25). 21. Exercised power from God over forces of nature such as wind and water. At the Red (Reed) Sea, he walked through on dry ground (Exodus 14). Jesus walked on water and instantly calmed a storm (Matt. 14). 22. Fire was important. At Mt. Horeb/Mt. Sinai there was fire (Ex. 3:1-6; 19:18 and 24:12-18) and there was the pillar of fire (Ex. 13:21-22). Jesus baptized the people with the Holy Spirit and with fire (Matt. 3:11-17 and Acts 2:1-4) and at the Transfiguration His face shined like the fire of the sun (John 17:1-3). Also see 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7; 1 Corinthians 3:11-14; Hebrews 12:29; and 2 Peter 3:1-14. 23. Was faithful as a Servant in all his house (Hebrews 3:5). Jesus was faithful as a Son over His house (Hebrews 3:6). 24. Brought water from a rock by a miracle of God (Exodus 17). Jesus Himself was the Living Water which was brought out of the tomb-rock which could not hold Him (John 7:37-38). 25. Asked that his nation be saved or else that his own name be blotted out of the Lord's book (Exodus 32:31-32). Jesus was willing to die, and did die, and was resurrected and thereby shown to be the perfect and acceptable ransom for sin. 26. A mountain was prominent in his work where the law was given for a nation. A mountain was prominent in the work of Jesus. He gave the famous Sermon on the Mountain with the law for people of all nations (Matthew 5, 6, & 7). 27. His followers were angry when other people showed performing signs (Numbers 11:26-29). Followers of Jesus did the same (Mark 9:38-40). 28. An angel watched over his body (Jude 9). Jesus had at least two angels watching over His body (John 20). 29. Had revealed to him the special sacred memorial or covenant Name of God (often called "Jehovah" in English) (Exodus 3:13-15). That special name was bestowed to Jesus (Philippians 2:5-11). 30. Was mighty in words and deeds (Acts 7:22). Jesus was more powerful in words and deeds (Matt. 7:28-29; and 8:3-13). 31. Sent 12 men to look over the land secretly (Numbers 12). Jesus sent out his 12 disciples to look over the same land and to publicly preach repentance and to cast out unclean spirits (Mark 6:6-13). 32. Did not have special clothing symbolic of his rank. Jesus also did not have special clothing showing His rank. 33. Did not have biological sons to carry on his spiritual functions. Neither did Jesus. 34. Was very gracious to foreign women at wells and gave them water (Exodus 2:15-17). Jesus was gracious to the Samaritian woman at Jacob's well and gave her the Water of Life (John 4). He was also gracious to: Mary Magdalene out of whom He threw 7 demons (Mark 16:9); Marium and Martha the sisters of Lazarus (Luke 10:38-41 and John 11); the woman arrested during adultery and he commanded her to stop sinning (John 8); the widow at Nain and He brought her son back to life (Luke 7:11-17); and He allowed the women to be the first to know that He had been raised from the dead (Matt. 28 and Mark 16). 35. True identity was not known at first to the women at the well (Exodus 2). The true identity of Jesus was not known at first to the woman at the well (John 4). 36. Lived modestly, only once being given an offering (Leviticus 8:29). Jesus lived a very modest life, sometimes not even owning a place to sleep (Luke 9:58). 37. Was involved in the activities of the holy Tabernacle on earth (Exodus 25-40). Jesus is involved in the perfect Tabernacle in Heaven made by God (Hebrews 8). 38. Was humble. Jesus was gentle and humble (Matt. 11:28-30). 39. Gave blessings from God to be given via Aaron to the people (Numbers 6:22-27). Jesus gave blessing from God to the people (Matt. 5:1-12) and told His followers to bless others (Luke 6:27-28). 40. Got complaints from the people who had been trained to write (Exodus 5:13-23). Jesus got complaints from the scribes (writers of the law) (Matt. 9:2-8; 16:21; and 21:12-16). 41. Opponent, Pharaoh, had his heart hardened (Ex. 7:3). Jesus' opponents had their hearts hardened because He healed on the Sabbath (Luke 6:7-11). 42. Law caused severe punishment, even death. Even greater punishment is against those who go back against Jesus (Hebrews 10:28-31). 43. Spoke to the 70 elders of Israel (Ex. 24:1 and Numbers 11). Jesus spoke to the 70 elders (called the Sanhedrin) (Luke 22:70-71). 44. Had sacrifices for the Covenant sealed with blood (Ex. 24:1-8). Jesus also sealed His new Covenant with blood (Hebrews 9:18-28). 45. Provided ransom by pouring out blood as a sacrifice (Ex. 12). Jesus similarly (Matt. 20:28 & Hebrews 9:11-15). 46. Closed the way to the Ark of the Covenant (Testimony) with a thick curtain (Ex. 26:33). Jesus, at His death, had the thick curtain in the temple torn open from top to bottom, opening the way (Matt 27 and Mark 15). 47. Was almost stoned by his brethren (Ex. 17:4). And Jesus also (John 8:58-59). 48. Had a peculiar bed as an infant (Ex. 2:3). Jesus also had a peculiar bed (Luke 2:7). 49. Was raised by the daughter of the king (Ex. 2). Jesus' mother was a daughter of the House of King David by his son, Nathan (Luke 3). 50. Was raised in the house of a man who was not his father, but he was adopted into the family (Ex. 2). Jesus was raised in the house of Joseph who was not His biological father, but He was adopted into the family (Matt. 1:18 & 25 and Acts 7:20-21). 51. Fought against the masters of evil (Ex. 5-12). Jesus battled Satan (Matt. 4:1-10). 52. Left a high position in the most powerful nation on earth to suffer for his people (Exodus 2-12 and Hebrews 11:23-27). Jesus left the highest position in Heaven to suffer for His people and to make ransom available to all people (Philippians 2:5-8). 53. Spoke the words of God (Deuteronomy 18:18 and others). Jesus spoke the words of God, the Father (John 12:50 & 14:10). 54. Spoke by God's authority (Deut. 18:19). Jesus spoke by God's authority (John 8:42 & 17:4-6). 55. Fed multitudes of people by miracles (Ex. 16). Jesus fed multitudes (Matt. 14 and 15). 56. Opened an era of law (Ex. 19 & 20). Jesus opened an era of grace and truth (John 1:17). 57. Established a memorial custom (Feast of Unleavened Bread and Passover) based on common food elements (Ex. 12). Jesus established the memorial of Himself by a custom utilizing two common food elements of the Feast of Unleavened Bread and Passover (Luke 22:19-20). 58. Finished the work which God commanded him (Ex. 40:33). Jesus completed His work (John 17:4 and & 19:30). 59. Does not have a known tomb where the body is located (Deut. 34). Jesus' tomb is empty because after death, he was raised up alive and ascended into Heaven (Mark 16:19 and Luke 24:50-53). 60. Reappeared unto men after death (Matt. 17:3). Jesus reappeared to people, even to 500 at once, after His death and resurrection (Matt. 28; Mark 16; Luke 24; John 20 & 21; and Acts 1:1-3). 61. Was rejected by his family (Numbers 12). Jesus' own half-brothers rejected Him at first (Matt. 13:55 & John 7:5). But, later at least two were believers and wrote the two New Testament books of James and Jude. Here are some of the observations of eye witnesses of the life of Jesus, the prophet. The people said after Jesus fed over 5,000 people, "This is of a truth the Prophet who is to come into the world. ... They were intending to come and take Him by force, to make Him King..." (John 6:14-15). Philip proclaimed, "We have found Him of whom Moses in the Law and also the Prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the [adopted step-] son of Joseph." (John 1:45). Andrew said, "We have found the Messiah." (John 1:14). Nethanael declared, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God." (John 1:49). Peter preached that the Prophet of Deuteronomy 18:18 is Jesus and that "God announced beforehand by the mouth of all the prophets that His Messiah should suffer He has thus fulfilled. " (Acts 3:18-27). Also see Stephen's message (Acts 7:37 & 52). Jesus stated that Moses wrote about Him (Luke 24:27 and John 5:46). Even this does not do the job. What is needed is to find out how Jesus and Moses were uniquely alike whereas Muhammad was not.That will come next. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 9:19am
|
ahmad - this is what you have referred me to: "Let us look at the following Verses: "Then God opened her [Hagar] eyes and she saw a well of water. So she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink. God was with the boy as he grew up. He lived in the desert and became an archer. While he was living in the Desert of Paran, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt. At that time Abimelech and Phicol the commander of his forces said to Abraham, "God is with you in everything you do. (From the NIV Bible, Genesis 21:19-22)" Hagar was an Arab. Abraham peace be upon him had Ishmael from her, who was 13 years older than Issac. After Sarah, Abraham's wife gave birth to Issac, Abraham decided to let Hagar and her son Ishmael go. He sent to the desert of Arabia in the region of Paran. Then GOD Almighty promised Ishmael that from him, He will increase his numbers and make from him a great nation, the Arab nation; "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. (From the NIV Bible, Genesis 17:20)" The Bible clearly says that Paran is south of Sinai in Egypt; "He said: 'The LORD came from Sinai and dawned over them from Seir; he shone forth from Mount Paran. He came with myriads of holy ones from the south, from his mountain slopes.' (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 33:2)" Kedar came from Ishmael; "These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, listed in the order of their birth: Nebaioth the firstborn of Ishmael, Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, and Mishma, and Dumah, and Massa, Hadar, and Tema, Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah: These are the sons of Ishmael, and these are their names, by their towns, and by their castles; twelve princes according to their nations. Kedar and Ancient Arabs (From the NIV Bible, Genesis 25:13)" The Arabian desert region was named after Kedar. See the second map below.
