Abraham in the Bible and Quran: Isaac, Ishmael, and Jesus

Abraham, known as Ibrahim in Islam, is honored by both Christians and Muslims, yet the two faiths understand his family, God's covenant, Scripture, and Jesus differently. The Bible blesses Ishmael but names Isaac as the son through whom the covenant continues, while the Quran presents Abraham's faith within a different account of revelation and history.

As Pentecostal Christians, we believe the New Testament identifies Jesus as the fulfillment of God's promises, so we don't accept Muhammad as a prophet whose message supersedes Scripture. We'll compare these beliefs fairly, beginning with what the Bible means when it calls Abraham the father of many nations. The Abrahamic covenant and its promises

Abraham Is Called the Father of Many Nations: What the Bible Means

When God changed Abram's name to Abraham, He tied that name to His promise: Abraham would become the father of many nations. In the Bible, this promise includes descendants and nations, but the covenant line is named clearly. God establishes His covenant through Isaac, then carries the promise through Jacob, whose name becomes Israel.

How the covenant passes from Abraham to Isaac, Jacob, and Israel

In Genesis 17, Abraham asks God to let Ishmael live before Him. God answers with a blessing for Ishmael, but names Isaac as the son through whom He will establish His covenant. The distinction matters: Abraham's descendants include more than one son, but Genesis identifies Isaac as the covenant heir.

God's promise continues through Isaac to Jacob. Jacob receives the covenant promise, and God gives him the name Israel. His descendants become the people of Israel, carrying forward the Biblical account of God's covenant with Abraham. We can read more about Jacob's name changed to Israel.

The New Testament also explains Abraham's promise in relation to faith and Jesus. Paul teaches that the blessing reaches the nations through faith, and he identifies Jesus as the promised Seed through whom that blessing comes. This does not erase the Biblical line through Isaac and Jacob. It explains how Christians understand God's promise to bless all nations through Jesus.

Christian traditions do not explain every detail of this relationship in exactly the same way. But the central New Testament claim is clear: Abraham's promise is fulfilled in Jesus, and people from the nations share in its blessing through faith.

Why Ishmael is blessed but is not named as covenant heir in Genesis

Ishmael is not forgotten or rejected by God. Genesis 17 promises that God will bless him, make him fruitful, and multiply his descendants. God also says Ishmael will become a great nation and father twelve princes. These are substantial promises, and the Bible presents Ishmael as a son under God's care.

At the same time, God says He will establish His covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear. Ishmael receives blessing and nationhood, while Isaac receives the specific covenant role named in Genesis. We should not confuse these promises or treat them as interchangeable.

This distinction is essential when comparing the Bible with the Quran. Genesis names Isaac as the covenant heir, while Ishmael receives his own blessing from God. The Biblical text does not place Ishmael outside God's concern, and it does not assign him the same covenant role as Isaac.

What Islam Teaches About Ibrahim, Isaac, Ishmael, and the Sacrifice

The Quran honors Ibrahim as a faithful servant and prophet who worshiped the one God. Its account shares important figures and themes with Genesis, including Abraham, his sons, trust in God, and a son's willingness to submit. But the Quran has its own emphases and does not simply repeat Genesis or use the same covenant framework.

How the Quran honors Abraham and presents his faith

In the Quran, Ibrahim rejects the worship of idols and turns to the one God. The text presents him as obedient and devoted, and Muslim tradition honors him as a prophet and an example of faith. These points allow Christians and Muslims to recognize some shared themes, even as our beliefs about revelation and the covenant differ.

The Quran also mentions Ibrahim's family, including Ismail (Ishmael) and Ishaq (Isaac). Yet it does not present the sequence of promises in the same way Genesis does. In Genesis, God names Isaac as the son through whom He will establish His covenant with Abraham. The Quran's passages about Ibrahim and his sons should be read in their own context, rather than treated as another telling of the Biblical account.

