It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Why Bastardize Ishmael but not the Tribes of Israel? The binding of Isaac or Ishmael?

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 12:44 PM
reply to: ToneDeaf

Hi, thanks for sharing. Actually, you are correct about the Commands being a part of NT.

In fact, be it the OT or NT, all apply in some form or another as righteous, according to the ways of God. The Commands of law are not exclusive to OT people or the Hebrew, just as grace and gospel are not exclusive to Christianity and NT people. Instead, all fulfills the purpose of testifying that all humans need to seek God by faith of trusting - believing - obeying His voice.

As shown in scripture testimony, whenever a person was set apart to serve God, it was because of their willingness to follow. In turn, their efforts by the power of God, were an example to help others do the same.

But for many people, law and grace seem different, yet both are for the same purpose. Before law, grace of unearned favor was His invitation. When law was given, grace was still the best and deepest way to God. Grace is God reaching out to us, faith is how we accept Him. Both must be based upon love, and by this - law is fulfilled.

And this is what equalizes us - grace & faith, not the flood; Galatians -chapters 3 and 4

posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 01:16 PM
a reply to: Logarock

Hi L, thanks again for sharing.

Yes, as you've stated: "Paul still talks about knowing what sin is by the law and living by the law of the Spirit to good works." I agree, that is the point; law is an absolute natural characteristic of divine humanity, was lost in the garden sin. And not just lost, but was more like given away for something far less valuable, un-natural.

I believe the issue Paul was illustrating is how humans will always struggle with law, as long as grace is not priority. In other words, God created Adam in His image and likeness, the capacity of freewill without sin knowledge. When tested, Adam and Eve failed to trust God in the most important way - obedience. This sin violated the innate law of their mind, separating them from their pure essence, natural fellowship with God, lawfulness, pure logic, etc.

Ultimately, they cast aside grace of unearned favor in all that God had done, chose a lie over truth, lawlessness over lawfulness. This is why the process of reconciliation is a step-by-step gradual reintroduction of humanity to Himself. He uses the same means of establishing trust with us, as used with Adam and Eve - the evidence of creation and the hearing of His voice. But if we suppress the truth of that evidence in unrighteousness, we also cast aside grace, just as our fore-father and mother did; Romans -chapter 1.

What do you think about this?

posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 08:18 PM
a reply to: Sahabi
Hello again Sahabi, thanks for sharing. In reading your post to AlephBet, I'd like to share as well:

First, you recognize the various aspects of the Bible, but do not agree with the premise. Secondly, you speak of Yahweh as the son of El, according to myth; as seeking to usurp El. But this record of testimony is not within the scripture of the Bible; unless one interprets it that way.

Therefore, if self interpretation is the basis of proper context and confirmation; anyone can conclude whatever they want. This approach is most often used by the self-righteous, especially religious Christianity, is why they fall short of pure truth.

You claim Canaanite mythology the closest resemblance to the God testified in the Bible; even pointing out similar use of the term 'El.' But, presupposition overlooks an important fact: historically, many civilizations of that time used similar terms. This is especially true for ruling nations whose influence affected everyday language, perception of images and concepts, people or things, including deities. Therefore, the term 'El' is merely a primary root word, perhaps originating from Aramaic language of the Aram people. This language was used by many tribes, including the Hebrew. In time, they developed their own lettering system and language. God also taught them to properly differentiate from similar common terms, avoid confusion.

You claim all is one and one is all, but this sounds like Modalism or Monarchianism. Whatever the case, any credible interpretation is confirmed by the voice of God. In fact, I would say if the so-called Hebrew God never answers - He does not exist.

According to what is written, scripture testimony reveals how God can be accessed by simply -ASKING, SEEKING & KNOCKING. In other words - ASK. It's that simple. No hocus pocus, no theological seminary or self-interpretation needed.
You say: "Perhaps I may be deceived,... and I concede that I may be wrong,... for many times my closely held truths have shattered into petty foolishness! " I too was this way long ago.