The Ishmaelites were Arabs and not Egyptians. They came from the Arabian desert; "As they sat down to eat their meal, they looked up and saw a caravan of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead. Their camels were loaded with spices, balm and myrrh, and they were on their way to take them down to Egypt. (From the NIV Bible, Genesis 37:25)" "take them down to Egypt" means taking them to the land of Egypt. It doesn't mean taking them toward the south direction. When for instance you say "my house is right down the street", it doesn't mean the house is south of the street. The house could be on the north side. The sentence means that the house is on the street, or will be found if the person walks in the path that you lead him to. The point however in the above Verse is that the Ishmaelites were not from Egypt. They came from another land. They had loaded camels and they were heading to Egypt. Arabs used to rely heavily on camels for traveling. And as we've seen from the above Verses regarding Ishmael and his Mother (Hagar) living in the desert of Paran in the South, this clearly proves to us that the desert of Paran is located in Arabia and not in Egypt, since the Ishmaelites are not Egyptians." ------------------------------------------ my points...... 1. why is he calling hagar an arab? if hagar was an arab, then the arab nation must have existed before ishmael was born, and if that is the case, how could it be said that the arabs came from ishmael? 2. he offers not one shred of evidence that paran is mecca, or in the vicinity of mecca 3. you have said that katherine said that paran could be anywhere except mecca. ----this is not true, she specified its location very exactly 4. genesis 17: 20 states that God will make of ishmael a great nation. it does not say he will make of him a great nation, the arab nation 5. where he is going with deuteronomy 33: 2 i dont know. he says that "the bible clearly says that paran is south of sinai in egypt" --- but egypt is not south of sinai. the translation in the niv is extremely problematical. it says "from the south, from his mountain slopes" the av says "from his right hand went a fiery law for them", which is reflected in other translations i have to hand, the revised version, darby, and the new revised standard version, which is more recent than the niv. even if the niv is correct, which is highly improbable, it certainly does not support his statement that paran is south of sinai in egypt. anyway i thought he was trying to prove that paran was mecca, therefore not in egypt 6. the reference to genesis 25 does not include the last phrase "kedar and ancient arabs". he then refers us to one of my favourite things - maps - in particular to the 2nd map, in order to verify that the "arabian desert region" (which one?) was called after kedar. but the name kedar does not appear on the map. i will talk more about these maps after my tea ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 9:22am
|
kath - that last post of yours was great. i dont know how you put it all together - in fact im going to print the whole thing out ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 10:13am
|
Hi Katherine, I think either you didn't read the whole chapter of Deuteronomy or you are simply hiding the facts. In either case, your allusion that proverbs like "they" or "their" refers to levites in Deuteronomy 18:18 is not correct. Though you are correct that Deut 18 begins with the special address to Levites but this part of special address finishes at Deut 18:8. Beyond that it again resumes the same address to general public of Israel. Kindly note that there is a change of pronoun (both highlighted and underlined words are mine to put emphasis) between 18:6-8 and 18:9. Here is the evidence for this change for the Levites but pronoun "you" remains same for the Israelites that continues till 18:18: "18:6 If a Levite moves from one of your towns anywhere in Israel where he is living, and comes in all earnestness to the place the LORD will choose, 7 he may minister in the name of the LORD his God like all his fellow Levites who serve there in the presence of the LORD. 8 He is to share equally in their benefits, even though he has received money from the sale of family possessions. Detestable Practices9 When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you, do not learn to imitate the detestable ways of the nations there. 10 Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in [a] the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, 11 or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead. 12 Anyone who does these things is detestable to the LORD, and because of these detestable practices the LORD your God will drive out those nations before you. 13 You must be blameless before the LORD your God." Let us see some more interesting evidence that totally contradicts you hypothesis that the pronoun in Duet 18:18 referes only to Levites. Kindly note the admonition to "them" to obey forthcoming Prophet in Duet 18:15 and then at 18:19. So do you intend to say that only Levites were to obey this command and not all of the Isealities? Since we know this is false, hence your allusion is also not correct. Here is the rest of the portion of the Dueteronmy 18 for everyone to see for themselves (kindly note the underlined words in the highlighted text). "The Prophet 14 The nations you will dispossess listen to those who practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the LORD your God has not permitted you to do so. 15 The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him. 16 For this is what you asked of the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, "Let us not hear the voice of the LORD our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die." 17 The LORD said to me: "What they say is good. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. 19 If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account." Your further examples from rest of the OT (Judges or Kings) is totally un-correlated with the present discussion especially the brethern of Isrealites simply because the those books were not claimed to be authored by Moses. Hence the context in which word "brethren" is used is totally different than by the one used by Moses.
|
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 10:41am
|
How was Jesus uniquely like Moses whereas
Muhammad was not? Look at the prophecy which gives us an indication of who the prophet is in Deut. 18: "The Lord your God will raise up for a prophet like me from among you, from your brethren � him you shall heed � just as you desired of the Lord your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly, when you said, 'Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God or see this great fire any more, lest I die.'" Deuteronomy 18:15-16. The prophet would be raised up just as God had raised Moses up as the mediator of the covenant which he gave at Horeb. The Israelites pleaded with Moses to become a mediator between them and God because they did not wish to hear God's voice face to face, and God said "They have rightly said all that they have spoken" (Deuteronomy 18.17). God henceforth raised Moses up as the mediator of the covenant between himself and Israel. God spoke to Moses in a very special way. Muhammad was not a mediator of a covenant. Thus the Lord used to speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend. Exodus 33.11 The Qur'an also teaches that God spoke directly to Moses in a way in which he did not speak to other prophets (Surah 4.164). Furthermore, to confirm the great mediatorial work which Moses was to perform, God did great signs and miracles through him in the presence of all Israel. Now as God had promised that the prophet to come would be like him in this mediatorial work, we must conclude that the distinguishing features of the prophet would be these: 1. He would be the direct mediator of a covenant between God and his people; 2. He would know God face to face. 3. His office would be confirmed by great signs and wonders which he would do by the power of God in the sight of all the nation of Israel. Read Deuteronomy 34:10-12, And there has not arisen a prophet since in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face, none like him for all the signs and wonders which the Lord sent him to do in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh and to all his servants and to all his land, and for all the mighty power and all the great and terrible deeds which Moses performed in the sight of all Israel. The three distinguishing features of Moses as a prophet are clearly mentioned: he was the mediator, between god and Israel he knew the Lord face to face, and he did great signs and wonders. The prophet like him would obviously have to emulate these unique features of his prophethood. Muhammad did not possess these exceptional characteristics by which the prophet was to be recognized. "Why are not (signs) sent to him like those which were sent to Moses?" Surah 28:48 Jesus is the mediator of a new covenant. See Hebrews 9:15, "And for this reason He (Jesus) is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance." See, 1 Corinthians 11:25, "This cup is the New Covenant in my blood." God's promise of the coming of a prophet like Moses who would mediate a new covenant was one of the great blessings in the days preceding the advent of Jesus Christ. Hebrews 8:6-13, "But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second. Because finding fault with them, He says "Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not continue in My covenant, and I disregarded them, says the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws in their mind and write them on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. None of them shall teach his neighbor, and none his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more." (Quoted from Jeremiah 31:31-34) In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away." Jesus brought the New Covenant. Jesus therefore is the promised prophet like Moses for he mediated the New Covenant between God and his people. Like Moses (and in a way in which no other prophet could compare), he also knew God face of face and became a direct mediator between God and men. "I know him, I come from him, and he sent me", Jesus said (John 7.29). Again he proclaimed: "No one knows the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him" (Matthew 11.27). And yet again Jesus said: "Not that anyone has ever seen the Father except him who is from God - he has seen the Father" (John 6.46). And what further evidence do we need that Jesus knew God face-to-face and is the direct mediator between him and men than these two verses: "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by me ... Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14.6, 14.9). When he spoke to God face-to-face, "Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him" (Exodus 34. 29-30). When the image of the invisible God was directly revealed through the transfigured face of Jesus Christ, "his face did shine as the sun" (Matthew 17.2). No other prophet could claim such a distinction - no one else knew God face-to-face in such a way that his face shone while he communed with him. Matthew 5:17-18. These verses say that Jesus was to fulfill the law of the prophets. He did this in fulfilling the prophecies of the coming Messiah as described in the Old Testament. He did bring a New Covenant as described above. |
Posted By: Angela
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 11:04am
I'm keeping my Mormon ideologies out of this arguement. I could really put a twist on this that would be head hurting. 
|
Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 11:29am
I'm sure that you could, but Mormons are not considered Orthodox Christians. There are parellels between Joseph Smith and Muhammad though and I'm sure I don't have to point them out to you. Let's keep this thread on track, shall we? Peace |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 11:42am
|
yes ahmad - the maps are interesting. the 2nd one simply because it reveals the utter lack of basis to the claim that paran is mecca. it is an empty piece of graphics. the rising sun motif (reaching its zenith in muhammad, of course), ressembling an old fashioned ad for breakfast cereals, is just silly. nowhere is it explained how "paran" comes to be written where "mecca" should be. the real interest lies in the first map. i cannot imagine why the writer has included it. it disproves his entire case. the map features 2 border lines, in orange. the one on the left is the border between the modern state of israel and the sinai peninsula (you can actually see the word peninsula), currently under the jurisdiction of egypt. the border on the right is the israeli-jordanian border. i looked up my readers digest world atlas to confirm this. the 2 borders converge to the south to a point at elat on the gulf of aqaba. the key words are negev, the desert area in the south of israel, and the name of the town be'er menuha, in israel, close to the jordanian border. the writer has very handily highlighted paran in yellow. this refers to nahal paran, in the atlas shown as a river (probably seasonal) flowing from the region of paran, which is therefore exactly where the bible says it is - north eastern sinai, going up towards israel. having got out my measuring tape, and calculated according to the scale of the map, i make this 1140 km from mecca - not even close! the last part of the section you referred me to, starting with "the ishmaelites were arabs, not egyptians" is extremely mystifying, as the author seems to be labouring under the bizzarre delusion that someone is claiming that the ishmaelites were egyptians. i know of noone who has made this claim, and the author does not enlighten us on this issue. he is charging at windmills, don quixote-style, i fear. his quotation from genesis 37: 25 offers no help. it merely tells us they were on their way to egypt from gilead (which is on the east bank of the jordan, the area to the north of modern-day amman). this verse does not refer to where they lived im sure ill have more to add to the other things you posted ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Angela
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 12:04pm
|
Katherine, I was just adding a joke. I see this same exact arguement once every three months on this website. A christian comes on and gives these same arguements which are refutted by the muslims here and its a neverending dance. You and Fredi are new....these arguements are new to you. They aren't to the more senior members of the board. They get rather tiresome and usually end up in a fight that causes the thread to be closed.
