Was Jesus Created...?
-
It is interesting that not a single individual attempted to refute the low-hanging fruit of sura 81?
Apple Pie,
It is NOT necessary to refute both the core and corollary arguments. In my previous post I challenged your logic in translation of 359 which you've either side stepped, ignored or did not see. You must answer that first...
It is completely understandable, as the Koran most obviously portrays Jesus as God Almighty?same as the Holy Bible from which it borrows itself from.
Perhaps you are not confident of your arguments yourself and since your facts and analysis does not say the above you are having to patch up the cracks with rhetoric.
The first of these compares Jesus to ?allah?.
As demonstrated in the previous post, the first portion of 3.59 tells us that Jesus is the similitude/equivalent of ?allah?, and that Jesus is ?inda?, i.e. with ?allah?.
NO that is not right!
Look
3.59?
The similitude of Jesus before God is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him "Be". And he was.
The logical comparator is "is as that"
What is compared is jesus with adam. You totally forget adam, do you see him as the gooseberry?!
Furthermore, your "3inda" definition is not that he is there, it is in the sight of GOD.
Otherwise
4134 Man kana yureedu thawaba alddunya faAAinda Allahi thawabu alddunya waalakhirati wakana Allahu sameeAAan baseeran
Basically, your logic would say that the reward of this life is the same as jesus and god. This is non sensical.
6124 Waitha jaathum ayatun qaloo lan numina hatta nuta mithla ma ootiya rusulu Allahi Allahu aAAlamu haythu yajAAalu risalatahu sayuseebu allatheena ajramoo sagharun AAinda Allahi waAAathabun shadeedun bima kanoo yamkuroona
Here you equated the humiliated wicked ones with jesus and god. It is clear that the humiliated are not god hence jesus is not part of god either.
Clearly, "3inda" refers to issues in the sight of GOD and nothing else.
Observe the first particle?
= ?inna?
?inna? definition
This really adds smoke and not much more than that, yes it emphasises the point but it does not address your shoddy logic.
You really need to start addressing these issues head on. Your interpretations are not supported by the quran.
-
Greetings Ash Shuura,
Thanks for adding your comments?
Apple Pie wrote
It is interesting that not a single individual attempted to refute the low-hanging fruit of sura 81?Apple Pie,
It is NOT necessary to refute both the core and corollary arguments. In my previous post I challenged your logic in translation of 359 which you've either side stepped, ignored or did not see. You must answer that first...
We have systematically exegeted the first five words of 3.59?leaving plenty of room for Q & A.
What part of this is escaping your grasp??
Not to worry?we have established the first part so that you will soon understand the second part.
Quote
It is completely understandable, as the Koran most obviously portrays Jesus as God Almighty?same as the Holy Bible from which it borrows itself from.Perhaps you are not confident of your arguments yourself and since your facts and analysis does not say the above you are having to patch up the cracks with rhetoric.
We are entirely confident in our position.
This is proven by the complete and utter lack of a direct rebuttal to the posts? other than ones voicing their distain for the obvious?
Quote
The first of these compares Jesus to ?allah?.As demonstrated in the previous post, the first portion of 3.59 tells us that Jesus is the similitude/equivalent of ?allah?, and that Jesus is ?inda?, i.e. with ?allah?.
NO that is not right!
Look
3.59?
The similitude of Jesus before God is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him "Be". And he was.
The logical comparator is "is as that"
Show us the word(s) rendered as ?is as that??.
What is compared is jesus with adam.
Wrong.
What is compared (in the first comparison), in Jesus to ?allah?.
You totally forget adam, do you see him as the gooseberry?!
The second comparison involves ?Adam??.that we will cover after everyone is cognizant of the first comparison between Jesus and ?allah??
Furthermore, your "3inda" definition is not that he is there, it is in the sight of GOD.
?In the sight of God??is just another way of stating
denoting presence, i.e. perceptible presence, and also ideal presence, or rather the place of presence; and nearness, or the place of nearness; or the utmost nearness, and therefore it has no dim.; i.e. it is primarily used in relation to that which is present with a person (or thing), in any adjacent part or quarter with respect to that person (or thing); or in relation to that which is near to a person (or thing); thus is signifies at, near, nigh, by, near by, or close by, a place, or thing; with, present with, or in the presence of
Otherwise
4134 Man kana yureedu thawaba alddunya faAAinda Allahi thawabu alddunya waalakhirati wakana Allahu sameeAAan baseeran
Basically, your logic would say that the reward of this life is the same as jesus and god. This is non sensical.
No.
This would be a more proper rendering?
Who was/is wanting the present world's reward/compensation, so at Allah (is) the present world's and the end's reward/compensation, and Allah was/is hearing/listening, seeing/ knowing/understanding.
The reward is with ?allah?.
No comparison is being made here.
Incidentally?the Holy Bible tells us that the reward is with Jesus?and, obviously, is the same in the Koran, as well?
6124 Waitha jaathum ayatun qaloo lan numina hatta nuta mithla ma ootiya rusulu Allahi Allahu aAAlamu haythu yajAAalu risalatahu sayuseebu allatheena ajramoo sagharun AAinda Allahi waAAathabun shadeedun bima kanoo yamkuroona
Here you equated the humiliated wicked ones with jesus and god. It is clear that the humiliated are not god hence jesus is not part of god either.
Clearly, "3inda" refers to issues in the sight of GOD and nothing else.
