|
|
|
QURAN VS BIBLE
A) WAS JESUS CHRIST CRUCIFIED AND RESURRECTED FROM THE DEAD?
1) THE TESTIMONY OF THE QUR'AN
Text, translation and commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Cairo, Egypt, 1938:
# S. IV 157-158:
157.
"That they [the Jews]said (in boast),
"We killed Christ Jesus
The son of Mary,
The Apostle of God";-
But they killed him not,
Nor crucified him,
But so it was made
To appear to them,
And those who differ
Therein are full of doubts,
With no (certain) knowledge,
But only conjecture to follow,
For of a surety
They killed him not:-
158.
Nay, God raised him up
Unto Himself; and God
Is exalted in power, Wise;-
If Christ was not crucified dead and buried then it was the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on humanity - for billions have believed in this to their dying moments; millions have researched the accounts exhaustively and have affirmed the truth of Christ's death & resurrection; and millions have sought in innumerable ways to refute the historical accounts of Christ's crucifixion, death, burial and resurrection without success.
To say that it was all untrue is highly improbable - especially given the absolute lack of any historical testimony available to the contrary - after 2000 years of searching!
The 27 writings of the New Testament all testify in numerous ways by numerous different people especially as to more than a few absolutely harmonious EYE WITNESS accounts of the historical event of Christ's crucifixion, death, burial and resurrection.
4) THE WRITTEN HISTORICAL TESTIMONY OUTSIDE OF THE BIBLE
And there is even more evidence outside of the Bible itself which alone demands a verdict in favor of believing that these events did occur.
The following text is from the book "Evidence that Demands A Verdict" Vol 1 (Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tn., 1979, Campus Crusade for Christ), by Josh McDowell with page number references given in [brackets] after each section quoted.
a) CORNELIUS TACITUS (born A.D. 52-54)
A Roman historian, in 112 A.D., Governor of Asia, son-in-law of Julius Agricola who was the Governor of Britain A.D. 80-84. Writing of the reign of Nero, Tacitus alludes to the death of Christ and to the existence of Christians at Rome:
"But not all the relief could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. [atrocious offences - by worshipping God and denying the diety of the false gods].
Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, suppressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also." Annals XV.44 [p.84].
"A satirist of the second century, who spoke scornfully of Christ and the Christians. He connected them with the Synagogues of Palestine and alluded to Christ as: "...the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world...Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshipping that crucified sophist himself and living under his laws."
The Passing Peregrinus.
c) FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS (born A.D. 37)
"A Jewish historian, became a Pharisee at age 19; in A.D. 66 he was the commander of Jewish forces in Galilee. After being captured, he was attached to the Roman headquarters..................
"Josephus, a Jewish historian, writing at the end of the first century A.D., had this fascinating passage in Antiquities, 18.3.3:
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had fortold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day." Antiquities XViii.33. (Early Second century).
Attempts have been made to show that Josephus could not have written this...However, "this passage," writes Michael Green in Man Alive, "was in the text of Josephus used by Eusebius in the fourth century....
.....And it is all the more remarkable when we remember that, so far from being sympathetic to Christians, Josephus was a Jew writing to please the Romans. This story would not have pleased them in the slightest. He would hardly have included it if it were not true." [p.187].
The Arabic text of the passage is as follows: "At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good, and (He) was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon His discipleship. They reported that He had appeared to them three days after His crucifixion and that He was alive; accordingly, He was perhaps the Messiah concerning Whom the prophets have recounted wonders."
The above passage is found in the Arabic manuscript entitled: "Kitab Al-Unwan Al-Mukallal Bi-Fadail Al-Hikma Al-Mutawwaj Bi-Anwa Al-Falsafa Al-Manduh Bi-Haqaq Al-Marifa." The approximate translation would be:
"Book of History Guided by All the Virtues of Wisdom. Crowned with Various Philosophies and Blessed by the Truth of Knowledge."