|
Sorry.Posted By: Katherine
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 12:39pm
That's OK, Angela. I am also familiar with these arguments. The Muslims are looking frantically for Muhammad in the Bible and I have read all of their claims and none of them hold up. Christians run into the same problem with the Jews, bless their hearts. As you probably know Christians believe that Jesus was the Messiah--not just any Messiah--but the "special" Messiah--the one that the Jews are still waiting for. They reject Jesus as their Messiah and say that the Christians are wrong. Interestingly enough, the Qur'an calls Jesus "the Messiah." Every prophet was a "messiah" or an "annointed one." As said above Jesus was the special Messiah. I wonder on what basis the Muslims make the claim that Jesus was the Messiah? Prophecies in the Old Testament? If so, which ones? And further than that I wonder what the Muslims believe the special Messiah was to do. The Qur'an does not tell us. Blessings. |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 05 April 2006 at 3:12pm
|
An interesting story about "Tribe of Kedar" may help you brother Fredi to link up Prophet Ismai'l, the son of Prophet Ibrahim with the deserts of Arabia. Here is the link for this info. http://www.guidedbiblestudies.com/topics/tribe_of_kedar.htm - http://www.guidedbiblestudies.com/topics/tribe_of_kedar.htm Here is another such link http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03474a.htm - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03474a.htm and yet another http://www.ensignmessage.com/archives/ishmaelarabs.html - http://www.ensignmessage.com/archives/ishmaelarabs.html all from my Christian brothers' sources. |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 06 April 2006 at 10:57am
| Sis Katherine, I think you are not even close to refute their (Muslim's) claims when you say "The Muslims are looking frantically for Muhammad in the Bible and I have read all of their claims and none of them hold up.". All of your compraision is faulty, an example of which I have already provided when you alleged the issue of pronouns in Due 18:8 and you simply accepted it by not replying over the issue or taking a stand over it. In the same way, it really amuses me when a Christian, brother or sister like you, make all out efforts to claim that Jesus was mediator of law with God same as Moses was. Though its very simple and easy for any Muslim to refute your claim, however, I would rather like to accept your claim, and as Muslim we must all do that, but only if you don't make Jesus as another person in Godhead of Trinity. I hope you understand as what I am refering here. "Mediator of law with God", as you say, is a distinction of Moses, which can only be with Jesus, if Jesus is not himself a divine personality in Godhead. Otherwise your anology doesn't work here. Think about it. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 07 April 2006 at 7:37am
|
ahmad - im not terribly sure what im supposed to be looking for in these links you have posted. the linkage of ishmael to as vague a concept as "the deserts of arabia" would hardly be headline news. what remains to be proven is his linkage to mecca and the lineage from ishmael, through kedar or whoever, to muhammad the other thread, i see, has sadly been closed ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 07 April 2006 at 8:00am
|
Ah Ha! Well when you are in Arabia, i.e. when you say ""the deserts of Arabia" would hardly be headline news", then its all the more reasonable to search for the links from the arabian sources. Isn't it? Then the references from the "bible" are not so cluefull but the arabian history shall throw light on the lineage of Prophet Mohammad with Prophet Ismail. Would you accept those resources if I proceed with that history? |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 07 April 2006 at 9:49am
|
ahmad - so youre saying references from the bible are "not so cluefull" - in that case why has - whatisface -bedawi gone to such extraordinary lengths to locate muhammad in the bible? are you saying his great effort is all in vain? (which it is) of course we know why he has done this - it is because muhammad said he was in the bible and therefore certain muslims spend endless hours trolling the holy scriptures to this end. by all means proceed with your resources, if you could produce a genealogy or two, it would be of interest, but it would not address the point at issue ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 07 April 2006 at 1:22pm
|
O my dear brother Fredifreeloader, your response is quite typical of a "escaping from the facts" kind. Instead of refuting the arguments of bro Badawi with logic and evidence, you are resorting to tactics of mere empty assertions. This would not help. In our discussions, I have brought you into the desert of Arabia from your own Bible. Now if you want the geneology of Prophet Mohammad to link up with Prophet Ismail, the silence of Bible can't be taken as an excuse of ignorance of the facts. So, here we say, in order to compliment the info from the Bible, the Arabic history must be considered. I guess, by doing this, we have already given great respect to this book of many anonymous authorships. Don't you realise that. On a similar note, when someone try to locate Prophet Mohammad in the Bible, it is kind of proof that these books contain, more or less, the same info that was historically used by many Jew and Christian monks, who used to wander in the desert of Arabia in search of the promised Prophet. Some of them did recognise Prophet Mohammad as the one they were looking for. So, if you follow the line that Prophet Mohammad is not found in the present day Bible, it is very convenient for us to reject the authenticity of this book simply because its not the same scripture that used by those historical monks to identify Prophet Mohammad. So, if Dr. Badawi has located Prophet Mohammad in the present day Bible, it is kind of great service to the Bible itself, more than anything else. Just think about it. |
Posted By: Servetus
Date Posted: 07 April 2006 at 2:05pm
|
(Fredi) �what remains to be proven is his linkage to mecca and the lineage from ishmael, through kedar or whoever, to Muhammad� (Ahmad) �Then the references from the "bible" are not so cluefull but the arabian history shall throw light on the lineage of Prophet Mohammad with Prophet Ismail. Would you accept those resources if I proceed with that history?� Consider referring to Jewish sources as well, Ahmad. In his monumental History of the Jews, Heinrich Graetz, the so-called �grandfather� of modern Jewish historians, describes how it was that some of the Jews, in diaspora, or dispersion, fleeing the destruction of Jerusalem under Titus in 70 C.E., entered the Arabian peninsula and there sought and obtained protection and tribal rights (water, etc.) from their relatives, the resident Ishmaelites. Granted, it did behoove those Jews to prove and establish blood ties at that point and that they reportedly did.
Servetus _________________________________________ |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 08 April 2006 at 7:21am
|
servetus - "the resident ishmaelites" - well it may have been, but it could have been the resident dedanites, the resident midianites, or the resident predecessors of hagar (if a certain website, which we are no longer allowed to mention, is to be believed) --- as well as a few other abrahamic -ites. ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 08 April 2006 at 1:34pm
|
ahmad - you said- "Instead of refuting the arguments of bro Badawi with logic and evidence, you are resorting to tactics of mere empty assertions" - well bear in mind that i have already exposed the said badawi on this very thread, both with logic and evidence, and have also answered a few idiocies on the other website you posted. if you have nothing to add to my comments on this, i can only assume you find them acceptable. should you wish to argue back then please do, as i am always ready to listen, especially when proven wrong. if you wish me to start going through everything that has been posted from this person on the subject of "muhammad in the bible?" then i shall attempt it ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 09 April 2006 at 6:22pm
|
I think, bro Fredi, you haven't paid attention to my posts where I took you along on to the deserts of Arabia from your own Bible, just to show you the link between Prophet Mohammad and Prophet Ishmail, the very link you have doubted upon in your solo piece of disagreement with the article by Dr. Bedawi. I am waiting for your response to travel further on to that journey from Arabian history, simply because to travel in a desert, one has to use camels and horses and not simply mules. So for this one must realize that, out side the Bible, there is whole world out there where silence of Bible can't be assumed as absence of the history. If you are merely alluding to the identity of "Jesse", though your hypothesis of conjecture may be true, however, do read Encyclopaedia Biblica, Rev. T. K. Cheyne D.Litt D.D., J. Sutherland Black M.A. LL.D., Vol. 3, under "Names," p. 3292, item 52, where the Biblical scholars have reasoned it out as how the name "Jesse" is a contraction of actual name "Ishmael". Therefore, with that in mind, the reason probably they have placed "?" with the two definitions is only because Christians have tradtionally assumed the verses to be prophesising about Jesus through the lineage of Prophet David. However, Critics questions them as why an unkown personality (like Jesse the father of David) is being refered in the prophesy despite a well known legendary figure of David himself is present within the same time frame? Why using an obscure personality leaving aside the well known personality of Prophet David himself? So, the most logical explanation over here is that "Jesse" is a contraction for "Ishmael" in that Prophesy, as explained by the Biblical scholars referred above. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 10 April 2006 at 5:50am
|
