Israel a grateful servant : He never was a prophet neither his progeny was

cleanfox5982

Salaam brother,

There is no problem if we disagree with each other, still we can be handshake. Let me explain you my understanding, inshaAllah.

Salam ,

Stop this strategy its satanic .

If you find that i am offensive in this message its only a self defence as i read directly and indirectly your personal attack , i will surely can guaranty to you that i will never ever fight with you because you disagree with me , but i can't guaranty friendship or brotherhood in the system as long as we disagree between each other ( i am not a pretender here or claiming self superiority but i am 10000 % that we can't really become friend or brother if we disagree , i'am not assuming here that you should agree with me precisely but i mean in general about all members discussions in the forum) , we should come and overcome and have strong patient to come to an absolute agreement that's the goal , the concept of " disagrement do not spoil the intimacy" was one of the fabricated rules and culture during the Abbasid era at the time of the spread of false hadiths , the concept of disagreement on the system is strongly banned and refused by the Quran

2-213 Mankind was one Ommah ; then Allah sent the prophets as bringers of good tidings and warners and sent down with them the Scripture in truth to judge between the people concerning that in which they differed. And none differed over the Scripture except those who were given it - after the clear proofs came to them - out of jealous animosity among themselves. And Allah guided those who believed to the truth concerning that over which they had differed, by His permission. And Allah guides whom He wills to a straight path.

3-19 Indeed, the system in the sight of Allah is Islam. And those who were given the Scripture did not differ except after knowledge had come to them - out of jealous animosity between themselves. And whoever disbelieves in the verses of Allah , then indeed, Allah is swift in account.

You , me , all the people in the forum we are among "The people of the book " if you become a ruler or a governor and you keep on holding on the scripture you become "Those who received the book " , and if i become too among "Those who received the book " we are both asked to not disagree at all about what is on the book , we should be in a total agreement , in the contrary if i was or you were among other poeple scripture then disagrement ( variance) in the law ( Al-shariaa' &#1607 is recongnised because the law ( Al-shariaa' &#1607 do differ from poeple scripture to another.

33
33 He has sent down upon you, the Book in truth, confirming what was before it. And He anzala/revealed AlTauraata and AlInjeela.

As per your understand brother, AlTauraat and AlInjeel both are sent down or anzala in 33, right? But that is not the case.

546
546 And We sent, following in their footsteps, Eisa, the son of Maryam, confirming that which came before him in AlTauraat; and We aataiyna/gave him AlInjeel, in which was guidance and light and confirming that which preceded it of AlTauraat as guidance and instruction for the righteous.

AlInjeel was not sent down but was given , another reference

5727
5727 Then We sent following their footsteps Our messengers and followed with Jesus, the son of Mary, and aataina/gave him AlInjeel. And We placed in the hearts of those who followed him compassion and mercy and monasticism, which they innovated; We did not prescribe it for them except seeking the approval of Allah. But they did not observe it with due observance. So We gave the ones who believed among them their reward, but many of them are defiantly disobedient.

If you find any clear aayat as I quoted above that AlInjeel was sent down, please let me know, I could not find such aayat.

Did you understand 33 now? That waw separates it. Same as in...

What about this

15-87 And We have certainly given ( Ataynak) you, seven of Matani and the great Qur'an.

1587

Muhammed was given the Quran , the arabic word used here is / Ataynak , the same word used for Ii'ssa ( son of Mary ) being given the Injeel in verse 5-46 . So as per your claim , Muhammed should not then be receiving the book but he was only given the book , what about the this verse then

20-2 We have not sent down to you the Qur'an that you be distressed

The word used here is " / Anzalna " so your claim is simply and clearly wrong , your claim collapse now and forever , and you better vomit what you have in your chest because it will make your understanding sick and your self will get contaminated , and you better not vomiting it in the forum as you will mislead people and it will remain in your account .

332
332 Say, "Obey Allah and the Messenger." But if they turn away - then indeed, Allah does not like the disbelievers.

Do you think this waw also relates AlRasool? If so, then how about 459?

459
459 O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best and best in result.

Do you see the difference between 332 and 459 brother? Additional 'atii'oo/obey is missing in 332, why? Until you stop using your so called Arabic grammar rules, you will not understand what I am saying.

There are two waws in AlQuraan as and . One waw is separating waw and another with tashdeed is a relating waw.

