Sister of Aaron
-
The mother of Esau and Jacob was Rebekah, not Maryam. Father was Isaac
Dear Aysha
I never claimed that the mother of Esau and Jacob was Maryam. The point I was trying to make was that the name "Isa" which appears in the Quran is simply the Arabic form of "Esau". "Esau" is a Hebrew name. Just as "Ibraheem" is the Arabic version of the Hebrew "Abram". Of course the Esau who was the brother of Jacob was not the son of Maryam. THat's a different Esau. This just goes to show you that the name "Esau" was a very common Hebrew name.
The letter "" which is called "Alif Maqsoura" in Arabic, doesn't exist in the original Hebrew language. Instead, it is replaced by what is similar to the letter "". Doctor Kamal Salibi, who is an expert on original Hebrew texts, has confirmed this. (The original Hebrew of the Old Testament is quite different for the Hebrew spoken in Israel today).
Let me try to explain it again
If you read the Arabic transliteration of the OT, you will see that "Esau" (the Hebrew name) is written as "" NOT "" Because there is no "alif maqsoura" in Hebrew, they replaced it with "".
Hence, Isa = Esau.
"Jesus", on the other hand, is an entirely different name. It has nothing to do with Isa whatsoever. The Muslims are confused because they think "Isa" is Arabic for Jesus. It is NOT so. The Arabic for "Jesus" is NOT . Jesus, in Hebrew, is Yeshua.
Hence
Esau (Hebrew name) = Isa (Arabic) = . This name appears in the Quran. It is the name of the prophet who was sent to the Israelites in Arabia, not long after the time of Moses. Isa was the son on Maryam, daughter of Amram.
Yeshua (another Hebrew name) = Yassoo (Arabic) = . This is the name of a political rebel who entered Jerusalem some 2000+ years ago, to overthrow the Heriodian rule and establish a kingdom for the Jews of the Davidic descent. Jesus can be traced back to David. Jesus was tried for treason, and died on the cross. End of story. He was not a prophet, and is not mentioned anywhere in the QUran. He lived and died many centuries after Isa the son of Maryam.
The main reason for the confusion is that both names are pronounced the same in Greek (although their spelling is different)
Esau = Isa = (Greek), pronounced "Iessous"
Yeshu = Jesus = (Greek), also pronouced "Iessous"
Note that the spelling is not the same. These are two different and distinct names we are dealing with here, belonging to two people who lived in completely different eras.
Peace...
-
Dear Aysha
I never claimed that the mother of Esau and Jacob was Maryam. The point I was trying to make was that the name "Isa" which appears in the Quran is simply the Arabic form of "Esau". "Esau" is a Hebrew name. Just as "Ibraheem" is the Arabic version of the Hebrew "Abram". Of course the Esau who was the brother of Jacob was not the son of Maryam. THat's a different Esau. This just goes to show you that the name "Esau" was a very common Hebrew name.
You did claim that Maryam was the mother of Esau
They are simply incapable of grasping that the Maryam mentioned in the QUran, and her son Eesa (NOT JESUS) came 1000 years before the Jesus who was crucifed in Jerusalem.
The QUran calls the son of Maryam ESAU NOT YESHUA.
The only Esau mentioned in Torah is Esau the son of Rebekah and Isaac, so whether it was a common name or not at this time God only made reference to that one who was not a prophet nor was he crucified.
The QUran clearly tells us that at the clergy of the Israelites, who wrote the Torat with their own hands, spoke lies and slander against Maryam.
(See Quran 4156)
....(Exodus 15 19,20)
Note how they ridicule her They describe Maryam as being a "Nabiyya", yet she was dancing and singing like some drinken maiden.
The exodus verse is speaking about Miriam the sister of Moses and prophetess, the Quran verse you posted is speaking about Mary mother of Jesus. (see 4157) You have decided that Miriam was acting 'like some drunken maiden' when she was joining in celebration of the destruction of Pharaoh and so was her brother Moses, was he too drunken? they were singing praises to God just as they did in Medina when prophet Muhammed arrived there.
Also, they claim that she became jealous of her brother Moses, and refused to speak to him, so God cursed her with a skin desease and she died a wretched death. (See Old Testament, Numbers 12 , 1-15).
Which Maryam are they talking about here?
