Responses to Akbarally Meherally's site

Abraham and the Child of Sacrifice Revisited - Again

RESPONDING TO AKBARALLY'S DECEPTION CHARGE

Mr. Meherally attempts to rebut other aspects of my article, yet as we shall see, falls way short of doing so. Let us proceed to his arguments.

MORE TEXTS....

Mr. Sam Shamoun writes in his original article:

Thus, Muslims believe that scribes later corrupted the original reading from Ishmael to Isaac. This idea stems from the Muslim misunderstanding of the phrase, "Only son", in reference to Isaac, since the title is used to affirm Isaac's unique status, a status based on the following:

Isaac was the only promised child of Abraham, a fact which the Quran agrees with (cf. Genesis 17:15-21; Sura 11:69-73, 37:112-113, 51:24-30). Ishmael was never a promised child.

THE QUR'AN DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE PRESENTED FACT...

Here is the promise from the Book of Genesis Chapter 17:

God said; "I will establish My Covenant with him (Isaac) as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him." (verse 19). "But My Covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this season next year." (verse 21).

Response:

Mr. Meherally again attacks a straw man, since I NEVER said that the Quran mentions God making a covenant with Isaac. The fact that you made this inference from my citation of Genesis 17:15-21 is your problem. Please read what I actually did say, instead of assuming what you think I meant to say.

I used Genesis 17:15-21 to demonstrate the point that God's promises about Isaac, WHICH INCLUDED MAKING A COVENANT WITH HIM BUT WAS NOT LIMITED TO JUST THAT ASPECT, did not include Ishmael at all. Amazingly, you twisted the citation and quoted only a part of it, leaving out the very part that was essential in establishing Isaac's preeminence over Ishmael:

God also said to Abraham, "As for Sarai your wife, you are no longer to call her Sarai; her name will be Sarah. I WILL BLESS HER AND WILL SURELY GIVE YOU A SON BY HER. I will bless her so that she will be the mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her." Genesis 17:15-16

Mr. Meherally, please tell us why did you fail to include this portion of my citation which clearly proved the point I was trying to establish, namely that Isaac was the only promised child given to Abraham?

In fact, I used this point as just one of the many reasons why the Holy Bible addresses Isaac as Abraham's only son, since THE PROMISES made to the latter, which included the Covenant, were passed down solely to the son born from Sarah. You would have clearly seen this had you quoted my citation in its relevant context:

"Thus, Muslims believe that scribes later corrupted the original reading from Ishmael to Isaac. This idea stems from the Muslim misunderstanding of the phrase, "Only son", in reference to Isaac, since the title is used to affirm Isaac's unique status, a status based on the following:

Isaac was the only promised child of Abraham, a fact which the Quran agrees with (cf. Genesis 17:15-21; Sura 11:69-73, 37:112-113, 51:24-30). Ishmael was never a promised child.

Isaac was conceived miraculously to Sarah when the latter was old and barren, with the Quran likewise agreeing (cf. Genesis 17:15-17, 18:9-15, 21:1-7; Sura 11:69-73, 51:24-30). Ishmael was conceived in the normal process of sexual reproduction.

God promised that it would be Isaac's descendants who would inherit the land given to Abraham. (Genesis 13:14-18, 15:18-21, 28:13-14). Ishmael had no part in the inheritance and promise given to Isaac through Abraham.

IT IS FOR THESE REASONS THAT ISAAC IS CALLED ABRAHAM'S ONLY SON since God himself reckoned him AS THE CHILD OF PROMISE AND BLESSINGS, AN HONOR NEVER BESTOWED UPON ISHMAEL."

Therefore, can you produce one verse from the Holy Bible where it states that God had promised to bless Abraham with a son from Hagar and that this son would receive the land given to Abraham’s seed as an inheritance? Could you please show us in the Holy Bible where God makes a covenant with Ishmael as he did with Isaac, Jacob and their descendants after them?

Meherally claims:

Here is what is revealed in the Glorious Qur'an:

Sura 11:69-73 and Sura 51:24-30... Allah's Messengers came to Abraham and gave glad tidings of Isaac, and after him, of Jacob. There is NO MENTION of any Covenant or Promise for Isaac.