There is nothing whatsoever in the Arabic tongue called "waw with tashdeed is a relating waw same as there is nothing even called " waw " ( you are using Abbasid grammar not me , and for your information not all that grammar is wrong, and i am sure you know that iam not using traditional grammar , and i am sure you remember what i posted in that matter since i joined the forum , and i am sure you used what i posted in that matter as reference in your understanding and research ) . Tashdid ta?dd "emphasis&quot, is one of the diacritics used with the Arabic alphabet, marking a long consonant (geminate),(consonant or vowel doubled) , for "tashdeed"on the phonetic " W" it is "mushadada" only when its inside a word never isolated and never in the beginning of a word or at the end of a word , for the simple reason as its hard to pronounce by being so hard to pronounce it become not Arabic ( Authentic) as the Arabic tongue is following one of the very simple basic rule witch is easy . easy to pronounce easy to memories easy to use , hence Tashdid on the phonetic " W" when its isolated between word do not exist at all.
Exemple for Tashdid on the phonetic " W" iside a word

2-185 (...) faman tatawwaa' (...)

16-92 (...) men baa'di qowwah (...)

If you you can justify or find a Tashdid on the phonetic " W" isolated or in front of a word or at the end of a word , you will never saw me posting in this forum.

what does mean , when you say (There are two waws in AlQuraan as and . One waw is separating waw) , what does "separating waw" mean this is loose and poor explination , the "W" in 19-58 simply mean that the "Al-maa'touf /The conjunctive noun ( Isreal's progeny ) is different then The upon conjunctive Al-maa'touf aa'layeh (Ibraheem's progeny &#1605 , if i say

Yesterday i saw the familly of mmkhan and Jankiz khan .
Don't youunderstand that the "and" in between is to indicate that they are diffrent familly ?, and that the familly in front of mmkhan ("Al-maa'touf /The conjunctive noun ) is to be unlaterly spreaded to Jankiz Khan (The upon conjunctive Al-maa'touf aa'layeh ) ?, mean i saw the family of mmkhan and the family of Jankiz Khan , and its reasonably from the contecxt of the speech it is understood that the familly of mmkhan is diffrent to the family of Jankiz Khan

There are other diffrent usage of "W" in the arabic tongue witch is not its subject now.

That is OK brother. Why not Muhammed, Ibrahim and Musa are single person and not a group because of their usage in AlQuraan. Please see..

03035 - Imran's imraat .
11071 - Ibrahim's imraat .
19005 - Zachariyya's imraat .
66010 - Nooh's imraat .
66010 - Loot's imraat .
66011 - Firaun's imraat .

04001 - Nafs's zauja .
07019 - Adam's zauja .
33053 - Allah's Rasool's zauja .
33059 - Nabi's zauja .

Then what about this

66 -1 O Prophet ( Al-naby &#1610, why do you make unlawful for you what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives ( azwajak ) ? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
(

The verse is saying your wives ( azwajak ) to whome ? to the Prophet ( Al-naby &#1610,

There are dozen of prrof from quran that distruct your above claim , the one i bring is enough in my opinion, there are more insight about thematter of Prohphet and Messenger but its out of the subject of the thread .

Your claim collapse now and forever , and you better vomit what you have in your chest because it will make your understanding sick and your self will get contaminated accordignly , and you better not vomiting it in the forum as you will mislead people and it will remain in your account , i saw dozens of mistakes and misleading understanding in your recent posts , and i didn't want to interact for the simple reason

I didn't want to end up to personal conversation and useless disagrement like now.

Do you see the difference between 332 and 459 brother? Additional 'atii'oo/obey is missing in 332, why? Until you stop using your so called Arabic grammar rules, you will not understand what I am saying.

Hope you understand what I am saying, again, it has nothing to do with grammar.

Stop this Not only i understand what you'r saying but I understand through your understanding what you do no't understand in your understanding

May Allah increase us in knowledge and guide us to His true path pr
mmKhan

Personal view I am worried about some of what you are posting recently that you are about decreasing in knowledge .

If you don't like me and my posting ignore me and my posting , but do not post attack underline ( message not to you only but to the ones that they know themself)

Salam ( i mean i will not fight with you )

mmkhan

Salam ,

Stop this strategy its satanic .

If you find that i am offensive in this message its only a self defence as i read directly and indirectly your personal attack , i will surely can guaranty to you that i will never ever fight with you because you disagree with me , but i can't guaranty friendship or brotherhood in the system as long as we disagree between each other ( i am not a pretender here but i am 10000 % that we can't really become friend or brother if we disagree ,

The word used here is " / Anzalna " so your claim is simply and clearly wrong , your claim collapse now and forever , and you better vomit what you have in your chest because it will make your understanding sick and your self will get contaminated , and you better not vomiting it in the forum as you will mislead people and it will remain in your account .

