Are Gospel and Torah in the Quran the ones we know nowadays in the BIBLE?
-
Hi all,
I know this topic has been already treated but inside other topics and I wanted with your help clarify things and put it in a dedicated topic.
Yusuf Ali translation
33 It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Torah (Of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus)
348 "And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel.
365 Ye people of the Book! why dispute ye about Abraham, when the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed till after him? Have ye no understanding?
393 All food was lawful to the Children of Israel, except what Israel made unlawful for itself before the Torah was revealed. Say "Bring ye the Torah and study it if ye be men of truth."
543 But why do they come to thee for decision when they have (their own) Torah before them? Therein is the (plain) Command of Allah; yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) people of Faith
544 It was We who revealed the Torah (to Moses); therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the Prophet who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's will, by the Rabbis and the Doctors of Law for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's Book, and they were witnesses thereto therefore fear not men, but fear Me, and sell not My Signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers
Quran then support and attest that the are Books of God almighty, and that jews and christians should follow them and rule by them.
So question that come by reading these verses is If they are the ones we know why they contradict Quran?John 316
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal lifeJohn 1011
I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.John 1030
I and the Father are oneEtc etc.........
So my conclusion is the INJEEL (Gospel) God talk about in the Quran is not the one we know today.
The next question is then at the time Quran was revealed did the real Gospel exist, if yes where is it?
Please if anyone can clarify, correct, update so share knowledge with every one.
Peace-Thanks
Peace
There are two issue with the Bible of today
1- they are traslation of the orginal bible that is written in Aramic; and as we know, translation most of the time are not accurate.
2-God revealed the Bible to Jesus; thus, any thing that is written after jesus is not part of the bible; for example, the Crucifixion is a story that is written by others.
Thus, as a Moslem, I follow and believe in the parts that are confirmed by the Quran.
I will PM Sis Arnab, who is very knowledgable with Aramic and hebro to comment o the verses you quoted from the bible.
Peace
peace -
Hi all,
I know this topic has been already treated but inside other topics and I wanted with your help clarify things and put it in a dedicated topic.
Yusuf Ali translation
33 It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Torah (Of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus)
348 "And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Torah and the Gospel.
365 Ye people of the Book! why dispute ye about Abraham, when the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed till after him? Have ye no understanding?
393 All food was lawful to the Children of Israel, except what Israel made unlawful for itself before the Torah was revealed. Say "Bring ye the Torah and study it if ye be men of truth."
543 But why do they come to thee for decision when they have (their own) Torah before them? Therein is the (plain) Command of Allah; yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) people of Faith
544 It was We who revealed the Torah (to Moses); therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the Prophet who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's will, by the Rabbis and the Doctors of Law for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's Book, and they were witnesses thereto therefore fear not men, but fear Me, and sell not My Signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers
Quran then support and attest that the are Books of God almighty, and that jews and christians should follow them and rule by them.
So question that come by reading these verses is If they are the ones we know why they contradict Quran?Salam,
The previous scriptures do not contradict the Quran. I'll re-translate the following verses. Please keep in mind that no translation is entirely accurate. The best way to read scriptures in the original language.
John 316
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal lifeThat is an often used mistranslation.
In Aramaic a better translation would beFor God so loved the world/eternity/knowledge (root word ilm) he gave his unique/one (root word wahid) creation (root word bara) that all who believe (root word amen) in him will not perish but would have eternal life(root word ilm).
The word used in Aramaic is Bara not beni. I do not accept the theory Bara means son in Aramaic. I believe this was an attempt to diefy Jesus by suddenly re-translating this word as son.
Bara means creation and we know from the Injeel and the Quran that the likeness of Isa is as the likeness of Adam...Allah "created" both of them.
John 1011
I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.In Aramaic a better translation would be
Truly I am the good shephard. The good shephard puts/commits his life to ruling/directing the flock.
John 1030
I and the Father are oneI and my father (are) one/united compassionate (the root word literally means to bend or stoop in kindness to an inferior)
Etc etc.........
So my conclusion is the INJEEL (Gospel) God talk about in the Quran is not the one we know today.
This is because you are relying on English Mis-translations and not reading the Aramaic original.
The next question is then at the time Quran was revealed did the real Gospel exist, if yes where is it?
Yes it existed. Yes we still have it. The only thing one has to do is read it in the original language and believe it.