Wrong again.
And if an evidence/verse came to them, they said "We will never/not believe until we be given/brought similar/equal/alike (to) what was given/brought (to) Allah's messengers." Allah (is) more knowing where/when He makes/puts His message, those who committed a sin/crime will be struck/marked (with) humiliation/lowliness/subservience at Allah, and strong (severe) torture because (of) what they were cheating/deceiving.
The sinners are not being compared to ?allah??they are being dealt with directly by him?
Quote
Observe the first particle?= ?inna?
?inna? definition
This really adds smoke and not much more than that, yes it emphasises the point but it does not address your shoddy logic.
Thanks for adding your opinion.
However?we are not really interested in opinion.
Try buttressing your opinion with references?
You really need to start addressing these issues head on.
Done.
Your interpretations are not supported by the quran.
Actually, they are?
Thanks?
-
Apple Pie,
We have systematically exegeted the first five words of 3.59?leaving plenty of room for Q & A.
What part of this is escaping your grasp??
No, it is infact you who has neither translated nor grasped the first part of 359...
You said
1-)Amazingly?not only does the classic Arabic tell us that Jesus is the equivalent or similitude ?Mathalu? of ?allah??
2-)but we are also told that Jesus is present with ?allah??as ?allah? is not alone?!
1st Point
4211
The creator of the heavens and earth...there is nothing like a likeness of Him...
Hence, because there is nothing like Him, jesus can not be GOD.
Also,
3.59?
The similitude of Jesus before God is as the exampleof Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him "Be". And he was.
The logical comparator is "is as that " or to clarify your question "is as the example of" to be precise.
Infact, see 4359
...He was no more than a servant..
Context When (Jesus) the son of Mary is held up as an example...
Conclusion
a-)There is nothing like the likeness of him.
b-)The similitude of adam and jesus are compared and NOT GOD.
c-) Jesus was no more than a servant.Therefore, your assertion is wrong.
2nd Point
we are also told that Jesus is present with ?allah??as ?allah? is not alone?!
This can not be the case, as pointed out
Furthermore, your "3inda" definition is not that he is there, it is in the sight of GOD.
Otherwise
4134 Man kana yureedu thawaba alddunya faAAinda Allahi thawabu alddunya waalakhirati wakana Allahu sameeAAan baseeran
Basically, your logic would say that the reward of this life is the same as jesus and god. This is non sensical.
6124 Waitha jaathum ayatun qaloo lan numina hatta nuta mithla ma ootiya rusulu Allahi Allahu aAAlamu haythu yajAAalu risalatahu sayuseebu allatheena ajramoo sagharun AAinda Allahi waAAathabun shadeedun bima kanoo yamkuroona
Here you equated the humiliated wicked ones with jesus and god. It is clear that the humiliated are not god hence jesus is not part of god either.
We did not compare here, you got it wrong we addressed your second premise where your position is presence meant being part of...
Conclusion
Since,
a-)Reward in GODs presence does not imply a rewards are also GOD.
b-) Since the wicked humiliated can not be part of GOD in His presence
.then...this presence does not infer jesus is part of GOD.Therefore, your 2nd assertion is also wrong.
-
Greetings Ash Shuura,
Thanks for your reply?
You said
Quote
1-)Amazingly?not only does the classic Arabic tell us that Jesus is the equivalent or similitude ?Mathalu? of ?allah??2-)but we are also told that Jesus is present with ?allah??as ?allah? is not alone?!
1st Point
4211
The creator of the heavens and earth...there is nothing like a likeness of Him...
Hence, because there is nothing like Him, jesus can not be GOD.
The Holy Bible is quite clear that there is one God, as well.
The Holy Bible also states that Jesus is God.
It states both?just like your book of faith also does?
Does this surprise you?
Furthermore?the key term in not mentioned at all in your example.
Also,
3.59?
The similitude of Jesus before God is as the exampleof Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him "Be". And he was.
The logical comparator is "is as that " or to clarify your question "is as the example of" to be precise.
Why not define your terms first, so that you are cognizant of the proper usage of them?and how they apply to the ayah in question?
Go ahead?define for us using verifiable classic Arabic Lexicography.
Your whole argument hinges on the correct interpretation of this one word?
Infact, see 4359
...He was no more than a servant..
Context When (Jesus) the son of Mary is held up as an example...
Please inform us why Jesus? name is never mentioned in your example?
Conclusion
a-)There is nothing like the likeness of him.
Same as stated in the Holy Bible?
b-)The similitude of adam and jesus are compared and NOT GOD.
Jesus is compared to ?allah?, as He is co-equal?
You have yet to define for us.
c-) Jesus was no more than a servant.
Therefore, your assertion is wrong.
The ayah that you used for this one does not even mention the name Jesus?
2nd Point
Quote
we are also told that Jesus is present with ?allah??as ?allah? is not alone?!This can not be the case, as pointed out
Actually, it is indeed the case, as we have amply demonstrated?
Furthermore, your "3inda" definition is not that he is there, it is in the sight of GOD.
We already went over this?what part of the classic definition did not agree with you?
Quote
Otherwise4134 Man kana yureedu thawaba alddunya faAAinda Allahi thawabu alddunya waalakhirati wakana Allahu sameeAAan baseeran
Basically, your logic would say that the reward of this life is the same as jesus and god. This is non sensical.
