In-depth reality of Eisa’s last moment through Al Quran
-
Brother jkhan.
Let me also give you some thing to ponder and be aware of.
This is not an article of RK
https//www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-08-07-mn-1997-story.htmlRead again, I pasted from it not from RK.
RK confirmed and made the comparison to Jesus death.Also the article about Jesus death was by Lisa Spray, an ex christian who worked with RK
You go around finding other researchers that you agree with , you are choosing what you think is the truth.What is wrong with me agreeing and quoting what RK and team/believers with him researched?
Unlike you, I believe GOD inspires and sends messengers like it is stated in Qoran. GOD also inspires believers/pretenders/human devils... that are inspired from other gods with RK to play both roles to help or hinder RK s roles according to GOD s knowledge of people.So , it is up to us to check truths from falsehood coming from any individual and groups.
Does that mean RK and co were right in everything? No of course not.
But Qoran confirms many truths from His group.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
We can always request evidence for physical tortures that allegedly took place in the past.. Crucifixion is a form of physical torture claimed to have existed in human history. Bring evidence.. I don't think I am misquoting anything..
Furthermore, I did not say I am superior to you..
Why we debate in this forum or why we share our own views, simply to educate others, and along the course of such debate, we get some information from the other parties.. The debate wins and not the people who participate in it.. Debate wins, meaning truth goes forward and touches the thoughts of those who reflect and those who are truth-seekers. That means neither you nor me will ever win.. Always falsehood exposes its genuine character.. So be patient, and seek... I am seeking, are you?We have to present the truth, if we know it, and let the truth prevail on its own.. Why don't you get me, and why do you think about me always negatively as if I am forcing you.. It shows, you like to remain in your view but still trying to show a good face to the world as if you are polite..
To speak the truth, there is no need for fear.. Let people get hurt by listening to the truth.. Can't help.. That's why truth hurts.. No need to adjust truth to pacify anyone.. Truth is one, and not what you and I speak is truth, but on its own it is truth.. People have the capacity to realize, but with the right approach only..
Let's keep sharing.. If you feel you speak the truth, pls share... I only share the truth, which I feel is the truth..
Stick to the topic pls..
-
Peace jkhan.
The body of Jesus was still functioning until after the crucifixion but the soul departed weeks earlier.
As far as those delivering the punishment Jesus was still alive.We have an example, in our time, of this phenomenon of the soul departing and the body functioning for a time after here
https//www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-08-07-mn-1997-story.html
Yes William john Schroeder- 19 letters - departing just after his heart transplant but his body lived few months after
Quote from the text-
The length of Schroeder’s survival and his ability to live outside the Kentucky hospital were signs of progress in the experimental implant program. But three earlier strokes, all apparently related to the man-made pump, left his speech and mobility severely impaired and raised questions about the risks of the device and the quality of life recipients might expect.“He volunteered for the artificial heart because he loved life and the people around him, and he wanted to help others,” said DeVries.
And
When President Reagan called to wish him well, Schroeder bent the chief executive’s ear about the runaround he was getting from the folks at Social Security.Those first two weeks with the heart were good times for the retired federal employee. Schroeder himself said he felt “fantastic.”
But on the evening of the 19th day, Dec. 13, only a few hours after receiving a hand-delivered Social Security check spurred by his complaint to Reagan, he suffered the stroke.
He was unconscious for about an hour and he awoke paralyzed on his right side and unable to speak. DeVries said later he feared he might have lost his patient.
From this moment onwards until his departure from this life completely, William J Schroeder was only functioning as a body devoid of intellect ,understanding or memory-soul-
.Speech Was SlurredAlthough Schroeder awoke, he had difficulty recognizing his family and remembering what day it was, and his speech was slurred. Neurological tests indicated that Schroeder had actually suffered small strokes, severely damaging three areas of his brain.
DeVries said he thought the strokes resulted from a blood clot that formed in or near the heart and broke into pieces en route to the brain. Dr. Robert K. Jarvik, inventor of the artificial heart, agreed.
But both men said they would probably never be sure whether the Jarvik-7 heart was to blame for the strokes. Future implants might shed some light on the link between the heart and strokes, they said.
While the strokes set back Schroeder’s progress, and apparently caused a temporary sag in his spirits, his doctors remained optimistic that he would be able to leave the hospital, something the first mechanical pump recipient, Barney Clark, never did.
Thanks brother.
GOD bless you.
Peace.Let me be very clear..