The above manuscript composed by Bishop Apapius in the 10th century has a section commencing with: "We have found in many books of the philosophers that they refer to the day of the crucifixion of Christ." Then he gives a list and quotes portions of the ancient works. Some of the works are familiar to modern scholars and others are not.
d) PHLEGON, A FIRST CENTURY HISTORIAN
[As quoted by Philopon]:
"And about this darkness...Phlegon recalls it in the Olympiads (the title of his history)." He says that "Phlegon mentioned the eclipse which took place during the crucifixion of the Lord Christ, and no other (eclipse), it is clear that he did not know from his sources about any (similar) eclipse in previous times...and this is shown by the historical account itself of Tiberius Caesar."
e) LETTER OF MARA BAR-SERAPION
FF Bruce records that there is:
"'... in the British Museum an interesting manuscript preserving the text of a letter written some time later than A.D. 73, but how much later we cannot be sure. This letter was sent by a Syrian named Mara Bar-Serpion to his son Serapion. Mara Bar-Serapion was in prison at the time, but he wrote to encourage his son in the pursuit of wisdom, and pointed out that those who persecuted wise men were overtaken by misfortune. He instances the deaths of Socrates, Pythagoras and Christ:
"'What advantage did the 'Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished...the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion..."
About A.D. 150, Justin Martyr, addressing his Defence of Christianity to the Emperor Antoninus Pius, referred him to Pilate's report, which Justin supposed must be preserved in the imperial archives. But the words, "They pierced my hands and feet," he says, "are a description of the nails that were fixed in his hands and his feet on the cross; and after he was crucified, those who crucified him cast lots for his garments, and divided them among themselves; and that these things were so, you may learn from the 'Acts' which were recorded under Pontius Pilate."
Babylonian Talmud. "...and hanged him [Jesus] on the eve of the passover."
Comments in the Baraila are of great historical value:
"On the eve of the Passover they hanged Yeshu (of Nazareth) and the herald went before him for forty days saying (Yeshu of Nazareth) is going forth to be stoned in that he hath practiced sorcery and beguiled and led astray Israel. Let everyone knowing aught in his defence come and plead for him. But they found aught in his defence and hanged him on the eve of Passover." (Babylonia Sanhedrin 43a). - "Eve of Passover" [p. 81-81]
J. N. D. Anderson, citing Cambridge professor C.F.D. Moule, asserts, "From the very first the conviction that Jesus had been raised from death has been that by which their [the Christians] very existence has stood or fallen. There was no other motive to account for them, to explain them...At no point within the New Testament is there any evidence that the Christians stood for an original philosophy of life or an original ethic. Their sole function is to bear witness to what they claim as an event - the raising of Jesus from among the dead....The one really distinctive thing for which the Christians stood was their declaration that Jesus had been raised from the dead according to God's design, and the consequent estimate of Him as in a unique sense Son of God and representative man, and the resulting conception of the way to reconciliation."
"As an historic fact, it has been His resurrection which has enabled men to believe in His official exaltation over humanity. It is not a mere question of the moral influence of His character, example, and teaching. It is that their present surrender to Him as their Redeemer has been promoted by this belief, and could not be justified without it...." [pp. 188-189]
When an event takes place in history and there are enough people alive who were eyewitnesses of it or had participated in the event, and when the information is published, one is able to verify the validity of an historical event ........ "No one could now issue a biography of Queen Victoria, who died thirty-one years ago, full of anecdotes which were quite untrue. They would be contradicted at once. They would certainly not be generally accepted and passed on as true.
[The writer refers to an event in his time to illustrate his point that writers within thirty years of the event of Jesus' death and resurrection had to be truthful or find their writings soon refuted - that did not happen]
Hence, there is a great improbability that the account of the resurrection given by Mark, which agrees substantially with that given in the other Gospels, is a pure invention.
This mythical theory has had to be abandoned because it will not bear close scrutiny...." [pp. 189-190]
"The evidence for our Lord's life and death and resurrection may be, and often has been, shown to be satisfactory; it is good according to the common rules for distinguishing good evidence from bad."
[The same rules which would establish whether or not the Qur' an is authentic when applied to the Bible have established the Bible AS IT EXISTS TODAY AS ABSOLUTELY AUTHENTIC AND CREDIBLE].