Sura 37:112 and 113... "And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet - one of the righteous. We blessed him and Isaac: But of their progeny are (some) that do right and (some) that obviously do wrong, to themselves." The last line happens to be a mere statement of fact. There is NO MENTION of any Covenant or Promise for Isaac, only a blessing.

Response:

Since I never claimed that the Qur'an mentions God making a covenant with Isaac, this is clearly a straw man. In relation to Isaac being the only one who is explicitly said to be promised to Abraham as a child of glad tidings compare the following citations:

And Our messengers cam unto Abraham with good news. They said: Peace! He answered: Peace! and delayed not to bring a roasted calf. And when he saw their hands reached not to it, he mistrusted them and conceived a fear of them. They said: Fear not! Lo! we are sent unto the folk of Lot. And his wife, standing by laughed when We gave her good tidings (of the birth) of Isaac, and, after Isaac, of Jacob. She said: Oh woe is me! Shall I bear a child when I am an old woman, and this my husband is an old man? Lo! this is a strange thing! They said: Wonderest thou at the commandment of Allah? The mercy of Allah and His blessings be upon you, O people of the house! Lo! He is Owner of Praise, Owner of Glory! S. 11:69-73

Hath the story of Abraham's honoured guests reached thee (O Muhammad)? When they came in unto him and said: Peace! he answered, Peace! (and thought): Folk unknown (to me). Then he went apart unto his housefolk so that they brought a fatted calf; And he set it before them, saying: Will ye not eat? Then he conceived a fear of them. They said: Fear not! and gave him tidings of (the birth of) a wise son. Then his wife came forward, making moan, and smote her face, and cried: A barren old woman! They said: Even so saith thy Lord. Lo! He is the Wise, the Knower. S. 51:24-30

And we gave him tidings of the birth of Isaac, a prophet of the righteous. S. 37:112

Mr. Meherally, can you please produce for us a verse where it explicitly mentions the birth of Ishmael as glad tidings from God to Abraham? In fact, I'll make it easier for you to search for the answer. Here are all the references where Ishmael is mentioned by name: S. 2:125, 127, 133, 136, 140; 3:84; 4:163; 6:86; 14:39; 9:54; 21:85; 38:48. Not one of these verses mentions that Ishmael's birth was announced as something of glad tidings given to Abraham like that of Isaac.

Furthermore, can you also produce a single verse where Ishmael's mother is even mentioned explicitly by name, or even implicitly? In fact, the impression given is that Ishmael is Abraham's son from Sarah since she is the only wife alluded to in the Quran! One must go outside the Quran and read either the Holy Bible or the Islamic traditions in order to discover that Abraham had another wife named Hagar who bore him Ishmael. This point demonstrates the Holy Bible's superiority over the Quran since what the latter vaguely mentions or is silent on the former magnificently clarifies!

Meherally asserts:

I AM SORRY TO ADD that Sam Shamoun's claim that the Qur'an agrees with the Bible is FALSE, DECEPTIVE and MISLEADING. The Bible speaks of God making an "Everlasting Covenant" whereas, the verses of the Quran do not speak of Allah making any kind of Covenant.

Response:

Again, notice the ad hominem attacks. It seems that Akbarally wants to sway his readers into believing him by emotional outbursts such as accusing me of being false, deceptive, etc. Yet, such statements prove absolutely nothing except Meherally's inability to deal with the facts presented in my article. Furthermore, the Holy Bible also mentions God’s specific promise to Abraham that Sarah would bear a son. It would be through that son that God would fulfill all his divine promises to Abraham.

BTW, we are still waiting for an acknowledgment from Meherally on his misquotation of Badawi. Should we assume that since Meherally has failed to comment thus far on this fact that he was deliberately trying to deceive and mislead his readers?

Meherally complains:

Sam Shamoun wrote in his original article:

Isaac was conceived miraculously to Sarah when the latter was old and barren, with the Quran likewise agreeing (cf. Genesis 17:15-17, 18:9-15, 21:1-7; Sura 11:69-73, 51:24-30). Ishmael was conceived in the normal process of sexual reproduction.

NONE of the above quoted verses from the Bible or the Quran recognize, substantiate or attest to the fact that there was an "absence of sex" between Abraham and his wife Sarah, in the birth of their son Isaac.