Salam,

Red part 4912 .

Blue part You don't even know how to talk, no decency. Be happy with you Deen. You are afraid of your lies getting exposed. Anyways,

1041
1041 And if they deny you, then say, "For me are my deeds, and for you are your deeds. You are disassociated from what I do, and I am disassociated from what you do."

mmKhan

cleanfox5982

Salam,

Red part 4912 .

Blue part You don't even know how to talk, no decency. Be happy with you Deen. You are afraid of your lies getting exposed. Anyways,

1041
1041 And if they deny you, then say, "For me are my deeds, and for you are your deeds. You are disassociated from what I do, and I am disassociated from what you do."

mmKhan

Out of context .

Reply to the main subject and the argument i provided or leave me in Salam

The phonetic " W" and its usage in 19-58 (between Ibramem and Israel).
Ataynak and Anzalna
Zawjak and the prophet

I feel not comfortable and i take out what i said in the previous post , and would like if moderator could delete what is offensive and keep the main post and arguments , and i appreciate if you watch your word next time.

I respect your self but i do not respect some of your understanding , hence i distinguish between what you are and some of what you hold as way of understanding , but in the meanwhile i do recognize many of correct understanding posted by you . anyway i am not here to judge you . I found you offensive so i replied back , now i take out that .

Salam

Ayisha

Salam ,

Stop this strategy its satanic .

If you find that i am offensive in this message its only a self defence as i read directly and indirectly your personal attack , i will surely can guaranty to you that i will never ever fight with you because you disagree with me , but i can't guaranty friendship or brotherhood in the system as long as we disagree between each other ( i am not a pretender here or claiming self superiority but i am 10000 % that we can't really become friend or brother if we disagree , i'am not assuming here that you should agree with me precisely but i mean in general about all members discussions in the forum) , we should come and overcome and have strong patient to come to an absolute agreement that's the goal , the concept of " disagrement do not spoil the intimacy" was one of the fabricated rules and culture during the Abbasid era at the time of the spread of false hadiths , the concept of disagreement on the system is strongly banned and refused by the Quran

so agree with you or you speak to people like this??

The word used here is " / Anzalna " so your claim is simply and clearly wrong , your claim collapse now and forever , and you better vomit what you have in your chest because it will make your understanding sick and your self will get contaminated , and you better not vomiting it in the forum as you will mislead people and it will remain in your account .

Yesterday i saw the familly of mmkhan and Jankiz khan .
Don't youunderstand that the "and" in between is to indicate that they are diffrent familly ?, and that the familly in front of mmkhan ("Al-maa'touf /The conjunctive noun ) is to be unlaterly spreaded to Jankiz Khan (The upon conjunctive Al-maa'touf aa'layeh ) ?, mean i saw the family of mmkhan and the family of Jankiz Khan , and its reasonably from the contecxt of the speech it is understood that the familly of mmkhan is diffrent to the family of Jankiz Khan

confused but ..."Yesterday i saw the familly of mmkhan and Jankiz khan" would mean they are from the same family and "Yesterday i saw the family of mmkhan and the family of Jankiz khan" would be different families..........

Your claim collapse now and forever , and you better vomit what you have in your chest because it will make your understanding sick and your self will get contaminated accordignly , and you better not vomiting it in the forum as you will mislead people and it will remain in your account , i saw dozens of mistakes and misleading understanding in your recent posts , and i didn't want to interact for the simple reason

I didn't want to end up to personal conversation and useless disagrement like now.
again?

Stop this Not only i understand what you'r saying but I understand through your understanding what you do no't understand in your understanding
I don't understand you not understanding his understanding but maybe he's thinking the same as me and doesn't understand your understanding of his understanding making it impossible to have any understanding of the misunderstanding in question..whatever you understand that to be......but I as an onlooker don't understand. hypno

brickwall

Bender

I don't understand you not understanding his understanding but maybe he's thinking the same as me and doesn't understand your understanding of his understanding making it impossible to have any understanding of the misunderstanding in question..whatever you understand that to be......but I as an onlooker don't understand. hypno

Salaam,

rotfl

I already said it once but I repeat it, I really like your avatar )

Salaam,
Bender

Ayisha

Salaam,

rotfl

I already said it once but I repeat it, I really like your avatar

Salaam,
Bender

Salam, thank you sun

cleanfox5982

Salaam brother,

Note that in the verse also the progeny of Adam is mentioned.
Why didn't you consider Nuh?