jamal badawi wrote (as quoted by akmf): "An additional confirmation which leaves no iota of doubt is found in the Book of Isaiah (Ch. 11:1-2): let us be quite clear about this business. note that he says there is "no iota of doubt" as to the "truth" of what he is saying. yet even on the page you yourself have drawn to my attention to, the question mark is also there. thus badawi is deliberately falsifying the evidence. i fail to see how he could not have spotted the question marks or the alternative name abishai given in the entry for jesse. furthermore, there is no indication that ishmael was ever called jesse, or jesse ishmael let us also look more closely at isaiah 11. it is, of course a prophecy yet to be fulfilled, concerning the glorious future kingdom of Christ on earth, to be set up when he returns in glory, that he be fully vindicated here in the scene of his rejection. v.3 indicates that "he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears" - would you say muhammad did not require witnesses when he judged? ----also v.6-8 describe conditions on the earth which were certainly not in evidence during the life of muhammad. -----look at v.9 - would you say that the earth "was full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea" when muhammad had done his "work"? look at v.11, and also verses 1 and 4 of chapter 12 - they contain the phrase "in that day" - in what day? - in the day that has been getting described in the first 10 verses of chap.11 - the remaining verses of chap.11 and chap.12 reveal further characteristics of the "day" in question. chap.11 v.12 shows us that it will be a great time of regathering of israel, from the four corners of the earth - did this happen during the time of muhammad? let us also consider v.1 again, in particular "the Branch" and who he is. ---this is also prophesied in jeremiah 23: 5-8 - note here that the Branch will be raised unto david, therefore jesse. note that he is a king. note that in his days judah shall be saved, and israel shall dwell safely. note that he shall be called "the Lord our righteousness". note that the seed of the house of israel shall be brought "from all countries whither i had driven them" -----i fail to see how this can ring any bells with students of the life and times of muhammad the "Branch" is referred to in other scriptures, notably in zechariah 6: 12, 13 --- note that he shall build the temple of the Lord. note that he shall bear the glory. note that he shall sit and rule upon a throne. note that he shall be a priest upon his throne. now muhammad was neither a king, nor a priest. but Christ is both - the only one who is both king and priest (apart from melchisedec, which is why we have "thou art a priest forever after the order of melchisedec" -hebrews 7: 17) - look at what happened to uzziah when he tried it - 2 chronicles 26: 16-21 now i was deeply moved when i reread the words "he shall bear the glory" - glory becomes Christ, his is all the glory, it is his by right, and the knowledge that the day is coming when it will be fully accorded to him, and will be manifested throughout the world which presently hates him, is thrilling to the soul. this could not be said of muhammad, who would have said himself that all glory belonged to God (sadly not realising that Christ is God). muhammad would not accept the glory that is Christs --(although i did note that in his "treatise", badawi admitted that muslims praise muhammad as well as allah) ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 10 April 2006 at 7:57am
|
Noop! I am sorry I am not refering you to the page that you have shown us. Kindly see that my reference is on a different section and page number of the same encyclopedia, where there is no issue of question marks etc. Here it is what they write over here "Jesse, for Ishmael� The changes which proper names undergo in the mouths of small children account for a large number of these particular abbreviations - who could guess, to take modern examples, that Bob and Dick arose out of Robert and Richard? � such forms as in ai were particularly common in later times � and many more in the Talmud, which also exhibits various other kinds of abbreviation" It is further interesting to note the following words of the authors of this same "Encyclopaedia Biblica": They say: "In many cases the contraction is such as to render the discovery of the original form impossible."
I think now the matter is more clear that how Dr. Bedawi has put more weight on this particular word usage as opposed to the traditioanl one.
O my dear brother, why are you closing your one eye when reading the passages "closely". Kindly paste full verse whenever refering it for understanding, otherwise one's honesty may be questioned. Here is the complete verse 3 of isaiah 11. " 3 and he will delight in the fear of the LORD. Right in the begining of this verse we clearly see a negatation of my Christian brothers' idea of Trinity. Was this the reason that you ommitted it in your quote? Hmm!! On the more why would you just stop on verse 3? Why not read the very next verse 4 that shall clarify as how he would do the justice? Here we read " 4 but with righteousness he will judge the needy, And with this, I think, I could now feel to better understand as how Dr. Bedawi is putting so much emphasis on his choice of meaning for the word "Jesse" which links quite reasonably to Prophet Mohammad through Prophet Ishmael. I hope any rationalistic understanding of the said prophesy would ultimately lead it to point towards Prophet Mohammad. As far as my Christian brothers are concerned, the very first sentence of verse 3 should be sufficient to make them sleep over this Prophesy, at the least, whether they like it or not, is immaterial.
|
Posted By: Servetus
Date Posted: 10 April 2006 at 9:01am
|
"servetus - "the resident ishmaelites" - well it may have been, but it could have been the resident dedanites, the resident midianites, or the resident predecessors of hagar (if a certain website, which we are no longer allowed to mention, is to be believed) --- as well as a few other abrahamic -ites." Call this �fun with genealogy� and with climbing the family tree. How they did so climb makes an interesting chapter in Heinrich Graetz�s History of the Jews, as I mentioned, largely in response to your inquiry concerning proofs which link Muhammad to Ishmael. To take the broader, in this case exclusively patrilineal view, one could always continue to trace Eber to Shem and to then identify all the sons of Shem, including Arabs, Jews, Berbers, etc., as Shemites, or Semites. Servetus |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 10 April 2006 at 2:01pm
|
you then said: "Noop! I am sorry I am not refering you to the page that you have shown us. Kindly see that my reference is on a different section and page number of the same encyclopedia, where there is no issue of question marks etc. Here it is what they write over here "Jesse, for Ishmael� The changes which proper names undergo in the mouths of small children account for a large number of these particular abbreviations - who could guess, to take modern examples, that Bob and Dick arose out of Robert and Richard? � such forms as in ai were particularly common in later times � and many more in the Talmud, which also exhibits various other kinds of abbreviation" It is further interesting to note the following words of the authors of this same "Encyclopaedia Biblica": They say: "In many cases the contraction is such as to render the discovery of the original form impossible." " yes, ahmad, i know youre not. but i am referring you to the page you brought to my attention, as i clearly stated, namely p3292, section 52. the question mark is also there, in the parenthesis containing ishmaels name in hebrew characters. you then continue to quote "in many cases the contraction is such as to render the discovery of the original form impossible" - yes indeed. all the more reason to avoid the supreme folly committed by badawi in making the crass assumption he has made. the possibility that jesse is a contraction of ishmael is in any event an irrelevance, but i will say this - it does not take into account the difference in meaning of the two names. now elizabeth means "oath of God" its also incidentally a hebrew name. now in all its various forms, contractions and derivatives, such as betty, beth, bethie, lisa, liza, liz, lizzy, lizzie, elspeth, eliza, lise, libby, elise etc., i am unaware that any of the contractions is given a different meaning. however ishmael (ishma-el) means "God will hear" - but jesse (yeshai) means "wealthy". but of course its all a big red herring isnt it. even if jesse is a contraction of ishmael, it doesnt alter the fact that davids fathers name was jesse, and that the branch in question is Christ your riposte to my remarks on isaiah 11 is very weak indeed - "and he will delight in the fear of the Lord" cannot be viewed as a negation of your "christian brothers" notion of the trinity. it may well, however be a negation of your muslim brothers notions of the trinity. you have also no answer it would seem to the rest of the chapter, and like badawi, are unable to link it in any rational way to muhammad. all you have to go on is the dodgy link between jesse and ishmael which is in any case irrelevant. the Lord did not require to hear the evidence of witnesses, for "he needed not that any should testify of man, for he knew what was in man" john 2: 25 - muhammad could not judge like this ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 11 April 2006 at 2:28am
|
yes servetus - my point is that ishmael cannot be viewed as the father of arabs, and that the "great nation" which God promised would issue from him, is not in fact the arab nation. the reason for this is found in genesis 25: 1-4. abraham had 6 other sons to keturah. midian is the name that stands out as it is very much associated with the north-western area of arabia, where the midianites lived. but jokshan had two sons, sheba and dedan, whose descendants also lived in arabia. these nations were therefore not the offspring of ishmael. the dedanites are referred to in the bible, as is the queen of sheba. also, hagar is called an egyptian in the bible. i do not know why muslims are objecting to this. badawi is claiming she was a bedouin (by implication a nomad in the desert) and the now-banned website states categorically that she was an arab, indicating there was at least one nation living in the desert before ishmael. in fact taking all this into account we have midian, dedan, sheba and the people of hagar (according to muslims). this makes at least 4 nations in arabia who were not ishmaelites. (well from my point of view it is only 3, as hagar was an egyptian.) we cannot reasonably assume that there were not even more than this. now it is clear that not all arabs are descended from ishmael, and the proportion of those who are is not at all clear. on the subject of the genealogy of muhammad, do we find such a thing in the quran? i dont remember reading one ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: superme
Date Posted: 11 April 2006 at 3:58am
|
Isn't the story that ishmael was young or a baby from the muslim side of the story when his mother took him into an unknown territory? The arabs continued the story that that they were arrived in Mecca. They settled there and he married the local woman, at least once. Unless if the story has been modified into: He grew up with his mother only in mecca, than took a journey into somewhere to find a wife than he came back to mecca and settle there in which the whole arab nations today are his seed. Which one is correct here? But it is about race this thing is, which I don't like anyway. I like to live my life, do my job and die. That's all I want. As for my identity, forget it, I am nobody. |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 11 April 2006 at 8:31am
|
Here I would say, that differences in meanings can't be a significant factor, especially once we are dealing with mulitple centuries of generations between "Jesse--Ishmael" and "Jesse--father of David" along with transfusion of numerous local dialects in the languages with time that ultimately (by the time Jesus arrived) resulted into the replacement of Hebrew language for the Israelities to Aramaic. For example, you provided the meaning of 'jesse' as equivalent to 'wealthy', where as there are other multiple meanings of the same word; one source says it mean "the Lord exists", something closer to "Lord hears", and another one says it mean "firm, or a gift". It is also curious to know when we read such illustrations from Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Moody Press Chicago, 1980 (TWOTOT) page 210, "There are many places in the OT where it is now recognized that the parallel of a name and its meaning is not necessarily etymological." Just as an example "The name Abraham, for instance, comes as a result of him being the father of many nations, and although the phrase Father Of Many (ab-hamon) vaguely looks like Abraham, the name, in a literal fashion, means something completely different."
