Evidence for God from Science

Genesis 17:

12 Throughout your generations, every male among you at eight days old is to be circumcised. This includes a slave born in your house and one purchased with money from any foreigner. The one who is not your offspring, 13 a slave born in your house, as well as one purchased with money, must be circumcised. My covenant will be marked in your flesh as an everlasting covenant. 14 If any male is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that man will be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.”

23 Then Abraham took his son Ishmael and all the slaves born in his house or purchased with his money—every male among the members of Abraham’s household—and he circumcised the flesh of their foreskin on that very day, just as God had said to him. (Ishmael was 13 years old at this time.)

The everlasting sign of the covenant is circumcision. The covenant went through Isaac, not Ishmael.

So why was Ishmael circumcised when the covenant did not go through him?

Thanks.

Simple answer, based upon my own analysis given what I know.

God's covenant was established with Israel-Jews from Abraham, but has equally always overflowed to other nations and sons (seed) of Father Abraham. Circumcision of skin, was a sign of the Old Covenant which was evidently directly established with the people of Israel and Judah, but then could and did also overflow to others.

God promised a new covenant, one that is of the heart. (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Romans 2:29) It too overflows to all of Abraham's seed (gentiles) and not just those who are via Isaac and Israel as such.

I see such, as encouraging, that God didn't just select one nation to save, but always intended an overflow of such to all. Truly, the gospel, the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, was first to the Jew and then by extension to "the Greek." (Romans 1:16)

Such isn't just a Pauline gospel, but has always been intended and always the case. I think we see a glimpse of that with Isaac and Ishmael.

Kurieuo wrote:Simple answer, based upon my own analysis given what I know.

God's covenant was established with Israel-Jews from Abraham, but has equally always overflowed to other nations and sons (seed) of Father Abraham. Circumcision of skin, was a sign of the Old Covenant which was evidently directly established with the people of Israel and Judah, but then could and did also overflow to others.

God promised a new covenant, one that is of the heart. (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Romans 2:29) It too overflows to all of Abraham's seed (gentiles) and not just those who are via Isaac and Israel as such.

I see such, as encouraging, that God didn't just select one nation to save, but always intended an overflow of such to all. Truly, the gospel, the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, was first to the Jew and then by extension to "the Greek." (Romans 1:16)

Such isn't just a Pauline gospel, but has always been intended and always the case. I think we see a glimpse of that with Isaac and Ishmael.

Thank you.

I asked this question of a Jew and was given link.

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_c ... shmael.htm

Clip: This is more than a technical choice. G‑d’s insistence on Isaac as the progenitor of His chosen people tells us something very fundamental about the nature of our relationship with Him.

For Ishmael and Isaac differed in two significant respects:

Ishmael came into the world by natural means, while Isaac’s birth was a supernatural event.
Ishmael was circumcised at the age of thirteen, the age of daat (awareness), whereas Isaac entered into the covenant of circumcision as an eight day-old infant—an age at which a person is not even aware of what is taking place, much less of its significance.
In other words, Ishmael represents a rational relationship with G‑d, one that is based upon a person’s nature and understanding. Isaac represents a supranatural, supra-rational bond.

Kurieuo wrote:Simple answer, based upon my own analysis given what I know.

God's covenant was established with Israel-Jews from Abraham, but has equally always overflowed to other nations and sons (seed) of Father Abraham. Circumcision of skin, was a sign of the Old Covenant which was evidently directly established with the people of Israel and Judah, but then could and did also overflow to others.

God promised a new covenant, one that is of the heart. (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Romans 2:29) It too overflows to all of Abraham's seed (gentiles) and not just those who are via Isaac and Israel as such.

I see such, as encouraging, that God didn't just select one nation to save, but always intended an overflow of such to all. Truly, the gospel, the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, was first to the Jew and then by extension to "the Greek." (Romans 1:16)

Such isn't just a Pauline gospel, but has always been intended and always the case. I think we see a glimpse of that with Isaac and Ishmael.

Thank you.

I asked this question of a Jew and was given link.

http://www.chabad.org/library/article_c ... shmael.htm

Clip: This is more than a technical choice. G‑d’s insistence on Isaac as the progenitor of His chosen people tells us something very fundamental about the nature of our relationship with Him.