Salam Bender ,

Because The context of the speech point to Israel not to Nuh/Noah , the singular pronoun "Inaho / he " is pointing to the progeny of the ones who was carried with Nuh/Noah in the ship not to Nuh/Noah him self

17-2 And We gave Moses the Scripture and made it a guidance for the Children of Israel that you not take other than Me as Disposer of affairs,
17-3 progeny of those We carried with Noah. Indeed, he was a grateful servant.
17-2/3

And the word "progeny " can be used for a single person as for a group of people , same as in

3-33 Indeed, Allah chose Adam and Noah and the family of Abraham and the family of 'Imran over the Al-Aalimen
3-34 A progeny some of them from others. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.

3-33

Adam , Nuh are single person , the family of Abraham and the family of 'Imran are group of people , we can say to someone that he is a progeny of somebody as we can say to a group of people that they are a progeny of someone.

And Why did you only mark Israel red here and not Bani Israel?

Because the article "Inaho / he " is used for single pronoun not plural pronoun , so it is pointing to a single person ( Israel ) , if it was pointing to all bani Isreal the verse would say " Inahoum / they"

I think there are only 2 possible scenario's for
if is reffering to a group then "thurriyata" is reffering to Bani Israel and Israel is not the name of a person but the collective name of those who where with Nuh.
if is reffering to a single person then "thurriyata" is still reffering to Bani Israel and Israel was a person among those who where saved with Nuh.
Do you have evidence from The Quran for this?

There is a "Delay " of the singular pronoun "Inaho / he " , it can be placed in front of the word " Progeny " but doesn't fit for the context of the speech and "the Rhetoric "

The "Delay " is as below

17-2/3 ( &#1615
17-2 And We gave Moses the Scripture and made it a guidance for the Children of Israel that you not take other than Me as Disposer of affairs,
17-3 (He is ) progeny of those We carried with Noah. Indeed, he was a grateful servant.

The singular pronoun "Inaho / he " in front of "progeny of those We carried with Noah" was deleted and delayed till the end of the phrases , you can see how the singular pronoun "Inaho / he " in front of "progeny of those We carried with Noah" doesn't fit at all and there is loose repetition , so the delay of the singular pronoun "Inaho / he " is because of the context of the speech and "the Rhetoric " .

Will give inchallah , my understanding to the rest of your question later.

cleanfox5982

salam
i agree with main of this post.
I think that Israel was not a nabi nor a rassol but only elevated to this grade by lies of his progeny.
Bani Israel seems to be even jealous of bani Ibrahim and bani Imran, the true lineage of prophecy.

There are many other questions

Is Israel the only false prophet in old testament ?
Are bani Israel the lineage of false prophets, claiming prophecy.
who is mister israel ?
Where are now, the true bani israel (10 tribes are lost in official jewish history) and where are bani israel mentionned in quran as comtemporary to Muhammed ?

Peace

Salam ,

From a overall Quranic point of view this questions is not that important , the case (&#1607 of Bani Israel is a model for Al-Omyeen ( the community of Muhammed) to reflect upon and to learn how to drive when a scripture come down. Also contain correction and alteration to bani Israel for some of their thoughts , works , and saying.

In my understanding Israel is from the progeny of the people who were before Adam in the earth , for the simple reason as he is not from the progeny of Nuh / Noah , so he is not from the progeny of Adam , Israel is a progeny (a seed ) from the one who was carried on the ship with Nuh/ Noah , the other argument is that the Quran is stating that the progeny of the chosen ones are a progeny one is from the other , so those who was carried with Nuh/Noah are simply not among the progeny of Adam , and among them ( those who was carried on the ship with Nuh) was the ancestor of Israel and his sons.

The other scenario is that the progeny of those who was carried with Nuh still from Adam , but even-though they still not from the chosen ones (&#1606 , but from their progeny will come a Man called Israel , who was a Thinkfull servant , his sons will become a big tribe , and Allah will favorite ( &#1606 them by placing inside them the progeny of the chosen ones and i guess it stared from the family of Ibraheem , the Quran mention Ibraheem and Israel together so most likely they were in the same era. ( probably not)

Back to Israel

17-2 And We gave Moses the Scripture and made it a guidance for the Children of Israel that you not take other than Me as Disposer of affairs,
17-3 progeny of who We carried with Noah. Indeed, he was a grateful servant.