"Thousands and tens of thousands of persons have gone through it piece by piece, as carefully as every judge summing up on a most important cause. I have myself [The writer: Wilbur M. Smith] done it many times over, not to persuade others but to satisfy myself. I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know of no one fact in history of mankind which is proved by better and fuller evidence of every sort, to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great sign which God hath given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead." [p. 191]
[The numerous writers and eyewitnesses which are responsible for the absolutely consistent account of Christ's crucifixion, death, burial and resurrection cannot simply be dismissed by saying that they were deceived en masse - the whole lot of them - and that then they all testified in absolutely perfect & consistent detail the account of the events to which they were deceived; or that their accounts were so contrived or altered later so to be so miraculously and perfectly consistent with one another as it now appears in Scripture - especially miraculous considering that their accounts whether deceived or not totally agree - IN DETAIL- with one another and with the Old Testament predictions of those events - those events also being fully supported by archaeological evidence. My question to those who doubt the authenticity and divine inspiration of what we have today as the bible is: "How much historical authentication, miraculous uniformity and miraculously perfect outcome of prophecy do you need to admit to yourself that the Bible indeed is the Word of God???
Contrary to popular belief there are thousands of copies of the original writings of the Bible which DO NOT vary in the details of ANY Scriptural teaching or event. Copies of what others say are the true writings of the Old and New Testaments simply have not surfaced as a reality for thousands of years].
As Michael Green points out, crucifixions were "not uncommon in Palestine."
Pilate required certification of Christ's death. Of this Green remarks: "Four executioners came to examine Him, before a friend, Joseph of Arimathea, was allowed to take away the body for burial". [p. 198]
[Scripture records this in a number of places. If this account of Pilate's verification were untrue, then other writings would long ago have refuted what Christians were saying about the Lord's death and Christianity would have been a religion of the past - based on a hoax.
For the Christians have nothing, not even a good religion, if Christ did not die on the cross and then come back to life. So instead of all the persecutions of Christians throughout history, why didn't everyone just refute the story of Christ's resurrection? Why has this story survived so many vicious attempts to quash it? Could it not be that the truth has prevailed with the supernatural preserving power of God Himself? Why would God Himself permit this story of Christ's death, burial and resurrection continue despite so much opposition if it were so false?]
[The Jews themselves could have refuted the story of Christ's death years ago if the story was false. They had every reason to do so because they did not want their authority disturbed by another prophet who started another religion by becoming a martyr. Why didn't they?]
Why did the Jews ask Pilate to place a guard at Christ's tomb, if no such sepulcher existed?
"Now on the next day, which is the one after the preparation, the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered together with Pilate, and said, 'Sir, we remember that when he was still alive that deceiver said, "After three days I am to rise again." Therefore give orders for the grave to be made secure until the third day, lest the disciples come and steal him away and say to the people, "He has risen from the dead," and the last deception will be worse than the first.' Pilate said to them, 'You have a guard; go, make it as secure as you know how.' And they went and made the grave secure, and along with the guard they set a seal on the stone" (Matthew 27:62-66). [p. 203]
[The above account could simply have been refuted years ago by any number of people if it is untrue - by the Jewish authorities, the Roman historians, Pilate's historians etc., etc. Why does this story of guarding a tomb with the remains of Christ persist?] When Paul spoke to the Athenians about Christ, they had no answer for his claims:
"Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer" (Acts 17:32).
They merely laughed it off, because they could not understand how a man could rise from the dead. They did not even make an attempt to make a defence for their position. They, in essence said:
"Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is already made up."
Why did Paul see such unbelief in Greece unlike that in Jerusalem? Because while in Jerusalem the fact of the empty tomb was indisputable (it was right there for people to examine), in Athens the evidence was far away, so that the emptiness of the tomb was not common knowledge. Paul's hearers had not checked the story out for themselves, and rather than go to any trouble to investigate, they were satisfied to jest in ignorance. [p. 226]
[...much like people will do when they read this short study: they won't finish reading or verify what I have presented here to see if there is any truth in it].
The empty tomb is that silent testimony to the resurrection of Christ which has never been refuted. The Romans and Jews could not produce Christ's body or explain where it went, but nonetheless they refused to believe. Not because of the insufficiency of evidence but in spite of its sufficiency do men still reject the resurrection. [p. 226]
B) THE CONDITION OF MAN IS TOTALLY DEPRAVED
1) THE TESTIMONY OF THE QUR'AN
The Qu'r an teaches that man can live a life of purity, goodness and peace. Compare C.40.
