*Miraculous Birth* of Isa: continued debate
-
Peace Ahmed,
You stated
well, did I say THE SAME EXACTLY, I'm sorry if I did, now the verse clearly say THE LIKENESS OF JESUS IS LIKE ADAM, AND Like does not really mean a perfect match
do you agree?
I do agree. Now tell me, is "1" like "0"?
Wrong, Uzair was worshipped as god, and Pharaoh was worshipped as god and i;m sure there are many others
Please double check the wording of my reply. I said "Because Jesus alone was/is being worshipped as God."
What this means is that at the time of the revelation up until now, Jesus is the only one worshipped as God. If you disagree, then you need to prove that there were Pharoah worshippers in the 7th century or later, or Uzair worshippers in the 7th century or later. Good luck wink
Yep because it shows contradiction in the Quran and I will continue debating it if any one continue to argue it...
Great, so it is important to you. Now please explain the "balls" comments.
I don't care to find any jew, it is enough for me that the Quran said it, now another example is Pharaoh that was worshipped as a God.
Well, you should, unless you plan on taking a crash-course on the history of Judaism. Remember 1736 that you mentioned in your post?? If you're going to stick to it, and maintain that the Jews worshipped Uzair as God at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an, then you'd better provide some evidence. Otherwise, it's conjecture, isn't it?
Haha, nice try Tay, as if the number of each is a valid argument, can you please tell me the number of each or a close figure at the time when this message was revealed?
Of course the number is valid. Are you kidding me? Look around, bro. Do you know any pharoah worshippers? Uzair worshippers? I'll tell you a close number of each at the time of the revelation Zero
thanks mate for the laugh, so Adam never existed.
I'm glad to see you're open-minded about this. So much for free-minds, huh??
then there is nothing suggest that Jesus had a father as well
You mean besides the detailed explanation of how ALL humans are created, and how Isa was only a human??
It was mentioned in 19-17-35, but Tay, can you please tell me how a baby can talk after just being born?
Sure, as long as you can provide the evidence that Isa talked "after just being born".
you see I'm happy that I get a question as an answer to a question I raise, but I will not be happy when I have no answer to that question given as a reply, my question stand mate, do you have an answer?
Not until you answer the question that you answered with a question.
Moving on, I stated previously
So, the angel, in the form of man, came to Mary and impregnated her, and then went back to Heaven?You replied
Yep according to 1917-35,
I disagree. Nowhere does it say that Maryam was impregnated by the angel. This is your extrapolation.
well I guess he went back to the heaven but possibly Allah sent him somwher else I don't know and according to 1736 "Don not argue if you lack knowledge"
Fair enough. But I was asking about his "body". Do bodies go to Heaven? Also, since this angel was a man, capable of impregnating a woman, then he must have grown up from a baby to a man, and of course, from parents. So, was he an angel the whole time?
Did it ever occur to you that maybe the angel was a vision, in the form of a man, and not a physical being?
May peace be upon you,
Tay -
well I guess he went back to the heaven but possibly Allah sent him somwher else I don't know and according to 1736 "Don not argue if you lack knowledge"
Fair enough. But I was asking about his "body". Do bodies go to Heaven? Also, since this angel was a man, capable of impregnating a woman, then he must have grown up from a baby to a man, and of course, from parents. So, was he an angel the whole time?
Did it ever occur to you that maybe the angel was a vision, in the form of a man, and not a physical being?
Excellent.
1917 contains a key word - tamaththalan - ie. as a simulated thing. Like the root for similitude - mathalun - so there is a clear demonstration here that the being was only a simulation or a vision.
It could even be indicating that the entire episode is a similitude, an allegory.
Regards.
-
peace all
And We granted him Isaac and Jacob, both of whom We guided; and Noah We guided from before; and from his progeny is David, and Solomon, and Job, and Joseph, and Moses, and Aaron. It is such that We reward the good doers.
And Zachariah and John, and Jesus, and Elias; all were from the upright.
And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot; and each We have preferred over the knowledgeables.
And from their fathers and their progeny and their brothers We have also chosen; and We guided them to a straight path. (684-87) -
Peace Ahmed,
Peace Tay
You stated
well, did I say THE SAME EXACTLY, I'm sorry if I did, now the verse clearly say THE LIKENESS OF JESUS IS LIKE ADAM, AND Like does not really mean a perfect match
do you agree?
I do agree. Now tell me, is "1" like "0"?
No, but, 11 is 50% identical 12, ie, logically speaking we can say 11 is like 12 ?as not in numbers but shape?
Wrong, Uzair was worshipped as god, and Pharaoh was worshipped as god and i;m sure there are many others
Please double check the wording of my reply. I said "Because Jesus alone was/is being worshipped as God."
What this means is that at the time of the revelation up until now, Jesus is the only one worshipped as God. If you disagree, then you need to prove that there were Pharoah worshippers in the 7th century or later, or Uzair worshippers in the 7th century or later. Good luck wink
And why it has to be from the time of revelation till now?
Would that mean when Jesus comes back and all Jews and Christians believe that he is not a god, this verse will be wrong then?, or it might be historical record that is not needed any more?
Yep because it shows contradiction in the Quran and I will continue debating it if any one continue to argue it...
Great, so it is important to you. Now please explain the "balls" comments.
It is a duty that is why it is important, for balls comment, it is a metaphor to being vigilant wink
I don't care to find any jew, it is enough for me that the Quran said it, now another example is Pharaoh that was worshipped as a God.
Well, you should, unless you plan on taking a crash-course on the history of Judaism. Remember 1736 that you mentioned in your post?? If you're going to stick to it, and maintain that the Jews worshipped Uzair as God at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an, then you'd better provide some evidence. Otherwise, it's conjecture, isn't it?
no, I have not stated when or how long the Jews worshipped Uzair, neither I did with Pharaoh, because worshipping them for a month or a zillion year is irrelevant here, the verse has nothing to do to prove Jesus is not a god by saying he is like Adam, because Allah refuted this false claim explicitly MANY times, he does not need to say in a such puzzle describing Jesus alone as like Adam, so your conclusion is wrong
The verse was only to say that Jesus is like Adam because both has not father
Again, if you say that verse is only to show that the people are worshipping a man as a god and they should stop it, then this verse should not be needed when all the jews and Christians believe in Jesus when he comes back again
Haha, nice try Tay, as if the number of each is a valid argument, can you please tell me the number of each or a close figure at the time when this message was revealed?
