Did Abraham go to sacrifice Isaac or Ishmael?

[hamba2han]

My earlier post seems to have been ignored.

No, it wasn’t.

There is really no conflict between the Bible and the Qur’an and the only places where there exists variances between these two sciptures is when the Bible actually contradicts itself as can be seen in the story of Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all).
If Christians and Jews cannot see the verses where the Bible contradicts itself, then this only serves to further prove that what they choose to believe is merely based on blind faith.

the real problem is that Christians and Jew know that the Bible says it was Isaac. It is none of our business if you decide what verses are ok and what are “corruption”.

If there are to be found conflicting verses in the Bible, who decides which verse is more “ok” than any of the other conflicting verses?

What exactly is it that makes the magisterium better Catholics than everyone else that it is they who get to decide on such vital matters?

Catholics need to place their faith on the real teachings of Jesus (pbuh) as found in the Bible, NOT on any conflicting opinions of the magisterium.

 

[Valke2]

There is a key element in this story of Abraham’s (pbuh) obedience to God in sacrificing his only son which can easily answer the question of which son was to be sacrificed i.e. that of God’s command for all male children to be circumcised.

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

Genesis 17:13 "He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant."

And according to the Bible, how old was Abraham (pbuh) when he was circumcised?

Genesis 17:24 "Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin."

That makes Abraham’s son Ishmael 13, how old is Isaac at this time? Genesis 21:5 "Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him."

This means that during the circumcision/sacrifice, Abraham’s only “begotten” son is Ishmael and not Isaac as the Bible says.

The covenant therefore was made with Abraham and Ishmael.

The real problem here is that Christians and Jews do not believe (or more specifically, do not want to believe) what is so clearly written in their own Bible.

And no matter how much they try to twist and turn the issue, they just cannot turn away from what the Bible is telling them about the precise moment in time when the covenant was made…

There is really no conflict between the Bible and the Qur’an and the only places where there exists variances between these two sciptures is when the Bible actually contradicts itself as can be seen in the story of Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all).

As far as Abraham knew, Ishmael was sent in the wilderness to die. So using the logic that it would only be a true sacrifice if Abraham had to sacrifice an only child (which I disagree with), then we can easily deduce from the Torah/Book of Genesis, that Abraham believed Isaac was his only son and that Ishmael was already dead. I could then argue that sacrificing Isaac would have been an even bigger test of faith as Abraham believed he had already lost one son that he loved, was about to lose the onlyother son he had, and being over 100, he wasn’t likely to have any more children.

 

[paarsurrey]

As far as Abraham knew, Ishmael was sent in the wilderness to die. So using the logic that it would only be a true sacrifice if Abraham had to sacrifice an only child (which I disagree with), then we can easily deduce from the Torah/Book of Genesis, that Abraham believed Isaac was his only son and that Ishmael was already dead. I could then argue that sacrificing Isaac would have been an even bigger test of faith as Abraham believed he had already lost one son that he loved, was about to lose the onlyother son he had, and being over 100, he wasn’t likely to have any more children.

Hi

As I understand from Islam/Quran/Muhammad, human sacrifice was not allowed in any Revealed Religion. In the world in which Abraham was living there was a concept of human sacrifice. Abraham saw in a dream that he was sacrificing his son, he interpreted it correctly, and left his son Ishmael alongwith his mother Hagar in the wilderness as per guidance (this was done with a greater purpose to be fullfilled in distant future).

[37:104] And when they both submitted to the will of God, and Abraham had thrown him down on his forehead,
[37:105] We called to him, 'O Abraham,
[37:106] ‘Thou hast, indeed, fulfilled the dream.’ Thus, indeed, do We reward those who do good.
[37:107] That, surely, was a manifest trial.
[37:108] And We ransomed him with a mighty sacrifice.
[37:109] And We left for him a good name among the succeeding generations.
[37:110] Peace be upon Abraham!
[37:111] Thus do We reward those who do good.
[37:112] Surely, he was one of our believing servants.
www3.alislam.org/showChapter.jsp?ch=37&verse=103

The dream was fullfilled twice before even Issac was born (as per Quran). For the **first time when Ishmael was left in the wilderness **and second time when he was of age and agreed for the sacrifice. This way GodAllahYHWH revealed on Abraham that human sacrifice was prohibited.