NOWHERE in the Bible or the Quran it is written that Ishmael, who was "conceived in the normal process of sexual reproduction" between Abraham and his wife Hagar, was disqualified or had lost his status for being the eldest son of Abraham, because of that process. (Genesis 16:3 recognizes Hagar as "wife" of prophet Abraham).

Sam Shamoun: WHERE in the Bible or the Quran it is written that the "son" to be sacrificed by prophet Abraham has to be born "miraculously" or "without the normal process of sexual reproduction"???

Response:

Again, I challenge you to show me where I claimed that the miraculous birth of Isaac excluded any sexual activity between Abraham and Sarah! This is an argument from silence since we do not know whether the miracle entailed God to cause Abraham's seed or Sarah's womb to be fertile, or God caused the latter's womb to miraculously conceive without any sexual activity.

Yet, the both the Holy Bible and the Quran agree that the birth was indeed miraculous since it occurred when the couple were both old and barren:

"Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, "Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?" Genesis 17:17

Hath the story of Abraham's honoured guests reached thee (O Muhammad)? When they came in unto him and said: Peace! he answered, Peace! (and thought): Folk unknown (to me). Then he went apart unto his housefolk so that they brought a fatted calf; And he set it before them, saying: Will ye not eat? Then he conceived a fear of them. They said: Fear not! and gave him tidings of (the birth of) a wise son. Then his wife came forward, making moan, and smote her face, and cried: A BARREN OLD WOMAN! They said: Even so saith thy Lord. Lo! He is the Wise, the Knower. S. 51:24-30

[However, Genesis 21:1-5 and Hebrews 11:11-18 clearly speak of Isaac as being Abraham's son (in contrast to the virgin birth of Jesus, where it is made clear in the gospel accounts that he was not the son of any human father), and, to our knowledge, Jewish and Christian commentators have never assumed anything else but that Isaac was conceived through the normal marital relationship between Abraham and Sarah. There is absolutly no hint to the contrary.]

Secondly, I never claimed that Ishmael was disqualified from being the firstborn due to the fact that he was "conceived in the normal process of sexual reproduction," so this another straw man argument from Akbarally. Yet, Meherally seems to presume that since Ishmael was the firstborn he held precedence over Isaac. The only problem with this logic is that it fails to take into consideration that the Holy Bible clearly presents God sovereignly choosing the younger son over the firstborn. One such example is God selecting Jacob over his older brother Esau:

The LORD said to her (Rebekah, Isaac’s wife), "Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you will be separated; one people will be stronger than the other, and the older (Esau) will serve the younger (Jacob)." Gen. 25:23

Or Joseph's son Ephraim chosen ahead of his firstborn, Manasseh:

"When Joseph saw his father placing his right hand on Ephraim's head he was displeased; so he took hold of his father's hand to move it from Ephraim's head to Manasseh's head. Joseph said to him, 'No, my father, this is the firstborn; put your right hand on his head.' But his father refused and said, 'I know my son, I know. He too will become a people, and he too will become great. Nevertheless, his younger brother will be greater than he, and his descendants will become a group of nations.'" Gen. 48:17-19

Finally, again it seems I must constantly repeat the charge of a straw man argument seeing that Meherally attributes to me things I have never said. I have never said that the child that was to be sacrificed had to be born "miraculously" or that the child could not be born through "the normal process of sexual reproduction." What I did say was that it was the child promised to Abraham that God commanded to be sacrificed. That promised child was Isaac, not Ishmael, a fact which both the Holy Bible and the Quran agree with.

Meherally continues:

FURTHERMORE, Sam writes: Ishmael was never a promised child.

IF, making of a Covenant by God, within the Bible, makes Isaac a "promised child", then how about making of a Covenant by Allah, within the Qur'an, with Ishmael? Does it not make Ishmael a "promised child"???

Here is a verse from the Glorious Qur'an:

Remember We made the house a place of assembly for men and a place of safety; and take ye the station of Abraham as a place of prayer; and We Covenanted with Abraham and Isma'il that they should sanctify My House for those who compass it round or use it as a retreat or bow or prostrate themselves (therein in prayer). Sura 2:125

Response:

Please notice how Meherally inserts the words "making of a Covenant by God, within the Bible, makes Isaac a 'promised child'", something I have never said. Again Mr. Meherally, where in my article do I say that the making of a covenant makes a person a promised child? I challenge you to produce one statement in any of my articles, specifically the one you're trying to rebut, where I say this.