6124 Waitha jaathum ayatun qaloo lan numina hatta nuta mithla ma ootiya rusulu Allahi Allahu aAAlamu haythu yajAAalu risalatahu sayuseebu allatheena ajramoo sagharun AAinda Allahi waAAathabun shadeedun bima kanoo yamkuroona
Here you equated the humiliated wicked ones with jesus and god. It is clear that the humiliated are not god hence jesus is not part of god either.
We did not compare here, you got it wrong we addressed your second premise where your position is presence meant being part of...
Why not post my responses to your examples instead of glossing over them like nothing was ever said??
You can do better than this?
Be honest with yourself.
Conclusion
Since,
a-)Reward in GODs presence does not imply a rewards are also GOD.
Who said that they were?.?
b-) Since the wicked humiliated can not be part of GOD in His presence
.then...Who said that it did?
this presence does not infer jesus is part of GOD.
Are you talking about 3.59 now that your examples are defunct and do not demonstrate your position??
Please put some effort into your replies?
Thanks?
-
Apple Pie, your original question is not whether Jesus is like God. It is 'Does the Qur'an say that Jesus is created?' In that case people have answered your question by bringing ayats concerning the creation (khalaq) of Jesus. Please address the word 'khalaq' first.
-
Apple Pie,
Lets refocus your mind
Your core argument which you failed to prove
Quote
1-)Amazingly?not only does the classic Arabic tell us that Jesus is the equivalent or similitude ?Mathalu? of ?allah??2-)but we are also told that Jesus is present with ?allah??as ?allah? is not alone?!
Here is what I am not satisfied with your argument.
- Which particular definition you are picking and why?
- You have not given a transliteration of 459.
- You have not shown how the order of words work to produce your understanding.
- You have not validated your claim through the Quran to show you did not make a mistake.
Anyone can see for themselves what part of the arguments are complete and which aren't.
It is obvious to anyone that your interpretation can not be validated by the quran, your only hope is to pick shades of meanings that can be inferred from a whole host of definitions. Perhaps this is why you did not provide a translation of 359.
When you are answering please make sure you cover all the points and cut out the verbage that comes with it...
-
Greetings All,
Let us now consider the second half comparison of 3.59, which begins with the word ?kamathali??
Inna mathala AAeesa AAinda Allahi kamathali adama khalaqahu min turabin thumma qala lahu kun fayakoonu
Defining the word?
= ?ka?
?ka? definition
When prefixed to a noun is called ?ka? of comparison. A particle prefixed to nouns, and to other particles, and meaning ?as? or ?like?. It is a formally undeveloped noun, which occurs only as the governing word in the genitive connection, but runs in this position through all the relations of case (similitude, instar). Like, like that, so, similarly, likewise, even so, so shall it be, so the fact is.
When prefixed to the noun the latter is redundant, as in 2.261
Mathalu allatheena yunfiqoona amwalahum fee sabeeli Allahi kamathali habbatin anbatat sabAAa sanabila fee kulli sunbulatin mi-atu habbatin waAllahu yudaAAifu liman yashao waAllahu wasiAAun AAaleemun
2.261 (The) resemblance (of) those who spend their properties/wealth in Allah's way/sake (is) as/like (the) resemblance of a seed/grain (that) sprouted/grew seven ears/spikes, in every ear/spike (are) one hundred grain(s)/seed(s), and Allah doubles/multiplies for whom He wills/wants, and Allah (is) rich/abundant, knowledgeable.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume eight, p. 2998
A Grammar of the Arabic Language, W. Wright, Third edition, volume 1, p. 280
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar pp. 475
A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran, John Penrice, pp. 122 - 123Reviewing ?mathalu? once more?
= ?mathalu?
?mathalu? definition
Noun. Parable, likeness, similitude, like, reason, proverb, discourse, equivalent, comparison, sign, lesson, an example, case, state, condition, argument, match, an analogue. It comes from the root ?mathala?, which means to resemble, imitate, compare any one with, be or look like some one, bear a likeness.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume eight, pp. 3017 - 3018
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar pp. 525 - 526= ?ka? + ?mathali? = ?kamathali? = as/like
Occurrences of ?kamathali? in the Koran 13
Locations 2.17, 2.171, 2.261, 2.264, 2.265, 3.59, 3.117, 7.176, 29.41, 57.20, 59.15, 59.16, 62.5Thus, as we can see for ourselves, that the defining of our terms is absolutely critical to the proper understanding of the ayah in question.
There are two comparisons taking place in 3.59; the latter comparison is redundant to the former.
This is per the classic Arabic definition.
Period.
Not the other way around as Muslims would like it to be.
This then, forces Adam?s comparison to be likened to the comparison of Jesus to ?allah?.
So...the burning question is what is redundant about Adams? comparison to that of Jesus? comparison?
Let?s review more terminology?
The second (and redundant) comparison involves the creation of Adam.
The first term utilized is ?
= ?khalaqa?