Of course the number is valid. Are you kidding me? Look around, bro. Do you know any pharoah worshippers? Uzair worshippers? I'll tell you a close number of each at the time of the revelation Zero
well up to these days we have people who worship all sorts of things, even the devil and even the cows, so you argument about jesus alone as being worshipped as a god by masses is flawed especially believing in him as a god should stop when he comes back and all the Christians and jews will believe in him, so it is already in Allah plan that al of tem will believe in the human Jesus as a prophet
thanks mate for the laugh, so Adam never existed.
I'm glad to see you're open-minded about this. So much for free-minds, huh??
this is ridiculous bro, it does not mean that I don?t accept unfounded NON SENSE, delusions and thoughts motivated by the devil which I was warned against zillions of times in the Quran and you take it as close minded, well if this is the case then I?d rather be closed minded and not barbecued in hell for eternity
then there is nothing suggest that Jesus had a father as well
You mean besides the detailed explanation of how ALL humans are created, and how Isa was only a human??
Isa was signalled out clearly
Now The fire burns, right?, so that physic law was disabled when Abraham was put in the fire, IE. Allah can change any law any time, because He created that law, he does not need our ok to do it
You are nothing but a matter only sort of guy, do you believe in Allah as a physical entity or as a symbolic god Tay?, please answer this question
It was mentioned in 19-17-35, but Tay, can you please tell me how a baby can talk after just being born?
Sure, as long as you can provide the evidence that Isa talked "after just being born".
well no evidence other than what the Quran said, and it is clear that when they asked her of what the hell she did, she ponited to the baby and they wondered in how he will talk to them as a baby then he talked
if you are suggesting that he was not a baby then tell me how old was he you reckon?
you see I'm happy that I get a question as an answer to a question I raise, but I will not be happy when I have no answer to that question given as a reply, my question stand mate, do you have an answer?
Not until you answer the question that you answered with a question.
sorry I forgot the question, LOL, can we have another go and you ask it again?
Moving on, I stated previously
So, the angel, in the form of man, came to Mary and impregnated her, and then went back to Heaven?You replied
Yep according to 1917-35,
I disagree. Nowhere does it say that Maryam was impregnated by the angel. This is your extrapolation.
no but it said he came to ?Aheb? ?give? the baby, and Rohena was the same word used with adam when Allah breath into the moulded shape to give it life, so possibly Allah sent ?Rohehi? in the shape of a man ? you know Allah can do any thing? and not an angel that was sent and that makes great sense because Adam became alive when Allah breath into him from Rohehi, and what He sent to Mary was also Rohehi according to 1917
well I guess he went back to the heaven but possibly Allah sent him somwher else I don't know and according to 1736 "Don not argue if you lack knowledge"
Fair enough. But I was asking about his "body". Do bodies go to Heaven? Also, since this angel was a man, capable of impregnating a woman, then he must have grown up from a baby to a man, and of course, from parents. So, was he an angel the whole time?
as I stated latest that ?Rohina? may possibly means the same thing that happened to Adam when Adam was a moulded shape without any life, so Allah breath into Adam from Rohehi then Adam became alive, same with Mary Allah sent ?Rohehi? but this time He made it to look like a man and Mary become pregnant, ie, a new life was inserted into her uterus
Did it ever occur to you that maybe the angel was a vision, in the form of a man, and not a physical being?
no, but it ocured to me just now while I;m respnding to you that it can be the same thing that was blown into Adam from Roh Allah, it is the exact same thing that was sent to Mary on the shape of a perfect humans, the verse actually stressed that it looked like a perfect human ?Basharan Sawia?
May peace be upon you,
TayTake care Tay
-
Peace
AND Like does not really mean a perfect match
Keep that thought in mind when this discussion progresses Ahmed. I've some inquiries for you.
Joe
ready bro
peace
-
Tay,
I meant but Rohehi, "The Roh of Allah" but the word used in 1917 is "Rohena" and that is what I believe was sent to mary to give life to new baby without a father
if you look in adam story you will see that that the same word "Rohena" was used to make him alive
now what is Rohena exactly?, I don't know
it sounds in arabic like the "Soul of Allah", but is it or not? I do not know
so I will just consider it as an entity that has the secret of life and that is exactly what Allah sent to mary to give life and make her pregnat without a man, read 1917 and you will see that what was sent was "Rohena"
Possiibly this is irrlevant to you because you do not believe in Adam as a real person from the first place, however I have to do what i have to do and the message is delivered
Peace
-
Peace Ahmed,
First, let me say that this debate has been an enriching experience. I hope I haven't been too hard on you.
You stated
No, but, 11 is 50% identical 12, ie, logically speaking we can say 11 is like 12 ?as not in numbers but shape?
OK, so Isa was kinda similar to Adam. Now let me ask you this in the ayah, Allah explains that they were similar by way of their creation (dust, and "be"). Nowhere does it say that they were similar because they both had no fathers.
Why is it that you get the authority to add this to the Qur'an?
And why it has to be from the time of revelation till now?
Simple bro. The Qur'an is a book of guidance. If everyone who worshipped pharoah and Uzair are already dead, then why would they need guidance? On the other hand, millions of people worshipped Isa, and billions continue to until today.
Do you see the difference and the relevance of the timing?
Would that mean when Jesus comes back and all Jews and Christians believe that he is not a god, this verse will be wrong then?, or it might be historical record that is not needed any more?
I'm not sure what you mean. Isa died 2000 years ago, and his soul has passed on, and no soul returns. He will be questioned on the last day like the rest of us.
It is a duty that is why it is important, for balls comment, it is a metaphor to being vigilant
I see, so are you saying that I'm not vigilant?
well up to these days we have people who worship all sorts of things, even the devil and even the cows, so you argument about jesus alone as being worshipped as a god by masses is flawed
You asked me about people mentioned in Qur'an as being worhipped. So, my argument is not flawed at all.
this is ridiculous bro, it does not mean that I don?t accept unfounded NON SENSE, delusions and thoughts motivated by the devil...
I see, so any thing that goes against your beliefs must be NON SENSE and motivated by the devil?? Perhaps you're a prophet then?