That difference matters when we compare the two faiths. Shared names do not mean the texts make identical claims about the sons, the covenant, or the meaning of Abraham's obedience. We can acknowledge what the Quran says about Ibrahim while being clear about what Genesis says and what the New Testament teaches about God's promises.

Why the Quran does not name the son in the sacrifice passage

Genesis names Isaac in God's command to Abraham. Genesis 22:2 identifies him directly, and the full account of Abraham's test in Genesis 22 continues with God providing a ram instead of Isaac. This is the Biblical account of Abraham's near-sacrifice of Isaac, a passage also discussed in our article on Abraham and Isaac on Mount Moriah.

Quran 37:100–107 recounts Ibrahim's vision and the son's willingness to submit, but does not give the son's name. The passage itself does not say, "Ishmael." Many later Muslim interpreters identify the son as Ishmael, and later tafsir commonly presents that identification; a tafsir discussion of Surah As-Saffat 37:100 gives this interpretation. But the Quran's wording and later interpretation are not the same thing, and Muslim interpretation has not been uniform across history.

So when you compare the accounts, keep the distinction clear: Genesis names Isaac, while the Quran's sacrifice passage leaves the son unnamed. Many Muslim interpreters identify him as Ishmael, but that identification comes through interpretation, not an explicit name in Quran 37. We should not claim that the Quran says what it does not say, even while recognizing the important place Ibrahim's faith holds in Islam.

How the Bible and Quran differ in their accounts of Scripture and history

The Bible and Quran both speak of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and revelation, but they do not give Scripture the same authority or tell the same history. The Bible includes the Old and New Testaments as Scripture. The Quran presents itself as revelation from God and refers to earlier revelations given to Moses and Jesus, while also making claims that differ from the Biblical text.

The Torah, Gospel, and Quran do not carry the same authority in both faiths

The Quran refers to the Torah and Gospel as revelations from God. It also presents the Quran as confirming earlier revelation and as a guide for its own community. For example, Quran 5:44–48 speaks of the Torah and Gospel in relation to guidance, judgment, and the Quran. A scholarly discussion of Quranic use of the Torah notes that the Quran portrays Israelite prophets as judging by the Torah.

The term taḥrif appears in discussions about how the Quran relates to earlier Scripture. Muslims have not all explained it in the same way. Depending on the interpretation, it may refer to textual alteration, misreading, concealment, or distortion of meaning. We should not claim that all Muslims hold one identical view of Biblical textual history, or present a complex theological debate as settled history.

As Christians, we believe the Old and New Testaments are Scripture, and we do not accept the Quran as a revelation that corrects or supersedes them. That is our theological judgment, grounded in our belief that God has spoken through the Biblical record and revealed His promises through Jesus.

Where parallel accounts agree, and where their details part ways

Genesis distinguishes Ishmael's blessing from Isaac's covenant role. In Genesis 17:18–21, God promises to bless Ishmael, while naming Isaac as the son through whom He will establish His covenant. The Quran honors Ibrahim and names both Ismail and Ishaq, but it does not lay out this same covenant sequence in the same way.

The near-sacrifice also shows why shared names and themes do not make the accounts interchangeable. Genesis 22:2 names Isaac. Quran 37:100–107 recounts Ibrahim's vision and his son's submission, but does not name the son. Many later Muslim interpreters identify him as Ishmael, though that identification comes through interpretation, not an explicit name in the Quran.

Christians may therefore say that Quranic claims conflict with the Biblical text. That is a theological conclusion about the authority and truth of the accounts, not a neutral description of what every Muslim believes. We should state clearly what each text says, then distinguish those words from later interpretations. For more on Isaac's place in Abraham's family, see Abraham's obedience and the promised son.

Why Christians see Jesus as Scripture’s fulfillment, while Islam honors Him differently

The difference between Christian and Muslim belief about Jesus is not a small disagreement about one prophet. It reaches the heart of how each faith understands God's promise, revelation, and salvation. We believe the New Testament identifies Jesus as the promised Messiah and Son of God, and that belief shapes how we read the promise God gave Abraham.