?khalaqa? definition
Masculine singular. He created, determined. Anything made smooth; signifying the being smooth, as such also in a rock, freedom from crack or fracture, and, as such, the being old and worn out, hence used as an epithet, old and worn out. It comes from the root ?khalaqa?, which means the act of measuring; or determining the measure, proportion, or the like, of a thing; and the making a thing by measure, or according to the measure of another thing; or proportioning a thing to another thing. It signifies the bringing of a thing into existence according to a certain measure, or proportion, and so as to make it equal to another thing, or uniform therewith; or the originating or producing a thing after a pattern or model which one has devised, not after the similitude of anything pre-existing. As an act of God, it signifies the originating or bringing into being or existence anything not after the similitude of anything pre-existing; and the creating a thing; and thus it is generally best rendered; as meaning the bringing into existence from a state of no-existence. As an act of God, signifies the creating out of nothing. To measure, proportion, determine, fashion, create, form a thing, be fir, apt to a thing, behave kindly.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume two, pp. 799 - 803
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar pp. 163 - 164= ?hu?
?hu? definition
An indeclinable affixed personal or possessive pronoun of third person singular masculine; when affixed to a verb or preposition as a person pronoun, it means him or it; and when to a noun as a possessive, his or it. Singular personal or possessive pronoun. Him. Verbal suffix which expresses the accusative.
References
A Grammar of the Arabic Language, W. Wright, Third edition, volume 1, p. 100
A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran, John Penrice, p. 152= ?khalaqa? + ?hu? = ?khalaqahu? = He created him
Occurrences of ?khalaqahu? in the Koran 6
Locations 3.59, 20.50, 32.7, 36.78, 80.18, 80.19Observe that in all instances of the Koranic usage of ?khalaqahu?
? It is referring to man?not to Jesus
? It is singular
? It refers to the act of measuring; or determining the measure, proportion, or the like, of a thing; and the making a thing by measure, or according to the measure of another thing; or proportioning a thing to another thing
? The originating or producing a thing after a pattern or model which one has devised, not after the similitude of anything pre-existing.
? As meaning the bringing into existence from a state of no-existence. As an act of God, signifies the creating out of nothingThus?we are told that Adam was created, i.e. he had a beginning (out of nothing), in the likeness of his creator.
That Adam had a starting point, is confirmed by the next word?
= ?min?
?min? definition
A preposition signifying origin, composition, explanation, commencement, or separation; in its ordinary acceptation, it is equivalent to of, from, or out of; or, when following a comparative, than; but it occasionally may be rendered on, by, by reason of, some or a portion of, of the same kind as, after the manner of, etc. Used for expressing a starting point, part of a whole, origin as, from, of some amongst, of, from, on account of,
References
A Grammar of the Arabic Language, W. Wright, Third edition, volume 1, p. 280 - 282
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar, p. 542
A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran, John Penrice, pp. 140 - 141Next, we are told that Adams? nothingness starting point was from dust?
= ?turabin?
?turabin? definition
Noun. Dust and earth generally the former; i.e. fine, dry, particles of earth. It comes from the root ?tariba?, which means it (a thing) became dusted, or dusty; dust lighted upon it; it (a place) had much dust or earth; abounded with dust or earth. He (a man) had dust, or earth, in his hand; he clave to the dust or earth; or he clave to the dust or earth, by reason of poverty; he became so poor that he clave to the dust, or earth; and he suffered loss and became poor so that he clave to the dust, or earth; to have much earth, be full of earth, have dust in his hands, be destitute.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume one, pp. 300 - 301
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar, p. 74
A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran, John Penrice, p. 22Occurrences of ?turabin? in the Koran 7
Locations 2.264, 3.59, 18.37, 22.5, 30.20, 35.11, 40.67Occurrences of the root ?tariba? and its 4 forms in the Koran 22
Locations 2.264, 3.59, 13.5, 16.59, 18.37, 22.5, 23.35, 23.82, 26.67, 30.20, 35.11, 37.16, 37.53, 38.52, 40.67, 50.3, 56.37, 56.47, 78.33, 78.40, 86.7, 90.16Reading each Koranic occurrence, in context, shows that the root, and all derivatives of the root, refers directly to a Resurrection event.
Worthy of honorable mention is the creation of man as demonstrated in sura 86?which shares the same root as ?turabin? used in 3.59?
Observe the same ?creation? of man similarities in these passages of sura 86?
86?
.5 So, in order to inform mankind from ?khuliqa? that which originated the inner man.
.6 The inner man originated ?khuliqa? from water pouring/jetting/flowing forcefully.
.7 He comes forth from between the backbone/loins/spine and the ?ttara-ibi? breast bone/rib bones?.from the root ?tariba?!
.8 When His (is) upon/near/above He returned/was brought back the one who has power over.
Since we are already cognizant of the fact that sura 86 is about Jesus and the ?creation? of man through His Crucifixion, Death, and Resurrection?we can thus be confident that 3.59 is also demonstrating this very same thought process?
Man was created through Jesus?
Our next word denotes a sequence?
= ?thumma?
?thumma? definition
Then; i.e. afterward, or afterwards, a particle, or conjunction denoting order and delay; mostly used as a conjunction indicating a sequence in line or order to be rendered as then; thereafter; thereupon. It comes from the root ?thamma?, which means he repaired it, or put it into a good, sound, or right, state; to pick up, collect, repair, heap up (things in a place). He collected it together; namely a thing.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume one, pp. 350 - 352
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar p. 84= ?qala?