For Ishmael and Isaac differed in two significant respects:

Ishmael came into the world by natural means, while Isaac’s birth was a supernatural event.
Ishmael was circumcised at the age of thirteen, the age of daat (awareness), whereas Isaac entered into the covenant of circumcision as an eight day-old infant—an age at which a person is not even aware of what is taking place, much less of its significance.
In other words, Ishmael represents a rational relationship with G‑d, one that is based upon a person’s nature and understanding. Isaac represents a supranatural, supra-rational bond.

Some of those points are quite interesting. Looks to me that these stated differences between the two, would quite easily fit within the Israel/Gentile distinction as many Christians view such.

Another perspective -- God had promised Abraham and Sarah that they Would have a child of their own. Sarah got impatient and did according to the accepted custom of that day -- a wife Could give her handmaid to her husband to have children by if she was baron or at least seemed to be for a length of time. Even though God Had promised her a son by Abraham. So Ishmael was born through her handmaid -- and God Did follow through with His promise of a natural child / Isaac.

So Isaac was the natural child of Abraham and Sarah -- even as old as they were.

Why Couldn't Ishmael be circumcised?

I'm also thinking that the line of Christ goes through Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, his 12 sons, one of the son's Judah.

Gensis 17:

20 As for Ishmael, I have heard you. I will certainly bless him; I will make him fruitful and will multiply him greatly. He will father 12 tribal leaders, and I will make him into a great nation.

What does "great nation" mean? Does it mean great religion?

Thanks.

Christian2 wrote:Gensis 17:

20 As for Ishmael, I have heard you. I will certainly bless him; I will make him fruitful and will multiply him greatly. He will father 12 tribal leaders, and I will make him into a great nation.

What does "great nation" mean? Does it mean great religion?

Thanks.

So I decided to spend a couple of hours looking into this, and will share my own thoughts.

Genesis 25:13-15 has the 12 tribal names:

• These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, listed in the order of their birth: Nebaioth the firstborn of Ishmael, Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, 14 Mishma, Dumah, Massa, 15 Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish and Kedemah. 16 These were the sons of Ishmael, and these are the names of the twelve tribal rulers according to their settlements and camps. 17 Ishmael lived a hundred and thirty-seven years. He breathed his last and died, and he was gathered to his people. 18 His descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the eastern border of Egypt, as you go toward Ashur. And they lived in hostility toward all the tribes related to them.

Joseph was sold to the Ishmaelites who sold him in Egypt, Midianites in particular. (Gen 37:28) Midian was a son of Abraham via Keturah, as Genesis 25:1-4 reads:

• Abraham had taken another wife, whose name was Keturah. 2 She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah. 3 Jokshan was the father of Sheba and Dedan; the descendants of Dedan were the Ashurites, the Letushites and the Leummites. 4 The sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanok, Abida and Eldaah. All these were descendants of Keturah.

Given Midianites, weren't from Ishmael, yet were called Ishmaelites, then either they were called such due to their lifestyle or land inhabited. They inhabited much the same land. So then, it seems Ishmaelites more became representative of a nation of diverse tribes (4including Abraham's offspring through his other wives). Note Gen 25:5-6:

• 5 Abraham left everything he owned to Isaac. 6 But while he was still living, he gave gifts to the sons of his concubines and sent them away from his son Isaac to the land of the east.

It seems Ishmael's great nation, absorbed Abraham's offspring outside Sarah. Note, Gen 17:20 says, "I will make him a great nation." Not "I will make them [12 tribes] a great nation." The Midians themselves appear great, and no doubt they became a very strong tribe to the east of Egypt and up around Israel. If they too formed part of the Ishmaelites, then so much greater the nation of Ishmael. I read here, the term "Ishmaelite" may even be synomous with the term "Midianites", yet then surely different terms are to some extent purposeful (in Joesph story), I think Ishmaelites was more of a confederation of tribes included, but not limited to, the tribes of Ishmael's sons.