Meherally proceeds:

Finally, here is what we as Muslims believe:

Say: "We believe in Allah and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes and in (Books) given to Moses, Jesus and the Prophets from their Lord; we make no distinction between one and another among them and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam)." Sura 3:84

Response:

Perhaps Meherally can explain these passages for us:

O Children of Israel! Remember My favour wherewith I favoured you and how I preferred you to (all) creatures. S. 2:47

O Children of Israel! Remember My favour wherewith I favoured you and how I preferred you to (all) creatures. S. 2:122

Lo! Allah preferred Adam and Noah and the Family of Abraham and the Family of 'Imran above (all His) creatures. S. 3:33

And when the angels said: O Mary! Lo! Allah hath chosen thee and made thee pure, and hath preferred thee above (all) the women of creation. S. 3:42

"And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot. Each one (of them) did We prefer above (Our) creatures..." S. 6:86

He said: O Moses! I have preferred thee above mankind by My messages and by My speaking (unto thee). So hold that which I have given thee, and be among the thankful. S. 7:144

And thy Lord is Best Aware of all who are in the heavens and the earth. And we preferred some of the prophets above others, and unto David We gave the Psalms. S. 17:55

Since Allah clearly made a distinction between the prophets, does this mean that Muslims are more fair and righteous than Allah since they view all the prophets equally, giving them the same honor and respect? If Allah can make a distinction and prefer some above others, why can't Muslims do likewise seeing that their God clearly did so?

Mr. Meherally continues:

Mr. Sam Shamoun writes in his original article:

God promised that it would be Isaac's descendants who would inherit the land given to Abraham. (Genesis 13:14-18, 15:18-21, 28:13-14). Ishmael had no part in the inheritance and promise given to Isaac through Abraham.

THE BIBLICAL FACTS:

When God promised the land to prophet Abraham, his name was Abram.

God had asked Abram to change his name to Abraham when he was ninety-nine years old. (see Genesis 17:1-5). Ishmael the eldest son was at that time thirteen years old. Isaac was born one year after the name change.

In other words, Isaac was not even born when the land was promised by God.

The name Isaac appears for the first time in the Bible in Gen. 17:19.

The land was promised by God was to the seeds of Abram, (see K.J.V.), And it was forever. There is no record of God going back on His Promise.

Genesis chapter 28 deals with God's promise to Jacob.

Response:

Here Akbarally is actually being deceptive. Notice that in my article I cited Genesis 13:14-18, 15:18-21 and 28:13-14. Let us read what these verses actually say and then proceed to expose Meherally's straw man and red herring arguments:

"The LORD said to Abram after Lot had parted from him, "Lift up your eyes from where you are and look north and south, east and west. All the land that you see I will give to you and your offspring forever. I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your offspring could be counted. Go, walk through the length and breadth of the land, for I am giving it to you." So Abram moved his tents and went to live near the great trees of Mamre at Hebron, where he built an altar to the LORD." Genesis 13:14-18

And now Genesis 15, beginning at verse 12 for the context:

"As the sun was setting, Abram fell into a deep sleep, and a thick and dreadful darkness came over him. Then the LORD said to him, "Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a country not their own, and they will be enslaved and mistreated four hundred years. But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves, and afterward they will come out with great possessions. You, however, will go to your fathers in peace and be buried at a good old age. In the fourth generation your descendants will come back here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure." When the sun had set and darkness had fallen, a smoking firepot with a blazing torch appeared and passed between the pieces. On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, "To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates- the land of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites and Jebusites." Genesis 15:12-21

According to this promise, the ones who were to inherit the land of Canaan were the very ones that were to first serve as slaves in a foreign land for four generations. The only seed who ever served as slaves for four generations were the Israelites in Egypt, never the Ishmaelites:

"Then he said, 'I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob' The LORD said, 'I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt. I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and I am concerned about their sufferings. So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey- the home of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites.'" Exodus 3:6, 7-8

"Because he loved your forefathers and chose their descendants after them, he brought you out of Egypt by his Presence and great strength, to drive out before you nations greater and stronger than you and to bring you into their land to give it to you for your inheritance, as it is today." Deuteronomy 4:37-38