Let’s hypothetically assume that the corpse or half alive body (lol) of Eisa, son of Maryam was found by someone, and they decided to put him on the cross… Did the Divine explain to the people who were witnessing the incident that Eisa’s psyche, real person is already dead and it is just the mere body they were crucifying? So don’t worry.. No.. People were witnessing that the body in which Eisa, the person lived in it being crucified…Emotional torture.. So, in whatever the angle we look at it, what people witnessed was Eisa, son of Maryam was crucified and the Divine is responsible for misleading all.. Why should the Divine take his life and leave the body like a dog to be crucified? So the Divine sets up everything.. Instead, if the Divine sent him to another nation to preach the same message by Eisa, it would have been far better solution.. You are mocking the Divine here.. Your option does not make any sense..
You assumption does not work at all with traditional translations..
Traditional translation is clear.. ‘They did not KILL him’.. ‘They did not CRUCIFY him.. So, you say, since the Divine took his life away prior to crucifixion, Yes they did not KILL him. Plausible, okay.. But they CRUCIFIED him for sure.. it is not the psyche that is crucified on the cross, but it is the body of a person that is always crucified.. Do you copy that? Do you see the fallacy in your stance? You can’t … cus you don’t want the truth, you like to remain where you stand… When someone speaks against your stance, you speak totally outside the topic.. I've noticed this for ages with you now.. That’s why I did not reply to you and clearly stated to let readers reflect.. Cus I know your attitude..
Logical Question to @Everyone...
Read Al Quran 533 and let me know that the Divine prescribed CRUCIFIXION in that verse or not.. If you really think that the Divine commanded Crucifixion, explain why...
Remember, according to Romans and Greeks, Crucifixion was a capital punishment invented by the Persians in 500 BC, and the Divine created Law based on ancient Persian tradition... So, the Divine applies the law of the Persians in verse 533? And that too for not killing anyone..
-
Peace jkhan.
Let me show you why you do not understand the verse
You say, quote
"Traditional translation is clear.. 'They did not KILL him'.. 'They did not CRUCIFY him.. So, you say, since the Divine took his life away prior to crucifixion, Yes they did not KILL him. Plausible, okay.. But they CRUCIFIED him for sure.. it is not the psyche that is crucified on the cross, but it is the body of a person that is always crucified.. Do you copy that? Do you see the fallacy in your stance? You can't ... cus you don't want the truth, you like to remain where you stand... When someone speaks against your stance, you speak totally outside the topic.. I've noticed this for ages with you now.. That's why I did not reply to you and clearly stated to let readers reflect.. Cus I know your attitude.."
1- you skipped " Wa Lakin SHubbiha lahum" They did both, crucified and killed, according to them Jesus was there in both entities.
So what is there for me to copy? your misunderstanding of the verse?2- GOD is saying that the real Jesus-soul- was not killed nor crucified by them because GOD took the soul before they acted on the body. But They thought they did.-crucified and killed the real Jesus-
The following verse confirms their plot was outdone by GOD s plan that took place before their act.
i.e Wa ma kataluhu Yaqueena"- They did not kill the real Jesus for certain.GOD took it up to His realm
.
3- Do you think GOD took up the body of Jesus or the real Jesus? Or what does GOD took Jesus up mean?Your questions are built on your misunderstanding of the verses brother.
If you reflect on your posts you find that most of your questions are reflecting your own misunderstandings of the verses of Qoran.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Salam to all,
According to me yes Jesus was on the cross but he never died. Shubiha lahum It appeared to them Jesus died but infact he went into comatose. So they thought he was dead and he was brought down from the cross(as per Bible) shubiha lahum the likeness of death.
The notion that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) may have migrated to regions like France (which was part of the Roman Empire in the 1st century) or even to areas such as Kashmir (which lies outside Roman territory) is often perceived as a contemporary idea, particularly the latter, which is frequently linked to the Ahmadiyya movement.
It is crucial to acknowledge that attributing this idea solely to the Ahmadiyya movement is not justifiable, as investigations by various independent scholars and historians have arrived at similar conclusions, identifying the roots of such beliefs in the region long before the emergence of the Ahmadiyya movement.
Certain verses, when considered against the backdrop of the ambiguity surrounding Prophet Jesus's (pbuh) death, might be interpreted as supporting the notion of his successful journey to distant lands characterized by mountainous terrains and abundant water sources. For instance, one can refer to the following verse
Al-Mu'minun 2350
وَجَعَلۡنَا ٱبۡنَ مَرۡيَمَ وَأُمَّهُۥٓ ءَايَةࣰ وَءَاوَيۡنَٰهُمَآ إِلَىٰ رَبۡوَةࣲ ذَاتِ قَرَارࣲ وَمَعِينࣲ
And We made the son of Mary and his mother a sign and sheltered them within a high ground having level and flowing water.
