Baha'u'llah said Ishmael was the Sacrifice

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Just like your answer had nothing to do with Baha’u’llah’s error about Ishmael.
Again, you miss my point.

There are proven historical errors in the Old Testament, the Isaac and Ishmael problem you seem to be fixated on is just one of them.

I think if you think this spells the end of Bahaullah you may as well say that this spells the end of science because it is scientifically proven that fish came before reptiles which is contrary to Genesis.

Do you not consult a doctor if you have cancer Techno? Do you just pray and hope for a cure? Science is dead right?

.
 
The same can be said about Christianity. Jews swear by it even today.

The point I am making is that at least the validity the Bab and Bahaullah’s supernatural claims is verified by historical scholars and independent laypeople and diplomats and orientalists, poets and anthropologists.

.
How can something supernatural be verified, the only thing to come close would a miracle Healing, and we know Bahaullah did none of that.
 
Lol, I totally agree this is my debate **against ** Baha’u’llah and his followers you must have never read my post.🙂
Forget it, you cannot debate with these folks, they have been indoctrinated. I know because I have an acquaintance of that cult, you can’t get anywhere with them. The same with Muslims or any other Eastern cult.

Pax
Linus2nd
 
Again, you miss my point.

There are proven historical errors in the Old Testament, the Isaac and Ishmael problem you seem to be fixated on is just one of them.

I think if you think this spells the end of Bahaullah you may as well say that this spells the end of science because it is scientifically proven that fish came before reptiles which is contrary to Genesis.

Do you not consult a doctor if you have cancer Techno? Do you just pray and hope for a cure? Science is dead right?

.
I get what you are saying now…the Old Testament has it wrong and Muhammad and Baha’u’llah has it right on the Isaac and Ishmael thing.🙂
 
Forget it, you cannot debate with these folks, they have been indoctrinated. I know because I have an acquaintance of that cult, you can’t get anywhere with them. The same with Muslims or any other Eastern cult.

Pax
Linus2nd
Here goes that sense of inherent superiority again.

“We are a religion, you are a cult”

“We are Gods chosen ones, you are the lost, deluded and satanic”

Reminds me of…forget it 🤷

.
 
Forget it, you cannot debate with these folks, they have been indoctrinated. I know because I have an acquaintance of that cult, you can’t get anywhere with them. The same with Muslims or any other Eastern cult.

Pax
Linus2nd
I know, but Servant19 is so nice that he has kinda become my Friend.🙂
 
Here goes that sense of inherent superiority again.

“We are a religion, you are a cult”

“We are Gods chosen ones, you are the lost, deluded and satanic”

Reminds me of…forget it 🤷

.
Reminds me of a Wizard of Id comic.

The King is chatting with a priest, and asks him, “So, padre, how many religions are in the kingdom?”

The priest answers, “Just the one, Sire.”

The King, surprised, says, “Then why all the churches?”

The priest answers, “Well, the cults have to go somewhere…” :rolleyes:
 
Just like your answer had nothing to do with Baha’u’llah’s error about Ishmael.
If Baha’u’llah identifies the son involved as Ishmael, then as a Baha’i I accept that. Abdu’l-Baha was asked about it and he said that which son was not the important part of the story, but the fact that Abraham had faith in God to the point of being willing to sacrifice his son, was.
 
If Baha’u’llah identifies the son involved as Ishmael, then as a Baha’i I accept that. Abdu’l-Baha was asked about it and he said that which son was not the important part of the story, but the fact that Abraham had faith in God to the point of being willing to sacrifice his son, was.
Well of course it wasn’t important to Abdu’l-Baha he was on the payroll. 🙂
 
Hebrews 11:19
Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive** Isaac** back from death.

James 2:21
Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?
 
I wanted to thank Techno for quoting Baha’i sources accurately and fairly… The reference to Ishmael and the reference Abdul-Baha made to the trinity.

Because it’s been raised here I’ll post a few more references that I’ve been interested in …particularly referring to Ishmael “God has heard”…

The following is the Baha’i view presented by Shoghi Effendi:

As regards the questions you have asked, as Bahá’u’lláh says categorically that God commanded Abraham to offer up Isma’il, as far as we are concerned, it is Isma’il who was the intended sacrifice.
In view of the great antiquity of Genesis, it is quite possible that at some period the names were changed, and the error was propagated.
Whatever happened, we Bahá’ís must follow the words in our own Scriptures as being the most authentic…


Shoghi Effendi, The Unfolding Destiny of the British Baha’i Community, p. 461-412

Now it is true that for Baha’is Ishmael was the sacrifice…not Isaac. This is not a big doctrinal deal with us… It’s not part of a creed that’s recited…

The Qur’an also refers to the sacrifice of Abraham…and it is a different account from that mentioned in the Bible…It’s found in Surih As-Saffat 37:100-105. In this case after Abraham relates a vision He had to His son they concurrently agree…

*Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: “O my son! I see in vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: Now see what is thy view!” (The son) said: “O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills one practising Patience and Constancy!”
37:103

So when they had both submitted their wills (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),*

The above is a translation by A. Yusuf Ali … a widely read translation.