Here's a tip
Open-minded means one is willing to hear an argument before drawing a conclusion. All I did was mention that Adam was not one person, but representative of mankind in general, and you repliedlol thanks for the laugh, mate
That right there is closed-minded, because you've already decided without hearing any opposing views.
It is what it is.
Isa was signalled out clearly
Yes, because he was/is worshipped as God. I sense we're going in circles here.
Now The fire burns, right?, so that physic law was disabled when Abraham was put in the fire,
People walk on fire all the time. It's mind over matter.
Allah can change any law any time, because He created that law, he does not need our ok to do it
Sure, Allah "can", but he "won't" according to the Qur'an.
You are nothing but a matter only sort of guy
Not really sure how I should resond to that one.
do you believe in Allah as a physical entity or as a symbolic god Tay?, please answer this question
OK. My answer is neither. Allah is the Creator, the Source, beyond the physical and symbolic.
if you are suggesting that he was not a baby then tell me how old was he you reckon?
I'd rather not conjecture. The Qur'an does not give us his age. He could have been an infant, or he could have been 5, or he could have been 10. Any of those ages would do just fine.
sorry I forgot the question, LOL, can we have another go and you ask it again?
I think we have enough going on right now wink
As for the rest of your post, there is no need for us to delve further, as I am fine with agreeing to disagree. The reason being that our views are fundamentally different. You believe that Allah changed his laws throughout our history, while I do not. That being the case, it is impossible for us to see eye to eye on these topics. I'm ok with that.
What I'm not ok with is having my views being called nonsense and motivated by the devil. Everyone is different, bro, and in my opinion, that's what makes the Qur'an so wonderful. You and I can look at the same ayat and get 2 completely different pictures, although they both lead to the same thing, and that is believing and appreciating our Creator, and our lives.
May peace be upon you,
Tay -
Peace Truth,
You stated
1917 contains a key word - tamaththalan - ie. as a simulated thing. Like the root for similitude - mathalun - so there is a clear demonstration here that the being was only a simulation or a vision.
hmmm...that might explain why Dr. Shabbir exposits 1916-17 as such
1916 (O Prophet) Make mention of Mary in the Book when she withdrew from her people to an eastern location. (She left the sanctuary and went to her village in Nazareth).
1917 (Since she was not used to mixing with people), she had chosen seclusion from them. Then We sent to her Our angel who appeared to her in the shape of a well-made human being (although he had no physical or material existence).Now, look at 1918-19
1918 She exclaimed, ?Verily, I seek refuge in the Most Gracious that you may be righteous.?
1919 He said, "I am only a Messenger of your Lord who says ?I shall bestow upon you the gift of a son endowed with a spotless character.?? (Tasreef with 345 is very important here).and what does 345 say
345 Angels said, ?O Mary! Allah gives you the good news through a word from Him. His name would be Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, held in honor in this world and among the ones close to Me in the Hereafter.
So, the angels were telling Mary that the good news is coming "through a word from Him". The "word" being the angel in 1917.
These were not 2 seperate encounters where Mary spoke to a group in one encounter and a single angel in the second. This is evidenced by the fact that her reply is the same in 1920 and 347, ie, "How can I have a son when no man has ever touched me?"
It wouldn't make sense for her to say it twice and get the same reply twice.
Therefore, the chronology would be something like this
- Mary secludes herself for an unknown period of time.
- Mary is contacted by a group of malaikat.
- The malaikat convey the word (bikalimatin), via one malaika in the appearance of a man, as a vision, that she will have a son.
- Mary says, "How can I have a son when no man has ever touched me?"
Your thoughts??
Peace,
Tay -
Peace Ahmed,
Peace Tay
First, let me say that this debate has been an enriching experience. I hope I haven't been too hard on you.
Likewise mate
You stated
No, but, 11 is 50% identical 12, ie, logically speaking we can say 11 is like 12 ?as not in numbers but shape?
OK, so Isa was kinda similar to Adam. Now let me ask you this in the ayah, Allah explains that they were similar by way of their creation (dust, and "be"). Nowhere does it say that they were similar because they both had no fathers.
The creation from dust similarity is irrleveant the verse never said they are similar BECAUSE they were made from dust, rather it was extra info that he was made from dust, you see Allah said ?Khalqahu? not ?Khalqahuma? the first is singular refernig to Jesus and the second is the plural if Allah wanted to use the creation of the Turab as the similarity between them, In addition to that Allah told us many times that All humans were created from dust, so no real news here to be used as a string argument to refute the ignorant.
Why is it that you get the authority to add this to the Qur'an?
Of course I have the Authority over myself, but why you are suggesting my authority should apply on all Muslims?
You see, on the Judgment Day I will care less about you, my wife, my children my parents and my friends or anyone for that matter but myself, I will run away from them because all I care about is myself and that is controlled by my authority over myself in this life and how I used it, exactly like yourself, you have your authority over yourself
33- ?But when the deafening cry comes?
34- ?The day on which a man shall flee from his brother,?
35- ?And his mother and his father?
36- ?And his spouse and his son--?
37- ?Every one of them shall on that day have an affair which will occupy him.?
(33)
(34)
(35)
(36)
(37)However in this testing life, me and you share a common thing, that thing is Islam, and because you are claiming something opposite to what is very well founded for 2000 years, hence you are contradicting the Quran while you provided NO PROOF BUT CONJECTURE AND HEARSAY FROM THE SUPPORTERS OF THIS FALSE CLAIM also the majority of Muslims ?Regardless they follow a specific sect or not knows for certain that Isa did not have a father according to the Quran, and for many others according to the Quran and hadith and even for non Muslims like the Christians who are confused on who is the father of Jesus, some of them say God and some of them say Joseph. In effect any claim coming from any one Muslim or not sunni or not that will contradict the Arabic Quran and I have gained knowledge in that claim, I MUST HAVE MY VOICE so young Muslims may be saved and not dragged to follow conjecture, SOMETHING WAS WARNED AGAINST BIG TIMES IN THE QURAN.
The most compelling Quran evidence that you are turning a blind eye on it is, the Quran consistently do not use the word parents when it comes to Jesus
In addition to that it was also consistent in referring to Isa as ?Son of Mary?, in fact is rude in the Arab world to refer to anyone as son of the name of his mother, in a desperate attempt by the supporters of this false claim they suggest that Harun also called Moses ?Son of my mother?