This is really getting interesting indeed.
Do you intend to take the position that your proposed "Massaih to come" would be simply killing the people on this earth on the basis of faith alone? This is really more astonishing to hear from rationalistic person that you appears to be. Are you literally expecting a God descent on this earth? This Isaiah is then, for sure, not refering to such a divine personality. Look at the v5 which says "5 Righteousness will be his belt and faithfulness the sash around his waist. " which quite reasonably resembles with a human Prophet than a divinely figure, more closely with the traits of Prophet Mohammad. So, I think, the notion of Trinity has a real yoke on your interpretations, the absence of which can only make these prophesies sensible to understand and not in the presence of it.
Well, my brother, suffice is to say that if the link between "jesse" and "Ishmeal" is dodgy, as you say, it is equally or even more dodgy between "Jesse" and "Your divine Jesus". |
Posted By: Servetus
Date Posted: 11 April 2006 at 11:04am
|
�yes servetus - my point is that ishmael cannot be viewed as the father of arabs, and that the "great nation" which God promised would issue from him, is not in fact the arab nation.� |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 11 April 2006 at 2:16pm
|
Here is what Jewish tradition tells us about the link between Ishmael and Arabs " Hagar, a daughter of Pharaoh, gave birth to Ishmael, who would become the father of the Arabs, according to both Jewish and Muslim tradition." http://www.jewishbulletin.ca/judaism/index.html - http://www.jewishbulletin.ca/judaism/index.html Not only this, hitorically speaking, many Jewish scholars, such as Rabbi Abraham Ibn Ezra, a 12 century Jewish scholar have always linked Ishmael with Islam as Ishaq with Judaism. Even before him, we see Rav Sa'adia Ga'on, the tenth-century rabbinical leader whose Arabic translation of the Bible enjoyed unchallenged authority and popularity among the Jews, also clearly joining the links. Here is another interesting article by Jewish encyclopedia describing Kedar, the son Ishmael: "One of the sons of Ishmael (Gen. xxv. 13; I Chron. i. 29). The name is also applied in Scripture to the tribe that sprang from him, and is likewise used for the Bedouins generally, whose characteristic traits are ascribed to Kedar (Cant. i. 5; Isa. xxi. 16, xlii. 11, lx. 7; Jer. ii. 10, xlix. 28; Ezek. xxvii. 21). While very little is known of Kedar, the head of the tribe, his posterity, called also the "Bene Kedar" (Isa. xxi. 17), are described as barbarous tribes in connection with Mesech. "Woe is me," says the Psalmist (Ps. cxx. 5), "that I sojourn in Mesech, that I dwell in the tents of Kedar!" According to other passages, they appear to have been rich in flocks of sheep and goats, in which they traded with the Syrians (Ezek. xxvii. 21; Jer. xlix. 49). They dwelt in tents of black hair (Cant. i. 5) in the midst of the wilderness of Arabia, and were known as skilful archers (Isa. xxi. 17). But they also settled in villages or towns (Isa. xlii. 11). According to Mohammedan tradition, Kedar ("Ḳaidhar") was the ancestor of Mohammed; and it is through him that Mohammed's descent is traced to Ishmael (Caussin de Perceval, "Essai," i. 175). http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=156&letter=K&search=kedar - http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=156&let ter=K&search=kedar |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 11 April 2006 at 2:24pm
|
ahmad - you said: "For example, you provided the meaning of 'jesse' as equivalent to 'wealthy', where as there are other multiple meanings of the same word; one source says it mean "the Lord exists", something closer to "Lord hears", and another one says it mean "firm, or a gift"." --------- in other words these unspecified sources do not give the meaning "God will hear". your reference to twotot is neither here nor there, as i was not talking about comparisons of the parallels of names and the meanings of names, i was giving the meaning of the name. now it is only natural, as a muslim, that you should try to appropriate the characteristics of Christ to muhammad. qualities such as judgment (although i have already shown that the judgement spoken of in isaiah 11 can only belong to Christ), righteousness and faithfulness. the latter two characteristics also belong to God, as our God is a covenant God, establishing covenants in righteousness and carrying them out through faithfulness. however you have singularly failed to address the other aspects of the prophecy-----, namely the conditions on earth which will result from the advent of the person described, the peace and safety which will prevail throughout creation, v.6-9, the geographical changes which will take place, v.15, and the historical events, namely the regathering of israel v. 11-12, and the cessation of internal wrangling among the jews, and the cutting off of the enemies of judah, v.13, and the new order in the middle east, namely the domination of israel over the rest, v.14 -----none of this occurred with muhammad! --not only that, his modern-day followers are doing their very utmost to prevent some of it happening at all! basically all that there is to link this passage of the bible to muhammad is the notion that "jesse is a contraction of ishmael" and even this is only on the basis that muhammad is descended from ishmael. (it also does not take onto account the fact that jesse is the predecessor of Christ) ------now it has come to my attention that there is no genealogy of muhammad in the quran - this being the case (unless you can prove otherwise) can you point to any clear statement in the quran which indicates that muhammad is descended from ishmael? ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Servetus
Date Posted: 12 April 2006 at 10:20am
|
�on the subject of the genealogy of muhammad, do we find such a thing in the quran? i dont remember reading one� �------now it has come to my attention that there is no genealogy of muhammad in the quran - this being the case (unless you can prove otherwise) can you point to any clear statement in the quran which indicates that muhammad is descended from ishmael?� Consider starting with Quran 2:129, Fredi, but do note in advance that this reference is not as obvious as is the lack of foreskin on any given adult Arab male. Does one need a literal reminder of the �sign� of the Abrahamic and, by extension, Ishmaelite covenant? But anyway, in this respect, and even if there were no linkages, one could say that the Quran, in large part, apparently takes St. Paul�s warning (to Timothy) and does not concern itself or its readers, fortunately, with �endless genealogies.� It seems that those records are kept elsewhere. As a matter of academic interest, why should one have to point to the Quran for such genealogical proofs, Fredi? According to Heinrich Graetz (as I recall), when the above-mentioned Jews arrived in Arabia from a recently destroyed Jerusalem and managed to establish blood ties to the resident Arabs, they did not exclusively refer to Biblical genealogical records. Obviously, some, in fact the lion�s share of history is not to be found either in the Bible or the Quran. The great Roman (Jewish) historian, Flavius Josephus, did not rely exclusively upon the Bible for some of his complex and comprehensive records. From my time on this board, I understand that, unlike the average Protestant Christian, Muslims, at least Sunni Muslims, are not sola scriptura and do not rely upon the Quran alone. They have, at their disposal, a vast corpus of extra-Quranic literature, including the ahadith and records from such generally respected (in the West) historians as Ibn al-Tabari and Ibn-Khaldun. Before I brought the Jewish historian, Heinrich Graetz, into this discussion as one in a series of proofs which links Muhammad to Ishmael, AhmadJoyia had offered to provide Arab sources. Perhaps now would be a good time to do so, Ahmad? If the Jews are capable of writing their histories, I think the Arabs are capable as well. Servetus |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 12 April 2006 at 1:37pm
|
servetus - 2: 129 seems a good reference, i will give it some thought time permitting and come back to it. it seems to depend on the presence of both abraham and ishmael in mecca. it would also seem to refer to a later date than when ishmael is alleged to have first been taken there, as muslims say he was only a baby at the time, and so could not have joined in prayer with his father or "raised the foundation of the house" with him (2: 127)
now you seem to be laying great stress on the fact of circumcision, implying ? that it indicates inclusion in the covenant, but genesis 17: 12 says that every male in abrahams household was to be circumcised , including those "born in his house" -(see eliezer of damascus -genesis 15: 2,3) and those "bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed" ---now the covenant was between God, abraham and his seed after him -17: 10, so excluded an indeterminate number of those actually circumcised -----now verses 19 and 21 clearly show that the continuation of the covenant would be through isaac and his seed after him. there is no indication that ishmael is included in the covenant. the fact that ishmael was circumcised does not include him in the covenant ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 12 April 2006 at 4:25pm
|
My dear, the whole notion of having 'same meaning' for the same word used at numerous places is a week logic, if not flawed as I have already shown you, not only through historical veracity of the occassions of the occurances of the word at two places, but as well through an example. Even now a days a simple word has multiple meanings; could this mean the name for the two is different? I don't think so. The reference to twotot is a direct one to substantiate this concept and not "neither here nor there". Hence your critic, sololy on the 'meaning' of the word is on thin ice.
