In the name of Allāh,
the Beneficent, the Merciful.
Peace and Blessings of Allāh on Mohammad
DEDICATED TO
Allāh–the Glorious and the High
Lord of the worlds
AND TO
Mohammad–who brought the world
to our feet and eternity to our arms.
*

ISHMAEL
–LEGITIMATE BIRTH & HEIR–
& PAUL
(See also Ishmael-wild ass of a man or fruitful?)

Was Ishmael of illegitimate birth? Are Hagar’s children, Ishmael and Arabs, born in slavery?

(Notably, Sarah, Abraham’s wife, was also his sister, from his father’s side–(Gen. 20:11-12). Biblically, such a union is unacceptable: The Bible says, “if a man shall take his sister, his father’s daughter….and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people”–(Lev. 20:17). Isaac came from such a union–Abraham and Sarah.

Also, Bilhah and Zilpah who bore Jacob sons were handmaids of his wives Rachel and Leah, respectively–(Gen. 30:1-13). Thus these four sons, Dan and Naphtali, and, Gad and Asher, borne by the handmaids Bilhah and Zilpah, respectively, could all said to be of illegitimate birth if Ishmael is said to be of illegitimate birth because he was born of a handmaid. And three of these four sons of Jacob–Naphtali, Gad, and Asher–each became a founder of a tribe (of the twelve tribes of Israel –Rev. 7: 5-8.

And Judah, who was also a founder of one of the twelve tribes of Israel, is said to have committed adultery with his daughter-in-law, Tamarr, thinking she was “an harlot”–(Gen. 38:11-18). And Judah was the grandfather of Jesus, the Christian’s son of God and even God to some. Jesus was of the “seed of David” who committed adultery with Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife–(2 Samuel 11:2-5).

If Hagar was not Abraham’s wife, the implication would be that Abraham, a prophet of God, having “went in unto Hagar” out of wedlock, committed adultery. But this was a “blessed” union, as the Bible testifies:

“And the angel of the Lord said unto her (Hagar),
I will multiply thy seed exceedingly,
that it shall not be numbered for multitude.
And the angel of the Lord said unto her,
Behold, thou art with child, and shall bear a son,
and shall call his name Ishmael;
because thy Lord hath heard thy affliction”
“And as for Ishmael….Behold, I have blessed him,
…twelve princes shall he beget,
and I will make him a great nation”
(Gen. 16:10-11; 17:20).

   Clearly, Ishmael came through Divine artistry and not through illegitimate union. In fact, when Abraham despaired of having an heir, and wanted Eliezer to succeed him, God said to him: “he that shall come forth of thine own bowels shall be thine heir”–(Gen. 15:1-4). And Ishmael was the “heir” that came out of the “bowels” of Abraham, in fulfillment of this Divine decree.

   Abraham was eighty-six years old when he was given his son Ishmael; and he was one hundred years old when he was given his son Isaac–(Gen. 16:16; 21:5). Since Ishmael was already about fourteen years old when his brother Isaac was born, Isaac could not have been Abraham’s “only son” as stated in Genesis 22:2. (As shown later Isaac’s name here is a forgery).

   That Ishmael was not of illegitimate birth is made clear by the Word of God that He will give Abraham a son “also” of Sarah–(Gen. 17:16); which shows that the first son, Ishmael, was “also” a promised son. It also shows that not only did Abraham already had a son (Ishmael), but that God recognized Ishmael as the legitimate offspring of Abraham.

   That Ishmael the firstborn, and not Isaac, is the foremost inheritor of Abraham is made clear from the Bible, which says:

“If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, WHICH IS INDEED THE FIRSTBORN: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; THE RIGHT OF THE FIRSTBORN IS HIS“ –(Deut; 21:15-17).

   Ishmael was the beginning of Abraham’s strength; and the right of the firstborn is his.

What is Ishmael’s inheritance? After God’s promise to Abraham to make him a father of nations, and the establishing of the covenant of circumcision, “The next important event in the history of Abraham as recorded in Genesis (xxii),” “is the offering of “his only son” a sacrifice to God,” says Professor ‘Abdul Ahad Dawud (the former Rev. David Benjamin Keldani). The Professor then proceeds to explain:  