?qala? definition
Masculine singular. Said. It comes from the root ?qala?, which means He said, or a word signifying at least one complete proposition; or a word signifying a command or the like; or a word significant of a sound; to speak, say, inspire, profess, grasp, point cut, relate, emit an opinion upon, think, answer, reply, transmit, indicate a condition state or circumstance. It is also used to describe the upshot of events without there being actual speech or dialogue.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume eight, pp. 2994 - 2995
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar pp. 469 - 471Thus, we are informed of the creation sequence of Adam
? From nothing
? Then dust
? Then the WordFinally, the Word of ?allah? is shown to have the power to bring into existence that which never existed?
= ?kun?
?kun? definition
Masculine singular. Be thou. It comes from the root ?kana?, which means he, or it, was; to be, exist, happen, occur, take place, become, be such or so. A verb of the class called incomplete, because, with the agent that it comprises, or to which it relates, it cannot constitute a complete preposition; i.e. non-attributive. It governs its noun, or subject, in the nominative case, and it?s enunciative, or predicate, in the acc. case. Divested of all signification of time, is often used as a copula. As a complete, i.e., attributive verb.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume eight, p. 3004
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar, pp. 500 ? 502
A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran, John Penrice, pp. 128 - 129= ?yakoonu?
?yakoonu? definition
Masculine singular. Is. It comes from the root ?kana?, which means he, or it, was; to be, exist, happen, occur, take place, become, be such or so. A verb of the class called incomplete, because, with the agent that it comprises, or to which it relates, it cannot constitute a complete preposition; i.e. non-attributive. It governs its noun, or subject, in the nominative case, and it?s enunciative, or predicate, in the acc. case. Divested of all signification of time, is often used as a copula. As a complete, i.e., attributive verb.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume eight, p. 3004
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar, pp. 500 ? 502
A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran, John Penrice, pp. 128 - 129= ?fa? + ?yakoonu? = ?fayakoonu?
Occurrences of ?fayakoonu? in the Koran 10
Locations 2.117, 3.47, 3.49, 3.59, 6.73, 16.40, 19.35, 25.7, 36.82, 40.68The power of the Word.
We already know that the Koran proclaims Jesus as the Word?4.171?
Where have we hear this before??
Let?s look to the Holy Bible?
Joh 11 In1722 the beginning746 was2258 the3588 Word,3056 and2532 the3588 Word3056 was2258 with4314 God,2316 and2532 the3588 Word3056 was2258 God.2316
Joh 12 The same3778 was2258 in1722 the beginning746 with4314 God.2316
Joh 13 All things3956 were made1096 by1223 Him;846 and2532 without5565 Him846 was not3761 any thing1520 made1096 that3739 was made.1096
Joh 14 In1722 Him846 was2258 life;2222 and2532 the3588 life2222 was2258 the3588 light5457 of men.444John tells us this
? The Word was in the beginning
? The Word was with God
? The Word was God
? All things were made by the Word
? In the Word was every living soul #G2222 ?zoe?Joh 19 That was2258 the3588 true228 Light,5457 which3739 lighteth5461 every3956 man444 that cometh2064 into1519 the3588 world.2889
Joh 110 He was2258 in1722 the3588 world,2889 and2532 the3588 world2889 was made1096 by1223 him,846 and2532 the3588 world2889 knew1097 him846 not.3756
Joh 111 He came2064 unto1519 his own,2398 and2532 his own2398 received3880 him846 not.3756John tells us this
? The Word was in the Universe
? The Universe came into existence through the WordJoh 114 And2532 the3588 Word3056 was made1096 flesh,4561 and2532 dwelt4637 among1722 us,2254 (and2532 we beheld2300 his846 glory,1391 the glory1391 as5613 of the only begotten3439 of3844 the Father,)3962 full4134 of grace5485 and2532 truth.225
John tells us this
? The Word became flesh
? The Word is Jesus ChristThus?.it is quite clear from the above that the Word is Jesus?.and that Jesus brought into existence the entire physical Universe including the flesh of which He manifested His earthly tenure?
Pulling together all that we have learned regarding this ayah?
Thus?the outward rendering of 3.59?
3.59 Certainly Jesus' similitude present with allah; as/like Adam, He created him out of dust then said to him "Be thou." so (he) is.
The message behind the rendering
? Two comparisons are made ?mathalu? & ?kamathali?
? The first (former) comparison is between Jesus and ?allah?
? Jesus is shown to be co-equal ?mathalu? with ?allah?
? Jesus is shown to have always existed ?inna? with ?inda? ?allah?
? Jesus was not created
? The second (latter) comparison is redundant to the former
? The second comparison describes the creation ?khalaqahu? of Adam
? It is referring to man?not to Jesus
? It is singular
? It refers to the act of measuring; or determining the measure, proportion, or the like, of a thing; and the making a thing by measure, or according to the measure of another thing; or proportioning a thing to another thing
? The originating or producing a thing after a pattern or model which one has devised, not after the similitude of anything pre-existing.
? As meaning the bringing into existence from a state of no-existence. As an act of God, signifies the creating out of nothing
? We are told that Adam was created, i.e. he had a beginning (out of nothing), in the likeness of his creator
? Adam is made from dust ??turabin?
? The creation of man in this ayah is rooted in sura 86?which shares the same root as ?turabin?
? The Word of ?allah? brings forth Adam
? The Word i.e. Jesus is co-equal with ?allah?
? Man is created through Jesus
? Jesus is GodThus?it becomes quite clear that the second comparison of this ayah is simply re-enforcing the Biblical stance that Jesus (the Word) is what brought Adam into existence out of nothing.