A different verse, especially with the term "wakahlan" in Arabic, suggests that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) communicated at a more mature age, indicating that he could not have died at a young age (approximately in his mid-30s), as commonly assumed.
It could be argued that the terms 'mahdi' and 'wakahlan' represent two significant stages in the life of Prophet Jesus (pbuh), illustrating that he not only spoke as a young child but also, in stark contrast, at an advanced age (wakahlan).Al-Ma'idah 5110
إِذۡ قَالَ ٱللَّهُ يَٰعِيسَى ٱبۡنَ مَرۡيَمَ ٱذۡكُرۡ نِعۡمَتِي عَلَيۡكَ وَعَلَىٰ وَٰلِدَتِكَ إِذۡ أَيَّدتُّكَ بِرُوحِ ٱلۡقُدُسِ تُكَلِّمُ ٱلنَّاسَ فِي ٱلۡمَهۡدِ وَكَهۡلࣰاۖ وَإِذۡ عَلَّمۡتُكَ ٱلۡكِتَٰبَ وَٱلۡحِكۡمَةَ وَٱلتَّوۡرَىٰةَ وَٱلۡإِنجِيلَۖ وَإِذۡ تَخۡلُقُ مِنَ ٱلطِّينِ كَهَيۡئَةِ ٱلطَّيۡرِ بِإِذۡنِي فَتَنفُخُ فِيهَا فَتَكُونُ طَيۡرَۢا بِإِذۡنِيۖ وَتُبۡرِئُ ٱلۡأَكۡمَهَ وَٱلۡأَبۡرَصَ بِإِذۡنِيۖ وَإِذۡ تُخۡرِجُ ٱلۡمَوۡتَىٰ بِإِذۡنِيۖ وَإِذۡ كَفَفۡتُ بَنِيٓ إِسۡرَٰٓءِيلَ عَنكَ إِذۡ جِئۡتَهُم بِٱلۡبَيِّنَٰتِ فَقَالَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ مِنۡهُمۡ إِنۡ هَٰذَآ إِلَّا سِحۡرࣱ مُّبِينࣱ
when Allāh will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, 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; and when I taught you writing and wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel; and when you designed from clay like the form of a bird with My permission, then you breathed into it, and it became a bird with My permission; and you healed the blind and the leper with My permission; and when you brought forth the dead with My permission; and when I restrained the Children of Israel from you when you came to them with clear proofs and those who disbelieved among them said, "This is not but obvious magic."
The term "wakahlan" clearly suggests a stage of maturity, particularly since it implies that an individual's hair would likely be mixed with strands of silvery-white.
Another expression that highlights the blessings granted to Prophet Jesus (pbuh) implies that he suffered no harm and enjoyed full divine safeguarding.
Quran 5110
.... And when I restrained (kafaftu) the Children of Israel from you when you came to them with clear proofs..."This is my take
-
Peace centi50
When you say, quote
"According to me yes Jesus was on the cross but he never died. Shubiha lahum It appeared to them Jesus died but infact he went into comatose. So they thought he was dead and he was brought down from the cross(as per Bible) shubiha lahum the likeness of death."
You have a contradiction with what Qoran says here4157
And for claiming that they killed the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of God. In fact, they never killed him, they never crucified him - they were made to think that they did. All factions who are disputing in this matter are full of doubt concerning this issue. They possess no knowledge; they only conjecture. For certain, they never killed him.*
وَقَولِهِم إِنّا قَتَلنَا المَسيحَ عيسَى ابنَ مَريَمَ رَسولَ اللَّهِ وَما قَتَلوهُ وَما صَلَبوهُ وَلٰكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُم وَإِنَّ الَّذينَ اختَلَفوا فيهِ لَفى شَكٍّ مِنهُ ما لَهُم بِهِ مِن عِلمٍ إِلَّا اتِّباعَ الظَّنِّ وَما قَتَلوهُ يَقينًاThe real Jesus , the soul was taken up by GOD prior to the crucifixion.
The verse is talking about Jesus -the soul- it was not present with them when they were dealing with/crucifying only the body of Jesus. Hence they never touched the real Jesus-Soul-
This will eliminate any contradictions that may arise with other interpretations.
In fact it ties up all the verses together about Jesus death in a clear context that makes sense.