Now consider the Genesis account…in chapter 22

*Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

2 Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

3 Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. 4 On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. 5 He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.”

6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, 7 Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”

“Yes, my son?” Abraham replied.

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”

8 Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.*

Two things are fairly clear from the above verses… “Take your son your only son whom you love - Isaac-…” Ishmael was the first child of Abraham by several years…beforeIsaac was born. There’s an inconsistency there you’ll note.

The other issue is that in the Genesis account the child is unaware of what is to occur…that is, his being sacrificed… while the Qur’an indicates a concurrence between Abraham and His son.
 
I wanted to thank Techno for quoting Baha’i sources accurately and fairly… The reference to Ishmael and the reference Abdul-Baha made to the trinity.

Because it’s been raised here I’ll post a few more references that I’ve been interested in …particularly referring to Ishmael “God has heard”…

The following is the Baha’i view presented by Shoghi Effendi:

As regards the questions you have asked, as Bahá’u’lláh says categorically that God commanded Abraham to offer up Isma’il, as far as we are concerned, it is Isma’il who was the intended sacrifice.
In view of the great antiquity of Genesis, it is quite possible that at some period the names were changed, and the error was propagated.
Whatever happened, we Bahá’ís must follow the words in our own Scriptures as being the most authentic…


Shoghi Effendi, The Unfolding Destiny of the British Baha’i Community, p. 461-412

Now it is true that for Baha’is Ishmael was the sacrifice…not Isaac. This is not a big doctrinal deal with us… It’s not part of a creed that’s recited…

The Qur’an also refers to the sacrifice of Abraham…and it is a different account from that mentioned in the Bible…It’s found in Surih As-Saffat 37:100-105. In this case after Abraham relates a vision He had to His son they concurrently agree…

*Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: “O my son! I see in vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: Now see what is thy view!” (The son) said: “O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills one practising Patience and Constancy!”
37:103

So when they had both submitted their wills (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice),*

The above is a translation by A. Yusuf Ali … a widely read translation.

Now consider the Genesis account…in chapter 22

*Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, “Abraham!”

“Here I am,” he replied.

2 Then God said, “Take your son, your only son, whom you love—Isaac—and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on a mountain I will show you.”

3 Early the next morning Abraham got up and loaded his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. 4 On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. 5 He said to his servants, “Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you.”

6 Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, 7 Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, “Father?”

“Yes, my son?” Abraham replied.

“The fire and wood are here,” Isaac said, “but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?”

8 Abraham answered, “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.” And the two of them went on together.*

Two things are fairly clear from the above verses… “Take your son your only son whom you love - Isaac-…” Ishmael was the first child of Abraham by several years…beforeIsaac was born. There’s an inconsistency there you’ll note.

The other issue is that in the Genesis account the child is unaware of what is to occur…that is, his being sacrificed… while the Qur’an indicates a concurrence between Abraham and His son.
Have you also considered that Ishmael’s birth was by natural means, conceived out of wedlock, while Isaac’s birth was supernatural, born of a woman around 90 years of age, physically incapable of having children naturally, and the wife of Abraham for 75 years.

Why did God cause this supernatural event to occur if Ishmael was to be the one through whom God’s chosen people would descend?
 
Reminds me of a Wizard of Id comic.

The King is chatting with a priest, and asks him, “So, padre, how many religions are in the kingdom?”

The priest answers, “Just the one, Sire.”

The King, surprised, says, “Then why all the churches?”

The priest answers, “Well, the cults have to go somewhere…” :rolleyes:
We don’t mind you if you don’t mind us ;). You know of course that Ba’ ahi’s haven’t a leg to stand on, nor did Bab, nor does Islam. Do you honestly believe the entire history of the Israelites is concocted, from Abraham on? And on what bases do you make that judgment, on the testimony of Muhammad? And what is the bases of his credibility? There is none. It was a complete fabrication. There was no vision and his Qu’ran is based on a corrupted interpretation of one of the heretical sects he met while on his trading routes. He has no more credibility than Mary Edy Baker or Joseph Smith and a hundred others. Study your history and read the Bible, it will take some time, but it will be worth it…

Linus2nd .
 