• Midian [N] [E] [H]
  (strife ), a son of Abraham and Keturah, ( Genesis 25:2 ; 1 Chronicles 1:32 ) progenitor of the Midianites, or Arabians dwelling principally in the desert north of the peninsula of Arabia. Southward they extended along the eastern shore of the Gulf of Eyleh (Sinus AElaniticus ); and northward they stretched along the eastern frontier of Palestine. The "land of Midian," the place to which Moses fled after having killed the Egyptian, ( Exodus 2:15 Exodus 2:21 ) or the portion of it specially referred to, was probably the peninsula of Sinai. The influence of the Midianties on the Israelites was clearly most evil, and directly tended to lead them from the injunctions of Moses. The events at Shittim occasioned the injunction to vex Midian and smite them. After a lapse of some years, the Midianites appear again as the enemies of the Israelites, oppressing them for seven years, but are finally defeated with great slaughter by Gideon. [GIDEON] The Midianites are described as true Arabs, and possessed cattle and flocks and camels as the sand of the seashore for multitude. The spoil taken in the war of both Moses and of Gideon is remarkable. ( Numbers 31:22 ; Judges 8:21 Judges 8:24-26 ) We have here a wealthy Arab nation, living by plunder, delighting in finery; and, where forays were impossible, carrying ont he traffic southward into Arabia, the land of gold --if not naturally, by trade-- and across to Chaldea, or into the rich plains of Egypt. (http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/midian/)

I will add, we should not far remove the eventuation of nations from their context. Such is just good exposition, to look for a plainer and simple meaning. God established a covenant with Isaac, (Gen 17:19) who passed this on the blessing to Jacob (Israel) which landed with his sons who formed the tribes of Israel. We have a next to immediate revealing in Scripture of where and with whom this covenant was established.

So then, to claim that the nation of Ishmael represents a religion which formed way outside the context of Scripture, such is really a push. Better to understand this great nation of Ishmael, was indeed also revealed in Scripture -- all that which is spoken of (i.e., including the Midians above and more). It seems to me like they spanned a lot of territory, and that were were like a large confederation of tribes. Something more is needed to align Muhammad and Islam specifically to such, especially when we have a simpler interpretation present.

Kurieuo wrote:

Christian2 wrote:Gensis 17:

20 As for Ishmael, I have heard you. I will certainly bless him; I will make him fruitful and will multiply him greatly. He will father 12 tribal leaders, and I will make him into a great nation.

What does "great nation" mean? Does it mean great religion?

Thanks.

So I decided to spend a couple of hours looking into this, and will share my own thoughts.

Genesis 25:13-15 has the 12 tribal names:

• These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, listed in the order of their birth: Nebaioth the firstborn of Ishmael, Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, 14 Mishma, Dumah, Massa, 15 Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish and Kedemah. 16 These were the sons of Ishmael, and these are the names of the twelve tribal rulers according to their settlements and camps. 17 Ishmael lived a hundred and thirty-seven years. He breathed his last and died, and he was gathered to his people. 18 His descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the eastern border of Egypt, as you go toward Ashur. And they lived in hostility toward all the tribes related to them.

Joseph was sold to the Ishmaelites who sold him in Egypt, Midianites in particular. (Gen 37:28) Midian was a son of Abraham via Keturah, as Genesis 25:1-4 reads:

• Abraham had taken another wife, whose name was Keturah. 2 She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah. 3 Jokshan was the father of Sheba and Dedan; the descendants of Dedan were the Ashurites, the Letushites and the Leummites. 4 The sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanok, Abida and Eldaah. All these were descendants of Keturah.

Given Midianites, weren't from Ishmael, yet were called Ishmaelites, then either they were called such due to their lifestyle or land inhabited. They inhabited much the same land. So then, it seems Ishmaelites more became representative of a nation of diverse tribes (Abraham's offspring through his other wives).

It seems Ishmael's great nation, absorbed Abraham's offspring outside Sarah. Note, Gen 17:20 says, "I will make him a great nation." Not "I will make them [12 tribes] a great nation." The Midians themselves appear great, and no doubt they became a very strong tribe to the east of Egypt and up around Israel. If they too formed part of the Ishmaelites, then so much greater the nation of Ishmael. I read here, the term "Ishmaelite" may even be synomous with the term "Midianites", yet then surely different terms are to some extent purposeful (in Joesph story), I think Ishmaelites was more of a confederation of tribes included, but not limited to, the tribes of Ishmael's sons.