Take care?
-
Salaam
ApplePie, you and all christians who regards Jesus (as) as God or one of Gods should put more deep thinking on your position. (Before it is too late).
On their "Daven" / "Shalat" in the synagogue the jews proclaims these words. (Commonly known as "SHEMA")
YHVH ELOHEYNU YHVH ECHAD
YHVH Our God YHVH ONE (Deu 64)
They substitue the word YHVH with ADONAIBy reading in your bible, it is said that Jesus (as) do "Daven" in the "Kenisah/Synagogue". (Ref Luk 416, Mat 423, 935, Mar 62) and he sometimes / usually earn an honorable privilege to be an "Aliyah" (The one leading a prayer and/or reciting verses from the Tanakh).
Then answer this
While Jesus (as) doing the "Daven" in "Kenisah/Synagogue", where the SHEMA are always proclaimed as part of the "Jewish Liturgy". What do you think Jesus (as) said when the SHEMA are being proclaimed altogether?
Is it
a. YHVH Eloheynu YHVH Echad - YHVH Our God YHVH One
(The correct shema, Deu 64)
or
b. Ani Eloheychem Ani Echad - I am your God I am One
c. Ani Eloheychem Ani Shelosha Hayah Echad
I am your God I am Three become One
c. Ani Eloheychem Ani Echad Mishelosha
I am your God I am one of the Three
d. Keep silentRead Mark 1229 and READ WITH YOUR OWN EYES HOW JESUS (AS) PROCLAIM HIS SHEMA.
Here's some links on how "the jews" do their "worshipping" in the time of Jesus (as).
http//community.gospelcom.net/Brix?pageID=1633
http//community.gospelcom.net/Brix?pageID=1637
http//community.gospelcom.net/Brix?pageID=3399And here's some verses in your own bible about the 'impossibility' of God becoming a man or a man becoming a God.
Isaiah 428
ANI YHVH HVU SHEMY VKHEVODIRY LEACHER LO-ETEN VTEHILATY LAPSILIM
I am YHVH, that is My name; and My glory will I not give to another, neither My praise to graven images.Hosea 119
KI EL ANOKHI VE LO-ISH
Because I am GOD and not a manTo moslems, feel free to use the above argument as a means of your "dakwah" to our christian brothers and sisters.
-
Greetings All,
Thanks for your replies?
Let?s concentrate on the most popular Koranic ?proof-text? used in the ?creation? controversy of Jesus?
3.59?
Inna mathala AAeesa AAinda Allahi kamathali adama khalaqahu min turabin thumma qala lahu kun fayakoonu
Our position is thus?
Jesus was not created.
Furthermore?Jesus is co-equal with God.
3.59 amply demonstrates these points?
Let?s look?
The authors?, who penned the Muslim book of faith, first used the following Arabic term when comparing Jesus to ?allah??
= ?Mathalu?
?Mathalu? definition
Noun. Parable, likeness, similitude, like, reason, proverb, discourse, equivalent, comparison, sign, lesson, an example, case, state, condition, argument, match, an analogue. It comes from the root ?mathala?, which means to resemble, imitate, compare any one with, be or look like some one, bear a likeness.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume eight, pp. 3017 - 3018
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar pp. 525 - 526Already?we can clearly see the comparison of Jesus to ?allah? is one of
? Similitude
? Equivalent
? Analogue
? Resemble
? Bear a likenessNow?look at the next Arabic term used when comparing Jesus to ?allah??
= ?inda?
?inda? definition
A particle used as a preposition to denote time and place. The vicinage, or the quarter, tract, region, or place, of a person or thing. Used in the manner pf a preposition, though properly a prefixed noun signifying a place (or anything local); of time when prefixed to a noun signifying a time denoting presence, i.e. perceptible presence, and also ideal presence, or rather the place of presence; and nearness, or the place of nearness; or the utmost nearness, and therefore it has no dim.; i.e. it is primarily used in relation to that which is present with a person (or thing), in any adjacent part or quarter with respect to that person (or thing); or in relation to that which is near to a person (or thing); thus is signifies at, near, nigh, by, near by, or close by, a place, or thing; with, present with, or in the presence of, a person or persons, or a thing or things; at the abode of a person; at the place of , or in the region of, a thing; or among , or amongst, persons or things and at, near, nigh, or about, a time; and at, or on, or upon, denoting the occasion of an event or an action; here; with; by; at the point of; about; from; in the presence of. The word denotes the idea of nearness, it also denotes a sense of rank or dignity or opinion, time and place.
is generally best rendered in the estimation, or sight of Allah. Sometimes it denotes comparison. Not alone.
References
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume five, pp. 2170 - 2172
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur?an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar p. 391Amazingly?not only does the classic Arabic tell us that Jesus is the equivalent or similitude ?Mathalu? of ?allah??but we are also told that Jesus is present with ?allah??as ?allah? is not alone?!
The blatant fact that ?allah? is not alone is confirmed elsewhere in your book of faith, as demonstrated in this grouping?
Innahu laqawlu rasoolin kareemin
81.19 That he truly is a Holy messenger's Word.
Occurrences of ?laqawlun? in the Koran 3
Locations 69.40, 81.19, 86.13We already know that sura 86 is discussing Jesus?.and that Jesus is the WORD spoken of in 86.13?
Then?