My take.
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
Relying on gossips will lead nowhere.
The words of Ayah are picturesque.
Why قَوْلِهِمْ is a proclamation (not just “their saying”)
Linguistically and pragmatically, قَوْل is more than a bare utterance. In Arabic usage — classical and Qur’ān — qawl denotes a deliberate, public statement with propositional force. When the phrase is marked with the plural possessive -him in a context of communal action and dispute, it tends to indicate an authored assertion that functions politically a claim issued to persuade, to announce, to confuse, or to control public opinion.
Just realization of this point make us be right in the moment it was happening in Jerusalem and understand what exactly is pictured in the Ayah.
Firstly agree or disagree before we move forward.
-
‘Eisa and Maryam settled in high lands and waters flowing in’, and this happened while Eisa was a kid.. Maryam went away from her own community, and she conceived and then went on to deliver the baby (Eisa) and ever since she lived in that area where they both were so comfortable.. And then Maryam opted to return to her birth place after a while with Eisa while he was a boy.. Eisa, Son of Maryam lived his entire life preaching to Bani Israel and Eisa was sent only to them (Bani Israel) and Quran confirms it.. When someone becomes a messenger fully, then he is to a community who speaks basically his own language plus the language of the message.. No messenger is assigned to preach to people who speak alien languages, yet same or identical language..
You can’t complete the Injeel all of a sudden and it takes time, on top of that all messengers married and lived family life and Eisa was not exempted from it.. Eisa’s mission completed by finalizing Injeel and even preached Torah to his community and that took time as usually messengers preach life time. .. He never migrated to France or Kashmir and all fancy hysterias of people..
His time of birth and his time of death was peaceful and it makes all sense and he lived a peaceful life as well until he died.. Eisa never encountered death at the hands of people nor he was crucified as they concoct and no one witnessed any such incident, save it is a concocted story well after Quran.. Concocted stories have no need eyewitness, cus story itself confabulated and made up and the story itself makes eyewitnesses .. Something never existed is not history except manipulations of history.. There is no meandering to the story of Eisa.. You can’t twist an actual incident that took place and claim that the eyes of people were bewitched while claiming something else took place.. It is not a logical answer to this by the Quran if such incident took place.. Had such an incident i.e. Crucifixion took place, then the reply in the Quran is not enough to substantiate except the Quran is few words against what is claimed. That cannot be words of the Divine, that’s so fragile. The Quran cannot simply bottle this up by saying Eisa was not crucified.. Instead what Quran claims is absolute truth.. As I explained in my earlier posts, Quran clearly claims Eisa was not uprooted nor evicted and this is what the Quran claims, simply cus they claimed it, and no one ever claimed of killing or crucifying at the time of the evince of the Quran.. But, what they claimed was they ‘uprooted’ Eisa, thus his teachings are gone, cus Eisa was evicted… And the Divine denied it by stating against it.. Perfect sense it makes.. But well after the Quran revelations, the religion of Christianity well established with a new invention, i.e. Eisa was crucified, and that’s totally a new story of this religion and they established the symbol of Cross.. there was no cross at the time of Quran.. You can’t compare what Quran states in 4157 and what people were going through at that time, with a totally invented story well after Quran was revealed.. Quran never talks about crucifixion of Eisa.. neither direct words of the Divine, nor the words of people were placed in Quran .. totally zero crucifixion.. yet, people compare the New Testament claim of crucifixion with Quran words of 4157 simply as a result of translators who muddled it up directly linking to the New testament claims of CRUCIFIXION..
So, the Quran’s reply was well understandable to the people while everyone who was against Eisa was of the assumption that Eisa was uprooted, thus he is evicted, and the Quran confirmed with a BIG NO.. not uprooted not evicted but they merely assumed.. It’s not the fault of the Divine nor the Divine set all this up. if some assume something on their own, just cus Eisa was missing from their sight, it is sheer speculation. That’s why the Divine says, they have no knowledge of it.. When people speculate, they have no knowledge of the truth.. -
‘Eisa and Maryam settled in high lands and waters flowing in’, and this happened while Eisa was a kid.. Maryam went away from her own community, and she conceived and then went on to deliver the baby (Eisa) and ever since she lived in that area where they both were so comfortable.. And then Maryam opted to return to her birth place after a while with Eisa while he was a boy.. Eisa, Son of Maryam lived his entire life preaching to Bani Israel and Eisa was sent only to them (Bani Israel) and Quran confirms it.. When someone becomes a messenger fully, then he is to a community who speaks basically his own language plus the language of the message.. No messenger is assigned to preach to people who speak alien languages, yet same or identical language..
