Go to FFI
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Attention: Year 2009 is here Wishing a very Happy New Year to all members of FFI. Our new and improved site is ready. To visit main site, click at faithfreedom.org and to visit our new forum, click at forum09.faithfreedom.org and register again. Do not worry about your old forum posts and PM, everything is saved here till 31st December, 2008 for future references.
Muslims: What happened to Jesus
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Faith Freedom International Forum Index -> The Quran and Hadith
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Christian2



Joined: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 375

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:37 pm    Post subject: Muslims: What happened to Jesus Reply with quote

Hello,

Quote:
004.157
YUSUFALI: That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-


Could a Muslim interprete this verse for me, please? Questions:

1. That they said (in boast): Who is "they"?

2. They Killed him not: Who is "they"?

3. Does this verse say that Jesus didn't die or that "they" didn't kill him, but someone else did?

4. If "they" killed him not, how was "it made to appear to them" that "they" did?

5. According to the Qur'an, what happened to Jesus? If Jesus wasn't killed, then how did he escape death and when?

Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
raheel



Joined: 20 Jan 2005
Posts: 200

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

he was taken up to heaven by Allah and now resides there.

he will come down to earth on the nearing of the day of judgement (several years before?) and lead all to islam.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sbwus



Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 1061
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 2:04 pm    Post subject: Re: Muslims: What happened to Jesus Reply with quote

Christian2 wrote:
Hello,

004.157
YUSUFALI: That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Could a Muslim interprete this verse for me, please? Questions:

1. That they said (in boast): Who is "they"?

2. They Killed him not: Who is "they"?

3. Does this verse say that Jesus didn't die or that "they" didn't kill him, but someone else did?

4. If "they" killed him not, how was "it made to appear to them" that "they" did?

5. According to the Qur'an, what happened to Jesus? If Jesus wasn't killed, then how did he escape death and when?

Thanks.



Perhaps, this may shock you, but I have to break this news to you that there is no Jesus in Islaam. Glorious Qur'aan 4:157 is as follows:
وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلاَّ اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِيناً

Now, you can see that there is no "Jesus" mentioned in the Ayaah 4:157. Qur'aan rather names one of the Prophet of Islaam "الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ ", therefore, if you want to learn about him, then click on the links below:

http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/alive.htm

http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/evidence.htm






sbwus
ISLAM IS THE ONLY SOLUTION
http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/
_________________
"An uninformed person cannot conceptualize the essence of knowledge nor its sublimity. One who fails to conceptualize something, its significance will never become rooted in the heart."


Last edited by sbwus on Tue Jan 25, 2005 3:20 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Christian2



Joined: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 375

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 2:19 pm    Post subject: sbwus, thanks Reply with quote

I will print out the sites you recommended and read them.

Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Christian2



Joined: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 375

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 2:22 pm    Post subject: raheel, thank you Reply with quote

Quote:
he was taken up to heaven by Allah and now resides there.


When did that happen?

Quote:
he will come down to earth on the nearing of the day of judgement (several years before?) and lead all to islam.


Does it say that in the Qur'an because a Muslim friend tells me that he does not believe that Jesus will have a second coming and he knows the Qur'an backwards and forwards?

How can you say that Jesus will come back and my Muslim friend say He will not?

Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
raheel



Joined: 20 Jan 2005
Posts: 200

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

when was he taken up to heaven?

Before jesus was going to be crucified-

the romans ended up crucifying someone else instead- who looked similar.


i don't what your muslim friend told you but it is quite clear in the Qur'an that Jesus will return:

When God said: "Jesus, I will take you back and raise you up to Me, and purify you of those who are unbelievers. And I will place the people who follow you above those who are unbelievers until the Day of Resurrection. Then you will all return to Me, and I will judge between you regarding the things about which you differed. (Surah Al 'Imran, 3:55)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mersk



Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 5764

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is where the stupidity of Islam and Mo is most glaring. If Allaha the all knowing and all purpose Allaha who knows everything and wills everything, he is not only a great magician to the Muslims but also a great deceiver.

He deceived the Jews, because he is all knowing, into believing Jews killed Jesus, in order to follow up on inciting hatred for the Jews by Christians, but he's also a conniving bastard for deceiving Jesus' disciples and his love ones he died for them to create a religion Christian, which he had a hand in since Allaha is the deceiver, only to turn the Muslims against Chrisitan later on with Islam.

All these from Allaha playing tricks or treats for Muslims. What audacity for Muslims to follow up on such thought patterns of a Mad person in Mo. - And to think that they follow a deceiver simply because Mad Mo said so!


Last edited by Mersk on Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:56 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Christian2



Joined: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 375

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:58 pm    Post subject: raheel, further questions Reply with quote

raheel,

Thank you for your reply.

Quote:
when was he taken up to heaven?

Before jesus was going to be crucified-


There is a lot of room here. When exactly? Before Jesus went to trial? After Jesus was condemned to death by the Romans? While Jesus was walking up to the cross? When exactly?

Quote:
the romans ended up crucifying someone else instead- who looked similar.