The Qur' an teaches that whoever submits his whole self to God and is a doer of good will get his reward with his Lord; On such shall be no fear, Nor shall they grieve. Cp. s. II. 110-112
The Bible clearly teaches the total depravity of man and man's inability to contribute anything toward his salvation. This is made clear in the five books that Moses wrote and all the way through Scripture to the end of the Book of The Revelation.
The Bible teaches throughout that no one seeks to do true divine good - no one truly can, no not one - that all the human good that man does to please God is as filthy menstrual rags and is rejected by God because it comes out of man's contaminated sin nature (Isaiah 64:6 & Romans chapter 3).
The Bible teaches that man needs a Savior through Whom man's salvation can exclusively depend. Cp Genesis & Romans chapter 3).
The God of the Bible says that this is impossible for man to do because every single man who ever lived is contaminated with a sin nature. Cp Genesis chapter 3 & Romans chapter 3 - detailed exegesis available upon request.
The reliability of the Bible due to so many manuscripts, (literally thousands), which are virtually identical, the proven meticulous way the Jewish scribes copied each old testament manuscript and the lack of manuscripts which are significantly different proves that we have precisely what the writers of Scripture originally wrote - both Old and New Testament.
The fact that instead of just one author the Bible has 40 - each writer not contradicting any of the others in the slightest - testifying to God's hand in producing such a miraculous work.
The many prophecies which have literally been fulfilled over the years AS PRECISELY WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE testifies to the divine inspiration of the Bible. NO OTHER BOOK CAN TESTIFY TO SUCH A DIVINE CLAIM.
If one were to say that the Bible as it appears today is contaminated then how does one explain the many prophecies which have been fulfilled and which are being fulfilled at this moment in perfect agreement with that which appears in the supposedly contaminated version? Or the Bible's miraculous uniformity and inerrancy?
This is supported in history by the repeated actions of mankind to fall further and further away from God. No other book of religion teaches this doctrine which reflects the true condition of mankind, and man's total lack of innate redeeming features.
C) ABRAHAM'S SON OF THE PROMISE IS ISAAC NOT ISHMAEL
The Qur' an states
[S. II 124]:
"And remember that Abraham Was tried by His Lord
With certain commands, Which he fulfilled: He said: "I will make thee
An Im am to the Nations."
He pleaded: "And also
(Im ams) from my offspring!"
He answered: "But My Promise
Is not within the reach
Of evil-doers."
If the above statement is true then Abraham, who disobeyed God a number of times and sinned a number of times as Scripture & history indicate has put himself out of the reach of God's Promise in spite of his obedience at other times according to the Qur' an.
The Bible indicates that God's Promise is unilateral - that no matter what, Abraham will be the recipient of the Promise so long as Abraham accepted God's Promise by faith at some time in his life. And that's just what Abraham did. And what did God say through Scripture? "Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness." - FAITH AND FAITH ALONE IN GOD'S PROMISE OF A MESSIAH-SAVIOR.(Gen 15:6)
Abraham's son of the Promise of God is not indicated as Ishmael in the Bible that we have today [AND always], rather it is indicated that it is Isaac who is that son of the Promise. Cp Gen 17:15-19; 21:1-2.
Scripture indicates that the son who is God's promise to Abraham must be in the line of descendancy to the Messiah - the Lord Jesus Christ. The genealogy of Jesus Christ as presented in Matthew 1:1-16 from the birth mother's side and Luke 3:23-38 from the legal human father's side DOES NOT INCLUDE ISHMAEL AT ALL BUT RATHER INCLUDES ISAAC.
So Jesus Christ is a descendant in His humanity directly in the line from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob and not through Abraham to Ishmael.
What is the significance of this?
In Genesis 3:15 God said that He will put enmity between Satan and THE WOMAN and between Satan's offspring - unbelievers - and the woman's (not the man's) seed. That seed - He will crush the head of Satan - i.e. deal Satan a mortal blow; and Satan will bruise His - that Seed's heel, i.e. wound Him but not mortally - referring to Christ's crucifixion and death.
The seed is Christ - why?
The normal seed comes from the man, but God said the seed of the WOMAN. Hence, some kind of supernatural birth.
