Are there Female prophetess

good_logic

So jafar ,she has mentioned all the fallacies has she?
Well yours is " my post was supposed to be light hearted" fallacy
Relax and smile brother . I am the one who commits all the fallacies here.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

huruf

Quote From https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?action=post;topic=9610367.90;last_msg=419872

The relationship between man and Allah is obviously not a biological one such as biological father and his biological son but to mean ?everything? as mentioned with the phrase ?Al Rahman Al Raheem? ( &#1616 in the very beginning and so many other places in the Quran to make us understand that He is the only actual mother and father of everything. This is because everything emerges from Him and merges back in Him on return as He is the only Source of life, Creator, Producer and Owner of everything. Quranic words ?? (Ibn) and ?? (abna?) do not refer to ?son? or ?sons? but correctly means ?build?, ?made? and ?constituted?. Whereas, according to the linguistic rules the only word ?? (Bin) is used in the middle of two names to mean ?son?. Hence, the pashion of taking the word ?? (Ibn), coming between two names, to mean ?son? has been invented and introduced by early Islam Persian Imams who have deliberately destroyed the correct understanding of the Quran by their false translation and fake literature.

Therefore, according to the linguistic rules the word ?? (ibn) coming between ?? and ?? in the Quranic phrase ? ? does not actually stand for ?Isa son of Mary? but correctly means ?Isa constitution of Miriam? or ?Miriam?s constitution Isa?. The Quran further clarifies the same thing by its phrases such as ?Isa Ruhu Allah? and ?Kalimatullah? to make us understand that Isa is actually Allah?s revelation, Allah?s words, Allah?s sprit constituted, made or build of Miriam. The phrase ? ? of the verse 518 also refers to ?Allah?s made?, ?Allah?s build? or ?Allah?s constituted?

There are so many technical things without fully clarification and comprehension of which this subject is difficult to understand for those who learn the Quran by its fake translation or with the false exegesis of their scholars.

This is the reason why I write extensive articles with substantial details of Quranic words so that people can erase from their memory the false meaning of Arabic words of the Quran, which they have memorized from the fake literature of Islam and false dictionaries of the Quran.

Hence, as I have said in my earlier reply that it is not possible to make things clear in one go but we need a series of in depth research articles with substantial information, evidence and references so that people can digest them and understand the truth mentioned in the verses of the Quran.

Also, the translation of the whole Quran is not only wrong but complete false and totally misleading. Therefore, any question with the reference of the false translation will not be understood until we have complete word to word analysis and correct translation of relevant verses of the Quran, which require one full length independent research article for each and every verse of the Quran.

However, in the meantime please conduct some research on the words ?? (ibn) and ?? (bin) as to where they are properly used in Arabic language, and in which shape they correctly come with someone?s name to take them to mean ?son? or ?daughter?. You also need to know if ?? (ibn) means ?son? then what is the meaning of popular phrase ? ? (ibn al waqt)? Is it ?son of time??

Moreover, I always reiterate to correctly understand the Quran please read my each and every article and pay attention to the analysis and correct meaning of Quranic words and grammar mentioned in these articles so that you will be able to understand and correctly translate the Quran without taking any help from anyone.

Had you read my article ?CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF QURANIC VERSES 1177, 1178 & 1179 REGARDING THE NATION OF LUT? you would have understood the correct meaning of the word ?? (banati) which is falsely translated to mean ?daughters? of Prophet Lut. Whereas, the correct meaning of this Quranic word ?? (banati) is ?my constituted?. How can a sensible person hand over his daughters to the corrupt evils to have sex with them without their wishes of going with them?

The ignorant scholars and their blind followers who use ? ? (Tasreef-e-Ayat) to balance their lies invented in their translation they use ?? (banati) to mean Prophet Lut?s daughters, they don?t ponder upon their evil act of altering the statements of the Quran with their blind aim of taking the same meaning of Quranic words in each and every verse no matter if they clashed with the context. Hence, without taking into account any linguistic rule, the ?Tasrifi evils? translate Quranic words ??, ??, ?? and their derivatives to mean ?son? and ?daughter? throughout the Quran and fill the translation of the Quran with the pagan myths, false stories of stone-age and ancient polytheist beliefs and pagan rituals.