They ignorantly forgot that Harun and Moses, WERE BIOLOGICAL BROTHERS AND HAD THE SAME MOTHER AND THERE IS NOTHING RUDE IN THAT
Does the Quran refer to any person as the son of his mother NAME as Isa? BIG NO
Does Harun mention the name of his mother when he was talking to his brother? ANOTHER BIG NO, he only called him ?SON OF MY MOTHER?
To take this verse that only appeared once and compare it to the other numerous verses where Isa was called BY ALLAH ?SON OF MARY? many times and suggest that it is normal to call him by the son of his mother name?, absolutely non sense, sorry
Even in some western cultures it is rude to ask for the name of the mother and some don?t put in the driver licence application for example
It will not be rude though if that man never had a physical father and him/his mother ARE PHYSICAL SIGNS FROM ALLAH to humanity, we only aware of two ?Adam and Jesus that never had a father according to the Quran ?Hence most Muslims?, history, most Christians, most Jews and even the hadith ?hence most Islamic sects?
Therefore it has to be CONCLUDED that Jesus had NO FATHER
I must have my voice when it comes to an allegation that will cause discord in our great religion, but because my voice most of the times is strong and generally Quran based, most of my debaters will grim and start accusing me of non sense (like forcing my authority, losing focus etc etc). That voice is no where near an authority on anyone other than on myself, not even on my wife and children. And I hardly lost my focus all my life so far.
And why it has to be from the time of revelation till now?
Simple bro. The Qur'an is a book of guidance. If everyone who worshipped pharoah and Uzair are already dead, then why would they need guidance? On the other hand, millions of people worshipped Isa, and billions continue to until today.
Do you see the difference and the relevance of the timing?Absolutely not.
Those billions will stop worshipping him when Jesus comes back, so why worry about them if it is already in the plan of Allah that they will recognise this simple fact that there is no God but Allah?, didn?t Allah sent Mohammad to them already to tell them that Jesus is not God? Isn?t written in the Quran that Jesus is not God neither son of God?
How many times Allah guided us in the Quran and told us that there is no God but Allah, you reckon?
And How many times Allah told us the Jesus is not God as straightforward as it can get, you reckon?
Many times I reckon, so you guys are manipulating the simple fact that Jesus was like Adam because he both DID NOT HAVE A FATHER and trying to convince others that Allah said that to refute that Jesus is not a God while He already said it straight many times that Jesus is not a god neither anyone but Allah is a God, very strange indeed, what is your purpose guys? To show that you managed to know what others been fooled for 2000 years? See what you do or what I do will not change the fact and the truth that Allah know it, this fact and the truth was said to us by Allah in His Arabic Quran and can not be manipulated and Islam will stand against all these wrong claims, by you, by the sunni, by the Quran alone sect, by the ignorant, by the Christians, by the Jews, by the atheists and by me (just in case) as it did for 1425 years and continue to do. Only the people whom Allah give knowledge will know the truth about the Arabic Quran.
Would that mean when Jesus comes back and all Jews and Christians believe that he is not a god, this verse will be wrong then?, or it might be historical record that is not needed any more?
I'm not sure what you mean. Isa died 2000 years ago, and his soul has passed on, and no soul returns. He will be questioned on the last day like the rest of us.
Well, it is known by many Muslims (regardless the sects) and many Christians that Jesus should come back, this is a huge subject and ironically I believe in it due to a small clue in the Quran
The supporters of that idea try to stretch it with the hadith, and I read all the hadith that talks about it and both sects ?Sunni and Shite? believe in them hard, I culd not buy any of them so I resorted to the Quran and ironically I found a clue that truly suggest that jesus is coming back for a further mission on earth, huge subject to debate, I debate it before on a Sunni forum who banned me because I was telling the truth about the hadith, Whyislam.org
It is a duty that is why it is important, for balls comment, it is a metaphor to being vigilant
I see, so are you saying that I'm not vigilant?
Oh please don?t take it as aggression, I just lack the English language and I hardly use MS Word LOL
well up to these days we have people who worship all sorts of things, even the devil and even the cows, so you argument about jesus alone as being worshipped as a god by masses is flawed
You asked me about people mentioned in Qur'an as being worhipped. So, my argument is not flawed at all.
Ok sorry, but you know that up to today there are all sort of things that are worshipped as gods, even humans, in fact as far as I believe the Ahmadya Sect founder, ?Mirza Ghulam Ahmad? claimed to be a god and ironically millions still joining this sect
Isn?t Satan a very clever devil?, or Satan for you is symbolic also?
this is ridiculous bro, it does not mean that I don?t accept unfounded NON SENSE, delusions and thoughts motivated by the devil...
I see, so any thing that goes against your beliefs must be NON SENSE and motivated by the devil?? Perhaps you're a prophet then?
well, anything wrong is motivated by the devil, but again don?t manipulate the fact that what you say is not only against my belief, it against the followings believe that Jesus had no human father as well
- Most Muslims
- Most Islamic Sects
- Most Christians
I?m just one human out of category 1 because I don?t follow any sect.
Here's a tip
Open-minded means one is willing to hear an argument before drawing a conclusion. All I did was mention that Adam was not one person, but representative of mankind in general, and you repliedlol thanks for the laugh, mate
That right there is closed-minded, because you've already decided without hearing any opposing views.
It is what it is.
Well that is not what I don?t like ?Argument? because I don?t argue when I have knowledge and I have enough courage to concede and admit that I was wrong, In fact I feel proud of it because I know how hard it is on humans to do this noble deed when debating
So I?m not here to argue, but if you want really to do it that way then WE MUST HAVE A PROPER DEBATE ie. we must have rules and unbiased judges this will prevent us from going in circles and looking silly, argumentive and wasting our valued time, so Judges will have the upper hand to rule according to the rules that me, you and them will make, are you in it this way?
Isa was signalled out clearly
Yes, because he was/is worshipped as God. I sense we're going in circles here.
But it was said STRAIGHTFORWARD IN MANY OTHER LOCATIONS here is a sample
172- O followers of the Book! do not exceed the limits in your religion, and do not speak (lies) against Allah, but (speak) the truth; the Messiah, Isa son of Marium is only a messenger of Allah and His Word which He communicated to Marium and a spirit from Him; believe therefore in Allah and His messengers, and say not, Three. Desist, it is better for you; Allah is only one Allah; far be It from His glory that He should have a son, whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth is His, and Allah is sufficient for a Protector.
