Riscontri positivi per “Arabi non discendenti di Ismaele”

Apologetica Maometto Storia

Il noto articolo, sin da quando è stata lanciato,〈Arabi: non discendenti di Ismaele〉(F.Maggio ne esamina il mantra) evangelici italiani, compreso  intellettuali da Università di rilievo Internazionale e principali leader di missioni internazionali hanno approvato e commentato l’iniziativa.  


Saggio persuasivo, fonti credibili, prove solide in ambito: biblico, archeologico, storico, antropologico, genealogico e filologico. Un mese di ricerca, ricerca avvalorata da accademici internazionali esperti in materia.

Di seguito i riconoscimenti di 16 leader italiani e di esperti internazionali su questo settore,ai quali ho sottoposto la mia ricerca. 
Concordano pienamente riguardo falle nel modo di pensare di molti cristiani evangelici,con tutte le conseguenze negative.

Dr. L.C. (Studioso – ricercatore): Eccellente lavoro. Smonta un luogo comune che tanti avevano e che anch’io in fin dei conti avevo “sposato”, benché non mi convincesse a fondo. Ora, grazie al Signore e a te, posso avere elementi per smontare quest’ennesima falsa pretesa del mondo musulmano”.


Dr. G.B. (Pastore): “Lo studio mi sembra interessante, approfondito e ben documentato; ho qualche perplessità a farne un argomento di discussione in ambito cristiano; mi sembrerebbe più adatto ad un confronto vero e proprio  con la realtà islamica e i suoi esponenti. Per la realtà evangelica invece ti consiglierei la stesura di un piccolo saggio chiaro e conciso, da distribuire nelle varie chiese per informare i credenti stessi che possono essere caduti nell’errore di considerare Abramo il comune progenitore delle due fedi; questa la mia opinione”.


Dr. D. S. (Anziano): “Ho avuto modo di leggere attentamente il tuo scritto ed ho apprezzato molto l’approccio che hai utilizzato. Indubbiamente il voler confutare qualcosa basandosi sul testo biblico è l’approccio migliore ed è quello che io prediligo. Le ragioni che esponi per confutare “la presunzione” in base alla quale gli arabi discendono da Abramo sulla base del testo biblico sono molto valide e ben argomentate. Non mi addentro nel disquisire sulle varie motivazioni che hai fornito perché non ne ho la competenza ma mi limito a dire che rileggerò il tuo scritto per approfondire l’argomento e pregherò affinché il Signore possa toccare i cuori delle persone che lo leggeranno, dandoti saggezza su come sviluppare in futuro delle discussioni o promuovere degli incontri su questo tema soprattutto con persone di etnia araba”.


Dr. R. R. (Anziano): “Leggendo il tuo brillante studio (Arabi, non discendenti di Ismaele) riflettevo su una questione apologetica. La Parola ci dice che gli arabi mentono riguardo Abramo. Ma forse il loro problema è che, pur stimando la Scrittura come testo più antico del Corano, in realtà non hanno abbastanza conoscenza biblica per parlare di quanto dice. E non si rendono conto che per le prove che presume il Corano, essi non hanno alcun fondamento. Il punto è: “ma che ne sanno di Abramo??”.
“Come fanno a conoscere Abramo??”.
“Lo sanno, non grazie a Maometto, ma grazie a quello che la Bibbia ha lasciato scritto secoli prima! Maometto ha solo costruito la sua storia, usando Abramo (che era conosciuto dalla Scrittura) ma deviando la verità per i suoi personali scopi. Dovremmo quindi riportarli all’autorità biblica, come testo più antico e autorevole delle loro prove coraniche. Allo stesso modo non si dovrebbero vantare di essere discendenti di una stirpe più antica di Abramo. Quindi non vorrei si verificasse lo stesso politically correct che è stato perpetrato ingiustamente con Abramo anche con Noè. In questo caso, sarebbe vero che tutti veniamo da lui, ma questo ci associa in virtù del genere umano, senza particolari promesse teologiche. Ma sicuramente il Corano metterà la storia da una prospettiva diversa, esprimendo Noè servo di Allah e in comunicazione con lui e non con il vero Dio”.