How were the Romans fooled? This "someone else" would have had to fool the Jews too. How did that happen? Also this person would have had to fool Jesus' mother and His disciples. How did that happen?

Who was the one crucified, if not Jesus? And further than that, wouldn't this person know that he was being crucified in place of Jesus? I would think so. That leads me to wonder why that person didn't say something like: "But I'm not Jesus!!! You have the wrong man!!!"

And then we have to deal with all the secular sources that say that Jesus was crucified. If they claim that Jesus was crucified but were wrong, then how do we explain that someone was crucifed that day who people thought was Jesus? Aren't we are left with a third party crucified on that day. Who was he?

Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mersk



Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 5764

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 5:06 pm    Post subject: Re: raheel, further questions Reply with quote

Christian2 wrote:
raheel,

Thank you for your reply.

Quote:
when was he taken up to heaven?

Before jesus was going to be crucified-


There is a lot of room here. When exactly? Before Jesus went to trial? After Jesus was condemned to death by the Romans? While Jesus was walking up to the cross? When exactly?

Quote:
the romans ended up crucifying someone else instead- who looked similar.


How were the Romans fooled? This "someone else" would have had to fool the Jews too. How did that happen? Also this person would have had to fool Jesus' mother and His disciples. How did that happen?

Who was the one crucified, if not Jesus? And further than that, wouldn't this person know that he was being crucified in place of Jesus? I would think so. That leads me to wonder why that person didn't say something like: "But I'm not Jesus!!! You have the wrong man!!!"

And then we have to deal with all the secular sources that say that Jesus was crucified. If they claim that Jesus was crucified but were wrong, then how do we explain that someone was crucifed that day who people thought was Jesus? Aren't we are left with a third party crucified on that day. Who was he?

Thanks.


I have reply one such from Muslims who without thinking said " a face mask of Jesus was placed over the crucified to fool the Romans, Jews, and Jesus disciple and Mommy.

Clever of Allaha to do so, dont you think so, and to think Allaha created Christianity in the process which Muslims condemn till today.

Of course they'll also tell you the event did not happen, and that it was the work of evil corrupters who made up the cruxification in the Bible because Mo said so too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Christian2



Joined: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 375

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 5:40 pm    Post subject: Mersk, exactly Reply with quote

Hi Mersk,

Quote:
Clever of Allaha to do so, dont you think so, and to think Allaha created Christianity in the process which Muslims condemn till today.


Isn't that the truth? Muslims and I guess the Qur'an tells us that God saved Jesus the humiliation of the cross but how did God accomplish that when everyone believed that it was Jesus on that cross? And as you rightfully pointed out; it was Jesus crucifixtion and resurrection from the dead that started Christianity and made it into the largest religion in the world.

If it was God's plan to save Jesus, then fine; but if so, then it must have been God's plan that Christianity continue and become the largest religion in the world, otherwise God never would have let people be fooled into thinking that it was Jesus on cross when it wasn't. Make sense?

Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mersk



Joined: 16 Jul 2004
Posts: 5764

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 6:03 pm    Post subject: Re: Mersk, exactly Reply with quote

Christian2 wrote:
Hi Mersk,

Quote:
Clever of Allaha to do so, dont you think so, and to think Allaha created Christianity in the process which Muslims condemn till today.


Isn't that the truth? Muslims and I guess the Qur'an tells us that God saved Jesus the humiliation of the cross but how did God accomplish that when everyone believed that it was Jesus on that cross? And as you rightfully pointed out; it was Jesus crucifixtion and resurrection from the dead that started Christianity and made it into the largest religion in the world.

If it was God's plan to save Jesus, then fine; but if so, then it must have been God's plan that Christianity continue and become the largest religion in the world, otherwise God never would have let people be fooled into thinking that it was Jesus on cross when it wasn't. Make sense?

Thanks.


Not only is Allaha a magican and deceiver for the Muslim, Allaha was also the first Muslim with amnesia.

There is a article here in this forum about Mo's illness which alter his mind.

Muslims are always forgetting what they wrote when defending Islam or feigning ignorance to the atrocities done by Muslims in the name of Allaha.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Christian2



Joined: 27 Nov 2004
Posts: 375

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 8:15 pm    Post subject: Mersk Reply with quote

Hi Mersk,

I don't know if you would be interested or not but I found the following articles on this subject facsinating:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Mna/frag4_1.html

http://www.answering-islam.org/Mna/frag4_2.html

Here is a clip from Chapter two above:
------

Again Dr. Ayoub found no difficulty in stating that the Qur'an plainly asserts that Jesus did die:

The Qur'an ... does not deny the death of Christ. Rather it challenges human beings who in their folly have deluded themselves into believing that they would vanquish the divine Word, Jesus the messenger of God. The death of Christ is asserted several times and in various contexts, see for example, S.3:55; 5:117; 19:33. [5]

According to Dr. Ayoub the Qur'an asserts the death of Christ several times and in various contexts. He does not appeal to any clever exegetical exercise, but to the clear passages of the Qur'an.