One may differ with me, I believe in free will

Thanks

 

[ralphinal]

Sumary of the story per the Bible
1)Abram is called by God, promised that he will be the father of a multitude
2) Abram becomes Abraham, due to wives old age and baron state, she tells Abraham to “go into her servent” and make a child, named Ishael.
3) God orders Abraham to have his entire clan circumcised and explains to Abraham that Sarah will have the child promised ot him. That child will be Isaac.
4)Sarah, despite her age and baron state, conceives and give birth to Isaac. She orders Ishmael and his mother out of the camp.
5) Hagar and Ishmael are not forgotten by God. Ishmael becomes the Father of another Nation, but the Convenant remains with Isaac.
6) Abraham, unaware of what happens to Ishmael, is told to sacrifice Isaac, the son promised to him by God and concieved by God’s intervention.

Where is the conflict? Where is the contradiction? The only contradiction is between Islam and the Judeo-Christian story.

 

[hamba2han]

As far as Abraham knew, Ishmael was sent in the wilderness to die. So using the logic that it would only be a true sacrifice if Abraham had to sacrifice an only child (which I disagree with), then we can easily deduce from the Torah/Book of Genesis, that Abraham believed Isaac was his only son and that Ishmael was already dead. I could then argue that sacrificing Isaac would have been an even bigger test of faith as Abraham believed he had already lost one son that he loved, was about to lose the onlyother son he had, and being over 100, he wasn’t likely to have any more children.

God would surely know whether or not Ishmael (pbuh) survived the journey and therefore what Prophet Abraham (pbuh) may have thought is not really a factor at all because the story of the sacrifice as written in the Bible is supposed to be the true account revealed by God Himself, isn’t it?

 

[Valke2]

God would surely know whether or not Ishmael (pbuh) survived the journey and therefore what Prophet Abraham (pbuh) may have thought is not really a factor at all because the story of the sacrifice as written in the Bible is supposed to be the true account revealed by God Himself, isn’t it?

It would be a factor in viewing it as a test of faith for Abraham. If Abraham believed Isaac was his only surviving son, then, as far as testing his faith, it is not relevant if he actually had another surviving son.

 

[hamba2han]

Sumary of the story per the Bible
1)Abram is called by God, promised that he will be the father of a multitude
2) Abram becomes Abraham, due to wives old age and baron state, she tells Abraham to “go into her servent” and make a child, named Ishael.
3) God orders Abraham to have his entire clan circumcised and explains to Abraham that Sarah will have the child promised ot him. That child will be Isaac.
4)Sarah, despite her age and baron state, conceives and give birth to Isaac. She orders Ishmael and his mother out of the camp.
5) Hagar and Ishmael are not forgotten by God. Ishmael becomes the Father of another Nation, but the Convenant remains with Isaac.
6) Abraham, unaware of what happens to Ishmael, is told to sacrifice Isaac, the son promised to him by God and concieved by God’s intervention.

Where is the conflict? Where is the contradiction? The only contradiction is between Islam and the Judeo-Christian story.

The covenant was made at the time the command to circumcise male children was given to Abraham (pbuh)… and the fact that Isaac was not even born yet means that the covenant was made to Abraham and Ishmael (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all) as he was his only son at the time.

And to suggest that Abraham did not know that Ishmael was still alive at the time the command from God was given to sacrifice his only son means that God did not see fit to inform Abraham of this fact despite promising him to make his seed Ishmael into a nation.

Genesis 21
12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.
13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed.
14 And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beer–sheba.

It is therefore totally beyond logic to think that Abraham did not know Ishmael (pbut) was still alive because he was being commanded by none other than God Himself.

 

[ralphinal]

The covenant was made at the time the command to circumcise male children was given to Abraham (pbuh)… and the fact that Isaac was not even born yet means that the covenant was made to Abraham and Ishmael (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all) as he was his only son at the time.

And to suggest that Abraham did not know that Ishmael was still alive at the time the command from God was given to sacrifice his only son means that God did not see fit to inform Abraham of this fact despite promising him to make his seed Ishmael into a nation.

Genesis 21
12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.
13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed.
14 And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beer–sheba.

It is therefore totally beyond logic to think that Abraham did not know Ishmael (pbut) was still alive because he was being commanded by none other than God Himself.