If you follow down the line of genealogy of Ishmael you will not find anyone who was born of the SEED OF THE WOMAN. You will find such a man, Jesus Christ Who was born of the seed of the woman Mary. So Who indeed was the promised son of Abraham? Answer: Isaac.
Later in Scripture, God reveals the birth of Christ to be a virgin birth accomplished by the supernatural miracle working of God the Holy Spirit.
(Cp. Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38; 2:1-7).
Context here and in every other passage of the Bible which teaches this doctrine of a coming Messiah-Savior Who would defeat Satan and break Satan's control over humanity indicates that the word seed is to refer to a singular seed, i.e. an individual man.
Cp Gal 3:16.
The promise to Abraham by God indicates that Abraham's seed was to flow directly to this Messiah-Savior.
There is no other way that Abraham could be forgiven by God and gain credit of perfect righteousness except as stated in Scripture - by faith alone that God would provide that Messiah-Savior through Abraham's seed Who would resolve the problem of Abraham's sin and everyone else's sin who ever lived in the world. (Gen 15:6 & 1 Jn2:2).
As history has shown, Isaac and not Ishmael is in the line of descendency to the Messiah-Savior Jesus Christ.
If Ishmael was that son of the Promise instead of Isaac, then Christ would not be Christ and we would not have a Messiah-Savior of the sins of the whole world as precisely predicted by Scripture from Genesis through Revelation which would make God out to be a liar - having reneged on His Promise. Thus dooming all mankind to eternity in hell for man would then be required to pay the penalty for any and all of his transgressions - God's justice could do no differently! A Holy and Righteous God of Perfect Justice cannot permit one unpunished sin in His universe. No matter how loving and how gracious He is, someone has to pay the penalty for the sins of each individual.
Who will it be for you - yourself or Jesus Christ?
God's Promise is not a Promise requiring a man to do righteous works because man cannot since he has a sin nature. No, that Promise is a promise of faith. If you believe that God has provided salvation only through the perfect work of Messiah-Savior Jesus Christ then you are credited with God's perfect righteousness as a gift and will have eternal life with God in heaven just like Abraham.
(Compare Romans Chapter 3).
The justice system which is taught in the Qur'an requires punishment for wrong doing; 'An eye for an eye..." and not the addition of sufficient good works to offset the evil already done. God's punishment for any sin is eternal condemnation in the Lake of Fire. Christ already paid that penalty for you - will you decide to accept that substitutionary death or will you decide to pay the penalty yourself?
D) JESUS CHRIST IS THE UNIQUE SON OF GOD
1) THE TESTIMONY OF THE QUR'AN
The Qur'an states in S II 116:
"They [Christians] say: "God hath begotten A son":
[Claiming that Christians maintain that God begat a son as a human father does] Glory be to Him. Nay,
To Him belongs all
That is in the heavens
And on earth: everything
Renders worship to Him."
The Qur'an incorrectly states that Christians believe and the Bible teaches that God begat a son as a human father does. This statement in the Qur'an is shortsighted and obviously not worthy of God. This leads one to question the reliability of the Qur'an as God's Word because it is obviously in error in its interpretation of what the Bible actually says and what Christians believe which is as follows:
a) The God of the Bible is taught throughout to be Spirit, Whom we worship in Spirit and in Truth, (Jn 4:23-24). So to ascribe that the Bible teaches that God is or was once a God of flesh is erroneous.
b) The term begotten, as it is used in general and in Scripture, does not limit itself to a human father begetting a human son.
For example, Jn 3:3, (KJV), says:
"Verily, verily I say to thee, unless anyone be begotten... [Greek = gennethe anothen = literally: 'born from above'] ...he cannot see the kingdom of God." Cp. Jn 5:7; 1 Jn 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18.
Now, can this mean that God is a human father begetting a human son as a human father does? Or can this be figurative speech speaking of a spiritual birth? Compare John 3:5-6
c) This term "begotten" is also used of one who by means of preaching the Gospel becomes the human instrument in the impartation of spiritual life, 1 Cor 4:15; Philm 10.
d) This term is clearly used of the act of God the Holy Spirit in the birth of Christ, (Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5; Ps 2:7 Mt 1:18-25; Lk 1:26-38; 2:1-7). None of which indicate that Christ became, (rather than having always been), the Son of God at His Birth. Nor does it prove that the Bible states that He had a human type father.
