We turn now to the issue central to this article - the story of the proposed sacrifice of Isaac in Genesis God speaks to Abraham and tells him to take his son, his only son, Isaac, and offer him to God as a burnt offering. We already know that Isaac is not Abraham's "only" son.
Thus, the words further marginalise Ishmael, almost as if he never existed. Yet, according to the biblical text, he did indeed exist, and it was he who for fourteen years was Abraham's only son. How are these facts to be reconciled? A clue, perhaps, is in the way the command is given: "Take your son, your only son, whom you love" Gen. The command is deliberate and explicit. In the Bible, Isaac appears to be the patriarch of Israel. Islam highlights these inconsistencies in the biblical narratives: Ishmael being disenfranchised from his rightful place in opposition to the cultural norms of the time; Ishmael as opposed to Isaac as heir; the identity of the unnamed child cast out with Hagar into the wilderness, and the identity of the son to be sacrificed to God "your son, your only son".
In Islamic thought and tradition, these inconsistencies collectively suggest that the sacrificial offering in Genesis 22 is more likely to be Ishmael than Isaac. For additional support, Islam calls on its fundamental premise that, while God has revealed God's self on many occasions in the past, the recording of God's revelations became distorted or misrepresented.
Against these inconsistencies is, first, that the structure of the biblical narratives, while never stating the fact explicitly, certainly implies through subsequent events that Abram and Sarai "jumped the gun" of God's promise by having Ishmael, meaning that Isaac was indeed the promised son of the covenant. Secondly, that Islam has long accepted that the covenant made with Abram was indeed conveyed to Isaac and his descendants. Thirdly, Islam has also long accepted the later Israelites to be, legitimately, People of the Book.
Three other issues must be addressed: the evolution of the biblical narratives under discussion; in light of that discussion, God's covenant with Abraham in Genesis 17, and the nature of the exposure of early Islam to the Hebrew Old Testament.
That the "Books of Moses" Genesis through Deuteronomy essentially achieved their final form canon at an early date is well known. It was not, however, until the mid th century that scholarship made concerted efforts to establish their age with any degree of certainty, and indeed, to a certain extent, the jury is still out in terms of universal agreement in this regard.
While the broad consensus of agreement with Julius Wellhausen's documentary hypothesis throughout the 20 th century has largely collapsed in recent years Viviano ; Blenkinsopp , enough established data remains to support some of Wellhausen's assertions.
These include evidence that, while many "hands" were involved, certain writing characteristics are evident that allow the identification of particular writers being responsible for certain blocks of content. Wellhausen labelled these writers J, E, D, and P, and the order of these letter identifications is generally agreed to represent the order of their appearance in history -J first, followed almost contemporaneously by E, later by D, and finally by P.
Friedman also identified two other writers, RJE and R. In terms of age, the original hypothesis was that J appeared in the early 9 th century BCE, and E in the late 9 th century BCE, the earliest D material and the P material in the mid-6 th century BCE, with some material possibly being fairly ancient Viviano We must remember, in this instance, that we are largely dealing with the Textus Receptus - the Hebrew Bible in the form that we have it today.
We must not overlook the fact that, before the material became canon an event that itself was staggered over several centuries , it existed in many forms. Regardless of recent discoveries Aleppo Codex, Cairo Geniza , for much of its history, the exact nature and content of the Hebrew Bible remained fluid.
The excursus above is relevant to our discussion, because the covenant made by God with Abraham Gen. The last consideration of this inquiry is the issue of the nature and extent of early Islam's exposure to Jewish Scripture traditions - specifically the Pentateuch - and here we are very much in the realm of terra incognita. Was it largely a transfer of oral material obtained by Mohammad from Jewish residents in Mecca or elsewhere during his time as a caravan master? Was it part of the knowledge base of his Hanefite companions as they pondered the nature of the "true" religion in the caves above Mecca?
And if they did - and bearing in mind that there were then, as there are now, versions of the Pentateuch for example, Masoretic, Samaritan, Septuagint, Vulgate - which version or versions did they have? Judeo-Christianity, the older religion, traditionally believes that Isaac was the sacrificial offering, and has textual support in the Bible.
The undeniable truth is that both religions are based on what is and has been traditionally believed. But tradition is not truth, and absent any verifiable historical facts, both religions rely on what they believe to be true. In this regard, Judaism, with the longer history, has the upper hand. Even if, as some believe, the Pentateuchal traditions were more a product of the Jews in exile in Babylon, based on redacted, embellished oral traditions with much new material added Moberly , those traditions pre-date the founding of Islam by 1, years.