Thee quwwatin AAinda thee alAAarshi makeenin
81.20 Of power at of the throne highly positioned/distinguished.
Here we are informed that ?the Holy messengers Word? i.e. Jesus, is ?inda??or present at the throne.
Furthermore?we are told that Jesus is ?quwwatin? at the throne?.i.e. singular; meaning ?and separately twisted portion of two or more which, being twisted together, compose the whole of a rope, and of a string, or thread?
Interestingly?.the authors? of the Koran make the special point of illustrating that two things are ?twisted? together to make one?!
Then?
MutaAAin thamma ameenin
81.21 Obeyed there at the same time or place, faithful/loyal.
Absolutely amazing?..the ?two? that are actually ?one? are now to be ?mutaAAin??i.e. ?Obeyed one; who is entitled to be obeyed?
Thus?.it is crystal clear that Jesus is God Almighty.
Straight from the Muslim book of faith, as penned by its? authors?
Comments thus far?.?
Lol.
"The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him "Be". And he was."
If you can take that to mean "Jesus is like Allah and Allah is not alone" xfiles music then a forum can't help you; I'd suggest some serious secondary school English education.
"The simplitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam" means "In Allah's 'eyes' Jesus is like Adam". Wow. That was what, one sentence?
As for your argument with 'similtitude' - Jesus was being compared to Adam, not Allah ("is as that of Adam").
As for 'in the presence of' - it means 'to Allah', not "OMG HE WAS WITH ALLAH THAT MEANS ALLAH ISNT ONE LOLZ ".
Your argument, is thus, broken.
-
Let?s define our terms first?
, , .
Shama? Yisra?el Yahweh Elohim Yahweh Echad
Deu 64 Hear,8085 O Israel3478 Yahweh3068 our God430 Yahweh3068 (is)one259
= ?Yahweh?
?Yahweh? definition
H3068 Singular noun. The Tetragrammaton YHWH, the Lord, or Yahweh, the personal name of God and His most frequent designation in scripture, occurring 5321x. The word refers to the proper name of the God of Israel, particularly the name by which He revealed Himself to Moses (Ex 6.2-3). It comes from the root ?hawa? H1961, which means either existence, or development; ?to be?. ?The existing one?.
H1961 ?hawa? A primitive root (compare H1933); to exist, that is, be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary) - beacon, X altogether, be (-come, accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), continue, do, faint, fall, + follow, happen, X have, last, pertain, quit (one-) self, require, X use.
H1933 ?havah? A primitive root supposed to mean properly to breathe; to be (in the sense of existence) - be, X have.
References
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT), Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich, & Geoffrey W. Bromiley, volume three, pp. 1067 - 1081
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) #484a, Harris, Archer, Waltke, volume 1, pp. 210 ? 212
The Complete Wordstudy Dictionary of the Old Testament, Warren Baker, Eugene Carpenter, p. 426, , .
= ?Elohim?
?Elohim? definition
H430 A masculine plural noun. God, gods, judges, angels. This is not a ?Plural of Majesty?. A better reason can be seen in scripture itself where, in the very first chapter of Genesis, the necessity of a term conveying both the unity of the one God and yet allowing for a plurality of persons is found (Gen 1.2, 26). This is further borne out by the fact that the form ?Elohim? occurs only in Hebrew and in no other Semitic language, not even in Biblical Aramaic. Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.
H433 ?eloah? Masculine singular noun. God or god. From H410; a deity or the deity - God, god. See H430.
References
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) #93c, Harris, Archer, Waltke, volume 1, pp. 41 - 45
The Complete Wordstudy Dictionary of the Old Testament, Warren Baker, Eugene Carpenter, p. 54
The New Strong?s Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible Red-letter Edition, James Strong, LL.D., S.T.D., Hebrew and Aramaic dictionary, p. 17, , .
= ?echad?
?echad? definition
H259 Adjective. One, same, single, first, each, once. It is closely identified with ?yahad?, to be united and with ?ro?sh?, first, head. It stresses unity while recognizing diversity within that oneness. A numerical adjective meaning one, first, once, the same. A numeral from H258; properly united, that is, one; or (as an ordinal) first - a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any (-thing), apiece, a certain ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together. One (number), each, every, a certain, an (indefinite article), only, once, once for all, one...another, the one...the other, one after another, one by one, first, eleven (in combination), eleventh (ordinal).
H258 ?achad? Verb. Perhaps a primitive root; to unify, that is, (figuratively) collect (one?s thoughts) - go one way or other; be sharp, keen.
References
Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) #61, #605, Harris, Archer, Waltke, volume 1, p. 30, 263
The Complete Wordstudy Dictionary of the Old Testament, Warren Baker, Eugene Carpenter, p. 33
The New Strong?s Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible Red-letter Edition, James Strong, LL.D., S.T.D., Hebrew and Aramaic dictionary, p. 10Here is the message that the Classic Hebrew is conveying to us
? Tetragrammaton = singular
? Elohim = Plural
? Echad = one unity
? The juxtaposed words?Tetragrammaton, Elohim, Tetragrammaton, Echad
? God is referred to not once, not twice, but three times
? Singular, Plural, Singular
? These three elements form one unity
? Singular = Plural
? Plural = Singular
? God = Gods
? God is clearly singular
? God is clearly plural
? God is UnipluralHence, it is little wonder why Jesus quoted and proclaimed this as most important?