"After the LORD your God has driven them out before you, do not say to yourself, 'The LORD has brought me here to take possession of this land because of my righteousness.' No, it is on account of the wickedness of these nations that LORD is going to drive them out before you. It is not because of your righteousness or your integrity that you are going in to take possession of the land; but on account of the wickedness of these nations, the LORD your God will drive them out before you, to accomplish what he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." Deuteronomy 9:4-5

Furthermore, not only did the promise of inheritance precede the birth of Isaac it also preceded Ishmael's birth as well! This means that Meherally' point that the promise of inheriting the land was given before Isaac's birth proves absolutely nothing since it is not the timing of the promise that is important. Rather, what matters is the identity of Abraham's children whom God promised would inherit the land, an identity revealed in the Holy Bible as the nation of Israel.

Thirdly, even though God promised Abraham that Ishmael would also be a great nation, that promise never included Canaan as part of God's blessing upon Ishmael:

"Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, "Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?" And Abraham said to God, "If only Ishmael might live under your blessing!" Then God said, "Yes, BUT your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant WITH HIM AS AN EVERLASTING COVENANT FOR HIS DESCENDANTS AFTER HIM. 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. BUT MY COVENANT I WILL ESTABLISH WITH ISAAC, WHOM SARAH WILL BEAR TO YOU BY THIS TIME NEXT YEAR." Genesis 17:17-21

Interestingly Meherally alludes to Genesis 17:1-5 yet fails to mention this preceding passage which helps clarify what the verses he alludes to actually mean within its immediate context. We wonder why? Perhaps Meherally realized that this passage would demonstrate to his readers that the Holy Bible specifically denies the fact that God had made a covenant with Ishmael like he did with Isaac.

The Holy Bible proceeds to record the fulfillment of God's promise to Ishmael:

"This is the account of Abraham's son Ishmael, whom Sarah's maidservant, Hagar the Egyptian, bore to Abraham. These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, listed in the order of their birth: Nebaioth the firstborn of Ishmael, Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, Mishma, Dumah, Massa, Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish and Kedemah. These were the sons of Ishmael, and these are the names of the twelve tribal rulers according to their settlements and camps. Altogether, Ishmael lived a hundred and thirty-seven years. He breathed his last and died, and he was gathered to his people. His descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the border of Egypt, as you go toward Asshur. And they lived in hostility toward all their brothers." Genesis 25:12-18

As far as Abraham being the father of many nations is concerned, I have never denied that Ishmael and his sons were part of the fulfillment of the promise of God to Abraham. In fact, my personal belief is that Ishmael was not the only one who contributed to the fulfillment of this promise, since Abraham had six other sons who also had children that formed mighty nations:

"Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah. Jokshan was the father of Sheba and Dedan; the descendants of Dedan were the Asshurites, the Letushites and the Leummites. The sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida and Eldaah. All these were descendants of Keturah. Abraham left everything he owned to Isaac. But while he was still living, he gave gifts to the sons of his concubines and sent them away from his son Isaac to the land of the east." Genesis 25:1-6

Interestingly, Meherally failed to include this promise made to Sarah:

God also said to Abraham, "As for Sarai your wife, you are no longer to call her Sarai; her name will be Sarah. I will bless her and will surely give you a son by her. I will bless her so that she will be the mother of NATIONS; KINGS OF PEOPLES will come from her." Genesis 17:15-16

This basically establishes the point that Abraham becoming the father of many nations did not entail the inclusion of Ishmael or Keturah's six sons to make this promise a reality. Isaac was all that God needed to fulfill the promise made to Abraham and Sarah that they would have offspring as numerous as the stars in heaven, producing many great nations and mighty kings. In fact, this is precisely what the Holy Bible states happened when Israel became a mighty nation under Moses' leadership:

"The LORD your God has increased your numbers so that today YOU ARE AS NUMEROUS AS THE STARS IN THE SKY. Deuteronomy 1:10

"Your forefathers who went down into Egypt were seventy in all, and now the LORD your God HAS MADE YOU AS NUMEROUS AS THE STARS IN THE SKY." Deuteronomy 10:22

"Your servant is here among the people you have chosen, a great people, TOO NUMEROUS TO COUNT OR NUMBER." 1 Kings 3:8