You tell me.
This Miriam was the sister of Moses. The slander against Mary the mother of Jesus was because she was pregnant before marriage.One of the Mary's in Quran gave birth to a son called Jesus/Emmanuel, meaning 'God with us' that was strengthened with the Holy Spirit see 287, 2253 and matt 120
The verse 1928 is referring to Miriam the sister of Moses and Aaron, previously in chapter 19;1-15 it refers to Zachariya having the son John the Baptist see Luke 15-25 its exact. The father of Moses, Aaron and Miriam was Amran who divorced his wife Jochebed before Moses was born, according to the Exodus Rabbah (Midrash). Miriam was the sister that cared for Moses by arranging for the real mother, Jochebed, to feed the baby Moses in the house of Pharaoh.
Jesus speaking as a baby is found in Apocrypha, the texts left out of the New Testement after the Nicene Council in 325ad.
Jesus/Isa/Emmanuel was a great prophet of Allah as Quran confirms throughout. He was the Word of God.
-
http//www.islamicaweb.com/forums/religion-spirituality/913-koran-torah-gospel-corrupted.html
aahh Sanhedrin!
002.079
YUSUFALI Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.What the Jews did by adding to Torah are the same as what the Muslims are doing with hadith IMHO. Scholars (Rabbi) and claimed oral transmissions (of Moses and Muhammed) are what distort what God said.
Sanhedrin 55b A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his.
Sanhedrin 55b A male aged nine years and a day who cohabits with his deceased brother's wife acquires her .
Muslims made it a little older with 9 years for a girl and on that I suppose its assumed 9 is still ok for a boy. ;D
-
aahh Sanhedrin!
002.079
YUSUFALI Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say"This is from Allah," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.What the Jews did by adding to Torah are the same as what the Muslims are doing with hadith IMHO. Scholars (Rabbi) and claimed oral transmissions (of Moses and Muhammed) are what distort what God said.
Sanhedrin 55b A maiden aged three years and a day may be acquired in marriage by coition, and if her deceased husband's brother cohabits with her, she becomes his.
Sanhedrin 55b A male aged nine years and a day who cohabits with his deceased brother's wife acquires her .
Muslims made it a little older with 9 years for a girl and on that I suppose its assumed 9 is still ok for a boy. ;D
Good point. When Shafi's point of view spread that every tradition of value must be grounded on some hadith by the prophet, every tradition that people wanted to pass along had to find its way in some form of hadith that claimed he said it or did it.
Its also important to point out its not the Jewish hadith the Koran attacked as much as the fatwas of the Rabbis. A tradition is just that, a tradition. Its what we do with it that matters. Different Jewish sects dealt with the oral traditions differently but only the Pharisees believed, like Sunni and Shias, that the oral traditions were binding and can even abrogate the written scriptures.
Rabbinic Judaism believed that the traditional interpretations received through the Oral Torah were binding. This belief, however, was not accepted amongst all segments of Judaism and religions which grew out of the Old Testament.
Galileans
The ancient Galileans were noted as not being strict to oral traditions. Many of the people Galilee, were less strict. In this regard it may be noted that Pharisees and scribes from Jerusalem, not from Galilee, were the ones who took issue with the failure of Jesus? disciples to observe the traditional washing of hands.? Mark 71, 5."Sadducees
Sadducees rejected the Pharisaic oral traditions. They based their interpretations on their own traditions emphasizing a more literal understanding of the verses. In many respects, this led to a more severe observance than that of the Pharisees especially as regards purity laws and temple practice. It must be noted that most aspects of Sadduceean law and methods of interpretation are not known.Essenes
Essenes, a monastic group of people, had a ?monastic organization?. Though they had non-biblical rules, and customs, they reject much of the oral traditions.Christians
Christians generally reject a notion of any oral Torah as they see most of the laws in Tanakh as completed or fulfilled by Jesus (Matthew 517). According to some, Jesus rejects some oral traditions as seen in Matthew 151, 2, 7-11; and Mark 74-8.Karaites
Main article Karaite JudaismKaraite Judaism or Karaism is a Jewish denomination which arose about the time of the completion of the Talmud. It is characterized by the rejection of writing down the Oral Law and Talmud, and, on its reliance on the Tanakh as scripture.