I think bro Servetus has already provided you with a befitting reply on this. I would rather go a step in a different direction ask you to account for differences in geneologies mentioned by the different gospel accounts? Secondly, on the issue of foreskin and circumcision, I don't think covanent or no covanant has anything to do with the keeping of the traditions, especially if such are divinely ordained. The fact that many arab tribes used to practice it even before the advent of Islam, can also be a good clue in this link. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 13 April 2006 at 9:29am
|
ahmad - if you want to prove that jesse is a contraction of ishmael, you will have to produce something without question marks - that is the bottom line. then once you have produced this, you will then have to establish beyond any doubt that the jesse in isaiah 11 is in fact ishmael son of abraham and not jesse father of david, if, that is, you wish to take this to a higher level than just another piece of muslim wishful thinking. we on the other hand are not required to produce anything at all. we know that davids father was called jesse, nowhere referred to as ishmael, and we know that abrahams son was called ishmael, nowhere referred to as jesse. saying "oh well muhammad was righteous, and he judged the poor with equity just like the guy in isaiah 11..." will just not do - you cannot pick and choose snippets here and there, passing over the rest of the prophesy or ignoring it as you are doing, and hope to appeal to any rational mind ----////---if you do not think the bulk of the prophesy is literal, perhaps you might like to outline briefly exactly how it was fulfilled in muhammad i was not criticising solely on the meaning of the name. in fact i mentioned it as an aside.......---------also there is no burial ground mentioned in the chapter - the word in v.10 is rest/resting-place/abode, referring to the place where he is - it has nothing to do with death-------you raised a number of other points which are irrelevant to the issue of "muhammad in the bible?" ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Servetus
Date Posted: 13 April 2006 at 10:04am
|
�now you [Servetus] seem to be laying great stress on the fact of circumcision, �� I am not meaning to interrupt, but please know that I only mention circumcision as one in a series of indications that Muhammad can be physically linked first to Ishmael and then to Abraham. For statements of proofs that Muhammad and his progeny, or �Nation,� or �Ummah,� is directly connected to Ishmael, I refer first to Heinrich Graetz and then to Moses Maimonides, among others. �now you seem to be laying great stress on the fact of circumcision, implying ? that it indicates inclusion in the covenant �� Again not meaning to interrupt, but I might have been more careful in my wording. Unless and until I want to involve myself in a complex game of Biblical Twister, or of convolutions in which the vouchsafed and God-given rights of the first-born are, through an at times surreptitious switching of hands, conferred instead upon the second-born, I know better than to participate in discussions concerning the details of the �covenant.� I shall simply conclude by saying, in the Biblical manner, that as for me and my house, we shall take St. Paul�s advice to Timothy and not involve ourselves, beyond a point, in controversies related to �endless genealogies.� Furthermore, we have heard and at least to a certain degree have understood: �And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him ... and I will make him a great nation.� [KJV] (Genesis 17:20) That said, I trust you will understand if I now excuse myself from this discussion and from this thread. I have enjoyed talking to you and thank you for your contributions. Best regards, Servetus |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 13 April 2006 at 12:03pm
oh dear servetus - that sounds pretty final. hope it was nothing i said  ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: Servetus
Date Posted: 13 April 2006 at 12:16pm
|
Not at all, Fredi. It is just that the only point that I tried to address in this thread is to establish a genealogical link between Muhammad and Ishmael. I have offered what I know. I think that most of the other points, especially as they relate to Biblical blessings and prophecies, are best addressed by others and by resident Muslims in particular. If anything needs to be clarified from my side, I am willing to continue. I just don�t want to become too deeply entangled in genealogies, etc., for reasons that I have given. Ok? Serv |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 14 April 2006 at 9:13am
|
What?? Did I ask Biblical scholars to link "Jesse" as a contraction of "Ishmael"? I don't think so. Probably someone needs house cleaning for themselves than asking others to do it for them. Remember we are analysing the evidence from your own biblical encylopedia. The question of "?" is more appropriate to be addressed to them as what does it mean to them rather taking a stance on conjectures. We are simply reading it from their own writtings, though for us, this is not a big issue to even worry about.
Ok!!
One can clearly see a baisness in such translations using the phrase "David's descendants" and totally omitting the words relating to resting-place etc.
|
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 14 April 2006 at 10:26am
|
Hello to everyone, This is my first post on this site. I think that the prophet like Moses was ultimately Jesus and there is much evidence in support of that view. But, I think that if the Muslims want to believe it is Muhammad, then they should go ahead and believe it. Now I will look around at the other subjects and see what else I may be able to contribute to the discussions. I do want to say that it is wonderful that a Muslim forum would want to encourage meaningful debate between Muslims and Christians and people of other faiths. It is a giant step forward to get to know each other's beliefs and correct any misconceptions of those beliefs. Ultimately the world will become a better place because of the efforts of this site and all of its participants.
|
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 14 April 2006 at 12:25pm
|
Hi Bro George, Welcome to this thread and the website. Sure you can put forward your thoughts and hopefully someone among us shall see how to comment upon them. Coming to your idea when you say "I think that the prophet like Moses was ultimately Jesus and there is much evidence in support of that view." First of all, I must say that I fully respect your thoughts, though not necessarily agree with them. In that notion, we already had some discussion with sis Katharine {amended} on this thread right in the begining of it when she pasted few instances to show her proofs. Kindly see as how she got responded about them. If you have anything more to it, I love to hear that. May God be with all of us. Amin! |
Posted By: Athanasius
Date Posted: 14 April 2006 at 12:47pm
|
It is interesting to note that Moses was commanded by God to hold up the serpent in the wilderness - and all the Jews stricken will illness were to look at the serpent - and those that did would be healed. In Christian understanding, the serpent also portrays Satan. Satan was cursed by God for tempting Adam and Eve into sin, which brought about the fall of all creation and the need for redemption. The Bible tell us that Jesus was cursed, for the Scripture states: Galatians 3:13: Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on the tree. Likewise, Scripture states: 2 Corinthians 5:21: For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Have you ever wondered why God wanted the Jews to look upon the serpent and be healed? Jesus became sin, Jesus took the curse. And just as the serpent was the means of healing, Christians believe that Jesus bore our sins, becoming our vicarious victim, that we could have eternal life. This is one link, at least, between Moses and Jesus, who is called in the Bible "one greater than Moses." ------------- Freedom is a gift from God - to deny men freedom is to worship evil. |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 14 April 2006 at 1:33pm
|
Bro can you quote your refernce......I am just being so lazy to connect it myself. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 14 April 2006 at 2:16pm
|
ahmad - you refer to "the author of this thread" as female. funny that, i always thought of akmf as a bloke. strange the misconceptions one can have ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 14 April 2006 at 2:59pm
| Thanks for your correction bro Fredi and I shall definitely like to correct my mistake. |
Posted By: Athanasius
Date Posted: 14 April 2006 at 3:05pm
|
The reference to the bronze serpent is here: "And The Lord said to Moses, "Make a fiery serpent, and set it on a pole; and every one who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live." So Moses made a bronze serpent, and set it on a pole; and if a serpent bit any man, he would look at the bronze serpent and live." (Numbers 21:4-9 RSV) ------------- Freedom is a gift from God - to deny men freedom is to worship evil. |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 14 April 2006 at 9:24pm
|
In Christian understanding, the serpent also portrays Satan. Satan was cursed by God for tempting Adam and Eve into sin, which brought about the fall of all creation and the need for redemption. The Bible tell us that Jesus was cursed, for the Scripture states: Galatians 3:13: Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on the tree. Likewise, Scripture states: 2 Corinthians 5:21: For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Have you ever wondered why God wanted the Jews to look upon the serpent and be healed? Jesus became sin, Jesus took the curse. And just as the serpent was the means of healing, Christians believe that Jesus bore our sins, becoming our vicarious victim, that we could have eternal life. This is one link, at least, between Moses and Jesus, who is called in the Bible "one greater than Moses." Thanks bro for your reference. Now I see where are you in Torah. However, there are so many difficulties in your correlation that it is difficult to see any such similarity between Prophet Moses and Prophet Jesus in this particular aspect, at least. 1. First of all, if taken in a literal sense, then if Moses made bronze serpent on the commands of God, I don�t see any such miracle performed by Jesus that is mentioned anywhere in NT. Not to my knowledge, at least. I would appreciate that if you could provide any such a reference. 2. However, one must realize that Jews don�t interpret this passage literally. Here is their explanation of this passage, from Jewish encyclopedia, which seems very logical to understand in the view of monotheistic theology. �The Mishnah does not take literally the words "Every one who was bitten by a serpent would look at the serpent and live," but interprets them symbolically. The people should look up to the God of heaven, for it is not the serpent that either brings to life or puts to death, but it is God (MishnahR. H. 29a). In the course of time, however, the people lost sight of the symbolical meaning and regarded the serpent itself as the seat of the healing power, and they made it an object of worship, so that Hezekiah found it necessary to destroy it (II Kings xviii. 4; see also Ber. 10a).K� Kindly note the under lined highlighted text, that the same very icon of healing, when became idol in a literal sense, was broken to restore the monotheistic theology. Now coming to some other interesting parts of your writings, I see you saying that Jesus was �Cursed� when you say ����..Cursed is every one that hangeth on the tree�. But who says Jesus was hanged on the �tree�? So how come this statement by Paul in Galatians 3:1 can be considered reliably true? On the more, mere doctrinal statements of some people can�t create the events in the history. Can you logically connect such statements of Paul with any such event around the historical Jesus on earth? Your comparison, is truly being too stretched out fabric to really fit anything in it, sensible or not is immaterial. I don't think you have made any reasonable comparison here. I know you can do better than that. |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 15 April 2006 at 5:37am
Thank you for the warm greeting. I read parts of the thread but found it long and tedious. I would like to simply say that I have read the Christian, Jewish and Muslim arguments about the prophet like Moses in books, from Christians, Jews and Muslims, but mostly from articles on the Internet. I don't agree with the Muslim position about the "brethren" issue. Aside from that the Koran does not say that Muhammad was the prophet like Moses and I think Allah would have told us in plain language if he were but he does not. I will say again that if Muslims want to believe that he is the prophet like Moses, then that is their affair. |
Posted By: ak_m_f
Date Posted: 15 April 2006 at 8:57am
Have you read the Koran? any proof to your arguments? link? O people ! Muhammad has no sons among ye men, but verily, he is the Messenger of Allah and the last in the line of Prophets (khaatam an-Nabiyyin). And God is Aware of everything.) (Al-Ahzab 33: 40) |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 15 April 2006 at 9:55am
|
[QUOTE=AhmadJoyia]