But, putting foolish pride aside, I opened my heart to logically pursue God. When I asked with all of my soul, in time He answered, and we've conversed ever since. And how He answered was key. I'll share this exactly in more detail, if you'd really like to know.


posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 06:18 PM
a reply to: Sahabi

The big deal Sahabi is: despite what you or anyone may perceive the interpretation of scripture, none is confirmed, accept by the voice of God. When He testifies confirmation by His voice speaking within our soul, then we confirm complete truth. This is the nature of all credible testimony recorded within the scripture of the Bible, is consistent in context through out. This is especially true of the testimony of Abram. He heard God, by this, understood for certain what had been heard from others by oral testimonial tradition, by the conviction of Holy Spirit, by logical conclusion. Therefore, unless you allow God to speak to you on this, your presuppositions will only confine you to notions you will one day regret when you actually face Him. And please know, I do not mean any disrespect in what I say. Thanks.

posted on Jan, 8 2015 @ 07:26 PM
a reply to: Sahabi
Hi again, thanks. I appreciate your candidness and zeal. But with all due respect, zeal without pure knowledge is dangerous. This can easily be seen of those bound up within all religion, especially religious Christianity; of which I too was a zealous pawn. By my religious zeal, self-righteousness became my undoing, as I allowed my naiveté to blind me into hypocrisy.

But this malady is common amongst humans who refuse to logically, simply do what the Supreme ask for. He says, He will be found directly if we simply seek Him with whole heart; Jeremiah -chapter 29: verses 11-14, Romans - chapter 10. Even Paul testifies of meeting God directly, comparing his former involvement with Judaism as dung.
This being said, what YOU claim to be mainstream doctrine - is only mainstream according to fleshly understanding. It is not the testimony of Holy Spirit, you would know this directly for sure - IF you allowed His voice.

Yet you say:

" Would you attack me, rather than considering the mainstream doctrine about Hagar and Ishmael's illegitimacy is unsubstantiated? "

But let's really be honest here, according to YOUR words: " I used to be a sincere Christian and then Muslim, amongst other systems. Today, I stand as a non-religious practitioner of spirituality, mysticism, and philosophy,.... "

No disrespect intended, but you sound confused. You went from one belief system to another - each opposed to the other, while claiming to follow the living God. If either of them really knew Him like Abram, Moses and the others, followers would simply follow HIM; not traditions passed down by here-say, perpetuated through evolving cultural exchange.

Simply put; God is smart enough to reveal Himself to anyone He wants, if we're willing to listen and obey. He's smart enough to know better than to create such vastly intricate, yet simple creations, then toss them aside to fend for themselves. He's wise enough to consider all risk in establishing a human species who might choose to turn against Him, and ignore His loving voice of reason. He's wise enough to be heard by anyone wise enough to hear.

The question is, do YOU really want to hear what the Spirit has to say? Or, do you simply want to follow the writings of a book, or listen to a few big-shot human's with titles saying what they really do not know, or presuppose and self-conclude what seems best to you - ALL without even allowing Him to speak His perspective?

The ultimate burden of proof for every human begins within, Sahabi - between you and God directly. I'm not attacking you. I am challenging you to look deeper than so-called human spirituality, mysticism or whatever WE call it can.

It is the depth of soul you have yet to really journey into, which He knows so very well, and is inviting you into, to meet you directly for complete disclosure of what you really want and need; IF you really want the WHOLE truth.

Otherwise, your path will forever be broad with a wide margin of error, as you continue into self-delusion unto self-destruct.


posted on Jan, 9 2015 @ 05:49 AM
a reply to: Sadinoel

May Peace be upon you! You've certainly given me plenty to respond to
Please afford me some time and I'll get to your points chronologically.

"On the surface, what you've shown would seem to indicate a slighting of Ishmael."

I do not hold any favor for either Ishmael or Isaac. My intent is to seek out the truth. When we read the scriptures, truly we see that Abraham married Hagar. We see that Ishmael is the oldest son of Abraham. I can understand why Sarah wanted Hagar and Ishmael gone. But according to the events in Genesis 17, Ishmael is a benefactor of the Everlasting Covenant of circumcision, making him an heir to the Land of Canaan, hand-and-hand with the descendants of Isaac. This is what Genesis 17 is telling us, but it is propagated that only the descendants of Isaac and Jacob were promised the Land of Canaan.