You can’t complete the Injeel all of a sudden and it takes time, on top of that all messengers married and lived family life and Eisa was not exempted from it.. Eisa’s mission completed by finalizing Injeel and even preached Torah to his community and that took time as usually messengers preach life time. .. He never migrated to France or Kashmir and all fancy hysterias of people..
His time of birth and his time of death was peaceful and it makes all sense and he lived a peaceful life as well until he died.. Eisa never encountered death at the hands of people nor he was crucified as they concoct and no one witnessed any such incident, save it is a concocted story well after Quran.. Concocted stories have no need eyewitness, cus story itself confabulated and made up and the story itself makes eyewitnesses .. Something never existed is not history except manipulations of history.. There is no meandering to the story of Eisa.. You can’t twist an actual incident that took place and claim that the eyes of people were bewitched while claiming something else took place.. It is not a logical answer to this by the Quran if such incident took place.. Had such an incident i.e. Crucifixion took place, then the reply in the Quran is not enough to substantiate except the Quran is few words against what is claimed. That cannot be words of the Divine, that’s so fragile. The Quran cannot simply bottle this up by saying Eisa was not crucified.. Instead what Quran claims is absolute truth.. As I explained in my earlier posts, Quran clearly claims Eisa was not uprooted nor evicted and this is what the Quran claims, simply cus they claimed it, and no one ever claimed of killing or crucifying at the time of the evince of the Quran.. But, what they claimed was they ‘uprooted’ Eisa, thus his teachings are gone, cus Eisa was evicted… And the Divine denied it by stating against it.. Perfect sense it makes.. But well after the Quran revelations, the religion of Christianity well established with a new invention, i.e. Eisa was crucified, and that’s totally a new story of this religion and they established the symbol of Cross.. there was no cross at the time of Quran.. You can’t compare what Quran states in 4157 and what people were going through at that time, with a totally invented story well after Quran was revealed.. Quran never talks about crucifixion of Eisa.. neither direct words of the Divine, nor the words of people were placed in Quran .. totally zero crucifixion.. yet, people compare the New Testament claim of crucifixion with Quran words of 4157 simply as a result of translators who muddled it up directly linking to the New testament claims of CRUCIFIXION..
So, the Quran’s reply was well understandable to the people while everyone who was against Eisa was of the assumption that Eisa was uprooted, thus he is evicted, and the Quran confirmed with a BIG NO.. not uprooted not evicted but they merely assumed.. It’s not the fault of the Divine nor the Divine set all this up. if some assume something on their own, just cus Eisa was missing from their sight, it is sheer speculation. That’s why the Divine says, they have no knowledge of it.. When people speculate, they have no knowledge of the truth..Salam to everyone,
I think one very important point Jkhan has raised and that we can not just brush aside is the question of ṣalab and translation. In verse 5:33 almost all translations say God prescribes “crucifixion” as a punishment. But that raises a serious issue: was God really advocating a Roman/Persian-style torture method that Arabs themselves may not have even practiced? Or did later translators import that meaning because crucifixion was already cemented in Christian history?If Jkhan is right then the whole way we have been reading verses like 4:157 might be colored by New Testament influence. That is not a small claim folks but a challenge to check whether we are reading the Quran on its own terms or through someone else lens......
I do not think this closes the debate, but it is definitely a strong question:
If ṣalab never meant Roman-style crucifixion then maybe we are debating something the Quran itself never actually mentioned. Worth reflecting on.What strikes me in this whole debate is that most of us myself included end up defending the Quran through the lens of translations handed down to us. I dont mean to say those earlier scholars were unintelligent far from it, they were brilliant people as well but even among Quranists today we often unknowingly carry the same conventional assumptions. The word ṣalab being rendered as “crucifixion” is one example. What Jkhan has done is unusual: he tried to translate it afresh with his own reasoning and because it clashes with the familiar version, it sounds odd at first. But folks is it not true that we are all influenced by others? For instance, GoodLogic may be influenced a bit by Rashad Khalifa, I myself by Ghulam Ahmad Parwez, and so on. The challenge Jkhan raises is whether we are really letting the Quran speak on its own terms or whether we are filtering it through later history and theology. That is a question that should haunt us and yet, as GoodLogic said in another thread perhaps what ultimately matters most is the Quran’s message: to live righteously, to do good. These debates are valuable but the certainty lies only with Him.