Some Karaites strive to adhere only to the p'shat (plain meaning) of the text. This is in contrast to Rabbinic Judaism, which relies on the Oral Law and employs several interpretive methods which, at times, stray from the literal meaning.
Codification
Prohibition to write the Oral TorahThe laws transmitted to Moses were contained in the Torah written down on scrolls. According to proponents of the Oral Torah, the explanation however, was not allowed to be written down. Jews were obligated to speak the explanation and pass it on orally to students, children, and fellow adults. It was thus forbidden to write and publish the Oral Law.
Following the destruction of the Second Temple and the fall of Jerusalem, it became apparent that the Palestine community and its learning were threatened, and that publication was the only way to ensure that the law could be preserved.
Thus, around 200 CE, a redaction of oral law in writing was completed. Rabbinic tradition ascribes this effort to Rabbi Judah haNasi. The Mishna is generally considered the first work of Rabbinic literature.
Over the next four centuries this body of law, legend and ethical teachings underwent debate and discussion (Gemara) in the two centers of Jewish life, Israel and Babylonia. The Gemara with the Mishnah came to be edited together into compilations known as the Talmud.
Many of the legalistic terms and concepts found in Rabbinic literature have antecedents in the Dead Sea Scrolls. This is especially true in the Halachic Letter (Miqsat Ma'ase Ha-Torah/ Qumran Cave 4).
Ramification of Jewish law
Oral law was the basis for nearly all subsequent Rabbinic literature. It is therefore intricately related to the development of Halakha. As such, despite codification, interpretation of the "oral law" is likewise required. Although the Oral Law has been in written form for almost 18 centuries, it is still referred to as Torah she-be'al peh.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_Torah
Matt 151-3 "Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, "Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread." He answered and said to them, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?"
Matt 231-5 "Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to His disciples, saying "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do. For they bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do to be seen by men."
Matt 2313 "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in."
Matt 2327-29 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness. Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
John 182-3 "Then Judas, having received a detachment of troops, and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, came there with lanterns, torches, and weapons"
-
-
-
You know interestingly enough, the rejected gospels which were written by people who knew Yeshua and were in his presence and were his real disciples do not mention any kind of miracles including a miraculous birth. Unlike Paul, and Pauline Christianity which puts the most overwhelming focus on Yeshua's death and resurrection, the Jesus Movement led by James who Yeshua designated as his successor (NOT Paul) was extremely if not fanatically adherent to his teachings. And did not attach any significance to Yeshua's birth or death. If these people were more attached to Yeshua's teachings more than anyone else in human history, why would they ignore something as significant as miracles such as a miraculous birth, miracles acts etc.? The rejected Gospels (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Ebionites/Hebrews) do not mention anything about miracles.
Have you guys ever seen the movie the lost tomb of Yeshua? Very compelling evidence of him having a wife Mary Magdalene, (the only way an unrelated woman would be buried in a family tomb is if she was married to someone in that tomb) Her tomb's inscription is "Mariamne" and the writings of Philip mention Mary Magdalene as Mariamne. Apparently, he also had a son named Judah. Along with 4 brothers, James, Judas/Jude (Not Judas Iscariot) Simeon, and Jose (Joseph, but they might have called him Jose to differentiate him from his father.) And two sisters, Salome and Mariam (common name it seems). The inscription on his mother's ossuary was Maria, perhaps to distinguish from the three Mariams in their extended family.
So maybe these miracles could have been added after, the miracles of Isa added to the life and works of Yeshua? And this was part of Ananias plans to destroy Yeshua's cause from the inside in a non violent way, and the reason why he sent Saul to Arabia for three years (to find parchments which contained stories of Isa, and his miracles including his miraculous birth) which is not discussed at all in any book?
Funny thing about Paul and Pauline Christianity, is their insistence on the irrelevance of the Torah. Yet the New Testament itself quotes Yeshua as saying something along the lines of the law (Torah) will not pass away until heaven and earth pass away. And before saying this, Yeshua says I have not come to abolish the Torah or the Prophets. And Yeshua also urges his followers to exceed the Pharisees in their righteousness.
The most perplexing line though, is in Galatians 3, when he says those who follow the Law are under a curse, and then produces a line from the Torah as evidence for his assertion which says the exact opposite, that cursed are those who do not follow the law.