The most common problem people have with understanding the words of Jesus
They don't keep in mind that Jesus spoke in parables/similtudes/metaphors.
Salam,
Arnab -
Salam,
The previous scriptures do not contradict the Quran. I'll re-translate the following verses. Please keep in mind that no translation is entirely accurate. The best way to read scriptures in the original language.
That is an often used mistranslation.
In Aramaic a better translation would beFor God so loved the world/eternity/knowledge (root word ilm) he gave his unique/one (root word wahid) creation (root word bara) that all who believe (root word amen) in him will not perish but would have eternal life(root word ilm).
a few questions please
- who is "him" in this verse?
- the word "amen" does exist? so is there basis in ending prayers with "amen" because it is an affirmation...it's saying "i believe?"
The word used in Aramaic is Bara not beni. I do not accept the theory Bara means son in Aramaic. I believe this was an attempt to diefy Jesus by suddenly re-translating this word as son.
Bara means creation and we know from the Injeel and the Quran that the likeness of Isa is as the likeness of Adam...Allah "created" both of them.
so if the above "him" refers to jesus, then why not the belief in "adam" also merits eternal life?
In Aramaic a better translation would be
Truly I am the good shephard. The good shephard puts/commits his life to ruling/directing the flock.
wouldn't this rendering contradict Luke 1819 or Mark 1018? what is "good" in aramaic? do we have an accurate translation above?
I and my father (are) one/united compassionate (the root word literally means to bend or stoop in kindness to an inferior)
so if jesus is compassionate as the "father", why couldn't we attribute "raheem" to Muhammad or to all the prophets since God commanded us not to make any distinction among them? why then take out the two verses in the quran? does the aramaic for this verse really points to "being compassionate" or to "to one in purpose"?
This is because you are relying on English Mis-translations and not reading the Aramaic original.
Yes it existed. Yes we still have it. The only thing one has to do is read it in the original language and believe it.
The most common problem people have with understanding the words of Jesus
They don't keep in mind that Jesus spoke in parables/similtudes/metaphors.
Salam,
Arnabalhamdulillah we have brothers in sisters schooled/well-versed in scriptural language (aramaic, arabic, etc.).
may God increase our knowledge.
God bless. ramon O0
-
Jesus is reported to have said ?he that hath seen me hath seen the Father? and ?I am in the Father, and the Father in me? (John 149-10); but in the same passage he shortly goes on to add ?At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.? (John 1420)
Again, while Jesus does proclaim ?I and my Father are one? (John 1030), he also prays for his followers, ?that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.? (John 1721) Whatever the nature of the ?oneness? Jesus is claiming exists between God and himself, it is apparently something that is supposed to hold between God and all Christians ? in which case it can hardly be the relation of numerical identity.
Likewise, in the two New Testament passages where Jesus is said to have regarded himself as ?equal with God? ? John 518 and Philippians 26 ? the Greek word translated ?equal? is isos, which means ?on the same level? or ?of the same rank,? never ?identical.?The claim that Jesus was God did not become Christian orthodoxy until the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE. The orthodox reading of these passages seems natural today only because they are read through the lens of what ?everybody knows? about Jesus? claims to divinity; few would find incarnationism in the texts unless they first brought it there.
An objector may point to the opening lines of the Gospel of John, which apparently identify the ?Logos? with God (John 11) and the ?Logos made flesh? with Jesus (John 114). Of course these lines were not spoken by Jesus, and so do not show that Jesus himself claimed to be God; but in any case, what exactly are they saying? The relation between God and the Logos seems to fall short of strict identity; the Greek, literally translated, says something like ?the Logos was with the God, and God is what the Logos was? ? an awkward construction clearly trying to express a subtler relation than identity. The term ?Logos? is borrowed from Greek philosophy, where it means a thing?s abstract rational nature; the Logos that is ?with? God and is what God is, is not God but God?s nature. To say that Jesus is the Logos made flesh, then, is simply to say that he is a physical embodiment of God?s nature. This hardly makes him identical with God, since all human beings are supposed to be created from God?s spirit (Genesis 27) and in God?s image and likeness (Genesis 126-27).
