Sister of Aaron
-
Thanks Ak85,
I am sure you could lay hand on another 100 such translations and explanations. They conveniently overlooked being under heavy veil of widespread gossips of disciples. A person can be called "disciple" only when he has accepted and followed a person, not before that. Once they believed they became Muslims, yet they retained their physical identity as Al-Hawariyun, as they are called in 5112 after having become Muslims. How could they be referred or translated as "Disciples"?. They were Al-Hawariyun before arrival of Easa alahissalam and afterwards also. Our respects and salam to them, our Muslim elders.
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/003.%20Aale%20Imran/temp09%203.52bc.gif
Al-Hawariyun replied, "We all are the helpers of Allah .
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/061.%20As%20Saff/Temp%2001%2061.14.gif
Resultantly/thereby a Group believed from amongst Bani Iesraa'eel and the other Group refused to accept/believe.Bani Iesraa'eel stood divided in two groups; one becoming believers/Muslims the other group-majority refusing and becoming Kaafir, at that point in time.
Surat As Saff-61
-
it said 'probably' dated 150 CE, wiki is not a great source as anyone can edit there, however, if you read wiki regarding the Gospel of John that also says "There is credible evidence that the Gospel was written no later than the middle of the second century. " It also is unsure, as with any of the others, whether it was actually written BY John.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John
I dont think there is one that can be dated without possible error to the actual time of Jesus and the Nag Hamadi scrolls have brought forth many of the pieces of the lost gospels which are worth reading.
Yes, and it also provided references for its statements on the dates. Did you notice the number after the statement on dates? That number is the citation for the reference.
The Nag Hammadi scrolls are the Coptic secret sayings of Jesus, correct? If this is true, what miracles are quoted in these sayings? Miracles that are actually refuted by the Qu'ran...These are the same sayings which Gnostics follow, which deny that the God in the Torah is the real God, and that this lesser God botched creation because this terrible world we live in could not have been created by The True God. And there is a true God above this lesser God, who is described as harsh and inferior (the lesser God of the Torah) to the True God. And that Jesus was sent by this True God to save us from this harsh world by planting the seed of knowledge in us, that this world is a carcass created by a lesser God. "Whoever knows this world, will discover a carcass (something along those lines)" Many times they refer to the God of the Torah as being "harsh and inferior" and even deluded and "jealous", when they attack the phrase saying "No other God besides God."
Google Gnosticism, don't take my word for it.
As for the dates, this is not what some random typed, this is the opinion of biblical scholars, who date this gospel to 150 C.E. I heard of this even before I came across this wiki page from another biblical scholar (how do I know biblical scholars? A course I'm taking is taught by one, www.barriewilson.com) but used this wiki page to have something to reference as to my assertion that according to scholars, this gospel is dated to 150 C.E. There are more references on the bottom of the page, where biblical scholars also discuss and argue why they believe this gospel is from the mid second century.
The Nag Hammadi secret sayings of Jesus also propose a docetic view of Jesus if I'm not mistaken, docetic view means that he appeared human but was not actually human...
-
Thanks Ak85,
I am sure you could lay hand on another 100 such translations and explanations. They conveniently overlooked being under heavy veil of widespread gossips of disciples. A person can be called "disciple" only when he has accepted and followed a person, not before that. Once they believed they became Muslims, yet they retained their physical identity as Al-Hawariyun, as they are called in 5112 after having become Muslims. How could they be referred or translated as "Disciples"?. They were Al-Hawariyun before arrival of Easa alahissalam and afterwards also. Our respects and salam to them, our Muslim elders.
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/003.%20Aale%20Imran/temp09%203.52bc.gif
Al-Hawariyun replied, "We all are the helpers of Allah .
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/061.%20As%20Saff/Temp%2001%2061.14.gif
Resultantly/thereby a Group believed from amongst Bani Iesraa'eel and the other Group refused to accept/believe.Bani Iesraa'eel stood divided in two groups; one becoming believers/Muslims the other group-majority refusing and becoming Kaafir, at that point in time.
Surat As Saff-61
Thank you for this clarification.
-
Yes, and it also provided references for its statements on the dates. Did you notice the number after the statement on dates? That number is the citation for the reference.
The Nag Hammadi scrolls are the Coptic secret sayings of Jesus, correct? If this is true, what miracles are quoted in these sayings? Miracles that are actually refuted by the Qu'ran...These are the same sayings which Gnostics follow, which deny that the God in the Torah is the real God, and that this lesser God botched creation because this terrible world we live in could not have been created by The True God. And there is a true God above this lesser God, who is described as harsh and inferior (the lesser God of the Torah) to the True God. And that Jesus was sent by this True God to save us from this harsh world by planting the seed of knowledge in us, that this world is a carcass created by a lesser God. "Whoever knows this world, will discover a carcass (something along those lines)" Many times they refer to the God of the Torah as being "harsh and inferior" and even deluded and "jealous", when they attack the phrase saying "No other God besides God."
Google Gnosticism, don't take my word for it.
As for the dates, this is not what some random typed, this is the opinion of biblical scholars, who date this gospel to 150 C.E. I heard of this even before I came across this wiki page from another biblical scholar (how do I know biblical scholars? A course I'm taking is taught by one, www.barriewilson.com) but used this wiki page to have something to reference as to my assertion that according to scholars, this gospel is dated to 150 C.E. There are more references on the bottom of the page, where biblical scholars also discuss and argue why they believe this gospel is from the mid second century.