The question posed at the beginning of this study was: "Does Islam have a reasonable claim in asserting that Ishmael, not Isaac, was the intended sacrifice demanded of Abraham in Genesis 22? It is similarly evident that Islam early on recognised the identified inconsistencies and has thus long maintained that Ishmael was the sacrificial offering.
But, while it is evident that in the Bible Ishmael is a key part of a narrative that has Isaac as its centrepiece and the ongoing God-driven history of Israel as its vehicle, Islam appropriates Ishmael but briefly, using his and his father's act of submission as cause for the announcement of the impending birth of Isaac before consigning Ishmael to relative obscurity. As with any jury, much as it wants to be impartial, unless the evidence is overwhelming, people are generally swayed by their personal biases.
An Islamist will no doubt conclude that the evidence, along with the assertion that the revelations to Mohammad "correct" the biblical narrative, is sufficient to support the Muslim position. A Judeo-Christian, on the other hand, will point both to the larger body of texts that, regardless of the inconsistencies, chiefly support Isaac as a great patriarch of Israel, and also to the fact that, with the exception of its position regarding Ishmael elaborated above, Islam broadly accepts this proposition.
For both religions, tradition is the pillar of their claims. In view of the grip that tradition - especially religious tradition - holds on its believers, the conflict between Islam and Judeo-Christianity regarding the identity of the sacrificial son in Genesis 22 is a debate unlikely ever to be resolved to the satisfaction of all parties. There is, however, one possible middle ground. Returning to the narrative of the "driving out" of Hagar and Ishmael, we must consider the sense of finality of the event.
Abraham certainly had a right to believe that Ishmael was God's heir to him as a result of his request in Genesis , and the fourteen years between the birth of Ishmael and the birth of Isaac had unquestionably cemented Abraham's deep affection for him, not least because he was truly his first born. Because of his deep love for the boy, driving him away must surely be considered a form of sacrifice of his first-born son, especially since there is no record of him ever seeing Ishmael again.
When the son is grown, God asks Abraham to offer him in sacrifice. In precisely what way is not clear, and neither is what exactly happens. Surah reads: "Thou hast indeed fulfilled the vision", suggesting that the sacrifice has occurred. Verse reads: "And we ransomed him with a great sacrifice.
Thus, like Isaac in the biblical account, Ishmael was sacrificed, yet lives. In this view, Islam does then appear to have a sustainable claim in terms of Ishmael being a sacrificial offering, but in addition to, rather than in place of Isaac. Ali, M. Seventh edition. American Standard Version. Blenkinsopp, J. Introduction to the Pentateuch. In: L. Keck gen.
Volume 1 Nashville, TN: Abingdon , pp. Boadt, L. Reading the Old Testament. Second edition. New York: Paulist Press. Brenneman, J. In: D. Freedman ed. Eerdmans , p. Speech BBC Broadcast to the nation. London, 1 October. Common English Bible. Donner, F. Narratives of Islamic origins: The beginnings of Islamic historical writing. Princeton, NJ: Darwin Press.
English Standard Version. Fretheim, T. Friedman, R. Who wrote the Bible. Ishmael, referred to as Ismail in Arabic and the Quran, was the older of Abraham's two sons, born by Abraham's servant, Hagar.
Within the Abrahamic religions, Christians and Jews revere Isaac, the younger son, while in Islam, Ishmael is revered by the Quran and Islamic tradition and remains one of the religion's key prophets and historical figures. A traditional theological debate among Muslim and Jewish and Christian doctrines involves Abraham and his sons: which son did God want Abraham to sacrifice? The debate is ongoing, and each version has impacted Islam and Judaism in significant ways: While Ishmael remains a cornerstone figure within Islam, Isaac is Judaism's second patriarch, after his father Abraham.
Ishmael is mentioned several times throughout the Quran, and it is through the Islamic holy scripture that he is invoked as a messenger, prophet and one preferred by God: "And mention in the Book, Ishmael. Indeed, he was true to his promise, and was a messenger and a prophet" Quran , and "And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot -- and all [of them] We preferred over the worlds" Ishmael is not only revered as a holy prophet within Islam, but Muslims also trace their religious roots and in some cases, their very ethnicity although this is debated , back to Ishmael.
Abraham conceives a son with Hagar when Sarah is unable to bear children. Then, after many years, Sarah miraculously gives birth to Isaac. After some time upon God's command, Abraham sends Hagar and Ishmael to the desert with God's promise of protection.
The Quran takes a special interest in Hagar and her son, through whom Arabs trace their connection to Abraham. The full story is mentioned in Sahih Bukhari[6]. The Qur'an stresses twice that it does not make distinction between the revelations by Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the tribes i.
Qur'an and Qur'an Another reference where the name of Ishmael appears is where the Qur'an states that he was inspired in the same manner as prophets like Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon.
0コメント