• Midian [N] [E] [H]
  (strife ), a son of Abraham and Keturah, ( Genesis 25:2 ; 1 Chronicles 1:32 ) progenitor of the Midianites, or Arabians dwelling principally in the desert north of the peninsula of Arabia. Southward they extended along the eastern shore of the Gulf of Eyleh (Sinus AElaniticus ); and northward they stretched along the eastern frontier of Palestine. The "land of Midian," the place to which Moses fled after having killed the Egyptian, ( Exodus 2:15 Exodus 2:21 ) or the portion of it specially referred to, was probably the peninsula of Sinai. The influence of the Midianties on the Israelites was clearly most evil, and directly tended to lead them from the injunctions of Moses. The events at Shittim occasioned the injunction to vex Midian and smite them. After a lapse of some years, the Midianites appear again as the enemies of the Israelites, oppressing them for seven years, but are finally defeated with great slaughter by Gideon. [GIDEON] The Midianites are described as true Arabs, and possessed cattle and flocks and camels as the sand of the seashore for multitude. The spoil taken in the war of both Moses and of Gideon is remarkable. ( Numbers 31:22 ; Judges 8:21 Judges 8:24-26 ) We have here a wealthy Arab nation, living by plunder, delighting in finery; and, where forays were impossible, carrying ont he traffic southward into Arabia, the land of gold --if not naturally, by trade-- and across to Chaldea, or into the rich plains of Egypt. (http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/midian/)

I will add, we should not far remove the eventuation of nations from their context. Such is just good exposition, to look for a plainer and simple meaning. God established a covenant with Isaac, (Gen 17:19) who passed this on the blessing to Jacob (Israel) which landed with his sons who formed the tribes of Israel. We have a next to immediate revealing in Scripture of where and with whom this covenant was established.

So then, to claim that the nation of Ishmael represents a religion which formed way outside the context of Scripture, such is really a push. Better to understand this great nation of Ishmael, was indeed also revealed in Scripture -- all that which is spoken of (i.e., including the Midians above and more). It seems to me like they spanned a lot of territory, and that were were like a large confederation of tribes. Something more is needed to align Muhammad and Islam specifically to such, especially when we have a simpler interpretation present.

Thanks, now I will spent a few hours looking into what you looked in to.

Just added this part also, which is obviously important to the idea that Ishmaelites were like a confederation of tribes, including Abraham's other sons (in light of the passage with Joseph being handed over to the Midianites who were also called Ishmaelites):

Kurieuo wrote: Note Gen 25:5-6:

• 5 Abraham left everything he owned to Isaac. 6 But while he was still living, he gave gifts to the sons of his concubines and sent them away from his son Isaac to the land of the east.

Kurieuo wrote:

Christian2 wrote:Gensis 17:

20 As for Ishmael, I have heard you. I will certainly bless him; I will make him fruitful and will multiply him greatly. He will father 12 tribal leaders, and I will make him into a great nation.

What does "great nation" mean? Does it mean great religion?

Thanks.

So I decided to spend a couple of hours looking into this, and will share my own thoughts.

Genesis 25:13-15 has the 12 tribal names:

• These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, listed in the order of their birth: Nebaioth the firstborn of Ishmael, Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam, 14 Mishma, Dumah, Massa, 15 Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish and Kedemah. 16 These were the sons of Ishmael, and these are the names of the twelve tribal rulers according to their settlements and camps. 17 Ishmael lived a hundred and thirty-seven years. He breathed his last and died, and he was gathered to his people. 18 His descendants settled in the area from Havilah to Shur, near the eastern border of Egypt, as you go toward Ashur. And they lived in hostility toward all the tribes related to them.

Joseph was sold to the Ishmaelites who sold him in Egypt, Midianites in particular. (Gen 37:28) Midian was a son of Abraham via Keturah, as Genesis 25:1-4 reads:

• Abraham had taken another wife, whose name was Keturah. 2 She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak and Shuah. 3 Jokshan was the father of Sheba and Dedan; the descendants of Dedan were the Ashurites, the Letushites and the Leummites. 4 The sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanok, Abida and Eldaah. All these were descendants of Keturah.

Given Midianites, weren't from Ishmael, yet were called Ishmaelites, then either they were called such due to their lifestyle or land inhabited. They inhabited much the same land. So then, it seems Ishmaelites more became representative of a nation of diverse tribes (4including Abraham's offspring through his other wives). Note Gen 25:5-6:

• 5 Abraham left everything he owned to Isaac. 6 But while he was still living, he gave gifts to the sons of his concubines and sent them away from his son Isaac to the land of the east.