We don’t mind you if you don’t mind us ;).
Not at all. You will never see a Baha’i ever mind a Catholic. WE WANT TO WORK WITH CATHOLICS 🙂
(not against you)
You know of course that Ba’ ahi’s haven’t a leg to stand on, nor did Bab, nor does Islam.
What leg is that?
Do you honestly believe the entire history of the Israelites is concocted, from Abraham on?
Nope not at all…there are some historical things that are undeniably true. Some have been lost in their authenticity somewhat. It is only human nature that facts are lost. Names are mistaken. etc etc
And on what bases do you make that judgment, on the testimony of Muhammad?
We follow the testimony of scholarship.

If a New Testament scholar says such and such happened, and here is the evidence, then Baha’is are the first to affirm it 🙂
And what is the bases of his credibility?
I think the scientific approach and scholarship holds a lot of credibility. When religion and science work hand in hand then things such as the massively growing “atheist movement” may be held in their tracks. At the moment, more people are losing their faith in God altogether than ever in history. Why? Because religion is not affirmed by science, nor the scientific approach…🤷
There is none. It was a complete fabrication. There was no vision and his Qu’ran is based on a corrupted interpretation of one of the heretical sects he met while on his trading routes. He has no more credibility than Mary Edy Baker or Joseph Smith and a hundred others.
Baha’is do not use any other testimony other than the Bab and Baha’u’llahs Revelations
Study your history and read the Bible, it will take some time, but it will be worth it…
Linus2nd .
I do study it. I’ve read it and continue to do so. And I agree it is worth it indeed.

It is also important to observe New Testament scholarship and recognize that “fact” and “faith” don’t always co-exist 🙂

.
 
Nope not at all…there are some historical things that are undeniably true. Some have been lost in their authenticity somewhat. It is only human nature that facts are lost. Names are mistaken. etc etc
Even if the writings are divinely protected? Is God subject to human failings?
 
Again, you miss my point.

There are proven historical errors in the Old Testament, the Isaac and Ishmael problem you seem to be fixated on is just one of them.

I think if you think this spells the end of Bahaullah you may as well say that this spells the end of science because it is scientifically proven that fish came before reptiles which is contrary to Genesis.
Have you considered that the Bible is not a scientific journal and is not meant to read as such? I can do better than your example. How did God create light (the first day) before he created the sun (the fourth day)? You miss the purpose and intent of Sacred Scripture.
Do you not consult a doctor if you have cancer Techno? Do you just pray and hope for a cure? Science is dead right?.
I would not go to a doctor for spiritual guidance, but I might go to a priest for healing, even from cancer. Science hasn’t helped a lot in curing cancer and has no answers to the questions that concern our ultimate destiny.

Steve
 
Even if the writings are divinely protected? Is God subject to human failings?
There seems to be such a mish mash of spiritual vs physical things in Christian interpretations.

History is related to this world.
The Bible is related to that world, you know the spiritual one.

That which is flesh is flesh, that which is spirit is spirit. Paul could not possibly be more clear. 🙂

What “happened” in history is not what God is interested in
What “happens” to your soul is all that God cares about and it is on matters relating to the soul where the Bible is unerring.

There is no human failings in the Bible if it is read with this in mind.

.
 
Have you considered that the Bible is not a scientific journal and is not meant to read as such?
History is a scientific discipline. Why then are you adamant that the Bible is scientifically true? (As you seem to imply in the post above) I would suggest all Catholics make note of the good statement you make here Steve 👍
I can do better than your example. How did God create light (the first day) before he created the sun (the fourth day)? You miss the purpose and intent of Sacred Scripture.
Exactly 👍

It is not me that misses the point. It is those that say that the history of Isaac/Ismael “destroys” Bahaullah. Are we having a laugh???

As you say, it is the spiritual meaning behind the story that is so important, not which person it involved. 🤷
I would not go to a doctor for spiritual guidance, but I might go to a priest for healing, even from cancer. Science hasn’t helped a lot in curing cancer and has no answers to the questions that concern our ultimate destiny.
You would go to priest to heal you from diabetes, arthritis, dental decay, an ear infection?? :eek:

Really?

Cancer was just an example Steve.
Besides which priest do I need to see for my cousin to be healed from cancer??

You seem to have missed the point being made 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top