17-2/3

The correct English translation should be like this

He is progeny of who (or the one) we carried with Noah , he is not the progeny that was carried with Noah but he is progeny of who was carried with Noah , there is a big difference in the two expression , the existence of " of Who / /men " is explaining and indicating that there is someone was carried with Noah in the boat , from the progeny of this Man come Israel and his Sons. The " of Who / /man " is a always used for "Al-aa'kel / Wise or intelectual beings " its diffrent to "What / /Ma" look at this

2-196 And complete the Hajj and 'umrah for Allah. But if you are prevented, then what can be obtained with ease of gifts. And do not uncover your heads until the gift has reached its place . And whoever among you is ill or has an hurt of the head a ransom of fasting or charity or Nask (...)

2-197 Hajj is well-known months, so whoever has made Hajj obligatory upon himself therein (....)

Ayisha

but from their progeny will come a Man called Israel , who was a Thinkfull servant , his sons will become a big tribe , and Allah will favorite ( &#1606 them by placing inside them the progeny of the chosen ones and i guess it stared from the family of Ibraheem , the Quran mention Ibraheem and Israel together so most likely they were in the same era. ( probably not)

Israel was Abraham's grandson. giveup

cleanfox5982

03035 - Imran's imraat .
11071 - Ibrahim's imraat .
19005 - Zachariyya's imraat .
66010 - Nooh's imraat .
66010 - Loot's imraat .
66011 - Firaun's imraat .

04001 - Nafs's zauja .
07019 - Adam's zauja .
33053 - Allah's Rasool's zauja .
33059 - Nabi's zauja .

mmKhan

Salam,

The word Imraah / Women is simply the opposite of Imraa / Men , and when the word Imraah / Women is used before a Masculine Men's name , like Imraah Noah or Imraah Imran , simply mean the wife of Noah , wife of Imran , the term Imraah of someone is where people who has scripture background got the culture of naming officially their women by similar term , like Madame Anderson or Ms Anderson ,a married women is not called by her own name in public or in scripture , simply to declare that she is a married women , nowhere in the Quran a women is named by her name , except Meriem the daughter of Imran , simply because she was not married to any men .

A verse to show the term Imraa / Men the opposite of Imraah / Women

19-21 O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a wicked man ( Imraa ) nor was thy mother unchaste .

The term Imraah of ( the wife of) is only used for Mankind , the term has a social functionality , the term Imraah of ( the wife of) is different then the term zawjah of ( the pair of ) , the second can be used for all creatures ( animals and plants ) , also the term Zawj / Pair can be called for men and women , a women can call her husband my pair (Zawji) , and the men can call his wife my pair ( Zawji) , in the other hand the term Imraah of ( the wife of) can only used for women (womankind) , to highlight her social statue as a married women to the men mentioned after the term Imraah so everybody will know that she is a married women , and her husband is known too , like Imraah Lut , Imraah Firaa'wn etc.

The term Zawj / Pair is used in the Quran for some women only because the speech and the case of the verses is not talking about them , they are not the subject of the speech so the Quran use the term Zawj / Pair , when a women is the subject of the speech then the Quran use the term Imraah of ( the wife of) and he give the name of her husband , like

3-35 when the wife of 'Imran (Imraah 'Imran ) said My Lord! I have vowed unto Thee that which is in my belly as a consecrated (offering). Accept it from me. Lo! Thou, only Thou, art the Hearer, the Knower!

12-51 He Said "What was your condition when you sought to seduce Joseph?" They said, "Perfect is Allah ! We know about him no evil." The wife of al-'Azeez (Imraah Al-'Azeez ) said, "Now the truth has become evident. It was I who sought to seduce him, and indeed, he is of the truthful

In both verse the speech is about the wife of 'Imran and Al-'Azeez , so the term Imraah / wife is used and indicating their husbands , same as in verse 66-10 , 66-11 , 12-30

When the verse is not talking about the women her self but just she is included in the speech , the term Zawjah / pair is used

And We said O Adam! Dwell thou and thy pair ( Zawjok &#1603 in the Garden, and eat ye freely (of the fruits) thereof where ye will; but come not nigh this tree lest ye become wrong-doers.

33-37 when you said to the one on whom Allah bestowed favor and you bestowed favor, "Keep your pair ( Zawjak &#1603 and fear Allah ," while you concealed within yourself that which Allah is to disclose. And you feared the people, while Allah has more right that you fear Him. So when Zayd had no longer any need for her, We married her to you in order that there not be upon the believers any discomfort concerning the wives of their adopted sons when they no longer have need of them. And ever is the command of Allah accomplished.

In both verse the speech is not about informing something about the wife of Zayed and Adam , they are not the subject of the speech , so the term Zawjah / pair is used , same as in verse 7-19.

So both term Imraah and Zawj / Pair has nothing to do with is it a single specific person mentioned or not.

Ayisha