D.M. (Responsabile Scuola Biblica): “Associare Islam-Ebraismo-Cristianesimo come fonti di verità alternative significa di fatto accettare che a Dio si può arrivare attraverso molteplici opzioni; in questo modo l’Islam perde il suo valore così come l’Ebraismo ed il Cristianesimo (…). Gli ismaeliti come gli edomiti, sono chiaramente popolazioni semitiche ed abramitiche, ma non sono ne la grande popolazione araba ne tantomeno la fonte dell’Islam. Associare l’Islam ad Abramo non solo è un errore teologico ma anche storico”. (Cit. D.M.)


Dr. D.H. (World Expert Missiologist among Muslims): “This assumption of continuity is indeed woven into the warp and woof of modern missions.  The following statement was prominent on the Frontiers website (it seems they’ve removed it just recently): “We are spiritually related to Muslims. Muslims look to ‘Ibrahim’ (Abraham) as ‘our forefather’ (Romans 4:1). Since those who follow Jesus call Abraham ‘the father of all who believe’ (Romans 4:11), we share our lineage. Like us, Muslims believe in one true God, the Creator of all peoples”. (Souce Frontiers #2)


Dr. P. Y. (World Expert-Executive Director): “God’s people should search into these issues to reveal the truth as God planted it in History. Myths should be debunked, and God can use these things to shake the foundations of people’s worldview – those who have built their beliefs on lies (…)”.


Dr. M.D. (Pastor, World Expert missiologist among Muslims): “I believe the point is that the Bible itself gives us no basis for considering Ishmael to be the father of the the Arabs. On the contrary. This means that the promises of Genesis 16:12 and Genesis 17:20 to Ishmael have nothing to do with Islam or the Arabs.  There is no Ishmaelite inheritance in Islam. and in particular the prophecy about Ishmael, that “He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.” has nothing to do with rise of Islam”Faysal Malick’s book is a good example of the kind of view that I was arguing against. Islam is not an Ishmaelite spiritual inheritance. It also means that many Christian writers’ linking of Islam to the history of the family of Abraham in Genesis is baseless. Indeed to make this association is evidence of the Islamization of Christian thought. I see this as quite a deep spiritual issue affecting how the church sees Islam”.


Dr. E.A. (World expert -Pastor former-Muslim Bangla Desh): “When we try to compare or contrast between the religions of Christianity and Islam, we should remember that there is no relationship between these two. Islam tried to cross their border by claiming that Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon, many others from the Old Testament and Isa [Jesus] as their prophets. But since there is a sharp and covenantal dividing line between Ismael and Isaac, and after Abraham all prophets above are from the line of Isaac, so they are never the prophets of Islam. Islam tried to do what some of the present mission agencies are trying to consider the sons of Ismael as their half-brothers”.


Dr. D.A. (Reverend – World Expert missiologist among Muslims): “As to the article, I found it very interesting. I’m not an expert in the various genealogies presented, but I found myself at the end asking, and what? I mean, the majority of Muslims today are not Arabs at all. My understanding of claiming that Islam was an ‘Abrahamic faith’ was that Abraham is seen as a foundational spiritual figure for Muslims, as he is for Jews and Christians. I never even thought that ‘Abrahamic faith’ meant that the three religions traced the ancestry of their founders (Moses, Jesus, Muhammad) back to Abraham. My own response to this has always been the question: Whose Abraham? Christians and Jews can use the same Torah text to at least have a discussion on the topic, while Muslims generally assume the Torah is corrupted. Meanwhile, both Jews and Christians do not regard the Qur’an as being of any revelatory value whatsoever (with the exception of some IM, folks, perhaps)”.


Dr. A.S. (Pastor Among Arabs – World Expert missiologist among Muslims): “It is refreshing to read these quotes. This is good tonic in light of the “maximalist” thinking that is so pervasive among professing evangelicals”.

Dr. J.S. Pastor Among Arabs – World Expert missiologist among Muslims) This discussion makes me thing about worldview considerations. A true Christian cannot help but view the world through his/her worldview glasses. A Muslim cannot help but view the world through their Islamic worldview glasses. This is somewhat encapsulated by the title of a thesis, which talks about a “Qur’ānic Filter.” In the same way, everything biblical, including Abraham is passed through the Islamic filter. No wonder, as Fred mentions, presto, some of the Islam-dust gets on to Abe and he becomes a model Muslim. What gets very tricky is when IMrs try put a set of Islamic glasses over their Christian ones. The distortion is obvious—except to those wearing this set.