It's like someone taking a picture of me and showing it to people to prove that I'm bald (I have quite thick hair)
Also, Paul's letters were written in at least the 30's and at latest the 60's. The first gospels were not written till the 70's. It is highly probable these Gospels could have included things from Paul.
Unlike James and the remaining disciples, Paul never met Jesus, was not familiar with his teachings, and was not present at his death. As a matter of fact, Paul was reviled by people who knew Yeshua (his actual disciples, people who met him and lived with him and were there at his death) and regarded as a false teacher.
-
the quran also says in 2278 to the prophet that there is no hardship in this judgement, the creed "of your father (abeekum)" abraham. Now this is indeed a metaphorical reference isnt it?
Similarly, can "sister of aaron" be a metaphorical reference too?
I really like your thinking. However grammatically 2278 is speaking to us; your father is in plural form like the rest of the verse. Thus, 'father' HAS to be metaphorical.
-
You know interestingly enough, the rejected gospels which were written by people who knew Yeshua and were in his presence and were his real disciples do not mention any kind of miracles including a miraculous birth. Unlike Paul, and Pauline Christianity which puts the most overwhelming focus on Yeshua's death and resurrection, the Jesus Movement led by James who Yeshua designated as his successor (NOT Paul) was extremely if not fanatically adherent to his teachings. And did not attach any significance to Yeshua's birth or death. If these people were more attached to Yeshua's teachings more than anyone else in human history, why would they ignore something as significant as miracles such as a miraculous birth, miracles acts etc.? The rejected Gospels (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Ebionites/Hebrews) do not mention anything about miracles.
The miracles, virgin birth, etc are all mentioned in the Lost Gospels. The Gospel of the Nativity of Mary tells her life and the virgin conception. The Gospel of Infancy which is attributed to Thomas (there is also one from Matthew and others) tells of Jesus miracles form an early age AND of speaking from the cradle - so does Quran. Still searching and reading on these but SO MUCH is making more sense now and relating to Quran.
-
But this is what they say Mazhar, that these hadith are from Muhammed himself, they are the hadith of Muhammed.
No, they don't say like this. They don't say that these are the words of him. That is why they use twice word Qala Qala. They attribute that he meant to say was this and that.
-
No, they don't say like this. They don't say that these are the words of him. That is why they use twice word Qala Qala. They attribute that he meant to say was this and that.
???
But most start with 'so and so said that so and so said that the messenger said' so they are saying he said them. If they are only saying what he MEANT to say thats even worse! o
-
???
But most start with 'so and so said that so and so said that the messenger said' so they are saying he said them. If they are only saying what he MEANT to say thats even worse!
Conjectural matter is always kept vague and confusing, and open for interpretation. That is the trick.
-
I really like your thinking. However grammatically 2278 is speaking to us; your father is in plural form like the rest of the verse. Thus, 'father' HAS to be metaphorical.
May be "figurative" sounds better. "the millat of the father of you people". Though it is clear and certain here that he has been referred as "father"/the head with relation to millat to which the addresses belong; yet it has abundantly been made evident by explanation immediately after, as to in what sense he is the father; "He named you people...".
-
You know interestingly enough, the rejected gospels which were written by people who knew Yeshua and were in his presence and were his real disciples do not mention any kind of miracles including a miraculous birth. Unlike Paul, and Pauline Christianity which puts the most overwhelming focus on Yeshua's death and resurrection, the Jesus Movement led by James who Yeshua designated as his successor (NOT Paul) was extremely if not fanatically adherent to his teachings. And did not attach any significance to Yeshua's birth or death. If these people were more attached to Yeshua's teachings more than anyone else in human history, why would they ignore something as significant as miracles such as a miraculous birth, miracles acts etc.? The rejected Gospels (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Ebionites/Hebrews) do not mention anything about miracles.
Have you guys ever seen the movie the lost tomb of Yeshua? Very compelling evidence of him having a wife Mary Magdalene, (the only way an unrelated woman would be buried in a family tomb is if she was married to someone in that tomb) Her tomb's inscription is "Mariamne" and the writings of Philip mention Mary Magdalene as Mariamne. Apparently, he also had a son named Judah. Along with 4 brothers, James, Judas/Jude (Not Judas Iscariot) Simeon, and Jose (Joseph, but they might have called him Jose to differentiate him from his father.) And two sisters, Salome and Mariam (common name it seems). The inscription on his mother's ossuary was Maria, perhaps to distinguish from the three Mariams in their extended family.