Indeed the New Testament authors clearly understand Jesus as offering everyone the opportunity to be sons (and daughters) of God and to partake of God?s nature
?But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.? (John 112-13)
?For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. ... And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.? (Romans 814-17)
?Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him.? (1 John 32)
As the New Testament authors understand Jesus? message, being the ?Son of God? is evidently not a status that Jesus claims for himself alone, but one that is open to all Christians;
http//praxeology.net/unblog02-04.htm
"They changed words from their contexts and forgot a good part of the message given to them, and you will continue to find them -except a few among them- bent on new deceits?" (513)
There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues (as they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, 'That is from God,' but it is not from God It is they who tell a lie against God and (well) they know it! (3,7
Then is it only a part of the Book that ye believe in, and do ye reject the rest? But what is the reward for those among you who behave like this but disgrace in this life? - And on the Day of Judgment they shall be consigned to the most grievous penalty. For God is not unmindful of what ye do. ( 2,85)
The Koran came to confirm the previous scriptures but these scriptures must be read properly and taken as a whole without deliberate distortions and misinterpretations
And if thou art in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto thee, then question those who read the Scripture (that) was before thee... (Surah 10, Jonah, verse 94)
But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) Law before them?- Therein is the (plain) command of God; yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) people of faith. (Surah 5, Maida, verse 43)
-
Salam,
The previous scriptures do not contradict the Quran. I'll re-translate the following verses. Please keep in mind that no translation is entirely accurate. The best way to read scriptures in the original language.
That is an often used mistranslation.
In Aramaic a better translation would beFor God so loved the world/eternity/knowledge (root word ilm) he gave his unique/one (root word wahid) creation (root word bara) that all who believe (root word amen) in him will not perish but would have eternal life(root word ilm).
The word used in Aramaic is Bara not beni. I do not accept the theory Bara means son in Aramaic. I believe this was an attempt to diefy Jesus by suddenly re-translating this word as son.
Bara means creation and we know from the Injeel and the Quran that the likeness of Isa is as the likeness of Adam...Allah "created" both of them.
In Aramaic a better translation would be
Truly I am the good shephard. The good shephard puts/commits his life to ruling/directing the flock.
I and my father (are) one/united compassionate (the root word literally means to bend or stoop in kindness to an inferior)
This is because you are relying on English Mis-translations and not reading the Aramaic original.
Yes it existed. Yes we still have it. The only thing one has to do is read it in the original language and believe it.
The most common problem people have with understanding the words of Jesus
They don't keep in mind that Jesus spoke in parables/similtudes/metaphors.
Salam,
ArnabSis Arnab,
The (so called) Gospel Of John is not originally written in Aramaic, it is writen in Greek.
Gospel Of John was written as early as 100 AD.
The guy who wrote that Gospel NEVER MET JESUS and possibly NOT EVEN A JEW, presumably he's a pagan Christian.Gospel Of John had a strong 'paganistic' nuance.
The terms LOGOS itself is of course a GREEK / HELLENISTIC slang.
The Gospel Of John seems to emphasis more of "Jesus Divinity", a concept which started to develop on 100 AD onward.Many accounts / stories / sayings inside Gospel Of John CONTRADICTS the Synoptic Gospel (Mark, Matthew, Luke).
E.g. the miracle of turning water into wine, there are no such account found inside Mark, Matt, Luke.
Besides; what's the point of turning water into wine??
Jesus was supposedly a NOZIRITH, one who takes a Nozir vow, is supposedly abstaining from wine and cutting hair for certain period while he/she dedicate his life doing "God's work" during that period.And many of the sayings quoted by you in this post is nowhere can be found within Mark, Matt and Luke. (Synoptic Gospel)
Salam / Peace
-
Peace Arnab
This one contradicts the Quran.Salam Belalhammad,
No it doesn't contradict the Quran.
Allah is nearer than your jugular vein (INside you). 5016
Allah breathed INto you of his spirit (breathed IN to you). 3872, 1529, 3209
He is with you where ever you are. 574So, now we can understand when Jesus said that He and God are united that it is true for all who are believers (as Jesus also said).
Salam,
Arnab -
a few questions please
- who is "him" in this verse?
Some say Jesus, some say God.
I say it doesn't matter the Quran says both are correct5111
And when I revealed to the disciples, saying, Believe in Me and My messenger, they said We believe and bear witness that we submit (ourselves).
- the word "amen" does exist? so is there basis in ending prayers with "amen" because it is an affirmation...it's saying "i believe?"
The root word amen (alif-meem-nun) means faith/belief/to be strengthened/secure etc in all the semitic languages. One English word does not really give the true depth of meanint that the root represents.
As for saying it at the end of prayers, this is tradition, not a command. I see nothing wrong with it.
so if the above "him" refers to jesus, then why not the belief in "adam" also merits eternal life?