It seems Ishmael's great nation, absorbed Abraham's offspring outside Sarah. Note, Gen 17:20 says, "I will make him a great nation." Not "I will make them [12 tribes] a great nation." The Midians themselves appear great, and no doubt they became a very strong tribe to the east of Egypt and up around Israel. If they too formed part of the Ishmaelites, then so much greater the nation of Ishmael. I read here, the term "Ishmaelite" may even be synomous with the term "Midianites", yet then surely different terms are to some extent purposeful (in Joesph story), I think Ishmaelites was more of a confederation of tribes included, but not limited to, the tribes of Ishmael's sons.

• Midian [N] [E] [H]
  (strife ), a son of Abraham and Keturah, ( Genesis 25:2 ; 1 Chronicles 1:32 ) progenitor of the Midianites, or Arabians dwelling principally in the desert north of the peninsula of Arabia. Southward they extended along the eastern shore of the Gulf of Eyleh (Sinus AElaniticus ); and northward they stretched along the eastern frontier of Palestine. The "land of Midian," the place to which Moses fled after having killed the Egyptian, ( Exodus 2:15 Exodus 2:21 ) or the portion of it specially referred to, was probably the peninsula of Sinai. The influence of the Midianties on the Israelites was clearly most evil, and directly tended to lead them from the injunctions of Moses. The events at Shittim occasioned the injunction to vex Midian and smite them. After a lapse of some years, the Midianites appear again as the enemies of the Israelites, oppressing them for seven years, but are finally defeated with great slaughter by Gideon. [GIDEON] The Midianites are described as true Arabs, and possessed cattle and flocks and camels as the sand of the seashore for multitude. The spoil taken in the war of both Moses and of Gideon is remarkable. ( Numbers 31:22 ; Judges 8:21 Judges 8:24-26 ) We have here a wealthy Arab nation, living by plunder, delighting in finery; and, where forays were impossible, carrying ont he traffic southward into Arabia, the land of gold --if not naturally, by trade-- and across to Chaldea, or into the rich plains of Egypt. (http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/midian/)

I will add, we should not far remove the eventuation of nations from their context. Such is just good exposition, to look for a plainer and simple meaning. God established a covenant with Isaac, (Gen 17:19) who passed this on the blessing to Jacob (Israel) which landed with his sons who formed the tribes of Israel. We have a next to immediate revealing in Scripture of where and with whom this covenant was established.

So then, to claim that the nation of Ishmael represents a religion which formed way outside the context of Scripture, such is really a push. Better to understand this great nation of Ishmael, was indeed also revealed in Scripture -- all that which is spoken of (i.e., including the Midians above and more). It seems to me like they spanned a lot of territory, and that were were like a large confederation of tribes. Something more is needed to align Muhammad and Islam specifically to such, especially when we have a simpler interpretation present.

What is boils down to is that the covenant went through Isaac and not Ishmael.

yes, and all of those of the covenant got deported to Babylon, let's not forget.

Christian2 wrote:Gensis 17:

20 As for Ishmael, I have heard you. I will certainly bless him; I will make him fruitful and will multiply him greatly. He will father 12 tribal leaders, and I will make him into a great nation.

What does "great nation" mean? Does it mean great religion?

Thanks.

Nations are the people, which even "country" does not conflate with. A country is a state, which might contain many nations.

'Nations' are made up of People. The United States of America is a 'one nation under God' -- A country made up of many states. People making up the various states in the country probably come from many different other countries or nations.

"What does 'great nation' mean? Does it mean great religion? A great nation -- probably politically powerful / strong army? But not necessarily connected with religion.


agree -- covenant went through Isaac / not Ishmael.

Isn't that why the Gaza strip area always been in conflict? It's the Promised Land and it was given to Abraham's descendents. And Isaac was the descendent not Ishmael.

crochet1949 wrote:'Nations' are made up of People.

exactly

crochet1949 wrote: The United States of America is a 'one nation under God'

that is exactly what it is not, although it desires to be perceived in that way. We have many, many nations in the country known as "USA," right? Sioux Nations, Cherokee Nations, Eskimo Nations, Black Nations, none of which have much in common at all with us, or us with them. It is strictly wishful thinking to call a country a nation. An invitation to perceive oneself as superior imo. And the supposed leader of this "great nation" is not even legally in the same jurisdiction. Washington DC is not even in your country, legally speaking. The god "Columbia" was invoked as the territory of those you serve, iow. So we are being played from both ends, lol.

agree -- covenant went through Isaac / not Ishmael.

but that is a spiritual covenant, and Ishmael was circumcised; the spiritual significance of that should not be ignored imo.