That is correct, Hamba. God did promise to care for Ishmael before Anbraham abandoned him. It still does not change that there is no proof in the Bible that Ishmael was the sacrifice, not Isaac. On the contrary, the Bible is clear that it was Isaac. Nor does it change the fact that Isaac was the covenant child, per Genesis 17:19-21

The only resonable conclusion is that it is presented as Ishmael in Islam to be more pleasing to Arabic peoples who see themselves as decendents of Ishmael. It is problematic to change a matter of faith for popularity reasons

 

[planten]

This is the relevant verse from the Qur’an:

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!” … Al-Qur’an, 037.102

And so, we see that the son who’s life was to be sacrificed was old enough to work and also to speak words of support and reassurance to his father who was commanded by God to kill him.

If we are to accept the relevant verses from the Bible as was pointed out in my previous post, does this indicate that the one who was to be sacrificed to be still an infant OR a 13 year old boy?

Dear me, you have given good answer. But may I guide you to help all friends here. The name of Ishmael is not mentioned in the Quran about the sacrificed son. There is a good reason for that. But, the matter can be understood only if we read the chapter 37 of Quran from verse 83 to verse 112 complete 30 verses.

That proves it was Ishmael who was sacrificed. In the bible, Abraham did not even tell his son Issac what he was going to do to him. He did not tell that he was going to sacrifice him on the alter. Issac kept on asking about the lamb. The father said that it will be provided. That is a very strange type of reply, partly true and partly lie.

Please all friends read verses 83 to 112 complete of the Quran. Then it will be easily understood that it was Ishmael who was sacrificed. Issac was not even born before the event of sacrifice. The news of the birth (promised birth) of Ishamel is in verse 37:101 and the news of the birth of Issac is in verse 37:112.

Issac cannot be sacrificed according to Quranic passage/ news. He was told to Abraham that he will be a prophet of God.(verse 112). A son who is told by Allah that he will live to be a prophet cannot be told to be killed.

But bible OT says that it was Issac who was sacrificed. That was in the bible before the Quran was revealed.

 

[inJESUS]

?Catholics need to place their faith on the real teachings of Jesus (pbuh) as found in the Bible, NOT on any conflicting opinions of the magisterium.

which happens to be that it was Isaac…so we do believe Jesus, who was a Jew, and who never claimed the word of God is corrupt. Likewise, the companions of your prophets themselves had this same belief, something you obviously cannot digest.

 

[inJESUS]

The dream was fullfilled twice before even Issac was born (as per Quran). For the **first time when Ishmael was left in the wilderness **

 

[inJESUS]

God would surely know whether or not Ishmael (pbuh) survived the journey

why then ask Abraham to sacrifice a son that Allah himself asked him to exile him with his mother and who settled in a different country and started already his own family?

 

[inJESUS]

The only resonable conclusion is that it is presented as Ishmael in Islam to be more pleasing to Arabic peoples who see themselves as decendents of Ishmael. It is problematic to change a matter of faith for popularity reasons

maybe Muslims prefer Pro-Arabs who re-write history to suit their belief over the earliest writings of the companions of Muhammad who believed in was Isaac.

 

[inJESUS]

Please all friends read verses 83 to 112 complete of the Quran. Then it will be easily understood that it was Ishmael who was sacrificed. Issac was not even born before the event of sacrifice. The news of the birth (promised birth) of Ishamel is in verse 37:101 and the news of the birth of Issac is in verse 37:112.

the earliest commentators did read these verses and came to the conclusion it was Isaac since the good news of birth were only mentioned about Isaac in Quran, never about Ishmael…the hadith agrees that Abraham exiled Ishmael by Allah’s command…the one the Quran mentions was of an age of running while the hadith proves that at that age Ishmael had already settled in a different country, learned Arabic and got married…the one avilabe at the age of running was Isaac, not Ishmael .

Issac cannot be sacrificed according to Quranic passage/ news. He was told to Abraham that he will be a prophet of God.(verse 112). A son who is told by Allah that he will live to be a prophet cannot be told to be killed.