“There are three distinct points which every true believer in God must accept as truths. The first point is that Ishmael is the legitimate son of Abraham, his firstborn, and therefore his claim to birthright is quite just and legal. The second point is that the Covenant was made between God and Abraham as well as his only son Ishmael before Isaac was born. The Covenant and the institution of the Circumcision would have no value or signification unless the repeated promise contained in the divine words, “Throughout thee all the nations of the earth shall be blessed,” and especially the expression, the Seed “that shall come out from the bowels, he will inherit thee” (Gen. xv. 4). This promise was fulfilled when Ishmael was born (Gen. xvi.), and Abraham had the consolation that his chief servant Eliezer would no longer be his heir. Consequently we must admit that Ishmael was the real and legitimate heir of Abraham’s spiritual dignity and privileges. The prerogative that “by Abraham all the generations of the earth shall be blessed,” so often repeated–though in different forms–was the heritage by birthright, and was the patrimony of Ishmael. The inheritance to which Ishmael was entitled by birthright was not the tent in which Abraham lived or a certain camel upon which he used to ride, but to subjugate and occupy forever all the territories extending from the Nile to the Euphrates, which were inhabited by some ten different nations (Gen. xvii. 18-21). These lands have never been subdued by the descendants of Isaac, but by those of Ishmael. This is an actual and literal fulfilment of one of the conditions contained in the Covenant.

   The third point is that Isaac was also born miraculously and specially blessed by the Almighty, that for his people the land of Canaan was promised and actually occupied under Joshua.……
…… there is a fundamental point of dispute between the two nations now existing for nearly four thousand years; and that point is the question of the Messiah and Muhammad. The Jews do not see the fulfilment of the so-called Messianic prophecies either in the person of Christ or in that of Muhammad. The Jews have always been jealous of Ishmael because they know very well that in him the Covenant was made and with his circumcision it was concluded and sealed, and it is out of this rancour that their scribes or doctors of law have corrupted and interpolated many passages in their Scriptures. To efface the name “Ishmael” from the second, sixth, and seventh verses of the twenty-second chapter of the Book of Genesis and to insert in its place “Isaac,” and to leave the descriptive epithet “thy only begotten son” is to deny the existence of the former and to violate the Covenant made between God and Ishmael. It is expressly said in this chapter by God: “Because thou didst not spare thy only begotten son, I will increase and multiply thy posterity like the stars and the sands on the seashore,” which word “multiply” was used by the Angel to Hagar in the wilderness: I will multiply thy off-spring to an innumerable multitude, and that Ishmael “shall become a fruitful man”(Gen. xvi. 12. It is Muslims who are numbered like “the stars and the sands on the seashore”–(Gen. 22:17). Now the Christians have translated the same Hebrew word, which means “fruitful” or “plentiful” from the verb para –identical with the Arabic wefera– in their versions “a wild ass”! Is it not a shame and impiety to call Ishmael “a wild ass” whom God styles “Fruitful” or “Plentiful”?”(Muhammad in the Bible, pp. 30, 31, 32. Emphasis added).

Man can alter Scripture(s),
man cannot alter the decree of God.

“God’s anger is revealed from heaven against
all the sin and evil of the people whose evil ways
prevent the truth from being known”
(Romans 1:18).

   That Ishmael, and not Isaac, was the son Abraham offered in his intended sacrifice is also borne out by Allāh, God, in His Qur’an: Abraham prayed for an heir and is given a son; then he had a vision about him sacrificing this son–(Qur’an 37:100-111), and AFTERWARDS Abraham was promised Isaac as stated in verses 112-113:

“And We gave him the good news of ISAAC, a prophet, a righteous one. And We blessed him (Abraham) and Isaac.”  

   Allāh blessing Abraham as Muhammad Ali explains: “Abraham and Isaac are spoken of distinctly to show that by blessing Abraham is here meant blessing his descendants through Ishmael.”

   Muslims who say that the Qur’an is not clear about which son was the intended sacrifice are to study the Qur’an carefully.

    (Whereas, clearly Ishmael was the intended son of sacrifice, one Christian quarter on the Internet in trying to glorify the Isaac branch of Abraham tried to explain that the Biblical epithet “thine only son” refers to Isaac and not Ishmael arguing that “son” here is a figurative expression; citing the story of Noah in which Noah called out to his rebellious “son” to join them on the Ark, and cried out to Allāh to save him saying “surely my son is of my family,” but Allāh replied, “he is not of thy family, he is (an embodiment of) unrighteous conduct” –(Qur’an 11:41-46). Clearly, Noah’s son being referred here as being “not of thy family, he is (an embodiment of) unrighteous conduct” refers to his spirituality and not the lineage of his birth.