Dr. F.F.  (Arab – Former Muslim – International Coordinator World Expert missiologist among Muslims) The underlying issue should be re- emphasized. Why does Islam   attempt to link to Muhammad to Ishmael and Abraham? Whereas Jesus had the testimonial support of myriad Old Testament prophecies, as well as the testimony of John, Jesus’ own miracles, and the Father (John 5:33-38), Muhammad had no such legitimizing or corroborating testimony. No holy book exists which legitimizes Muhammad.

The Jews of Medina resolutely rejected Muhammad’s prophetic claims.Craving this legitimacy, Muhammad resorts to “circular prophecy.” In other words, Muhammad receives revelations about himself that are put into the mouths of previous prophets. The most famous is Sura 61:6 when Jesus states that a prophet is coming after him whose name is “Ahmad.” Most Muslims, without thinking about the logical fallacy, will cite this as external confirmation of Muhammad, even though the verse was given by Muhammad himself as a part of the Qur’an.

Regarding this discussion at hand, Muhammad again uses circular prophecy to enlist the support of Abraham. We read in Sura 2:125 and forward that Abraham and Ishmael begin to purify the Kaaba. In v. 128 Abraham prays collectively on behalf of himself and Ishmael, “Make us Muslims [in submission] to You and from our descendants a Muslim nation [in submission] to You.” Here,   a Muslim nation is “ummatan muslimatan,” presaging the Islamic umma. Then in v. 129, Abraham again prays in the first-person plural on behalf of himself and Ishmael, “Our Lord, and send among them a messenger from themselves who will recite to them Your verses and teach them the Book and wisdom and purify them. Indeed, You are the Exalted in Might, the Wise.” The messenger (rasoolan) is of course Muhammad, whom Abraham prays Allah will raise up from Ishmael’s seed.

I suggest that much of the research Muslims strain to obtain is simply to justify Muhammad’s attempt at legitimacy. However, since the Qur’anic testimony came from Muhammad himself, it should not be accepted as definitive. Even  Jesus said, “If I alone testimony about myself, my testimony is not true” (John 5:31). 


Dr. G.H. (International Coordinator World Expert missiologist among Muslims) Brothers, I have a busy weekend and I just sat down to read this fascinating discussion. All have good points. Someone should put it all together. I think that we need to present these arguments as possibilities. I do not agree with one or the other completely. The truth is only known to God, But as we analyze history in light of the Bible we have some non-negotiable truths and some unverified theorems.

If we present ourselves this way and admit to what is absolute truth and what is integration of historical and Biblical narratives, we would make a stronger impact. unverified theorems. There is no historical evidence for the idea of Muhammad or the Arabs have anything to do with Ishmael except a spiritual association.


Dr. E.A. (ArabFormer Muslim – International Coordinator World Expert missiologist       among Muslims). To my knowledge, there is no mention of the Arabs calling themselves Ishmaelite or claiming that their heritage is linked to Ishmael till Mohammad did so. The discussion here is not the heritage of all Muslims, but the Arabs. As you know Muslims now are multi race and nationalities. 

Muhammad wanted legitimacy to his new political ideology cloaked in a religion by attaching himself and his new “faith” to Ishmael/Abraham. There are many in the Christian world keep trying to give the Arab race credit or prominence within the Bible. Such as Dr. Maalouf a professor of Islamic Studies at SWBTS in Ft. Worth, TX. did his Phd dissertation at DTS where he claimed that the Magi were Arabs, I disagree with his conclusion. I have been accused of being an Arab hater because what I am saying here, I am not, I am an Arab. But, we have to look at this issue from what the Scripture teaches.

I also agree with Mark and I quote: “Indeed to make this association is evidence of the Islamization of Christian thought.” This gives more ammunition to the IMers to develop more heretical methods.

Having said that, I don’t bring this issue with Arabs until they bring it up. Same with the issue that some Arab Christians believe in replacement theology, which I don’t.

If a Muslim brings up Abraham and other familiar biblical name because they are mentioned in the Qur’an, I just question the Muslim to who these people were? What did they do? what were their mission/calling? Then I help them see the difference from the Bible and go from there. I always help fellow believers and the Church that Islam’s spirit is an anti-Christ spirit. That means, everything in the Qur’an and Muhammad’s teaching is corrupt and Anti-Bible. Meaning, Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, and Jesus (Isa) might be mentioned in the Qur’an, but they are not the same people of the Bible. When witnessing to Muslims I encounter, my goal is to have them accept the Bible as the true word of God and start from there.

                 

Condividi:

Commenta