172- The Messiah does by no means disdain that he should be a servant of Allah, nor do the angels who are near to Him, and whoever disdains His service and is proud, He will gather them all together to Himself.
(171)
(172)-> In verse 4171 here is the straightforward warning from Allah to All the Christians regardless of the time limit
a) O followers of the Book! do not exceed the limits in your religion
b) do not speak (lies) against Allah, but (speak) the truth;
c) the Messiah, Isa son of Marium is only a messenger of Allah
d) and His Word which He communicated to Marium and a spirit from Him
e) say not, Three. And it is better for the Christians to Desist
f) Allah is only one Allah; far be It from His glory that He should have a son-> Can you see Tay how crystal clear and straightforward is the warning, regardless time?, please pay more attention to point d because Allah is saying that Jesus is Kalimah & Roh from Allah, remember 1917 ?, who was sent to Mary in the shape of a perfect human?, it was ?Roh from Allah?, so in effect Allah is consistently telling us EXCATLY WHAT JESUS IS.
-> Then Allah summed the CLEAR WARNING up beautifully ?The Messiah does by no means disdain that he should be a servant of Allah, nor do the angels who are near to Him, and whoever disdains His service and is proud, He will gather them all together to Himself.?
In another location we read the same warning but said differently
Certainly they disbelieve who say Surely, Allah-- He is the Messiah, son of Marium. Say Who then could control anything as against Allah when He wished to destroy the Messiah son of Marium and his mother and all those on the earth? And Allah's is the kingdom of the heavens and the earth and what is between them; He creates what He pleases; and Allah has power over all things,
(17)
-> Can you see mate HOW CRYSTAL CLEAR THE WARNING IS REGARDING THE FALSE CLAIM OF JESUS DIVINITY? In fact the Christians has been called DISBELIEVERS ?Certainly they disbelieve who say Surely, Allah-- He is the Messiah, son of Marium?
-> But you may pay much attention to this Allah is giving them a logic that He can easily destroy Jesus and everyone on earth, so you expect the verse to say that ?Who then could control anything as against Allah when He wished to destroy the Messiah son of Marium all those on the earth??, but it was not said like this, rather we see the Quran consistently flag Mary with Jesus, despite Allah already included ?All people on earth? ?Who then could control anything as against Allah when He wished to destroy the Messiah son of Marium and his mother and all those on the earth??
-> You may come and say that Mary was mentioned because they considered her a god as well !!, Well, this argument can not be admissible because the verse is clearly refuting Jesus divinity only at the beginning?Certainly they disbelieve who say Surely, Allah-- He is the Messiah, son of Marium?, as well all humans were added to them and all humans can not be said about them that they are God ? the Messiah son of Marium and his mother and all those on the earth?
The same CRYSTAL CLEAR warning was repeated in the same sura with further compelling logic from Allah
72- Certainly they disbelieve who say Surely Allah, He is the Messiah, son of Marium; and the Messiah said O Children of Israel! serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord. Surely whoever associates (others) with Allah, then Allah has forbidden to him the garden, and his abode is the fire; and there shall be no helpers for the unjust.
73- Certainly they disbelieve who say Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one Allah, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve.
74- Will they not then turn to Allah and ask His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
75- The Messiah, son of Marium is but a messenger; messengers before him have indeed passed away; and his mother was a truthful woman; they both used to eat food. See how We make the communications clear to them, then behold, how they are turned away.
(72)
(73)
(74)
(75)-> In 72- ?Certainly they disbelieve who say Surely Allah, He is the Messiah, son of Marium?, how clearer can it get? And how many times it should be said?
-> In 73- we see the Trinitarian concept is refuted by Allah for the second time ?Certainly they disbelieve who say Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one Allah, and the same clear warning is put down ?and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve.?, again how clearer can it get and how many times Allah should say it to us?
-> In 74- The tone has changed from a strong threat to stop their sin to good news if they do stop it ?Will they not then turn to Allah and ask His forgiveness? And Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.?
-> In 75- We see the consistency of referring to Isa as son of Mary The Messiah, son of Marium is but a messenger; he was indeed like all other messengers if we compare them from their mission point of view ?messengers before him have indeed passed away?, then AGAIN HIS MOTHER WAS FLAGED OUT DESPITE THE VERSES ARE REFUTING JESUS DEVINITY ONLY AS READ 572 earlier, and his mother was a truthful woman, if you compare the beginning of this verse ? ?, which means ? The Messiah, son of Marium is but a messenger; messengers before him have indeed passed away? with the beginning of verse 3144,
And Muhammad is no more than a messenger; the messengers have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed will you turn back upon your heels? And whoever turns back upon his heels!s, he will by no means do harm to Allah in the least and Allah will reward the grateful.
(144)
-> Well can?t miss this note why Mohammad was not called Son of Amina as Jesus was called Son of Mary?, let?s put the two Arabic beginnings of the verses under each other for one more visual investigation
? ?, verse 575
? ?, verse 3144- in fact no prophet was called with his mother name OTHER THAN JESUS, even in all verse when a few prophet names were mentioned together we will see that Jesus was signalled out and called ?Son of Mary.
Now The fire burns, right?, so that physic law was disabled when Abraham was put in the fire,
People walk on fire all the time. It's mind over matter.
That is fine, I may be able to do it to, I?m talking about creating a pit then filling it up with wood, then burn it as hell then put a human in there for about 15 minutes at least, not running on fire, but very creative try by you Tay. Sound s an Indian trick to me like those who sleep on nails LOL
Allah can change any law any time, because He created that law, he does not need our ok to do it
Sure, Allah "can", but he "won't" according to the Qur'an.
Well Allah only said that his words does change, and if in his words to change the laws then His words did not change if the laws has changed by him, because changing the laws was part of the law, as well Allah said zillions of times that He does What He wants, here is an example
15- Lord of the Throne of Glory
17- Doer of what He will.
(15)
(16)You are nothing but a matter only sort of guy
Not really sure how I should resond to that one.