"The people of Judah and Israel WERE AS NUMEROUS AS THE SAND ON THE SEASHORE; they ate, they drank and they were happy. 1 Kings 4:20

"So I advise you: Let all Israel, from Dan to Beersheba-AS NUMEROUS AS THE SAND ON THE SEASHORE-be gathered to you, with you yourself leading them into battle." 2 Samuel 17:11

"Though your people, O Israel, BE LIKE THE SAND BY THE SEA, only a remnant will return. Destruction has been decreed, overwhelming and righteous." Isaiah 10:22

"'I will make the descendants of David my servant and the Levites who minister before me AS COUNTLESS AS THE STARS OF THE SKY AND AS MEASURELESS AS THE SAND ON THE SEASHORE.'" Jeremiah 33:22

"Yet the Israelites WILL BE LIKE THE SAND ON THE SEASHORE, WHICH CANNOT BE MEASURED OR COUNTED. In the place where it was said to them, `You are not my people,' they will be called `sons of the living God.'" Hosea 1:10

Fulfilling the following promises:

"He took him outside and said, 'Look up at the heavens and count the stars-if indeed you can count them.' Then he said to him, 'So shall your offspring be.'" Genesis 15:5

"I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies..." Genesis 22:17

It should be stated that the phrase "as numerous as the sand on the seashore" and " as countless as the stars of the sky" is hyperbolic language that is used to show the greatness of Israel. It must be pointed out that the Holy Bible originates from Semitic thought and culture which is rich with expressions steeped in allegory, metaphor and hyperbole. The fact that this expression is hyperbolic in nature can be seen from the following citations:

"Joseph stored up huge quantities of grain, LIKE THE SAND OF THE SEASHORE; it was so much that he stopped keeping records because it was beyond measure." Genesis 41:49

"They came out with all their troops and a large number of horses and chariots-a huge army, as numerous AS THE SAND ON THE SEASHORE." Joshua 11:4

"The Midianites, the Amalekites and all the other eastern peoples had settled in the valley, thick as locusts. Their camels could no more be counted than THE SAND ON THE SEASHORE. Judges 7:12

"He rained meat down on them like dust, flying birds like SAND ON THE SEASHORE. Psalm 78:27

"God gave Solomon wisdom and very great insight, and a breadth of understanding as measureless as the SAND ON THE SEASHORE. 1 Kings 4:29

Hence, we find that the birth of the nation of Israel completely fulfilled all of God's promises to Abraham, leaving nothing for Ishmael or the six sons of Keturah to fulfill."

Meherally:

Mr. Sam Shamoun: CAN YOU DENY the above biblical facts or prove that Ishmael was not the seed of Abram or God had gone back on HIS promise?

Response:

I never did, so your straw man arguments prove absolutely nothing. Furthermore, why did you conveniently overlook the context of the passages that I alluded to in my original article that clearly shows that Ishmael had nothing to do with God's covenant promises? Why did you also fail to mention the fulfillment of God's promise to bless Ishmael with a nation, a promise fulfilled when Ishmael had twelve princes who ruled to the east of their brethren, a promise which has nothing to do with Muhammad or Islam? Finally, why have you still failed to acknowledge your misquotation of Badawi seeing that you have dropped it from your article without ever mentioning it to your readers? Instead of writing rebuttals that have little or no substance behind them, you would do better to admit your careless citations of scholars like Badawi and stop your ad hominem attacks on my integrity.

We wait for Meherally's other points. If they are anything like the preceding arguments, then they won’t be too difficult to rebut.

But wait, there's more...........Meherally continues with the torture session:

Are these the words of the Prophet of Islam?

Sam wrote, quoting Al-Tabari:

"Some say it was Isaac, while others say it was Ishmael."

By writing the above, Al-Tabari could have meant; (only!) some views were in the favour of Isaac while, views of others (rest!) were in favour of Ishmael.

Response:

Instead of telling us what YOU THINK Tabari meant, read Tabari carefully and see in fact what he actually did mean to say. Furthermore, the fact that some would prefer Isaac and others Ishmael proves that the Quran is vague and does not conclusively point to either child, which is precisely my point. Muslims have made an issue over something that the Quran fails to clarify, since it never explicitly mentions the name of the child causing confusion amongst the earliest Muslim authorities over this very issue. Akbarally's rebuttals have done absolutely nothing to clarify the problem.