We are to believe in Allah and all his messengers. Some say Adam was a messenger and some say that he was not. I personally think he was, but this is a subject of debate.
wouldn't this rendering contradict Luke 1819 or Mark 1018? what is "good" in aramaic? do we have an accurate translation above?
The root that is translated as good in John 1011, Luke 1819 and Mark 1018 is towb and has the same meaning in all the semitic languages good/beneficial
And, no it would be a contradiction. In Luke 1819 and Mark 1018 you have a man approaching Jesus and trying to exault him by calling him good teacher. This person went on to not only exalt Jesus but himself in this passage. Jesus (always speaking in metaphors and speech that made a point) tells this man that there is none Good except the ONE God. In order to help this man see the error of his ways, is how I see it.
so if jesus is compassionate as the "father", why couldn't we attribute "raheem" to Muhammad or to all the prophets since God commanded us not to make any distinction among them? why then take out the two verses in the quran? does the aramaic for this verse really points to "being compassionate" or to "to one in purpose"?
Raheem is not used in John 1030....see how confusing English translations can be and why I say that none are accurate? The root word used is khann and briefly means as I stated before compassionate (the root word literally means to bend or stoop in kindness to an inferior).
That being said, we all have the capability to be raheem (merciful/compassionate) and it can be a human attribute as well as an attribute of Allah. The believers strive to always be compassionate and merciful in everything they do.
I do not agree with those who say that verses of the Quran should be taken out. To me this is a very serious transgression and the action of a disbeliever not the action of a believer.
Salam,
Arnab -
Sis Arnab,
The (so called) Gospel Of John is not originally written in Aramaic, it is writen in Greek.
Gospel Of John was written as early as 100 AD.
The guy who wrote that Gospel NEVER MET JESUS and possibly NOT EVEN A JEW, presumably he's a pagan Christian.Gospel Of John had a strong 'paganistic' nuance.
The terms LOGOS itself is of course a GREEK / HELLENISTIC slang.
The Gospel Of John seems to emphasis more of "Jesus Divinity", a concept which started to develop on 100 AD onward.Many accounts / stories / sayings inside Gospel Of John CONTRADICTS the Synoptic Gospel (Mark, Matthew, Luke).
E.g. the miracle of turning water into wine, there are no such account found inside Mark, Matt, Luke.
Besides; what's the point of turning water into wine??
Jesus was supposedly a NOZIRITH, one who takes a Nozir vow, is supposedly abstaining from wine and cutting hair for certain period while he/she dedicate his life doing "God's work" during that period.And many of the sayings quoted by you in this post is nowhere can be found within Mark, Matt and Luke. (Synoptic Gospel)
Salam / Peace
This is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. However, it does not make it factual.
Salam,
Arnab -
Salam Belalhammad,
No it doesn't contradict the Quran.
Allah is nearer than your jugular vein (INside you). 5016
Allah breathed INto you of his spirit (breathed IN to you). 3872, 1529, 3209
He is with you where ever you are. 574So, now we can understand when Jesus said that He and God are united that it is true for all who are believers (as Jesus also said).
Salam,
ArnabPeace arnab
But he Called God "MY FATHER", which is not true according to Quran; and it is a great Sin to say such words.
Peace -
Jesus is reported to have said ?he that hath seen me hath seen the Father? and ?I am in the Father, and the Father in me? (John 149-10); but in the same passage he shortly goes on to add ?At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.? (John 1420)
Again, while Jesus does proclaim ?I and my Father are one? (John 1030), he also prays for his followers, ?that they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.? (John 1721) Whatever the nature of the ?oneness? Jesus is claiming exists between God and himself, it is apparently something that is supposed to hold between God and all Christians ? in which case it can hardly be the relation of numerical identity.
Likewise, in the two New Testament passages where Jesus is said to have regarded himself as ?equal with God? ? John 518 and Philippians 26 ? the Greek word translated ?equal? is isos, which means ?on the same level? or ?of the same rank,? never ?identical.?The claim that Jesus was God did not become Christian orthodoxy until the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE. The orthodox reading of these passages seems natural today only because they are read through the lens of what ?everybody knows? about Jesus? claims to divinity; few would find incarnationism in the texts unless they first brought it there.