Actually, the founders of the religions have purposely muddled up the names of the revelations with the names of the prophets. The Quran rarely uses the names of the prophets but it normally and mostly uses the names of God?s revelations and most of them are adjectives of His revelations.

For example, the Quran mainly uses the word Isa (&#1648 for God?s revelation conceived by Miriam (/&#1605 but in the translation of the Quran Prophet Moses and Aaron?s sister Miriam (/&#1605 was replaced with Virgin Mary of Christians and she was falsely made the mother of Jesus. If you carefully read the translation of Quranic verses 338 to 342 you will find for yourself how our liar scholars transferred the pregnancy of Zechariah?s wife to Miriam (/&#1605 and eventually in the translation of the further verse 345 they invented Virgin Mary and her son Jesus. In the mainstream translation of the verse 338 Zechariah is shown praying to have his offspring. In the translation of the next verse 339 the angels give him a good news of having a son. In the translation of the next verse 340 Zechariah is shown unconvinced or not believing in this and argues with His Lord as to how will he be having a son in his old age when his wife is also a barren woman, who cannot conceive a pregnancy. In the translation of the next verse 341 unconvinced Zechariah demands from his Lord to show him a sign as if he is really having a son and in the translation of the next verse 342 the angels give a news to Miriam (/&#1605 that she was chosen, and in the translation of the verse 345 the angels give the good news to Miriam (/&#1605 of having a son whose name will be Isa al Maseih ( &#1609.

Wonderful!?.. Zechariah wanted offspring, he was given a news of having a son, whose wife was not able to become pregnant being a barren woman, Zechariah himself was not able to become a father being an old man and as s token of sign Miriam (/&#1605 became pregnant and she had a son!

Curse on those evil liars who invented the above mentioned false story from the clear words of the Quran in which Miriam (/&#1605 conceives, retrieves, constructs or makes God?s revelation Isa al Maseih ( &#1609, which was the good news given by angels. If a blind layman looks at the words ? ? of the verse 345 he will correctly translate these words to mean ?God gives you glad tidings with Word from Him its name will be Isa al Maseih? but in the fake translation the evils invented ?Jesus Christ? and made him a prophet and son of virgin Mary!

What is the meaning of the phrase ?? (bi kalimati hi)? Don?t the evil translators of the Quran know the correct meaning of Arabic word ?? (KLM) and its derivatives such as ?? (Kalam) and ?? (Kalimah)? They are those who read ? ? (kalimah ash shadah) when they convert someone into Islam they also read the same Kalimah when they take funeral to the graveyard, and they call ? ? (Kalam Majeed) to the Quran or to ?God?s Communication?, to ?God?s words? and to ?God?s Revelation?. They also know the Kalam (&#1605 of so an so poet or so and so author but they forgot to correctly translate the same word Kalimah in the phrase ?? of the above verse 345. The forthcoming verse 349 ? ? confirms that it is a message sent towards Bani Israil. The word ?? (Rasoolan) is a product of ?? to mean messaging, sending consignment, delivery and courier.

If Isa or Jesus was a Prophet then according to the following verse of the Quran all people of the book including Muslims must take him as their prophet instead of Muhammad and Muslims should also be called the followers of Jesus. However, if you correctly take the words ? ? of the verse 4152 to correctly mean ?and those who adhere with/comply with/take oath with Allah and His sent message they don?t make difference/cut off/take away any of them? in which ?? (rusulihi) is not prophet or their plural (prophets) but the product of ?? (RSL) + ?? (hi) a third person singular objective pronoun of Allah to mean ?His?. Hence, ?? (rusulihi) correctly means ?His sent message?. There is nothing plural in the phrase ?? (rusulihi) but the liar translators falsely took it as a plural word and invented prophets from the singular phrase ?? (rusulihi).