How the New Testament connects Abraham’s promise to Jesus

The New Testament teaches that God's promise to bless the nations through Abraham reaches its fulfillment in Jesus. Paul connects Abraham's faith with the blessing of the Gentiles, then says the promise was spoken to Abraham and his Seed, who is Christ. You can read Paul's argument in Galatians 3, including his statement in Galatians 3:16.

This does not mean the covenant line through Isaac and Jacob disappears. It means Christians understand the blessing promised through Abraham as reaching all nations through Jesus. We believe Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and the One through whom people from every nation may receive God's promise by faith.

For more on Jesus as the promised Messiah, we must also recognize why Christians cannot accept a later prophet as overturning the Gospel. Since Jesus truly is God's Son and the fulfillment of Scripture, then a later message that denies His identity and His work does not complete the Gospel. It contradicts what we believe God has already revealed.

We also believe in one God, not three gods. The Christian doctrine of the Trinity teaches that the one God exists eternally as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Jesus is not a second god beside the Father; He is God the Son, who came in the flesh. This conviction is central to our faith, not an optional detail.

How Islam describes Jesus without accepting Christian claims about Him

Islam honors Jesus, called Isa in Arabic, as the Messiah and a messenger of God. The Quran also honors Mary, but it rejects the Christian belief that Jesus is divine or the Son of God. The difference is plain: Christians worship Jesus as God the Son, while Muslims honor Him as a human messenger and Messiah, but do not worship Him.

The Quran's account of Jesus' crucifixion also differs from the New Testament. Quran 4:157-172 includes the statement that Jesus' opponents did not kill or crucify Him. Muslim interpretations of this passage vary, including over what happened and how the verse should be understood. Christians, by contrast, confess that Jesus was crucified, died, and rose again. His death and resurrection are central to the Gospel, not details we can set aside.

We should explain this difference honestly and respectfully. Muslims do not believe in the Christian Trinity, and Christians do not believe in three gods. But our beliefs about Jesus remain incompatible: we confess Him as God's Son and risen Savior, while Islam denies His divine sonship and rejects the Christian account of His crucifixion.

Why Christians Do Not Accept Muhammad as the Final Prophet

The disagreement is about authority, not about the character of Muslims. Muslims generally receive Muhammad as God's final prophet, while Christians measure every claim about later revelation against the Biblical witness to Jesus and the Gospel. Because we believe Jesus fulfilled Scripture through His death and resurrection, we cannot accept a later message that corrects or replaces that witness.

What Muslims mean when they call Muhammad the seal of the prophets

Quran 33:40 calls Muhammad the Messenger of Allah and khātam al-nabiyyīn. The phrase is commonly translated as "seal of the prophets," as in Quran 33:40. Muslims generally understand it to mean that Muhammad is the final prophet in the line of prophets. The exact English rendering of khātam al-nabiyyīn is a translation choice, but the belief in Muhammad's prophetic finality is central to mainstream Muslim teaching.

We should describe this belief accurately before explaining why we disagree. Muslims do not see Muhammad as merely another teacher whose message can be weighed alongside earlier Scripture. They believe his message completes the line of prophecy and carries divine authority. Christians, however, do not recognize Muhammad's message as a final revelation from God.

Why the Christian view of Jesus creates a different standard for later revelation

Our standard is the Biblical witness to Jesus. The New Testament presents Him as more than a prophet: He is the Son of God, the promised Messiah, and the One through whom God's purposes are fulfilled. It teaches that He died for our sins and rose again, as Paul states in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. The letter to the Hebrews also says God has spoken to us through His Son in Hebrews 1:1-2.