The Nag Hammadi secret sayings of Jesus also propose a docetic view of Jesus if I'm not mistaken, docetic view means that he appeared human but was not actually human...
I confess to not having read everything I found yet, only latched onto these a couple of weeks ago peace
-
Thank you for this clarification.
I have been reading Kamal Salibi's blog, and in it he says that Hawariyun means "white." Dr. Salibi says this may refer to the fact they wore white clothes.
I found another site which says the root word is Hara, which means white. The website I'm putting forward says calling them Hawariyun i.e. the white ones may refer to "pureness" of their minds (I am not one to say white skin means pure and those who are not white skinned are not pure, please whoever is reading this do not draw this implication from me, not out of suspicion of other's understanding am I stating this but simply to clarify)
This actually helps with your assertion, as this group who's minds and souls were pure agreed to be his helpers, and those who's minds and souls were blackened rejected him
http//books.google.ca/books?id=yaGwFWCQb4MC&pg=PA125&lpg=PA125&dq=al+hawariyun&source=bl&ots=YSeddHno1q&sig=zwXNQ0tP-__iOHHBDOM1Oj5w07M&hl=en&ei=RZw9TNyxAoP_8Abp0pimBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CDUQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=al%20hawariyun&f=false
-
-
according to the following page, it is "taifatun" which is translated as "a group" in 6114, and "hawariyun" is translated as disciples in this same page as well. I have been looking for something else which discusses "hara" and its definition but cannot find anything
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=61&verse=14#%28611428%29
-
according to the following page, it is "taifatun" which is translated as "a group" in 6114, and "hawariyun" is translated as disciples in this same page as well. I have been looking for something else which discusses "hara" and its definition but cannot find anything
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=61&verse=14#%28611428%29
Do you mean the verb which is written as , perfect, third person, singular, intransitive.
-
What is the root word of al Harawiyun? if al Harawiyun means a group, then what is the correct translation of taifatun?
Root
Harawiyun does not mean "group". It is a plural noun/quasi active participle. And plural can refer to a group of people of same nature.
"taifatun" means group. By use of this word it becomes evident for us that they were not a small number but one of the divisions of Bani Asrael at that point in time.
-
Root
Harawiyun does not mean "group". It is a plural noun/quasi active participle. And plural can refer to a group of people of same nature.
"taifatun" means group. By use of this word it becomes evident for us that they were not a small number but one of the divisions of Bani Asrael at that point in time.
ok it doesn't mean disciples, and it doesn't mean group, it refers to a group of the same nature? what does it mean exactly?
-
i.e. the nature in reference to/describing those who who followed him or something along those lines? What nature?
And plural can refer to a group of people of same nature.
When you use plural word "women" what perception comes to your mind? or plural "Jews", "Christians", "Muslims"; some commonality. Eactly in that way take that plural. A group of people-Active participles of the verb made from Root .
-
They are simply incapable of grasping that the Maryam mentioned in the QUran, and her son Eesa (NOT JESUS) came 1000 years before the Jesus who was crucifed in Jerusalem. They are incapable of grasping the fact that "Eesa" and "Jesus" are not the same name. They are two different and distinct Hebrew names belonging to two different persons, who lived and died in two different eras.
But Qur'an confirms that son of Maryam "Eesa" claimed by the people as "son of God"(!).. If Jesus and Eesa different persons, then Eesa would not be mentioned there. This is important..
Another issue, if "sister of Aaron" is true translation, then why are we sure that Aaron is the same Aaron who was Moses' brother?
-
aramaic Isha = hebrew yeshu = isa in aranic
Essau = Isa also Isa was a common name is ancient hebrews, greeks twisted his name a bit from other Isa's of his time, it happened many times in the jewish community, before they get captives to babylonia, and after that they lost their language and names get twisted
another remarque to prouve the twisting of names Ishmael = Samuel , yet they are treated as 2 different names in the old testament, people use to love ishmael and they named their children on him, another prophet also was named ishmael but different than the son of abrahem, so they twisted the names
Take this in cnsideration before you say Jesus is not Isa
( Aaron was a respected man in that time, and could be brother of maryam, uncles of Isa , there is not only one Aaron in the jewish history, because he was a prophet, than must be a lot of people name their kids aaron, abraham, ishmael etc....)Do not take what you read in the old testament as truth and guidance, the quran said so
anyways what about hawariyoun ??? H W R make perfectly the word Hiwar hawara , hawarahoum
therefore hawariyoun sounds like those who do the hiwar for issa, meaning teachers to teach his message through hiwar, close to narrators -
I can believe this story only if Moses and jesus were messengers, higher rank than prophets, meaning the book of LAW bringers, than maybe isa said a messenger comes after me is called Ahmed, therefore it was only prophets between isa and Mohamed, for they have books but now LAW, They folow the law of Moses and modified by Jesus, than new law by mohamed
Moses ( messenger + Adron only a prophet) - Isa (Meesenger, prophesised a messenger after him) Than only prophets ( books with no new laws) Than the messenger Mohamed !!!!!!!!!!
Could this be the explanation ? I always thaught that messengers are those who bring books with LAW and prophets are teachers of these books, their teachings are made a book with no new lawI don't know