In the next verse 4153 ? ? question about revealing or bringing down a book itself telling us that it is not the context of the prophets but the context of revelation or bringing down a book, which is also being clarified with the phrase ?? (rusulihi) of the earlier verse 4152 that does not say ?His prophets? but ?a compilation? or ?a product of His sent message?. The next verse 4154 is talking about their covenant (&#1618 which is again a compliance of the statement of the above verse 4152 about taking oath, obeying or complying with God and His sent message ( &#1616. The next verse 4155 again talks about the compliance of their oath (&#1618 and declared them ungrateful rejecters who reject Allah?s verses ( &#1616. The further words ? ? of the same verse 4155 refer to the forthcoming incident mentioned in the next verse 4156 in which Prophetess Miriam (/&#1605 was accused of having a child without a legal father. Hence, the words ? ? of the verse 4156 correctly means ?and with their rejection and their taunting on Miriam a severe accusation? (word to word correct translation of Quranic verse 4156) make it clear that the statement ? ? of the previous verse 4155 counts Miriam (/&#1605 among Prophets and their dilution, attenuation, making them low or degrading of the prophets ( &#1614 and taunting or criticising them (&#1618 is not right ( &#1617. So, the words ? ? of the verse 4155 correctly means ?and their degrading of the prophets and their criticism not right? directly refer to their insulting or degrading remark or talk on the severe accusation on Miriam. This verse 4155 of the Quran not only tells us the true history that Miriam (/&#1605 did not have a child without father but she was accused and Isa (&#1648 which was actually God?s sent message (proven from the above explained context) was rejected by them and they falsely turned it into Miriam?s child Isa (&#1648 born without having his father. Therefore, in the above context the Quran itself reveals and explains how sent message of God or God?s revelation Isa (&#1648 or Isa al Maseih ( &#1609 was falsely made son of Virgin Mary and how this false belief was established and made viral.

The verse 4177 urges all people of the book including Muslims as they are also counted among the people of the book ? ? do not yield in your religion and do not press lie on God ? ? except the right which is that ? ? The Masheih (observation/thought/retrieval/discovery) Isa constructed by Miriam is sent message of God ?? and His word ? ? revealed/ diction/ thrown/delivered it to Miriam ? ? and spirit of its is to be complied with/to be obeyed/to be adhered with God and His sent message ? ? and don?t say/invent three gods.

I would like to draw your attention towards the feminine singular pronoun ?? (ha) in the phrase ?? (alqa ha), i.e. (ha) + (alqa) = (alqa ha) in which ?? (alqa) is a popular word used to mean idea, thought, imagination or anything that comes to someone?s mind or feeling coming in someone?s heart. You might have heard this word ?? (alqa) is usually used by poets when poetry arrives on them or when poetic thoughts come in their mind, which is also called ?? (aamad), i.e. ?arrival? or ?coming? in Urdu and Persian literature. Whereas, the feminine singular pronoun ?? (ha) in the phrase ?? (alqa ha) cannot be a pronoun of such a high profiled masculine prophet Isa or Jesus who was supposed to be a man! Hence, the formation of the words of the above verse 4171 itself discard the lie invented by the liar translators of the Quran, who falsely brought in the translation a man Isa or Jesus by using the feminine pronoun ?? (ha) which has been correctly used as a pronoun of revelation which is feminine. This is the reason why Satan Quranists falsely claim that the Quran was not written according to the grammar and no grammar was used in the Quran so that they can invent in the translation of the Quran whatever they want to spread in the name of the Quran. They should learn Arabic before holding their Quran teaching sessions and stop misguiding innocent people in the name of ?Quran Only? teaching.

Anyway, the word to word correct translation of the above verse 4171 does not consider that Isa al Maseih or Jesus Christ was a man or human being but God?s revelation constructed or retrieved by Merriam which was reconfirmed by Quranic phrase ? ? to correctly mean arrived, revealed, delivered it to Merriam or its revelation or arrival towards Merriam. Hence, those who are keen to know how revelations used to come to the prophets they should understand the correct statement of the above verse of the Quran in which prophets used to construct or retrieve the words of God. However, in some cases the names of Prophets and their revelation are same just as Newton and Newton?s theory in which the unit of force is also called Newton or someone?s invention or theory is given the name of its retriever or discoverer.