I hope you didn?t consider it an insult, I meant you are nothing but an Atheist, ie. you only believe in matter sorry and it is hard for you to believe in the unseen while this is a major requirement to be with the true believers group 23
do you believe in Allah as a physical entity or as a symbolic god Tay?, please answer this question
OK. My answer is neither. Allah is the Creator, the Source, beyond the physical and symbolic.
OK you are right because there nothing like Allah
The Originator of the heavens and the earth; He made mates for you from among yourselves, and mates of the cattle too, multiplying you thereby; nothing like a likeness of Him; and He is the Hearing, the Seeing.
(11)
Let me revise the question and add a couple more please
Is Allah real(exist) or not?
Did He sent the Quran or not?
And Is the Quran His true and direct words or not?
if you are suggesting that he was not a baby then tell me how old was he you reckon?
I'd rather not conjecture. The Qur'an does not give us his age. He could have been an infant, or he could have been 5, or he could have been 10. Any of those ages would do just fine.
Neither me and that is the way according to 1736, what the majority understand though that he was a newly born baby as strongly understood from the Arabic Quran, I was trying to respond to those who claim leaving a woman alone with a child for long time is impossible to happen and his father must have been there for him.
sorry I forgot the question, LOL, can we have another go and you ask it again?
I think we have enough going on right now wink
I absolutely agree
As for the rest of your post, there is no need for us to delve further, as I am fine with agreeing to disagree. The reason being that our views are fundamentally different. You believe that Allah changed his laws throughout our history, while I do not. That being the case, it is impossible for us to see eye to eye on these topics. I'm ok with that.
Likewise mate we have to agree to disagree
What I'm not ok with is having my views being called nonsense and motivated by the devil.
sorry no insult meant to you, but the truth according to the compelling evidence that it is non sense and most likely motivated by the devil while YOU DON?T KNOW IT.
Everyone is different, bro, and in my opinion, that's what makes the Qur'an so wonderful. You and I can look at the same ayat and get 2 completely different pictures, although they both lead to the same thing, and that is believing and appreciating our Creator, and our lives.
But the truth is one bro or at least in some issues MUST BE ONE, like a god or not, black or white I mean and the issue of Jesus father is black or white, there is no grey here and Allah provided enough evidences in the Quran to prove that so for someone calling himself an educated Muslim to come and say no it is not white it is black, WITHOUT ONE SINGLE COMPELLING EVIDENCE is a great insult to all those other educated Muslims who believe according to the compelling evidences and for 1400 years what the Quran says that it is white.
You see your discovery must fall hard to the ground because if it was that easy to work out it should have been known soon after the Quran was revealed, or at least the Quran which came to refute Jesus divinity should also refute his virgin birth, but what you are saying by mary was not a virgin and Isa had a father is nothing but the Quran is a big Lie and that is why I have to show you the evidences as a brother in this faith that your understanding that it took hundreds of years to work out is absolutely flawed and have not even one single merit, exactly as I show the sunni brothers and as we should show the terrorists, the ahmadya and all the flawed Muslims, it is duty bro, but not forced on the receiving end, your freewill stys intact
May peace be upon you,
TayLikewise mate and I'm sorry for any typos or other mistakes as i really don't have time to check it man and I was responding as i was reading it
-
Peace,
However in this testing life, me and you share a common thing, that thing is Islam, and because you are claiming something opposite to what is very well founded for 2000 years...
The ideas about virginal births only developed hundreds of years after Jesus died.
And when you come to things that are "very well founded for 2000 years" you may as well believe that Jesus is the son of god and that he is returning at some point in time in the future. They are also "very well founded". While you are at it you might as well believe that Jesus ver. II.0, will pray behind a mysterious 'Imam Mahdi ver 1.0' - hang on I think the mahdi belief is not as well founded - it's only 1200 years old.
Well, it is known by many Muslims (regardless the sects) and many Christians that Jesus should come back, this is a huge subject and ironically I believe in it due to a small clue in the Quran...
Well, what do you know; you do believe in all the "very well founded" things
The "virgin myth" is a slippery slope, and this sort of nonsense follows from it.
Have fun
-
Peace Ahmed,
You stated
The creation from dust similarity is irrleveant the verse never said they are similar BECAUSE they were made from dust, rather it was extra info that he was made from dust
You're stretching pretty far now Ahmed.
and because you are claiming something opposite to what is very well founded for 2000 years
The Qur'an says the majority will lead you astray.
while you provided NO PROOF BUT CONJECTURE AND HEARSAY FROM THE SUPPORTERS OF THIS FALSE CLAIM
Sorry, bro, but just saying "no proof" doesn't make it so. I provided ayat for every position I've taken.
The most compelling Quran evidence that you are turning a blind eye on it is, the Quran consistently do not use the word parents when it comes to Jesus
Is he the only one? If not, then it's not so compelling, is it?
Those billions will stop worshipping him when Jesus comes back, so why worry about them if it is already in the plan of Allah that they will recognise this simple fact that there is no God but Allah?,
Even if you were right and Isa is coming back, it would be TOO LATE for all the trillions of people who died before his return. Guidance is for THIS LIFE, not for some unknown future date.
You keep trying to make it seem as if there is no need for Allah to guide them. Meanwhile, it is clearly evident throughout the Qur'an, that the people of the book are addressed over and over about not transgessing their boundaries and saying that Allah had a son.
You're being very inconsistent and I fear it is because you need to protect your position. I would rethink this strategy.
you guys are manipulating the simple fact that Jesus was like Adam because he both DID NOT HAVE A FATHER
I'm not manipulating anything.
The Qur'an does not say what you claim, plain and simple bro.Well, it is known by many Muslims (regardless the sects) and many Christians that Jesus should come back, this is a huge subject and ironically I believe in it due to a small clue in the Quran
Wonderful, one small clue and you fall right back into preconceptions.
I suggest you be honest with yourself and admit that you haven't overcome what you've been spoonfed. It will be quite liberating.The Qur'an clearly states that Isa was a man, and all men die, and will be resurrected on the last day. The Qur'an even describes the conversation between Allah and Isa on the last day. So what small clue overrides Allah's law??
Ok sorry, but you know that up to today there are all sort of things that are worshipped as gods
That's fine, but it's irrelevant to our discussion.
well, anything wrong is motivated by the devil
OK. But you haven't proven it's wrong, only that you don't agree.
but again don?t manipulate the fact that what you say is not only against my belief, it against the followings believe that Jesus had no human father as well
- Most Muslims
- Most Islamic Sects
- Most Christians
I?m just one human out of category 1 because I don?t follow any sect.