   Also –putting aside Allāh’s Word that it was Ishmael who was the intended sacrifice and AFTERWARDS Isaac was promised to Abraham– as Prof. Dawud points out above, Jews “efface(d) the name “Ishmael” from the second, sixth, and seventh verses of the twenty-second chapter of the Book of Genesis and” “insert(ed) in its place “Isaac.” In any event, even if Isaac was the intended sacrifice, Muslims believe in all the prophets of God.

   Strangely, whereas Jews commemorate their freedom from Pharaoh they do not commemorate this most Holy covenant of sacrifice in which God decreed to “multiply” them “as the stars” and as the “sand” upon the seashore and give them as possession the “gate” of their enemies–(Gen. 22:17). The only reasonable answer to this Jewish failure to commemorate the sacrifice of “Isaac” would be, Jews knowing that Ishmael was the intended sacrifice and not Isaac, commemorating this sacrifice in the name of Isaac would be a mockery of themselves).      

*

ISHMAEL AND PAUL

Are Hagar’s children, Ishmael and Arabs, born in slavery?

Paul not only “shanghaied” Jesus’ teaching and created his own gospel (and has Christians following him and his “pagan” Son of God into Hell); he also dabbled in the lives of Abraham, his wife, Hagar, and their son, Ishmael.

In his letter to the Galatians, trying to convince them to follow him rather than follow others, he wrote that Ishmael was born of the “flesh” whereas Isaac was born of the “Spirit” (a Divine promise); and that “he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now (meaning that Arabs were persecuting Jews/Christians of his time).” Here is his statement (Galatians 4:21-31):
“Let me ask those of you who want to be subject to the Law: do you not hear what the Law says? It says that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman (Hagar, Ishmael’s mother), the other by a free woman (Sarah, Isaac’s mother). His son by the slave woman was born in the usual way, but his son by the free woman was born as a result of God’s promise. These two things can be understood as a figure: the two women represent two covenants. The one whose children are born in slavery is Hagar, and she represents the covenant made at Mount Sinai. Hagar, who stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia, is a figure of the present city of Jerusalem, in slavery with all its people. But the heavenly Jerusalem is free, and she is our mother. For the scripture says, “Be happy, you childless woman! Shout and cry with joy, you who never felt the pains of childbirth! For the woman who was deserted will have more children than the woman whose husband never left her.” Now, you my brothers, are God’s children as a result of the promise, just as Isaac was. At that time the son who was born in the usual way persecuted the one who was born because of God’s Spirit; and it is the same now. But what does the scripture say? It says, “Send the slave woman and her son away; for the son of the slave woman will not have a part of the father’s property along with the son of the free woman.” So then, my brothers, we are not the children of a slave woman but of a free woman”–(Good News, Canadian Bible Society).
(Note well: These are NOT the words of God or Jesus; these are the words of Paul who “was considered to be a traitor to Jesus’s thought by the latter’s family and by the apostles who had stayed in Jerusalem in the circle around James;” and who forged his own gospel; and was a self-admitted liar).

   (1) That “The two women represent two covenants. The one whose children are born in slavery is Hagar.”
Wonder what kind of “slavery” Paul is speaking about, physical or mental? I have no knowledge of early Arabs born into “slavery.” Though Jews were, under Pharaoh.
   If Paul meant physical “slavery,” into whose “slavery” were/are the children of Hagar born? Later Arabs have dictatorship but not slavery.
   If Paul meant the early Arabs had the mental slavery of “Idolatry,” his “pagan” Son of God doctrine is no better. In fact, his doctrine is worse, for whereas the idolatrous Arabs worshipped things fashioned by their own hands they did not attribute to His Holy Highness the injustice of putting one person’s sin onto others and make Him complicit in murder; moreover the murder of an innocent man.
   Whether physical or mental “slavery” it must be blasphemy of the highest order to submit that God covenanted one sector of his creation into “slavery.”

(2) “But the heavenly Jerusalem is free, and she is our mother.” (But the “heavenly Jerusalem” is no longer free; in fact “our mother” is now obsolete, replaced with “Mother” Makkah–Qur’an 6:92; 42:7– as his Son of God says:

“Therefore I say unto you, the kingdom of God shall be TAKEN FROM YOU, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof;” “Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, NOR YET AT JERUSALEM, worship the Father”–(Matt. 21:43; John 4:21); “All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee …and I will glorify the house of my glory–(Isaiah 60:7. The flocks of Kedar have NEVER come to the House of Israel or of Christ, but to the House of MOHAMMAD);

“And ye shall leave your name for a curse unto my chosen: for the Lord God shall slay thee, and call his servants by ANOTHER NAME”–(Isaiah 65:15; 62:2. The only “other name” God has called His servants is “MUSLIMS!”–Qur’an 22:78. While prior to the Qur’an/Islam those who submitted to Allāh were also “Muslims” the term was not then revealed);

“The glory of this LATTER house shall be GREATER than of the former, saith the Lord of hosts: and in this place will I give PEACE, saith the Lord of hosts” –(Haggai 2:9. Allāh has designated the Ka’bah a place of “peace”/security–Qur’an 2:125; 2:191; 5:97-99; 29:67).