Moreover, the clause ? ? and don?t say/invent three gods of the same verse 4171 depicts that the purpose of inventing Isa al Maseih or Jesus Christ was to worship a man making him god along with his mother who was also declared as a god along with the God. Whereas, the word ?? is coming from Hebrew title of God ?YHWH? or ?Ya Huwa? which is also called ?JEHOVAH? in Christianity in which ?Ya? or ?Je? is not a part of God?s title ?Hu?, ?Huwa? or ?Huva?.

Hence, this is another false assumption of the Quranists that the issue of father of Isa or Jesus was not there when the Quran was revealed otherwise the Quran would have clearly said that Isa or Jesus had a father. In fact according to the above verses the issue of Virgin Mary and birth of Isa or Jesus without having father was already there when the Quran was revealed. This is the reason why Quran has made it clear and dealt with this falsification very well in which the Quran states that Isa was a revelation of God constructed by Merriam but the inventors of the theory of 3 gods made Merriam?s revelation Isa or Jesus a man and then turned it into a third god together with its founder Merriam who was falsely made a virgin mother of Isa or Jesus.

Therefore, any argument whether Isa or Jesus had father or born without having father is complete rubbish and non-Quranic. So, those who take up this issue in the favour of their false idea that Isa or Jesus was having father and also those who falsely argue that Isa or Jesus was born without having father they must learn the Quran with open eyes and stop spreading non-Quranic false beliefs. They should follow the words of the Quran instead of following the fake translations of their scholars. Also, the clause ? ? of the same verse 4171 correctly means ?and spirit of its is to be complied with/to be obeyed/to be adhered with God and His sent message? urges us to obey God and His sent Message, in which ?? (Rusuli hi) is not any human being or prophet but ?sent message of God? which was on purpose replaced with man (prophet) to obey man instead of God?s message.

The words ? ? of Quranic verse 1934 are also in front of us in which ? ?, i.e. Isa construction of Merriam is called ? ?, i.e. the true statement. How a man can be a statement???

Hence, the verse 1934 ? ? correctly means ?that Isa construction of Merriam is a true statement in which they dispute?.

The reason of this never ending dispute is that we don?t follow the words of the Quran against our false beliefs.

To prove that Isa was a man the traditionalists invented that Isa was taken up in the heaven without giving him a death and he will be buried right next to Prophet Muhammad in Madina where the place of his grave is already reserved. They follow Ibni Kathir who states that Isa?s demise will take place in Madina, where his Janazah (Burial) Salaat will be performed. He will then be buried beside the holy prophet Muhammad. They also take Imam Tirmizi?s narration in which Trimizi narrates from Abdullah Ibn Salaam, that he said the character of the prophet Muhammad and the fact pertaining to Isa?s burial beside him, was written in the Torah.

Ahmadis, i.e. the followers of Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani have invented Isa?s grave in the locality of Khanyar of the town Srinagar of Indian occupied Kashmir and following the Ahmadis the Quranists (Ahle Quran/Quran Only) also identified Isa?s grave, which is ridiculous. To prove their falsification with their usual style of saying ?this and that? and ?it means this and it means that? they say Isa was not taken up but surely died because Isa used to eat and drink that?s why tasting death was necessary for him.

Where are the clear words of the Quran in which Quran confirms Isa?s death and his burial???

Hence, ?this and that? will not be acceptable anymore and there is no meaning of ?it means this and it means that? we need clear wording from the Quran without any dishonest word engineering as according to the traditional date of revelation of the Quran it was revealed quite after the time of traditional prophet Isa or Jesus. Therefore, the Quran should contain the clear information about the death of Isa or Jesus if he was a human being.

Therefore, it is true that Quran does not mention Mary nor does the Quran talk about her so called virginity. However, our stupid scholars and their nonsense followers have been fighting with each other on the question of Isa?s father!

Traditionalists believe that Isa was born without his father whereas the ?Quran Only?, Quranists or Ahle Quran put their lies together to prove that Isa had a father.

Likewise, Quranic words ?? (Messih) and ?? (Messiah) are adjectives as well as the names of God?s books but they were replaced with persons (human beings) and named them prophets out of which they brought one human in the shape of Jesus or Isa al Maseih and opened the door for another humen ?? (Messih) to come. This is the reason why Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani took a chance and declared himself the ?? (Messih), who was supposed to come in the world again, near the end of the world! Interestingly, this fake ?? (Messih) has ended but the world did not end so who will come next, before ending the world is another interesting question!