You quoted Galatians. For many reasons, I do not accept the words of Paul as being a manifestation of the teachings of Jesus. I do, however, find wisdom and insight in Paul's writings, but I do so while acknowledging the clear contradictions of Paul to the words attributed to both Jesus in the Canonical and Apocryphal Gospels and God of the Old Testament.

You quoted Paul as saying we are Children of God through faith, but Jesus and God did not say that:

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
John 10:34

I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the Most High.
Psalm 82:6


Again, you quoted what Paul says about faith and grace versus law and works. Let us examine what Jesus said about law and works:

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Matthew 5:17-20

Everything has not been accomplished, because according to the Bible, there are many prophesied events yet to occur. Therefore, according to Jesus, the Law is not abolished.

And Jesus even said that the Kingdom of Heaven is obtained by "doing":

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in Heaven.

Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

Matthew 7:1-5

But the answer to it all is oh so simple,... it is Love,... Compassion,... Forgiveness,...

As Jesus said in Matthew 7:1-5, it is reconciling one's shortcomings instead of judging others. We are to better ourselves through striving for all of the positive qualities, emotions, and mental states that Jesus spoke of.

As Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40, the greatest commandments are Love and the foundation of Law is Love. If we Love God and Love our fellow human, we have accomplished the Law.

We are to strive to keep our thoughts, emotions, intentions, words, and actions rooted in Love. Love is not a description, it is an action. When we truly have cultivated Love for God, Love for Mankind, and inner Love,... doing all of the acts of righteousness as preached by Jesus in the Gospels will manifest naturally without effort.

When we aim for Love, we don't stone the adulteress,... we aren't prideful,... we aren't hypocrites,... we don't do harm unto others,... we extend forgiveness, empathy, compassion, sharing, helping, and caring unto others.

What's the "Good News"? To have no fear and live in Love
That is the true peace, salvation, and grace: Love

edit on 1/9/15 by Sahabi because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 9 2015 @ 07:06 AM
a reply to: Sadinoel

Firstly, thank you for your interest in this thread, it is a pleasure!

First, you recognize the various aspects of the Bible, but do not agree with the premise. Secondly, you speak of Yahweh as the son of El, according to myth; as seeking to usurp El. But this record of testimony is not within the scripture of the Bible; unless one interprets it that way.

Therefore, if self interpretation is the basis of proper context and confirmation; anyone can conclude whatever they want.

These are not self interpretations. These are logical conclusions after analyzing verses such as:

When the Most High ('Elyon) allotted people for inheritance, when He divided up the sons of man, He fixed the boundaries for people according to the number of the Sons of El. But Yahweh’s portion is His people, Jacob (Israel) is His own inheritance.

(Deuteronomy 32:8-9)
(Wording found in the oldest manuscripts)

"Ascribe to Yahweh, O Sons of EL, ascribe to Yahweh glory and strength."

(Psalm 29:1)
(Retranslated to better reflect the original Hebrew)

"For who in the skies can be compared to Yahweh, who among the Sons of EL is like Yahweh?"

(Psalm 89:6)
(Retranslated to better reflect the original Hebrew)

[Bold brackets are my emphasis]

The Gods (Elohim) stand in the congregation of El. In the midst of the Gods (Elohim) He [El] judges.

[The Elohim address El]
“How long will you defend the unjust
and show partiality to the wicked? Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed? Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked? They [mankind] know nothing, neither will they understand. They walk in darkness. All the foundations of the Earth are shaken."

[El replies to the Elohim]
"I have told you Gods (Elohim) that you are all Sons of Elyon. But you will die like mere mortals; you will fall like every other ruler.”

Rise up, O God (Elohim) [El], judge the earth, for all the nations are your inheritance.

(Psalm 82:1-8)
(Retranslated to better reflect the original Hebrew)

Check out the verse-for-verse Hebrew word cross-reference at Bible Hub to verify the above translations.