"What?? Did I ask Biblical scholars to link "Jesse" as a contraction of "Ishmael"? I don't think so. Probably someone needs house cleaning for themselves than asking others to do it for them. Remember we are analysing the evidence from your own biblical encylopedia. The question of "?" is more appropriate to be addressed to them as what does it mean to them rather taking a stance on conjectures. We are simply reading it from their own writtings, though for us, this is not a big issue to even worry about." no you did not ask them for this, but you are using their guesswork (to put it politely) to establish a fact, which is as you know, about as irrational as you can get. and no, it is not my, or our own encyclopedia. as for house-cleaning, at least theyre not calling for the death of people converting from christianity, as abul ala maududi is calling for the killing of converts from islam [ "If "jesse" is a contraction of "Ishmael", then it is only a matter of interpreting the same prophesy but with a different lens. That is not difficult I suppose as usually been done by my Christian brothers despite the Jewish critic. On the other hand, as I have said before, my Muslim brothers only trying to patch up with the existing Bible by looking at some info that might help them establish the fact that the scriptures used by the pre-Islamic Jewish and Christian monks to look at Arabia for their prophised Massiah are the same. The fact that some of them did recognize Mohammad as the one mentioned in their scriptures. But my present day Christian brothers are bent upon differentiating between their own scriptures of the old from the present one. Is their any specific reason to keep such hostility towards Islam?" but you have yet to interpret the prophecy through any lens - we have yet to hear from you how the prophecy was fulfilled in muhammad. also, referring to unspecified "jewish and christian monks" is pointless - even if they did as you say, it does not prove they were correct. the Word of God does not require patching up, it stands on its own and doesnt need any concept such as sunnah to complete it "Brother wheather you like it or not, the prophesy clear negates the presence of any divine personality being alluded at. So its really against your own concept of divine Jesus. Secondly you believe about this propesy whatever you think it is, irrespective the owners of the scripture agree with you or not. Since they don't, the same reason can be used by Muslims as well. Its just so simple to understand." sorry, no. the prophesy does not negate the presence of any divine person unless you wish to exclude the concepts of righteousness and equity from God - such a thing would surely be blasphemous. the "owners of the scripture" is a very odd concept "Ok so, at least, you do see this harmonising with the prophesy which is quite naturally 180 degree opposite to your understanding of "faith" based justice." i do not understand what you mean here "So my dear, if the first part of the prophesy doesn't tally with your understanding, aren't you also making the same error, as you say, picking cherries that you like, in other part of the prophesy? You can't blame others for what you yourself are blamed for." no the first part of the prophesy tallies perfectly. who is righteous, but God, and who is equitable, but God? "Well you need to prove it, as you say "beyond doubt" instead of simply stating it against the common understanding of the phrase "and his resting-place shall be glorious" by A Hebrew-English Bible according to the Masoretic Text and the JPS 1917 Edition. I do notice why few Biblical translations are even avoiding such a situation by simply twisting the verse so much as not to get embarrsed by it? Here, from Contemporary English Version we read V.10 as "10 The time is coming when one of David's descendants will be the signal for the people of all nations to come together. They will follow his advice, and his own nation will become famous." One can clearly see a baisness in such translations using the phrase "David's descendants" and totally omitting the words relating to resting-place etc." strongs dictionary is quite clear - no mention of a burial place. what would be "glorious" about that? - a scene of decaying flesh and bones? is that your glory? why have you not quoted what the "jps 1917 edition" says? -- as for the "translation" you quote, they are perfectly correct in saying it will be one of davids descendants, though it is not a literal translation - it should be " the root of jesse" - as for his own nation (israel) becoming famous, israel will become great, but this is clearly not the correct translation ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 16 April 2006 at 6:27pm
|
"What?? Did I ask Biblical scholars to link "Jesse" as a contraction of "Ishmael"? I don't think so. Probably someone needs house cleaning for themselves than asking others to do it for them. Remember we are analyzing the evidence from your own biblical encylopedia. The question of "?" is more appropriate to be addressed to them as what does it mean to them rather taking a stance on conjectures. We are simply reading it from their own writtings, though for us, this is not a big issue to even worry about."
but you have yet to interpret the prophecy through any lens - we have yet to hear from you how the prophecy was fulfilled in muhammad. also, referring to unspecified "jewish and christian monks" is pointless - even if they did as you say, it does not prove they were correct. the Word of God does not require patching up, it stands on its own and doesnt need any concept such as sunnah to complete it Ah! My brother, skeptic can�t be taken as an excuse either. If you don�t want to know as how did your spiritual ancestors recognize Prophet Mohammad, other than merely questioning soundness in their decision, that is up to you, no compulsion, indeed. In that sense, can I expect any rationality from you upon my explanation about the fulfillment of this prophesy?
"Well you need to prove it, as you say "beyond doubt" instead of simply stating it against the common understanding of the phrase "and his resting-place shall be glorious" by A Hebrew-English Bible according to the Masoretic Text and the JPS 1917 Edition. I do notice why few Biblical translations are even avoiding such a situation by simply twisting the verse so much as not to get embarrsed by it? Here, from Contemporary English Version we read V.10 as "10 The time is coming when one of David's descendants will be the signal for the people of all nations to come together. They will follow his advice, and his own nation will become famous." One can clearly see a baisness in such translations using the phrase "David's descendants" and totally omitting the words relating to resting-place etc." strongs dictionary is quite clear - no mention of a burial place. what would be "glorious" about that? - a scene of decaying flesh and bones? is that your glory? why have you not quoted what the "jps 1917 edition" says? -- as for the "translation" you quote, they are perfectly correct in saying it will be one of davids descendants, though it is not a literal translation - it should be " the root of jesse" - as for his own nation (israel) becoming famous, israel will become great, but this is clearly not the correct translation Let us see what strongs dictionary says about this verse.
My dear, even from this translation, one thing is very obvious from the future tense �shall be glorious� that this �rest� can�t be understood as �heavens� from the divinity attached to this prophet. If �heaven� is to be understood, then the future tense used in the sentence doesn�t make sense where �heavens� as abode for God has always been glorified by all creatures. This understanding doesn�t bring anything new to the reverence for �his rest� clause attributed to the prophesied �root of Jesse�. Hence, this definition is illogical. Thus this �rest� can�t be taken as �heaven� but some physical location on this earth. Yes! Literally speaking, �rest� or �resting-place� can be understood as a place where someone resides for some period of time. Specifically with this prophesy, however, seems like kind of some permanent glorification of the site can only be understood from figurative understanding of this word where it means �place of burial� just like where saints are buried in tombs. Glorification of such tombs is quite natural to understand especially once its association is considered divinely inspired in such verses. The classical examples of such glorification exist in many parts of this world, though the glorification example of �resting-place� of Prophet Mohammad is quite conspicuous among them fulfilling the Prophesy, both in terms of time since he was laid in and the number of people went there, and are still going, and shall be kept going to offer salutations upon him. Hence fulfilling �his rest shall be glorious�. |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 17 April 2006 at 7:25am
|
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 17 April 2006 at 10:36am
|
" Brother, if one is taking a position of �their guesswork�, then I think, all anonymous books of Bible also come into the same category including the book �Isaiah�; current version of which is obviously not authored by the Prophet himself. So in that sense, even the very origin of this Prophesy is not more than a conjecture. But interesting thing is that my Christian brother don�t even want to talk about it." well ahmad, one-liners like "current version of which is obviously not authored by the prophet himself" are not useful on their own as you may know, and to go into them by way of further explanation is hardly to the point of the thread. suffice it to say that our friend jamal thinks its valid for muhammad. i am certainly not willing to enter into discussions re the perceived "state" of the holy scriptures unless i am given free rein to do likewise with the quran, which is hardly likely in these forums, where threads are being closed down almost as fast as theyre being opened. i regard the bible, as it stands, as the only written, and final, word of God to man "Ah! My brother, skeptic can�t be taken as an excuse either. If you don�t want to know as how did your spiritual ancestors recognize Prophet Mohammad, other than merely questioning soundness in their decision, that is up to you, no compulsion, indeed. In that sense, can I expect any rationality from you upon my explanation about the fulfillment of this prophesy?" so my "spiritual ancestors" are to remain anonymous? one might have thought they would have had their small place in the islamic firmament, at the very least, given their alleged perception----aahhh - so we may now expect your commentary on isaiah 11 shortly? - i am breathless with anticipation, ahmad "Let us see what strongs dictionary says about this verse.
My dear, even from this translation, one thing is very obvious from the future tense �shall be glorious� that this �rest� can�t be understood as �heavens� from the divinity attached to this prophet. If �heaven� is to be understood, then the future tense used in the sentence doesn�t make sense where �heavens� as abode for God has always been glorified by all creatures. This understanding doesn�t bring anything new to the reverence for �his rest� clause attributed to the prophesied �root of Jesse�. Hence, this definition is illogical. Thus this �rest� can�t be taken as �heaven� but some physical location on this earth. Yes! Literally speaking, �rest� or �resting-place� can be understood as a place where someone resides for some period of time. Specifically with this prophesy, however, seems like kind of some permanent glorification of the site can only be understood from figurative understanding of this word where it means �place of burial� just like where saints are buried in tombs. Glorification of such tombs is quite natural to understand especially once its association is considered divinely inspired in such verses. The classical examples of such glorification exist in many parts of this world, though the glorification example of �resting-place� of Prophet Mohammad is quite conspicuous among them fulfilling the Prophesy, both in terms of time since he was laid in and the number of people went there, and are still going, and shall be kept going to offer salutations upon him. Hence fulfilling �his rest shall be glorious�. " i dont know why youve started speaking about heaven here. Christ is returning to earth in glory to set up his glorious kingdom. the whole scene in this chapter is clearly earth, not heaven. "glorification of such tombs is quite natural to understand" - indeed it is, but is it spiritual, is it of God? - we believe that all the glory should be given to God, to whom alone it is due, and not shared with human remains, even if they are lodged in big fancy tombs.
as you can probably gauge, ahmad, i have yet to work out how to "quote" a post in parts like you and others can do, i will work it out eventually
you have not commented on the other scriptures i have brought to bear on the subject of the Branch, mentioned in isaiah 11 - all of which point to Christs return, and subsequent conditions. allow me to do another link-up. compare isaiah 11: 6-9 with isaiah 65: 25 - they are virtually identical. note the context of isaiah 65: 25. the section starts in v.17 - "behold i create new heavens and a new earth......" - did this happen with the arrival of muhammad?
now so far we have only talked about one small point raised by jamal, perhaps its time we moved on to the many other points he raised, unless you have something very solid to bring to bear ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 18 April 2006 at 7:17am
| I am presently occupied elsewhere and may not be able to respond to your comments, bro Fredi, for a week or so. I shall try to come back ASAP. See you then, Inshallah! Peace. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 18 April 2006 at 9:55am
|
no probs ahmad - enjoy! (but i may continue to post my comments on jamals theories) ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 24 April 2006 at 10:28am
|
well ahmad, one-liners like "current version of which is obviously not authored by the prophet himself" are not useful on their own as you may know, and to go into them by way of further explanation is hardly to the point of the thread. suffice it to say that our friend jamal thinks its valid for muhammad.