   (3) “For the scripture says, “Be happy, you childless woman! Shout and cry with joy, you who never felt the pains of childbirth! For the woman who was deserted will have more children than the woman whose husband never left her.”
   Paul here refers to Isaiah 54:1. But Isaiah 54:1 seems to be a general reference to “childless” women “who never felt the pains of childbirth!” It is strange that Paul should consider Sarah “childless,” seeing that Sarah conceived and gave birth to Isaac. And while modern women, due to anesthetic, may escape “pains of childbirth” it is doubtful that Sarah escaped this pain, as decreed by God–Gen. 3:16).
That Abraham “deserted” Hagar. Was Moses “deserted” when his mother put him in a basket in the water?

   God instructed Abraham to do as Sarah bid him–Gen. 21:12. Abraham obeying the instructions of God is not “desertion.” Abraham was instructed by God to sacrifice his “only son,” Ishmael, if Abraham had done so would God have hold him guilty of murder?
   Clearly, in asking Abraham to send Hagar away, God was advancing His purpose of sending to the Arabs and world Mohammad, the Comforter, who guided us into “all truth,” and would abide “forever” through the Qur’an.

Again, when Hagar’s “water was spent” “God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water”–Gen.21:15, 20. A person is never “deserted” when God is with her or him. Conversely, she or he is “deserted” when God is not with her or him even though she or he has the entire world at her or his feet. According to Islamic tradition, Abraham was with Ishmael in Arabia on at least two occasions; after Ishmael’s marriage and at their building of the Ka’ba–(Bokhari Vol. 4, # 583, 584).

   (4) That “the son who was born in the usual way persecuted the one who was born because of God’s Spirit.”

   Where and when and how did Ishmael “persecute” Isaac? All Ishmael did was “mock,” though it is not clear if Ishmael was “mocking” Isaac or Sarah–Genesis 21:9. Notably, whereas the Bible shows that Ishmael was about thirteen years old when Abraham sent Hagar and Ishmael away –Abraham was a hundred years old when Isaac was born, and when Ishmael “mocked” Isaac (Genesis 21:5, 10)– according to Islamic tradition, unless women nursed their thirteen-year olds, Ishmael was yet a baby–Bokhari Vol. 4, #583, 584. It is amusing to entertain that a baby can “mock” another baby.

   That Isaac was born of a “promise” and Ishmael was not, this also is claptrap! As noted above, when Abraham despaired of having an heir, and wanted Eliezer to succeed him, God said to him [and this was way before he had relations with Hagar]: “he that shall come forth of thine own bowels shall be thine heir”–Gen. 15:1-4. And Ishmael was the “heir” that came out of the “bowels” of Abraham, in fulfillment of this Divine promise. How then it is claimed that Ishmael was not born of “God’s Spirit”?

   Again, as noted above, God said He will give Abraham a son “also” of Sarah; which shows that the first son, Ishmael, was “also” a promised son. It also shows that not only did Abraham already had a son (Ishmael), but that God recognized Ishmael as the legitimate offspring of Abraham.

   Seemed that Isaac and Ishmael kept in contact with each other, for when Abraham, died “his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him in the cave of Machpelah”–Gen. 25:8-9.

   Significantly, Arabs cannot be charged with anti-Semitism; Arabs also are Shemites/Semites, descendants of Shem, one of the three sons of Noah.

   (5) And “it is the same now” (i.e., as Ishmael “persecuted” Isaac, Arabs were persecuting Jews/Christians in Paul’s time).
   Paul lived in the first century, in the time of Jesus. Jerusalem was destroyed in the year 70 A.C. by the Romans [it was also destroyed by the Babylonians in 6th.century B.C.] This destruction in 70 AD. was not by Arabs so that Ishmael/Arabs should be cited; moreover, rather than being destruction from “persecution” it may have been one of the destruction(s) prophesied by Jesus–Matt. 23:38; Luke 21:20-24. [Paul needed to blame the Romans and/or his Son of God instead of spewing hate at Ishmael/Arabs].