29
30Mar 1229 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is "Hear, Israel. The Lord our God is one Lord,
Mar 1230 and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul" and with all your mind, "and with all your strength." This is the first commandment. Deut. 64, 5
It is interesting that Muslims do not even comprehend their own scriptures let alone the scriptures of the Jews and Christians?
You would do well to research your ?arguments? before hand?
Take care?
-
/\ You would do well to read & comprehend.
'Assuming' you 're correct (el oh el), the statement "jesus is like allah, allah created adam from clay" has no linguistic consistency (note this is independent of language ) or value. This is like saying "I like coke, my eyes are blue". Two parts of a sentence that do not combine to convey any information whatsoever => linguistic inconsistency. Meaning, your inane interpretation is nothing more than a tripe attempt which results in nothing but an inherent inconsistency on your part.
However, that's assuming you're correct in the first place.
-
/\ You would do well to read & comprehend.
'Assuming' you 're correct (el oh el), the statement "jesus is like allah, allah created adam from clay" has no linguistic consistency (note this is independent of language o) or value. This is like saying "I like coke, my eyes are blue". Two parts of a sentence that do not combine to convey any information whatsoever => linguistic inconsistency. Meaning, your inane interpretation is nothing more than a tripe attempt which results in nothing but an inherent inconsistency on your part.
However, that's assuming you're correct in the first place.
Perhaps...in your future replies, instead of venting and giving your opinion on the matter, you could actually specifically refute our exegesis...
Till then... wink
-
That wasn't an opinion. Read it again. The refute comes in the form of linguistic inconsistency, as outlined. That, and the fact that your interpretation is just flat out wrong.
By the way, which part of my post is "venting"? I merely said you lack secondary school education - that's not 'venting', that's an observation.
-
ApplePie a simple answer please...
A / B / C / D or E
.Then I'll tell u the meanings and differences of YACHID, ECHAD, YHVH and ELOHYM.
Then answer this
While Jesus (as) doing the "Daven" in "Kenisah/Synagogue", where the SHEMA are always proclaimed as part of the "Jewish Liturgy". What do you think Jesus (as) said when the SHEMA are being proclaimed altogether?
Is it
a. YHVH Eloheynu YHVH Echad - YHVH Our God YHVH One
(The correct shema, Deu 64)
or
b. Ani Eloheychem Ani Echad - I am your God I am One
c. Ani Eloheychem Ani Shelosha Hayah Echad - I am your God I am Three become One
d. Ani Eloheychem Ani Echad Mishelosha - I am your God I am one of the Three
e. Keep silent -
albion wrote
Dhulqarnain..
Ahh, alas, a name near and dear to my heart. lol
-
That wasn't an opinion. Read it again. The refute comes in the form of linguistic inconsistency, as outlined. That, and the fact that your interpretation is just flat out wrong.
What part of our exegesis are you "refuting"....?
Please demonstrate with verifiable references... wink
By the way, which part of my post is "venting"? I merely said you lack secondary school education - that's not 'venting', that's an observation.
Your posts are no more than personal, unreferenced venting...
Thanks...
-
ApplePie a simple answer please...
A / B / C / D or E
.Then I'll tell u the meanings and differences of YACHID, ECHAD, YHVH and ELOHYM.
Then answer this
While Jesus (as) doing the "Daven" in "Kenisah/Synagogue", where the SHEMA are always proclaimed as part of the "Jewish Liturgy". What do you think Jesus (as) said when the SHEMA are being proclaimed altogether?
Is it
a. YHVH Eloheynu YHVH Echad - YHVH Our God YHVH One
(The correct shema, Deu 64)
or
b. Ani Eloheychem Ani Echad - I am your God I am One
c. Ani Eloheychem Ani Shelosha Hayah Echad - I am your God I am Three become One
d. Ani Eloheychem Ani Echad Mishelosha - I am your God I am one of the Three
e. Keep silentWe already replied to your Shema "argument"...
winkThe ball is in your court...
-
We already replied to your Shema "argument"...
Ah 'avoidance', you know it is the "BIG A" isn't it?
005.072
They do blaspheme who say "Allah is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.
004.171
O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not "Trinity" desist it will be better for you for Allah is one Allah Glory be to Him (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.
The rest is up to you..
We Moslems love Jesus too... we love him dearly...
He is one of God's special agents. An 'expert' on handling the munafiqoons (the hypocrites).004.159
And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him (Jesus) before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them005.074
Why turn they not to Allah, and seek His forgiveness? For Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.Shalom/Salam/Peace
-
We already replied to your Shema "argument"...
Ah 'avoidance', you know it is the "BIG A" isn't it?
005.072
They do blaspheme who say "Allah is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.
004.171
O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not "Trinity" desist it will be better for you for Allah is one Allah Glory be to Him (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.
The rest is up to you..
We Moslems love Jesus too... we love him dearly...
He is one of God's special agents. An 'expert' on handling the munafiqoons (the hypocrites).004.159
And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him (Jesus) before his death; and on the Day of Judgment he will be a witness against them005.074
Why turn they not to Allah, and seek His forgiveness? For Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.Shalom/Salam/Peace
So quick to move on to "greener pastures"...you are...
You brought up the Shema...now refute our rebuttal....after all, it was in queue first...and please don't pretend that you were unanswered - pleading ignorance is a very tiresome quality of Muslims...
Thanks...