Meherally:

Sam wrote;

Instead of listing both sides of the argument, our paper will therefore focus on those who said it was Isaac. Since Sam chose not to list the views recorded by Al-Tabari of those who were in favour of Ishmael, we have to leave the matter at that for the time being. If any reader has the access to the un-quoted data, I will appreciate communicating the same to me.

Response:

Here is a classic example of Meherally trying to confuse the issue by throwing smokescreens. It should have been apparent why I would choose to cite the traditions that claimed that the child of sacrifice was Isaac. The consensus of modern Islamic scholarship has tried to dogmatically assert that the Quran conclusively teaches that Ishmael was indeed the one that was to be sacrificed. Hence, to these Muslim scholars Isaac is not even a consideration as far as the Quran is concerned.

Yet, this ignores the fact that the earliest Muslim authorities were divided over this issue, not agreeing whether it was Isaac or Ishmael. This is precisely why I chose to cite the traditions that point to Isaac, since most non-Muslim readers are unaware of these citations, thinking that the Quran conclusively points to Ishmael.

Furthermore, I clearly quoted Tabari's statement that there were two sets of traditions coming from the time of Muhammad pointing out the disagreements over whether it was Isaac or Ishmael that was to be sacrificed. Why would I point this out if I were trying to deceive my readers or mislead them into thinking that all the traditions unanimously held to Isaac as the victim of God?

What Meherally should do is go out and look for the book, since I have provided the name of the book as well as its translator. It shouldn't be hard to find seeing that I found a copy of Tabari's book at my local Muslim bookstore. If I could find it with little difficulty, then I am quite certain that Meherally will have no problem of finding it either.

Meherally:

Sam writes, quoting Al-Tabari:

Both views are supported by statements related on the authority of the Messenger of God.

I did not see in any of the above quotes that "the expressed view" came from the prophet of Islam.

Response:

The fact that you were unable to find the traditions attributed to Muhammad is not a problem of my citations, but of your inability to actually read carefully. I provided the chain of transmission where Tabari lists the companions of Muhammad as the source behind these traditions. Where did they get their information from if not from Muhammad?

Meherally:

Any one who has read the biography of the prophet and his companions would uphold that it is totally inconceivable that IF, I repeat IF, the prophet of Islam had mentioned the name of Ishmael AS WELL AS of Isaac, as being offered for sacrifice, and that the companions of the prophet who had heard both the names would keep their silence, and would not seek the clarification!!!

Response:

This argument begs the question. Since Tabari is a main source of information on the life of Muhammad and his companions and since they did disagree over the child’s identity, how can Meherally make such an outlandish claim? Hopefully, Meherally will answer our question.

Meherally:

THE ABOVE FACTS PROVE THE EXPRESSED VIEWS ARE NOT OF THE PROPHET OF ISLAM BUT "COULD BE" OF INDIVIDUALS.

Response:

Actually, these are not merely the words of individuals, but the comments of the SAHABAH, Muhammad's personal friends and companions. In case Meherally missed it, here are the citations again:

"According to al-Husayn b. Yazid al-Tahhan - Ibn Idris - Dawud b. Abi Hind - Ikrimah- Ibn Abbas: The one whom Abraham was ordered to sacrifice was Isaac."

"According to Ya'qub - Ibn 'Ulayyah - Dawud - 'Ikrimah- Ibn Abbas: The victim was Isaac."

"According to Ibn al-Muthanna - Muhammad b. Ja'far - Shu'bah - Abu Ishaq - Abu al-Ahwas: A certain man boasted to IBN MAS’UD, "I am so-and-so son of so-and-so, son of the noble elders.' And 'ABDALLAH said, ‘This is Joseph b. Jacob, son of Isaac the victim of God, son of Abraham the Friend of God.’"

"According to Musa b. Harun - 'Amr b. Hammad - Asbat - al-Suddi - Abu Malik and Abu Salih IBN 'ABBAS and Murrah al-Hamdani - IBN MAS'UD AND SOME OF THE COMPANIONS OF THE PROPHET: Abraham was instructed in a dream to 'carry out your promise that if God granted you a son by Sarah you would sacrifice him.'"