You claim Canaanite mythology the closest resemblance to the God testified in the Bible

They appear to resemble one-another.

1. In the above verses, we see 3 distinct and separate deities forming a Biblical hierarchy of:

• Elyon
• El (Has many sons)
Yahweh (One of the Sons of El)

This corresponds to the Canaanite mythological hierarchy:

El (Has 70 Sons)
Baal-Hadad (One of the Sons of El)

2. Yahweh's triumph over Leviathan corresponds to Baal-Hadad's triumph over Yam.

3. The Gods of the Canaanites and the Bible were affiliated with mountains:

• El Shaddai (El of the Mountain)
• Yahweh (Mount Sinai)
• Baal-Zephon (Mount Zaphon)

posted on Jan, 9 2015 @ 05:18 PM
a reply to: Sahabi
Hello again Sahabi, thanks.

Since loving God is so very important to you, I would think hearing Him directly would be too. Yet this is not your primary testimony. Why? Abram, even Hagar relied upon His voice as their primary connection of interactive fellowship. But those who do not, merely assume the will of God. His will is not some isolated understanding we interpret as we go along. He and His will are one. We fulfill that will best by being in constant contact conversation through prayer and careful listening; which of course is not a one-side action.

Matthew -chapter 16: verses 13-20;
13. When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?”

14. So they said, “Some say John the Baptist, some Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

15. He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”

16. Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

17. Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

18. And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.

19. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

20. Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ.

Matthew 17:4-6; New King James Version (NKJV)

4. Then Peter answered and said to Jesus, “Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, let us[a] make here three tabernacles: one for You, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.”

5. While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them; and suddenly a voice came out of the cloud, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Hear Him!” 6 And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their faces and were greatly afraid.

posted on Jan, 9 2015 @ 05:23 PM
a reply to: Sahabi
Logical conclusion and analysis has it's place; best by the hearing of His voice. What may seem to resemble one thing to you, may be something else all together. Since interpretation is meant to be exact and pure, please allow God to speak directly His voice on these matters you conclude.

Thanks, have a good day

posted on Jan, 9 2015 @ 08:27 PM
Hi ..I just wanted to drop this interesting paper by Micheal Heiser . " Jesus as the Unique Son of God (μονογενής, monogenēs). Jesus is the “only begotten” son of God—but
“only begotten” is a confusing translation. The Greek word is μονογενής (monogenēs). Not only does the translation “only begotten” seem to contradict the obvious statements in the Old Testament about
other sons of God, it sounds as though there was a time when the Son did not exist—that He had a
beginning. The Council of Nicaea in 425 taught that the Son had always existed, but the idea of the
uncreated, eternal Son had been understood since the beginning of the Church—it was believed to be
the teaching of the New Testament.
The Greek word μονογενής (monogenēs) doesn’t actually mean “only begotten.” It presents a
problem neither with respect to Jesus having a beginning, nor with respect to divine “sons of God” who
are called gods (ים ִלהֹ ֱא, elohim) in the Old Testament. The confusion extends from a misunderstanding
of the root of the Greek word. For many years, μονογενής (monogenēs) was thought to have derived
from two Greek terms, μόνος (monos, “only”) and γεννάω (gennaō, “to beget, bear”). Scholars of Greek
eventually discovered, though, that the second part of the word μονογενής (monogenēs) does not come
from the Greek verb γεννάω (gennaō), but rather the noun γένος (genos, “class, kind”). The term literally
means “one of a kind” or “unique” with no connotation to time, origin or solitary existence. The validity
of this understanding is shown by the New Testament itself. In Hebrews 11:17, Isaac is called Abraham’s
μονογενής (monogenēs)—but Isaac was not the only son Abraham fathered, since he fathered Ishmael
prior to Isaac. The term must mean that Isaac was Abraham’s unique son—the son of the covenant
promises and the line through which the messiah would come. Just as Yahweh is an ים ִלהֹ ֱא (elohim),
and no other ים ִלהֹ ֱא (elohim) are Yahweh, so Jesus is the unique son, and no other sons of God are like
Him. link to the pdf a reply to: Sahabi

top topics

<< 3  4  5   >>

log in