An objector may point to the opening lines of the Gospel of John, which apparently identify the ?Logos? with God (John 11) and the ?Logos made flesh? with Jesus (John 114). Of course these lines were not spoken by Jesus, and so do not show that Jesus himself claimed to be God; but in any case, what exactly are they saying? The relation between God and the Logos seems to fall short of strict identity; the Greek, literally translated, says something like ?the Logos was with the God, and God is what the Logos was? ? an awkward construction clearly trying to express a subtler relation than identity. The term ?Logos? is borrowed from Greek philosophy, where it means a thing?s abstract rational nature; the Logos that is ?with? God and is what God is, is not God but God?s nature. To say that Jesus is the Logos made flesh, then, is simply to say that he is a physical embodiment of God?s nature. This hardly makes him identical with God, since all human beings are supposed to be created from God?s spirit (Genesis 27) and in God?s image and likeness (Genesis 126-27).
Indeed the New Testament authors clearly understand Jesus as offering everyone the opportunity to be sons (and daughters) of God and to partake of God?s nature
?But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.? (John 112-13)
?For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. ... And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ.? (Romans 814-17)
?Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him.? (1 John 32)
As the New Testament authors understand Jesus? message, being the ?Son of God? is evidently not a status that Jesus claims for himself alone, but one that is open to all Christians;
http//praxeology.net/unblog02-04.htm
"They changed words from their contexts and forgot a good part of the message given to them, and you will continue to find them -except a few among them- bent on new deceits?" (513)
There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues (as they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, 'That is from God,' but it is not from God It is they who tell a lie against God and (well) they know it! (3,7
Then is it only a part of the Book that ye believe in, and do ye reject the rest? But what is the reward for those among you who behave like this but disgrace in this life? - And on the Day of Judgment they shall be consigned to the most grievous penalty. For God is not unmindful of what ye do. ( 2,85)
The Koran came to confirm the previous scriptures but these scriptures must be read properly and taken as a whole without deliberate distortions and misinterpretations
And if thou art in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto thee, then question those who read the Scripture (that) was before thee... (Surah 10, Jonah, verse 94)
But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) Law before them?- Therein is the (plain) command of God; yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) people of faith. (Surah 5, Maida, verse 43)
Well done bravo
Salam,
Arnab -
Peace arnab
But he Called God "MY FATHER", which is not true according to Quran; and it is a great Sin to say such words.
PeaceSalam,
I disagree. Ab literally means the strong one of the house. so literally he is calling God his leader, the one who he depends on, his sustainer, etc.
The ancient pictographs that make up the root confirm this Alif (ox head meaning strength authority etc) and beyt (outline of a house)....together they mean strong one of the house. Ab is modernly understood to mean "father" which is very specific in English A male parent. But in the Semitic language this specific understanding is not correct.
From the Theological Word book of the Old testament
'ab. Father, forefather. This primitive noun apparently is derived from such baby sounds as abab (cf. "Papa," in TDNT, V, p. 960), rather than from the verbal root 'bh, Assyrian, abu "decide" (suggesting that the father is the "decider," BDB, p. 3). It designates primarily "begetter," though by extension, ancestor, and metaphorically, an originator, chief, or associate in some degree.
The noun 'ab occurs 1191 times in the Hebrew OT, plus nine times in the Aramaic (the form 'abi, Job_3436, KJV "my desire," is probably a verb, "I desire," from baya, KB, cf. ASV, "would that". Most instances refer to a literal father (from Gen_224, even before the fact of paternity, Gen_41, down to Mal_16); but 'ab may designate any man who occupies a position or receives recognition similar to that of a father the "father" of a servant is his master (2Ki_212); "a father to the poor" (Job_2916) is their protector; "a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem" (Isa_2221) is their governor; and "a father to Pharaoh" (Gen_45 is his advisor. The title "Father" is thus used for one in authority (2Ki_212), whether prophet (2Ki_621), priest (Jdg_1819), or king (1Sa_2411 ), or even-as a personification-the grave, "Thou art my father" (Job_1714).
Salam,
Arnab -
Salam,
I disagree. Ab literally means the strong one of the house. so literally he is calling God his leader, the one who he depends on, his sustainer, etc.
Okay...Now can you use another word to translate "Ab"; because using Father would give a different meaing.
Now, what is the meaning of the following very simillar words (Father "Ab" and Lord "Rb"Rb Ab
Does the Aramic language have two simillar words as Arabic?
-
Okay...Now can you use another word to translate "Ab"; because using Father would give a different meaing.