 

[inJESUS]

Here is the hadith again:

Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 583)
Narrated Ibn Abbas:

The first lady to use a girdle was the mother of Ishmael. She used a girdle so that she might hide her tracks from Sarah. Abraham brought her and her son Ishmael while she was suckling him, to a place near the Ka’ba under a tree on the spot of Zam-zam, at the highest place in the mosque. During those days there was nobody in Mecca, nor was there any water. So he made them sit over there and placed near them a leather bag containing some dates, and a small water-skin containing some water, and set out homeward. Ishmael’s mother followed him saying, “O Abraham! Where are you going, leaving us in this valley where there is no person whose company we may enjoy, nor is there anything (to enjoy)?” She repeated that to him many times, but he did not look back at her. Then she asked him, "Has Allah ordered you to do so?" He said, “Yes.” She said, “Then He will not neglect us,”…**The child (i.e. Ishmael) grew up and learnt Arabic from them **and (his virtues) caused them to love and admire him as he grew up, **and when he reached the age of puberty they made him marry a woman from amongst them. **After Ishmael’s mother had died, Abraham came after Ishmael’s marriage in order to see his family that he had left before, but he did not find Ishmael there. When he asked Ishmael’s wife about him, she replied, "He has gone in search of our livelihood.’ …

so Allah ordered Abraham to leave Hajar and his suckling son in order to go back to Sarah…why if he is to sacrifice Ishmael?and when did Ishmael return to be sacrificied if he grew up where he settled and got married before seeing his father?where was Ishmael at the “age of running” as per Quran? he was with his mother, not with Abraham who saw him after he got married.

 

[inJESUS]

Issac was not even born before the event of sacrifice. The news of the birth (promised birth) of Ishamel is in verse 37:101 and the news of the birth of Issac is in verse 37:112.

Al-Tabari disagrees:

“Some say that God would not have ordered Isaac sacrificed because God foretold his birth before it happened and that of Jacob afterwards, but this claim does not necessarily prove their view correct. God only commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac when he was able to walk, and it is conceivable that Jacob could have been born to him before his father was commanded to sacrifice him.”

“The account naming Isaac comes down to us through Abu Kurayb- Zayd b. al-Hubab- al-Hasan b. Dinar- 'Ali b. Zayd b. Jud’an- al-Hasan- al-Ahnaf b. Qays- al-‘Abbas b. ‘Abd al-Muttalib- THE PROPHET in a conversation in which he said, ‘Then we ransomed him with a tremendous victim.’ And he also said, ‘He is Isaac.’”

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 Abraham 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."

Issac cannot be sacrificed according to Quranic passage/ news.

 

[inJESUS]

There is a key

element in this story of Abraham’s (pbuh) obedience to God in sacrificing his only son which can easily answer the question of which son was to be sacrificed i.e. that of God’s command for all male children to be circumcised.

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

Genesis 17:13 “He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.” nice twist. Yet you ignore the fact **that the command of circumcision has nothing to do with sacrifice ** since the command to sacrifice does not appear until Genesis 22 when Isaac was a young lad.

If you base your argument on twisting scriptures that you really are lost for proof.

And maybe you are able to document for us the fact that Ishmael’s descendants have observed this practice of circumcising males on the eighth day from the time the promise was originally given to Abraham?

interesting to note yet:

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?’ Abraham answered, 'God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son.’ And the two of them went on together." Genesis 22:7-8

but what did God provide? a ram. The Lamb came later:

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, ‘Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!’" John 1:29

 

[Catholic_Dude]

There is a key element in this story of Abraham’s (pbuh) obedience to God…

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

Genesis 17:13 "He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant."

** And according to the Bible**, how old was Abraham (pbuh) when he was circumcised?

Genesis 17:24 "Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin."

That makes Abraham’s son Ishmael 13, how old is Isaac at this time? Genesis 21:5 "Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him."
** This means that during the circumcision/sacrifice, Abraham’s only “begotten” son is Ishmael and not Isaac as the Bible says.**

The covenant therefore was made with Abraham and Ishmael.

** The real problem here is that Christians and Jews do not believe (or more specifically, do not want** to believe) what is so clearly written in their own Bible.

And no matter how much they try to twist and turn the issue, they just cannot turn away from what the Bible is telling them about the precise moment in time when the covenant was made…

All the parts in green above have a huge problem, here is what Gen 17 really says: 15 God also said to Abraham, “As for Sarai your wife, you are no longer to call her Sarai; her name will be Sarah. 16 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.”
17 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?” 18 And Abraham said to God, “If only Ishmael might live under your blessing!”
19 Then God said, “Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. 20 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. 21 But my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year.”
The very passage talking about the covenant is extremely clear that it was through Isaac.