The numbers are meaningless. The Qur'an says not to follow the majority, to think for onesself. That's what I'm doing. Why do you have a problem with that?
Well that is not what I don?t like ?Argument? because I don?t argue when I have knowledge ...
An argument is a position within a debate. It doesn't mean something derogatory. We are simply arguing our positions. And you judged my position before hearing my argument. That's closed-minded.
But it was said STRAIGHTFORWARD IN MANY OTHER LOCATIONS
So what? The fact that it's been repeated should be a clue that Allah repeats this from many different angles throughout the Qur'an. There is no limit to how many times it should be repeated.
That is fine, I may be able to do it to, I?m talking about creating a pit then filling it up with wood, then burn it as hell then put a human in there for about 15 minutes at least
OK, quote the ayah that states exactly what you just said and we'll discuss it further.
Well Allah only said that his words does change
Wrong, He says his laws don't change. Again, agree to disagree here if you wish.
I hope you didn?t consider it an insult, I meant you are nothing but an Atheist, ie. you only believe in matter
Bro, I understand that English is your second language, and I'm tolerant of this. However, using words like Atheist, it is your responsibility to be concise in it's application.
Atheists do not believe in God.
you only believe in matter sorry and it is hard for you to believe in the unseen while this is a major requirement to be with the true believers group 23
I'm not sure where you got this opinion, but I assure you it's not from me. Of course I belive in the unseen. I just don't believe in the untrue.
Is Allah real(exist) or not?
yes
Did He sent the Quran or not?
yes
And Is the Quran His true and direct words or not?
yes
Neither me and that is the way according to 1736, what the majority understand though that he was a newly born baby...
Again with the majority stuff.
but the truth according to the compelling evidence that it is non sense and most likely motivated by the devil while YOU DON?T KNOW IT.
Thanks for the insight, and the insult. I'll keep that in mind in our next debate.
But the truth is one bro or at least in some issues MUST BE ONE, like a god or not, black or white I mean and the issue of Jesus father is black or white
You're putting Isa on the same level as Allah.
Allah is black and white.
His guidance is universal.I'm sorry for any typos or other mistakes as i really don't have time to check it man and I was responding as i was reading it
No problemo.
peace,
Tay -
As Salaam Alaikum,
I believe that Mary was a virgin when she got pregnant. D
Let me be brief and just babble for a second, i don't want to get too into this, it's already been exhuasting just reading this.
While those of you argue, "There must be a Y chromosome" because scienec proves that there is... I would like to point this out
God can create sperm.
And he could of planted it into her if he wanted.
We see today that there are women getting pregnant, but yet they have had no sex to get it done.
Take me for instance. My sister has a problem with her tubes, she has cist (or whatever u call it) on them. So it may be hard for her to get pregnant.
So who will I possibly be to her in the future if she doesnt? The carrier of her children. Does that mean her husband and I were banging eachother? No. It's called SCIENCE and all of that inventro fertilizaiton or whatever you call it. So why can't you all think that Allah was just ahead of our time???
Also maybe it's just me, but am I the only one who finds it interesting how an ayat talks about how "She" concieved a child......
usually when tehre ar e2 people involved, don't we usually say "They concieved"???????
I'm trying to think of where one would say "I have concieved a child" and yet two people have been involved... wierd.
Anyways...
I believe Mary was a virgin.
salaam
-
Peace NoProgressive,
While I respect your opinion of "I believe that Mary was a virgin when she got pregnant", your modern example is flawed.
The process of invetro fertilization requires taking the sperm of a man and fertilizing the female egg outside of the body. Science is not creating the sperm cell, they're just cutting out the middle-man, so to speak.
Peace,
Tay -
Salam Tay,
Peace NoProgressive,
While I respect your opinion of "I believe that Mary was a virgin when she got pregnant", your modern example is flawed.
The process of invetro fertilization requires taking the sperm of a man and fertilizing the female egg outside of the body. Science is not creating the sperm cell, they're just cutting out the middle-man, so to speak.
Peace,
TayJK- Please read my post at http//www.free-minds.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4700
GOD Bless! -
Peace
Actually, this "miracle" just maybe possible.
http//ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/sex2.htm
- Virginal reproduction
In cases of parthenogenesis (virgin birth), an ovum starts to divide by itself without fertilization, producing an embryo in which the paternal chromosomes may be replaced by a duplication of maternal ones. This asexual reproductive method is rare among warm-blooded vertebrates but more common among invertebrates. Pathological parthenogenesis has been observed in higher animals, such as the frog, fowl, and certain mammals. Parthenogenesis usually gives rise to female offspring or sometimes an abnormal male.
In 1900 Jacques Loeb accomplished the first clear case of artificial parthenogenesis when he pricked unfertilized frog eggs with a needle and found that in some cases normal embryonic development ensued. In 1936 Gregory Pincus induced parthenogenesis in mammalian (rabbit) eggs by temperature change and chemical agents. Artificial parthenogenesis has since been achieved in almost all major groups of animals, by mechanical, chemical, and electrical means, though it usually results in incomplete and abnormal development.
Attempts at artificial parthenogenesis in humans have not yet been successful. The first cloned human embryo was produced in October 2001. Eggs had their own genetic material removed and were injected with the nucleus of a donor cell. They were then incubated under special conditions to prompt them to divide and grow. One embryo grew to six cells before it stopped dividing. The same experimenters also tried to induce human eggs to divide into early embryos parthenogenetically -- without being fertilized by a sperm or enucleated and injected with a donor cell -- but their efforts met with only limited success .
There is some evidence, however, that natural parthenogenesis does occasionally occur in humans. There are many instances in which impregnation has allegedly taken place in women without there being any possibility of the semen entering the female genital passage . In some cases it was found either in the course of pregnancy or at the time of childbirth that the female passages were obstructed. In 1956 the medical journal Lancet published a report concerning 19 alleged cases of virgin birth among women in England, who were studied by members of the British Medical Association. The six-month study convinced the investigators that human parthenogenesis was physiologically possible and had actually occurred in some of the women studied .