So maybe these miracles could have been added after, the miracles of Isa added to the life and works of Yeshua? And this was part of Ananias plans to destroy Yeshua's cause from the inside in a non violent way, and the reason why he sent Saul to Arabia for three years (to find parchments which contained stories of Isa, and his miracles including his miraculous birth) which is not discussed at all in any book?
Funny thing about Paul and Pauline Christianity, is their insistence on the irrelevance of the Torah. Yet the New Testament itself quotes Yeshua as saying something along the lines of the law (Torah) will not pass away until heaven and earth pass away. And before saying this, Yeshua says I have not come to abolish the Torah or the Prophets. And Yeshua also urges his followers to exceed the Pharisees in their righteousness.
The most perplexing line though, is in Galatians 3, when he says those who follow the Law are under a curse, and then produces a line from the Torah as evidence for his assertion which says the exact opposite, that cursed are those who do not follow the law.
It's like someone taking a picture of me and showing it to people to prove that I'm bald (I have quite thick hair)
Also, Paul's letters were written in at least the 30's and at latest the 60's. The first gospels were not written till the 70's. It is highly probable these Gospels could have included things from Paul.
Unlike James and the remaining disciples, Paul never met Jesus, was not familiar with his teachings, and was not present at his death. As a matter of fact, Paul was reviled by people who knew Yeshua (his actual disciples, people who met him and lived with him and were there at his death) and regarded as a false teacher.
What made you think that Paul believed in the irrelevancy of the Old testament? Plus even though Paul never seen Jesus he did see his disciples and was their companion. Paul emphasis on Jesus's crucifixion and resuurection does not bother me. He probably was countering the claims of Jesus's enemies who saw Jesus as a fake. Its the divinity of Jesus and the Trinity that I have problems with. Paul has nothing to do with all this. In fact its John that Christians claim that emphaiszed jesus's divinity however they bring about implied verses with spin. Nothing explicit and very vague arguments. There is no evidence that any of them believed Jesus was divine, including Paul.
Paul was a follopwer of Rabbinic Judaism so he probably opposed Judaic law. Not Old Testament at least he probably interpret it different than a Rabbi would. After all many here interpret the Koran differently than how a Muslim would.
-
What made you think that Paul believed in the irrelevancy of the Old testament? Plus even though Paul never seen Jesus he did see his disciples and was their companion. Paul emphasis on Jesus's crucifixion and resuurection does not bother me. He probably was countering the claims of Jesus's enemies who saw Jesus as a fake. Its the divinity of Jesus and the Trinity that I have problems with. Paul has nothing to do with all this. In fact its John that Christians claim that emphaiszed jesus's divinity however they bring about implied verses with spin. Nothing explicit and very vague arguments. There is no evidence that any of them believed Jesus was divine, including Paul.
Paul was a follopwer of Rabbinic Judaism so he probably opposed Judaic law. Not Old Testament at least he probably interpret it different than a Rabbi would. After all many here interpret the Koran differently than how a Muslim would.
Paul's letter to the Galatians.
Galatians 215-17 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; yet we know that a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be justified by the works of the law.
Galatians 310 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the things written in the book of the law." (What was Paul thinking when he decided to cite this particular piece of "evidence" for his claim that those who follow the law are under a curse? Was he thinking?)
Galatians 54 You who want to be justified by the law have cut yourselves off from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.
Actually he met with his disciples for a mere 15 days and was rebuffed by them. Not only was he not their companion, they refer to him in their letters as "the man who is my enemy." Paul was the one who put forward the importance of crucifixion. To tell James and his followers that Yeshua's execution was something to be celebrated was incredibly abhorrent. In their letters (James) they refer to him (Paul) as a false teacher, and he refers to them in Galatians as those who preach a false gospel.
Galatians 16-7 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel-Not that there is another gospel, but there are some who are confusing you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
Did Paul believe Jesus was human?
Galatians 111-12 For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.
Son of God
Galatians 220 and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.