(continued)

 

[Catholic_Dude]

(continued)

… just to clarify the Koran makes it clear that the sacrifice story took place before the birth of Isaac. Now whether u believe it was Isacc or Ishmael is up to you, but in Islam its clear that it was Ishmael, even though his name was not mentioned in this part, u just have to read the verses before and after to figure it out.

Koran surah 37 verses 100-113
100 “My Lord! **Grant me (offspring) from the righteous.”
101 So We gave him the glad tidings of a forbearing boy. **
102 And, when he (his son) was old enough to walk with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a dream that I am slaughtering you (offer you in sacrifice to Allah)… …
…
104 And We called out to him: “O Abraham!
105 You have fulfilled the dream (vision)!” Verily! Thus do We reward the Muhsinoon (good-doers)
106 Verily, that indeed was a manifest trial
107 And We ransomed him with a great sacrifice (i.e. a ram);
…
…
** 112 And We gave him the glad tidings of Ishaque (Isaac) a Prophet from the righteous. **
113 We blessed him and Ishaque (Isaac), and of their progeny are (some) that do right, and some that plainly wrong themselves.

Does verse 112 mean Issac was THEN born? That looks like what “glad tidings” means. The problem here is the time line. v100 makes it look like a son was already born, and v112 makes it appear that AFTERWARDS Isaac was born. However v113 says a blessing upon Abraham and Isaac which would be very odd that Ishmael is not even mentioned! (especially because in v102 the son responds to Abraham that God’s will be done which he should be honored for in v113.

The bible agrees that Ishmael was the eldest. … … the TRUTH is that God asked him to sacrifice Ishmael, his eldest and only son at the time, and this what makes it a real trial for prophet Ibrahim. … …

The first and biggest problem here is that your own book doesnt mention Ishmael, thus you cant say “The Bible agrees” but rather “I agree with the Bible”.
As for the time of sacrifice the Bible is clear it was after Isaac was born (Gn 22) and it was after it said through Isaac the covenant would be established (Gn 17:15-21).

I believe that the Koran corrects the mistakes that r in the Bible. …

The problem with your argument is that the Koran does not correct the mistake! Ishmael is not even mentioned.
This is a HUGE corruption in the Bible if you are correct, but why was such a huge corruption not clearly corrected?

There is really no conflict between the Bible and the Qur’an and the only places where there exists variances between these two sciptures is when the Bible actually contradicts itself as can be seen in the story of Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all)

You cant compare the two books, the Bible is much much longer and more in depth and detail, there is no comparison.

… …
…
Genesis 21
12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman;** in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.**
13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed.
14 And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and took bread, and a bottle of water, and gave it unto Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her away: and she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beer–sheba.

It is therefore totally beyond logic to think that Abraham did not know Ishmael (pbut) was still alive because he was being commanded by none other than God Himself.

You are selectively citing the Bible, picking what you like and ignoring what you disagree with. It is clear Hagar and Ishmael were “sent away” leaving Isaac as the one and only heir and promise of the covenant.

 

[inJESUS]

This is a HUGE corruption in the Bible if you are correct, but why was such a huge corruption not clearly corrected?

isn’t it strange that the mission of the author of the Quran is to “correct” and “clear doubts”?

what did the author clarify about this huge and serious corruption? nothing, he made it a bigger confusion that resulted in Muslim scholars refuting each others while all claiming to have heard it from Muhammad.

what did the author of Quran clarify about the crucifixion? nothing, he made it a bigger , if not the biggest confusion that resulted in a thousand theory none of which makes sense and ironically the author said “those who are full of doubt”, when the clear fact is that the ones full of doubt about it have always been the Muslims!

what did the author of the Quran clarify about the Trinity belief? nothing , he made it a bigger confusion that resulted in Muslims believing we worship Mary and 3 gods.

what did the author of Quran clarify about the title son of God in Christianity? nothing, he made it a bigger confusion that resulted in Muslims believing that God had a woman and therefore had a physical son.

All in all, the author of the Quran did anything but clarify things because he himself did not undrstand them so how can he clarify them? and the result is Muslims not undrstanding them as well, in addition to confusion that is why when they put their answers about our belief on our forum, you can’t help but raise both of your eyebrows, all while claiming that their knowledge of our belief was said literally by an all-knowing deity, who, obviously, knows nothing of what we really believe in that is why his refutations make no sense as we do not believe in them in the first place.