Many primitive peoples believe that there are two methods of human reproduction the ordinary animal one and a higher one rarely employed -- virgin birth . One belief is that the rays of the sun can fertilize women. In this regard, it is interesting that ultraviolet rays can cause parthenogenesis in unfertilized eggs of sea-urchins. It is also believed that moon rays, wind, rain, and certain types of food can cause impregnation. In the 19th century the Trobriand Islanders of the western Pacific insisted that cases of virgin birth still occurred among them.
Further evidence for the possibility of human parthenogenesis comes from the mysterious phenomenon of dermoid cysts . These are malformed embryonic growths or tumour-like formations occasionally found in various parts of the body, including womb, ovaries, and scrotum. They often contain bones, hair, teeth, flesh, tissue, glands, portions of the scalp, face, eyes, ribs, vertebral column, and umbilical cord. They are found in males as well as females, both young and old, including virgins. They appear to be undeveloped embryos and fetuses in various stages of growth. Loeb and several other researchers argued that dermoid cysts may be related to the parthenogenetic tendency of the mammalian egg, catalyzed perhaps by an increase in blood alkalinity. However, the body's parthenogenetic capacity is now very feeble and the generative centres lack the power to carry the reproduction process through to its proper conclusion.
It is possible that some cases of human parthenogenesis involve self-fertilization rather than true virgin birth, as there are cases of sperm being produced in women by vestigial, usually nonfunctional, male reproductive glands known as the epo?phoron (parovarium) and paro?phoron, which correspond to the seminiferous tubules of the testicles in males. In some instances, the magnetic influence and nervous excitement occasioned by attempted sexual intercourse may rouse into activity the latent, rudimentary male sex glands so that they secrete semen, resulting in impregnation .
Prior to the acceptance by the medical profession of the present theory of conception (epigenesis) in the middle of the 19th century, the ovist and aura seminalis theories prevailed, which can be traced back to Pythagoras. According to the ovist theory, the new organism is a product of the egg alone, and the spermatozoon and male progenitor are not essential to the reproductive process. According to the aura seminalis theory, the male supplies only a vital stimulus (an aura or emanation) which initiates the development of the ovum. The aura seminalis theory was rejected after it was established in 1854 that ova were fertilized by the actual entrance of the nucleus or head of the spermatozoa.
However, Loeb's experiments showed that for fertilization to occur, neither the sperm nucleus nor the spermatozoon itself need enter the egg, or even be in proximity to the egg. He replaced the sperm by alkaline solutions, ultraviolet rays, and other stimuli. Alexander Gurwitsch discovered in the 1920s that cells emit weak ultraviolet ('mitogenetic') radiation that can cause cell division in other cells at a distance -- a finding still resisted by mainstream scientists .
The power of sperm to cause fertilization is distinct from their capacity of hereditary transmission. In one experiment, a fertilizing enzyme (occytase) was isolated from spermatozoa and, when added to unfertilized sea-urchin eggs, caused them to develop. This substance is present in mammalian blood, since the addition of ox's blood to unfertilized eggs produced the same effects. Sperm therefore exercise two independent functions they can trigger the segmentation of the ovum, and they may convey paternal genetic qualities. The former function can be replaced by chemical substances, while the latter can be dispensed with, in which case the offspring have purely maternal characteristics .
Eggs show at least a beginning of segmentation under normal conditions. But sperm, which are highly alkaline, appear to accelerate the process by compensating for the excessive acidity of the medium surrounding the egg rather than a chemical deficiency in the egg itself. An acid condition of the blood prevents the parthenogenetic development of ova in the ovaries, while increased alkalinity appears to favour parthenogenetic development .
Commenting on Pincus's experiments on artificial parthenogenesis in rabbits, G. de Purucker stated that the means employed had probably thrown the ova back to a condition identical with the hermaphroditism of the early third root-race. Since there is always a double sex in every human or animal of our day, the ova would develop from the double current innate in the mother rabbit and produce offspring much as the hermaphrodites did towards the middle of the third race .
References
J.B. Cibelli, R.P. Lanza and M.D. West, with C. Ezzell, 'The first human cloned embryo', Scientific American, Jan. 2002, http//sciam.com/explorations/2001/112401ezzell/index.html.
Raymond Bernard, The Mysteries of Human Reproduction, Mokelumne Hill, CA Health Research, n.d., pp. 47-50, 56-63.
Ibid., pp. 3-10.
Ibid., pp. 11-28, 89-93.
Ibid., pp. 51-5, 117; F.H. Buzzacott and M.I. Wymore, Bi-sexual Man or Evolution of the Sexes, Health Research, 1966 (1912), pp. 32-4; Hilton Hotema, Secret of Regeneration, Health Research, 1963, ch. 204-205, 211.
Secret of Regeneration, ch. 208-210, 234; Gray's Anatomy, http//www.bartleby.com/107.
Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird, The Secret Life of Plants, New York Harper & Row, 1973, pp. 54-5, 197-9; R. VanWijk, 'Bio-photons and bio-communication', Journal of Scientific Exploration, vol. 15, pp. 183-97, 2001.
The Mysteries of Human Reproduction, pp. 42, 109.
Ibid., pp. 118-9.
G. de Purucker, Studies in Occult Philosophy, Pasadena, CA Theosophical University Press, 1973, pp. 455-8. - Virginal reproduction
-
Peace Zeljko,
You asked
Did Jesus have a wife? How about a child?
The Qur'an is not specific in this regard, however, this may be a clue
We did send messengers before thee, and appointed for them wives and children and it was never the part of a messenger to bring a sign except as Allah permitted (or commanded). For each period is a Book (revealed).
Peace,
Tay -
Salam Tay,
Peace Zeljko,
You asked
Did Jesus have a wife? How about a child?
The Qur'an is not specific in this regard, however, this may be a clue
We did send messengers before thee, and appointed for them wives and children and it was never the part of a messenger to bring a sign except as Allah permitted (or commanded). For each period is a Book (revealed).
Peace,
TayJK- But this verse doesnt say that ALL messengers before Muhammad had wives and children. Taking it as such would be a misnterpretation. Irrespective of whether Jesus had children or not, which is historicaly quite absurd anyways, he was still not a usual person. GOD had definitely blessed him with extraordinary powers which he carried out in accordance with GOD's Will like healing the sick and raising the death by GOD'S leave. GOD Bless!