Finally,

As the Kur'an verse above quoted does not state which son was to have been sacrificed, many Muslim theologians refer the intended sacrifice to Isma'il ... But it may be said THAT THE OLDEST TRADITION- AL-THA 'LABI EXPRESSLY EMPHASISES THE ASHAB AND TABI'UN, I.E. THE COMPANIONS OF THE PROPHET AND THEIR SUCCESSORS FROM 'UMAR B. AL-KHATTAB TO KA'B AL-AHBAR- DID NOT DIFFER FROM THE BIBLE ON THIS QUESTION. (Gibb and Kramers, A Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, p. 175).

So, Mr. Meherally can you please explain to us how is it that the oldest traditions originating from your Prophet's companions believed that it was Isaac who was commanded to be sacrificed if the Quran is so clear that it was Ishmael?

Meherally:

WHAT SAM SHAMOUN HAS "QUOTED" ABOVE (IN THE NAME OF AL-TABARI) DOES NOT COME FROM A BOOK BY AL-TABARI, BUT FROM A BOOK ON AL-TABARI. This evident, if one was very particular to note that at the end of the quotes appear, e.g.; (2 : p. 32), (2 : pp. 82-86). WHAT DOES THIS FIGURE "2" STAND FOR? Here is the answer:

2. Al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, Vol. II, Prophets and Patriarchs (trans. William M. Brenner), State University of New York Press, Albany 1987.

Response:

This clearly demonstrates Akbarally's inability to deal with the real facts. He is constantly chasing straw man arguments, red herrings and throws smokescreens to cover his inability to rebut my points. I did not cite a book ON Tabari, but a translation OF Tabari's work into English. Please do notice the portion, "trans. William M. Brenner." In case Akbarally was unaware, this is an abbreviation that simply means that William Brenner WAS THE TRANSLATOR OF TABARI'S ORIGINAL WORK WRITTEN IN ARABIC. Brenner was NOT writing or commenting on Tabari.

This again would have been crystal clear had Akbarally carefully read my article, since I QUOTE TABARI'S' OWN WORDS WHO CLEARLY BELIEVED THAT IT WAS ISAAC, NOT ISHMAEL, THAT GOD COMMANDED ABRAHAM TO SACRIFICE:

"AS FOR THE ABOVE MENTIONED PROOF FROM THE QURAN THAT IT REALLY WAS ISAAC, IT IS GOD'S WORD WHICH INFORMS US ABOUT THE PRAYER OF HIS FRIEND ABARHAM WHEN HE LEFT HIS PEOPLE TO MIGRATE TO SYRIA WITH SARAH. Abraham prayed, 'I am going to my Lord who will guide me. My Lord! Grant me a righteous child.' This was before he knew Hagar, who was to be the mother of Ishmael. After mentioning this prayer, God goes on to describe the prayer and mentions that he foretold to Abraham that he would have a gentle son. God also mentions Abraham's vision of himself sacrificing that son when he was old enough to walk with him. The Book does not mention any tidings of a male child given to Abraham except in the instance where it refers to Isaac, in which God said, 'And his wife, standing by laughed when we gave her tidings of Isaac, and after Isaac, Jacob', and 'Then he became fearful of them'. They said. 'Fear not!' and gave him tidings of a wise son. Then his wife approached, moaning, and smote her face, and cried, 'A barren old woman'. Thus, wherever the Quran mentions God giving tidings of the birth of a son to Abraham, it refers to Sarah (and thus to Isaac) and the same must be true of God's words 'So we gave him tidings of a gentle son', as it is true of all such references in the Quran." (Ibid. p. 89).

Interestingly, Tabari PROVES FROM THE QURAN that Isaac, not Ishmael, was the child of sacrifice. How could he have used the Quran to conclusively prove that Isaac, not Ishmael, was commanded to be sacrificed IF THE QURAN CLEARLY TEACHES THAT THE COMMAND COULD ONLY HAVE BEEN DIRECTED TO ISHMAEL AS MEHERLLY TRIES TO PROVE IN HIS ARTICLE? Perhaps Meherally can answer instead of chasing red herrings and straw man arguments.

In the service of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, the Risen Lord!

Sam Shamoun


Responses to Akbarally Meherally
Answering Islam Home Page