As Pentecostal Christians, we believe the Holy Spirit still works and speaks, but no claimed revelation can overturn what God has made known through Jesus and Scripture. We test teaching by the Biblical Gospel, not by accepting a later claim simply because it presents itself as revelation. For more on Jesus as God in the New Testament, this conviction rests at the heart of our faith.

Muslims begin from a different understanding. They honor Jesus as Messiah and messenger, but do not accept His divine Sonship or the Christian confession of His death and resurrection. That difference shapes how each faith judges later prophetic claims. Since Muhammad's message conflicts with the New Testament's account of Jesus, we cannot accept him as a prophet whose message supersedes or corrects Scripture. This is a theological disagreement about revelation and authority, not a judgment about Muslims' sincerity or character.

The central theological impasses Christians and Muslims cannot simply blend

Christians and Muslims share important beliefs, including belief in one God and reverence for Abraham. But shared history and familiar names do not make the two faiths agree about God's nature, Jesus, the cross, or revelation. These differences shape what each faith teaches about worship and salvation, so we must explain them plainly rather than blend them into one belief.

One God, but different beliefs about the Trinity and Jesus

Both Christianity and Islam affirm one God. Christians do not worship three gods. We confess one God who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and we believe Jesus is God the Son made flesh. The Trinity is not three separate gods, but the one God revealed as three Persons. We explain this belief further through the Biblical teaching on the one God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Islam rejects the Trinity and denies that Jesus is God's Son. The Quran calls Jesus the Messiah and a messenger, while rejecting the Christian confession of His divine identity (Quran 4:171). Muslims honor Jesus, but they do not worship Him. Christians worship Jesus as Lord because we believe He is God, not merely a prophet.

That difference shapes worship and salvation. Christians trust in Jesus' death and resurrection as God's work to save sinners. Muslims do not accept that Jesus is divine or that His death atones for sin. These are different accounts of who Jesus is and what God has done through Him, not two ways of expressing the same doctrine.

Different accounts of the cross, salvation, and revealed truth

The cross is central to the Christian Gospel. Paul writes that Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose again, as stated in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. We believe Jesus willingly gave His life and truly rose from the dead. His death and resurrection are God's saving action in history.

The Quran gives a different account, saying Jesus' opponents did not kill or crucify Him (Quran 4:157). Muslims interpret this passage in different ways, but it does not affirm the Christian account of the crucifixion. When the cross is understood differently, salvation is understood differently too. Christians proclaim salvation through Christ's death and resurrection; Islam does not make that event the basis of salvation.

The disagreement also concerns Scripture and prophethood. Christians receive the Old and New Testaments as Scripture and do not accept the Quran as a revelation that corrects the Biblical witness to Jesus. Muslims generally regard the Quran as God's final revelation and Muhammad as the final prophet. Those claims cannot both govern our understanding of Jesus and Scripture.

We should represent these beliefs accurately, cite the Biblical and Quranic texts, and distinguish what a text says from later interpretation. We can speak with conviction about what we believe God has revealed through Jesus, while treating Muslim neighbors with respect. Respect does not require us to call opposing claims the same.

Conclusion

Genesis blesses Ishmael, yet names Isaac as the covenant heir; it also names Isaac in the account of Abraham's test. The Quran honors Ibrahim and his sons, but its sacrifice passage leaves the son unnamed, while later Muslim interpretations commonly identify him as Ishmael. These are real differences between the Biblical and Quranic accounts, not details we should blur together.

We believe the New Testament identifies Jesus as the fulfillment of God's promise to Abraham, as Paul explains in Galatians 3. Because the Quran and Islam's teaching about Muhammad differ from the Biblical witness to Jesus, we cannot accept Muhammad as the final prophet or as an authority who supersedes Scripture. The faiths share names and themes, but their claims about revelation and Jesus do not come together.

Read the primary texts carefully, distinguish Scripture from later interpretation, and speak these disagreements with both truth and respect. Our convictions about Jesus remain clear, and respectful discussion requires us to represent the other faith accurately.