   The current Muslim-Christian/West divide can be traced back to Christians/West meddling in Muslims’ affairs. More than a century ago Thomas Arnold noted in his book The Preaching of Islam [what may very well be true today also]:“Many of the persecutions of the Christians in Muslim countries can be traced either to distrust of their loyalty, excited by the intrigues and interference of Christian foreigners and the enemies of Islam, or to the bad feeling stirred up by the treacherous or brutal behaviour of the latter towards the Musalmans (Muslims);” “Of forced conversion or anything like persecution in the early days of the Arab conquest, we hear nothing.”(pp. 77, 136). If the Jews/Christians/West did not covet Muslims’ lands and oil it is doubtful Muslims would be riled against Jews/Christians/West).

 Of any Jewish/Christian persecution by Arab during Paul’s reign I am not aware of. In fact, Jews [and Africans, Armenians, and Persians) lived in pre-Islamic Arabia without difficulty). We even have Esau, Isaac’s son, marrying his uncle, Ishmael’s, daughter, Mahalath–Genesis 28:9. Doesn’t look like Ishmael/Arabs were “persecuting” Jews [though there was no Jew then. Jews came from Judah, one of the twelve sons of Jacob, Isaac’s son. Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, and Jacob, were neither Jews nor Christians –they were Semites/Shemites, descendants of Shem, one of Noah’s three sons, and religiously they were Muslims, i.e. those who submit to the will of Allāh/God.

   Jacob had twelve sons –Judah from whom “Jew” originated, Levi from whom “Levite” originated, etc. See Revelation 7:5-8 for these twelve sons of Jacob, from whom we got the Twelve Tribes of Israel; “Israel” being the name given to Jacob by God–Gen. 32:27-28; 35:10).

   (6) That “the son of the slave woman will not have a part of the father’s property along with the son of the free woman.”
   But, as noted above, God decreed:

“If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, WHICH IS INDEED THE FIRSTBORN: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; THE RIGHT OF THE FIRSTBORN IS HIS“ –(Deuteronomy 21:15-17).
   Ishmael was the beginning of Abraham’s strength; and the right of the firstborn is his. And as Prof. Abdul Ahad Dawud –the former Reverend David Benjamin Keldani – noted above, reveals:

“The Jews have always been jealous of Ishmael because they know very well that in him the Covenant was made and with his circumcision it was concluded and sealed, and it is out of this rancour that their scribes or doctors of law have corrupted and interpolated many passages in their Scriptures. To efface the name “Ishmael” from the second, sixth, and seventh verses of the twenty-second chapter of the Book of Genesis and to insert in its place “Isaac,” and to leave the descriptive epithet “thy only begotten son” is to deny the existence of the former and to violate the Covenant made between God and Ishmael.”

Even if Paul was correct in his letter to the Galatians, yet this would not make Jesus God or Son of God or Trinity or vicarious atoner or that mankind inherited sin from Adam. These cardinal doctrines of Christianity have no Divine foundation, no prophetic foundation, no logical foundation, and are repugnant to reason; Christians lie on God, they lie on Jesus, they blame the Devil; Christianity is evil, intolerant, backward, naked hate, and brutal and rabid misogyny; the Gospels portray Jesus-a hypocrite, liar, fraud. Christianity is lies, falsehood, and blasphemy. (See Jesus Dead, Buried, No Return).

Paul was a self-admitted liar; who forged his own gospel; introduced the pagan doctrine of Son of God into the Christian religion, who was uncertain whether he had the Holy Spirit with him and gave his own judgment; snared people into following his teachings through guile and craft; committed gross blasphemy by saying God made Jesus, the Christian’s God and Son of God, into a “curse” and “lower” than the angels (strangely Christians praise Jesus in their hymn/carol as “king” of the angels whereas Paul says Jesus was made lower than the angels); preached crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus; condemned the everlasting Divine Covenant of circumcision and the law of “works.” (See Allāh and Jesus or Paul).

Jesus says you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free (from lies, falsehood, and blasphemy). And the Divine truth is, Jesus was a prophet of God sent only for Jews and to foretell the coming of the Comforter who will guide into “all truth” and “abide forever” and whom all are to follow; and “There is no God but Allāh; Mohammad is the Messenger of Allāh!”

While Allāh God would not call us to account for that which we do not know, when knowledge comes to us what reason or excuse can we have for not accepting and follow it? “But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath NEVER forgiveness but is in danger of ETERNAL DAMNATION”–(Mark 3:29).

While we are alive we have the grand opportunity to repent and have eternal life in Paradise. When we die there is no second chance.

What is holding you back from baptizing
with Allāh, the Best of Baptizers?
(Qur’an 2:138).