Actually, that's correct. My mistake. handshake
Now, what is the meaning of the following very simillar words (Father "Ab" and Lord "Rb"
Rb Ab
Does the Aramic language have two simillar words as Arabic?
and are spelled exactly the same in Aramaic as in Arabic (alif-beyt/ba and ra/rosh-ba/beyt) and have the exact same meanings.
in Aramaic is usually translated as Lord same as with Arabic.
and in aramaic is usually translated as father or ancestor or something similiar, same as in Arabic.Salam,
Arnab -
Actually, that's correct. My mistake. handshake
and are spelled exactly the same in Aramaic as in Arabic (alif-beyt/ba and ra/rosh-ba/beyt) and have the exact same meanings.
in Aramaic is usually translated as Lord same as with Arabic.
and in aramaic is usually translated as father or ancestor or something similiar, same as in Arabic.Salam,
ArnabNow; the Word Rb can be used in referance to a Human being as well; for example, Joseph used it to refer to the Lord of Egypt
Now could it be that Jesus used it to refer to the Spirit and not To Allah; all of us know that Jesus was having a hard time when was asked about his Father; and I can Imagin that Mariam told him that it was the Spirit who blew into her, and therefore, the Spirit was the Image of Father for Him.
According to Quran, Jesus is a Spirit from God.
Thus, if Jesus saidI and my father (are) one/united compassionate (the root word literally means to bend or stoop in kindness to an inferior)
Thus, He means I and the Spirit.
What do you think?
-
Now; the Word Rb can be used in referance to a Human being as well; for example, Joseph used it to refer to the Lord of Egypt
Now could it be that Jesus used it to refer to the Spirit and not To Allah; all of us know that Jesus was having a hard time when was asked about his Father; and I can Imagin that Mariam told him that it was the Spirit who blew into her, and therefore, the Spirit was the Image of Father for Him.
According to Quran, Jesus is a Spirit from God.
Thus, if Jesus saidI and my father (are) one/united compassionate (the root word literally means to bend or stoop in kindness to an inferior)
Thus, He means I and the Spirit.
What do you think?
Salam,
I don't see that it would fit, because there are many places where Jesus refers to God as father through out the gospels. Some times this is in prayer or other instances where it is very clear that God is being referred to.Salam,
Arnab -
Salam,
I don't see that it would fit, because there are many places where Jesus refers to God as father through out the gospels. Some times this is in prayer or other instances where it is very clear that God is being referred to.Salam,
ArnabPeace arnab
You mean as the Sustainer and ot as Father & Do not scare me; D
Salam -
Peace arnab
You mean as the Sustainer and ot as Father & Do not scare me;
SalamThe word father can be used metaphorically in English and if one keeps this in mind, then there will be no misunderstanding.
Salam,
Arnab -
The word father can be used metaphorically in English and if one keeps this in mind, then there will be no misunderstanding.
Salam,
ArnabPeace Arnab
The word Father means the following in dictionary
Main Entry 1fa?ther
Pronunciation \f?-thr
Function noun
Etymology Middle English fader, from Old English f?der; akin to Old High German fater father, Latin pater, Greek patr
Date before 12th century
1 a a man who has begotten a child ; also sire 3 bcapitalized (1) god 1 (2) the first person of the TrinityNow, I think using the word Father will lead to a Great Sin.
Peace
-
Son of God is a nickname given by his followers in recognition of his miraculous birth. Semitic society always named a person as the son of his father. Since he had no human father his followers called him son of God. The disbelievers called him a bastard.
Sanhedrin 106a . Says Jesus' mother was a whore "She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters." Also in footnote #2 to Shabbath 104b of the Soncino edition, it is stated that in the "uncensored" text of the Talmud it is written that Jesus mother, "Miriam the hairdresser," had sex with many men.
"According to the Talmud, Jesus was executed by a proper rabbinical court for idolatry, inciting other Jews to idolatry, and contempt of rabbinical authority. All classical Jewish sources which mention his execution are quite happy to take responsibility for it; in the talmudic account the Romans are not even mentioned.
"The more popular accounts--which were nevertheless taken quite seriously--such as the notorious Toldot Yeshu are even worse, for in addition to the above crimes they accuse him of witchcraft. The very name 'Jesus' was for Jews a symbol of all that is abominable and this popular tradition still persists...
The koran tells us
4.157. That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger 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-4.156 Quran
That they rejected Faith; that they uttered against Mary a grave false charge;