Whereas, according to the Quran ?? (Messih) is the title of God?s revelation as we have seen in the analysis of the above verses of the Quran and in my articles on Ablution (&#1569. Hence, if the same ?? (Messih) will have to come again it will not be any man but God?s next revelation. However, to keep running their perversion and falsification our Satan clergy have closed the door of God?s revelations. This is because they want us to follow the same filth which they follow and gave us the same filth of their filthy pagan beliefs. I have already challenged the whole world to show me any single verse of the Quran in which Allah has ever said that His revelation has been stopped or no more revelation will come to the world again but so far no one turned up with any clear reference of the Quran regarding this issue. Some Quranist friends tried to convince me by saying ?it means this and it means that? but they did not have any clear proof from the Quran except repeating the same crap views of their founder Quranist scholars that man has grown up and he does not need anymore guidance in the shape of any new revelation etc.

In fact revelation has been called ?Rasool? (&#1604 in the Quran which is a Divine certification of a true Prophet of God. So, whoever has claimed to be a Prophet without having his own ?Rasool? (&#1604, i.e. without his retrieved or constructed message of Nature he is a false liar. This is because ?Rasool? (&#1604 and Prophet are integral parts of each other. No prophet can be without his ?Rasool? (&#1604 and no ?Rasool? (&#1604 is revealed without its Retriever or constructing Prophet, and obeying ?Rasool? (&#1604, i.e. ?His message? is obeying God but we are not urged to follow any human being in any shape, no matter who is he. To hide this Quranic order the evils have replaced ?Rasool? (&#1604 with Prophet and removed the hurdle of worship of men, which is a severe form of idolatry and paganism.

Therefore, the Quran was translated by such perverted evils who have concealed its actual message and gave us the fake beliefs and filth of polytheist paganism, which we have been carrying in the name of Islam.

I appreciate your article on this question and I think there are many interesting insights in it worth considerations.

As to the question of 'Isaa not being a real child but a spiritual or intellectual construction I never deny that a certain set of meanings may be in the range of a passage, in fact I am sure many parts of the Qur'an can have more than one context on which to be considered.

In this Maryam and 'saa question while I do not foreclose anything, right now I think, we humans have still pending our trial with the tandem Maryam-'Isaa as a set of two persons that are an aya and a new depart point for humans.

5.110

when Allah will say, "O 'Isaa Ibna Maryam, remember My favor upon you and upon your mother when I supported you with the Pure Spirit and you spoke to the people in the cradle and in maturity...

In this aya there is the word mother, which is the flesh mother, waalida, there is the speech by 3Isaa en another ayya where he says walidtu flesh born of a flesh mother.

So indepedently of any other meanings which may be understoods? from the story of Maryam and her son, there is a real flesh existence and relationship which it is very important to explore.

It is not as meaningless as so many Maryam's bashers would fancy, obviously self congretulating on the monopoly of prophethood, but, like everything if we want to hear and understand we should listen attentively and thankfully.

Salaam

si_di

just a few words,only V.I.P?s were visited by ruh al-guddus and diologue with him.

that ?s my two penny to it

centi50

Salam to All,

I am surprised brother Mazhar has commented on this subject here

God bless all in this forum

huruf

God bless you too, Centi50

Salaam

si_di

Hi guys and in particuarly Ladies,

i probably found in sura Naml a hint of a Prophetess but i gonna write my thoughts in another thread "Solomon and Saba"

Peace ladies

centi50

Hi guys and in particuarly Ladies,

i probably found in sura Naml a hint of a Prophetess but i gonna write my thoughts in another thread "Solomon and Saba"

Peace ladies

Salam brother

Where is that thread

God bless you

Novice

Dear brothers and sisters

I was browsing through this thread and just wanted to point out following
4171

the feminine pronoun is referring to a feminine noun attached with pronoun

His kalima can be found in
1920-21
(&#65279
She said how a boy for me when no bashar has touched me and neither I am one crossing the limit. He said your Rabb said that is easy on me so to make him a sign for people and blessing from us and a matter decided.

Salaam

huruf