Bro, if you are not �willing� then its something else. Other wise, you are always open to call upon critics over Quran, but only through your own understanding with logic rather than doing �cut and paste� from spurious sources. This forum is meant for healthy discussions among us and you shall not find me avoiding it, other than what time restricts me to do.
"Ah! My brother, skeptic can�t be taken as an excuse either. If you don�t want to know as how did your spiritual ancestors recognize Prophet Mohammad, other than merely questioning soundness in their decision, that is up to you, no compulsion, indeed. In that sense, can I expect any rationality from you upon my explanation about the fulfillment of this prophesy?" so my "spiritual ancestors" are to remain anonymous? one might have thought they would have had their small place in the islamic firmament, at the very least, given their alleged perception Well, I thought you already knew them and somewhere on this forum has already quoted them. Or perhaps, I am not very correct in this understanding. Nevertheless, few of them are �Warqa bin Naufal� and a Nestorian monk called �Buharia�.
----aahhh - so we may now expect your commentary on isaiah 11 shortly? - i am breathless with anticipation, ahmad Well, my brother, do you have any thing concrete to refute other than mere exclamation?
"Let us see what strongs dictionary says about this verse. And in that http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB31.htm#S3117 - there shall be a http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB83.htm#S8328 - of http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB34.htm#S3448 - which shall http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB59.htm#S5975 - - 6 for an http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB52.htm#S5251 - of the http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB59.htm#S5971 - to it shall the http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB14.htm#S1471 - http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB18.htm#S1875 - - 4 and his http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB44.htm#S4496 - shall be http://www.htmlbible.com/sacrednamebiblecom/kjvstrongs/FRMSTRHEB35.htm#S3519 - My dear, even from this translation, one thing is very obvious from the future tense �shall be glorious� that this �rest� can�t be understood as �heavens� from the divinity attached to this prophet. If �heaven� is to be understood, then the future tense used in the sentence doesn�t make sense where �heavens� as abode for God has always been glorified by all creatures. This understanding doesn�t bring anything new to the reverence for �his rest� clause attributed to the prophesied �root of Jesse�. Hence, this definition is illogical. Thus this �rest� can�t be taken as �heaven� but some physical location on this earth. Yes! Literally speaking, �rest� or �resting-place� can be understood as a place where someone resides for some period of time. Specifically with this prophesy, however, seems like kind of some permanent glorification of the site can only be understood from figurative understanding of this word where it means �place of burial� just like where saints are buried in tombs. Glorification of such tombs is quite natural to understand especially once its association is considered divinely inspired in such verses. The classical examples of such glorification exist in many parts of this world, though the glorification example of �resting-place� of Prophet Mohammad is quite conspicuous among them fulfilling the Prophesy, both in terms of time since he was laid in and the number of people went there, and are still going, and shall be kept going to offer salutations upon him. Hence fulfilling �his rest shall be glorious�. " i dont know why youve started speaking about heaven here. Christ is returning to earth in glory to set up his glorious kingdom. the whole scene in this chapter is clearly earth, not heaven.
Well, my brother, your caution about glorification may be noted in it own place, however, once God has glorified something for others (i.e. the promised prophet in this case), it is not up to us to go against it. The place shall be glorified, as promised by God, whether we like it or not. In case of Prophet Mohammad, his place is being glorified, irrespective of if its mentioned in the Bible or not, a self evident proof.
as you can probably gauge, ahmad, i have yet to work out how to "quote" a post in parts like you and others can do, i will work it out eventually you have not commented on the other scriptures i have brought to bear on the subject of the Branch, mentioned in isaiah 11 - all of which point to Christs return, and subsequent conditions. allow me to do another link-up. compare isaiah 11: 6-9 with isaiah 65: 25 - they are virtually identical. note the context of isaiah 65: 25. the section starts in v.17 - "behold i create new heavens and a new earth......" - did this happen with the arrival of muhammad?
now so far we have only talked about one small point raised by jamal, perhaps its time we moved on to the many other points he raised, unless you have something very solid to bring to bear |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 25 April 2006 at 7:03am
|
An additional confirmation which leaves no iota of doubt is found in the Book of Isaiah (Ch. 11:1-2): You are going to have to direct me to where it says in the Encyclopedia Biblica, "Jesse is contracted from Ishamel." This is very strange. Could it be a misquote? Further, Isaiah was a Jewish prophet speaking to the Jewish nation, who Jesse was for Jews has never been a big mystery. It's David's father. "And Obed begot Jesse, and Jesse begot David." Ruth 4:22 |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 25 April 2006 at 5:27pm
|
George, Don't forget that Ishmael and his descendants also begot and were begetting children. Some of them must also have begotten children by marrying girls of Issac's seeds. It was not just that only Issac's children begot in their own line. There must have been a lot of cross-begetting by Ishmael's children as it was quite common in those days. I have read this too, ""Jesse is contracted from Ishamel." but I can't find it again. If I do, I will let you know. I believe we cannot look at Mary's genealogy and say that it is the genealogy of Jesus. As Jesus had no earthly father, he is NOT from the line of David. Period. Even if the genealogy belonged to Joseph, still Jesus is NOT from the line of David. Period. |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 7:31am
Are you saying that Muhammad was a Jew? Would you please provide Muhammad's family tree. Thanks. Let's not get into the genealogy of Jesus. There are answers to what you posted coming from Jewish law. |
Posted By: ibnuarradi
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 8:05am
|
|
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 8:07am
|
George, From you: "Are you saying that Muhammad was a Jew? Would you please provide Muhammad's family tree. Thanks. Are you saying that Abraham, Issac, Ishmael, Jacob, Essau, Joseph and Benjamin were Jews? I don't have Muhammad's family tree with me but you can google and find that out, if you wish.
Posted: 25 April 2006 at 9:54am | IP Logged |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 8:10am
The Jews say that Abraham was a Jew. |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 8:13am
|
I don't want to hear what the Jews say. There were no Jews at that time. Those were Hebrews. I want to hear from you as a Christian. Let me have your response, please. |
Posted By: BMZ
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 8:16am
|
ibnuarradi, Greetings and Salaam Alaikum from Singapore. That was indeed a delight to have the family tree of our dear Prophet posted by you. Thanks BMZ |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 8:59am
|
Reference for Jesse as contraction of Ishmail: Encyclopaedia Biblica, Rev. T. K. Cheyne D.Litt D.D., J. Sutherland Black M.A. LL.D., Vol. 3, under "Names," p. 3292, item 52. |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 9:23am
|
the actual entry for jesse has already been posted on this thread by me. it does not show that jesse is a contraction of ishmael ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: fredifreeloader
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 10:05am
|
bmzsp - was that the official family tree? or one of the alternative versions? ------------- for i am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth - romans 1: 16 |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 10:15am
|
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 10:17am
|
Well, in fact both the enteries, one posted by bro Fredi (without reference) and one pasted above, do allude towards the possibility of 'Jesse' being the contraction of 'Ishmael'. Whether one accepts it or not, is a matter of personal choice and faith, most of this has also been discussed on this thread. Regarding 'official' and 'alternative' version of family tree, one may like to mirror this question pertaining to Luke's and Mathew's account as well. Isn't it? Choose with your own personal liking/disliking. |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 10:39am
Could you give me the link for the family tree, please. |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 10:41am
Could you please provide a direct link. I looked and could not find it. Thanks. |
Posted By: George
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 10:43am
|
Jesse was the father of King David. Obed -> Jesse -> David (Ruth 4:17). The scriptures teach that "My covenant I will establish with Isaac" (Genesis 17:21). Later God repeated, "In Isaac your seed shall be called" (Genesis 21:12). Jesus came through the lineage of Isaac ... Jesse ... David ... etc. (Matthew 1:5-16). From early on in the Old Testament, the Bible never deals with the descendants of Ishmael. The fact that Jesus is the branch is clearly seen by Jeremiah (23:5-6) "The days are surely coming, says the Lord, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. And this is the name by which he will be called: The Lord is our righteousness". This is to be fulfilled in the future at the second coming of Christ. " ... its rider is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war ... he is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is called The Word of God ... on his robe and on his thigh he has a name inscribed, King of kings and Lord of lords" (Revelation 19:11-16). |
Posted By: AhmadJoyia
Date Posted: 26 April 2006 at 11:57am
http://www.bible-researcher.com/encyclopaedia-biblica.html - http://www.bible-researcher.com/encyclopaedia-biblica.html |