This teaching is completely harmonious with other Scriptural teaching that Jesus Christ - the Word, Who has no beginning, Who is God (Jn1:1-2) set to the side the exercising of His Diety in order to add to Himself perfect Humanity in order to die for the sins of the whole world. (Phil 2:7-11).
Every informed Christian knows that this is precisely what the Bible teaches throughout!
So how is it that the Qur'an did not know such basic and elementary teaching from the Bible - 'contaminated' or intact - which has been testified to thousands of times by the testimony of innumerable Christians for hundreds of years??? The Qur'an incorrectly interprets what the Bible Scriptures say. If the Qur'an is the inspired Word of God then why is there a misinterpretation here of Scripture from the Bible whether it is contaminated or not?
If the Bible in its original manuscript is the Perfect and Holy Word of God as the Qur'an testifies; then how is it that God permitted, (according to the Qur'an) His Holy Word to be contaminated to such an extent that what is now available is untrustworthy? Or is it evident that the original Holy Word of God is still intact in the form of the 66 books of the Bible and available to all who seek to know about God, (which evidence is overwhelming)?
Many people say that the Qur'an is perfectly preserved. Could not God with all of His power have made the Bible available to us today as it was originally written? Where is the evidence of contamination - which passages remain preserved? Why is there perfect consistency, perfect inerrancy and perfect fulfillment of prophecy in today's Bible if it is contaminated?
F) THE NATURE OF GOD: HE IS ONE GOD AND THERE IS NO OTHER
1) TESTIMONY OF THE QUR'AN FALSELY ACCUSES THE BIBLE, CHRISTIANS & JEWS OF BELIEVING IN POLYTHEISM
The Qur' an says in S. II 135: "They say: "Become Jews
Or Christians if ye would be guided (To salvation)." Say thou:
"Nay! (I would rather) the Religion Of Abraham the True,
And he joined not gods with God.' "
2) THE BIBLE ACTUALLY TEACHES MONOTHEISM A TRIUNE GOD OF THREE PERSONALITIES IN ONE GOD
Again, the Qur'an errs on the human side by misinterpreting the doctrine of God as it is presented in the Bible; which further adds to its unreliability.
G) THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT THROUGH ISAAC WAS NEVER CANCELLED
1) THE TESTIMONY OF THE QUR'AN INDICATES THAT GOD CANCELED HIS COVENANT WITH ABRAHAM
S. II 141 & C 49 in the Qur'an state that God has cancelled His covenant with the Jewish people and now is fulfilling it with the Muslim people: "That was a people that hath
Passed away. They shall reap
The fruit of what they did,
And ye of what ye do!
Of their merits
There is no question in your case:"
[C.49]
"But those people have passed away,
Who promised to uphold the Law of God.
Their progeny having been found
Unworthy, their place was taken
By a new people looking towards Mecca,-
A new people, with a new messenger,
To bear witness to God's Law,
To proclaim the truth, maintain
His symbols, and strive and fight
For unity in God's Way."
2) BUT THE BIBLE AND HISTORY SAYS DIFFERENTLY
This leads to three key points:
a) If God's covenant with Abraham and the Jewish people is unilateral as the Bible clearly teaches i.e. God promised to fulfill it, no matter what, through the Nation Israel,
Then what kind of God is it
Who breaks His promise unjustifiably as the Qur'an teaches? The Bible does
not teach that God is through with the Nation Israel especially with
respect to honoring His Covenant. Compare New Covenant study 
b) If earlier passages in the Qur'an teach that God will fulfill the Abrahamic covenant unilaterally through Ishmael to the nations of the Muslim religion, then why does the same Qur'an now teach in these passages quoted above that God started to fulfill His covenant through Isaac, i.e. the Nation Israel, but canceled it because of Israel's unholiness and then replaced Israel with Islamic nations? Were the Islamic nations behaving is such a perfect and holy fashion over the centuries that God would not have removed a conditional covenant from them also? (If the covenant were a conditional one and it is not)?
c) If the seed of Abraham was indicated by God to be the Messiah through the line of David and that historically became a reality then the Abraham covenant could not have been canceled.
Compare God's stipulations to fulfill the New Covenant untilaterally
Compare
THE GENEALOGIES OF JESUS 