Not only do some Muslim thinkers assert Jesus did die, there are others who assert that Jesus died on the cross. The philosopher Abu Ya'qub Ishaq al-Sagastani said,

Without doubt murder and crucifixion were inflicted upon his body. The pronoun (hu) since it appeared at the end of the words 'murdered him' 'qataluhu', or crucified him is a pointing letter to the spirit (huwiyya) of Jesus. So in this exists the evidence that he who suffered death and crucifixion was not the spirit (huwiyya) of Jesus. [6] [empasis added]

The philosopher Sagastani sees that the Qur'an denies the crucifixion of the spirit of Jesus but undoubtedly affirms the physical crucifixion of the body of Jesus.

Mahmoud Mohammad Taha the leader of the Republican Brothers in Sudan, wrote in a booklet titled al-Masih:

The belief of the Muslims that Jesus did not die is based on Sura 4:157. [7] But it is clear that that verse does not give that understanding ... specially if we take into consideration the other verse in which God said, 'Isa [Jesus] I am about to cause you to die and lift you up to me', [8] and also the words, 'Peace be upon me, the day I was born, and the day I die, the day I am raised up alive'. [9] Naturally the Qur'an does not contradict itself, for the the expression 'mutawaffika' means that he will die ... and also the expression 'the day I die' points in the same direction. So the straight understanding becomes that the Christ was killed, then raised up. And that is what is pointed to by the words of God, 'and they slew him not of a certainty - no indeed', [10] which means that without any doubt they killed him, as they thought they did, but they slew him not of a certainty which is the same expression as 'they thought they did' [11] ... this meaning appears in the Qur'an in other places such as the words of God, 'you did not slay them, but God did, and when thou throwest, it was not thyself that threw, but God threw'. [12] And the meaning of that verse is that, when you killed them, it was not you who killed them, but it was God. [13]

Thus Mamoud Mohammad Taha, like the philosopher Sagastani understood from the same Qur'anic passages that Jesus was killed by the Jews without a doubt, then raised up by God. With Dr. Ayoub he found no difficulty in concluding that the Qur'an speaks plainly of the death of Jesus, otherwise the Qur'an would be contradicting itself. He then proceeded to prove that this mode of expressing the death of Christ is not unique but has a parallel in the Qur'an, indeed it is an affirmation in the form of negation.
------
In my view, the next step for the Muslims should be to study the OT prophecies of the promised long-hoped for Messiah, sin offerings, atonement, and decide for themselves who Jesus really was and why He came to earth.

Regards
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
a_student



Joined: 04 May 2004
Posts: 865
Location: Seventh Heaven

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 8:47 pm    Post subject: Re: Muslims: What happened to Jesus Reply with quote

sbwus wrote:

Perhaps, this may shock you, but I have to break this news to you that there is no Jesus in Islaam. Glorious Qur'aan 4:157 is as follows:
قَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلاَّ اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِيناً

Now, you can see that there is no "Jesus" mentioned in the Ayaah 4:157. Qur'aan rather names one of the Prophet of Islaam "الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ "
Look again, عِيسَى is "Jesus". Transliterated, it is "`iisaa(y)", originally "`iisay", which the reverse of the Hebrew "Yeshua`", where Hebrew "sh" = Arabic "s" (compare "Ishmael" and "Ismail"). Linguists believe the reversal of y and ` was caused by the difficulty of pronouncing the latter after a vowel. In fact, Hebrew inserts the short vowel "a" to aid pronunciation. Also, remember that vowels are relatively unimportant in Semitic languages like Hebrew and Arabic.
_________________
"There's nothing an agnostic can't do if he really doesn't know whether he believes in anything or not." -Graham Chapman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
sbwus



Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Posts: 1061
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:09 pm    Post subject: Re: Muslims: What happened to Jesus Reply with quote

a_student wrote:
sbwus wrote:

Perhaps, this may shock you, but I have to break this news to you that there is no Jesus in Islaam. Glorious Qur'aan 4:157 is as follows:
قَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ اللّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَـكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ وَإِنَّ الَّذِينَ اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ مَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلاَّ اتِّبَاعَ الظَّنِّ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِيناً

Now, you can see that there is no "Jesus" mentioned in the Ayaah 4:157. Qur'aan rather names one of the Prophet of Islaam "الْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ "
Look again, عِيسَى is "Jesus". Transliterated, it is "`iisaa(y)", originally "`iisay", which the reverse of the Hebrew "Yeshua`", where Hebrew "sh" = Arabic "s" (compare "Ishmael" and "Ismail"). Linguists believe the reversal of y and ` was caused by the difficulty of pronouncing the latter after a vowel. In fact, Hebrew inserts the short vowel "a" to aid pronunciation. Also, remember that vowels are relatively unimportant in Semitic languages like Hebrew and Arabic.


This is an absolute self-defeating argument you have put forward. Care to explain than why Arabic Bible refers to your guy (Jesus) as بيسوع المسيح ?

Let me also quote something very interesting fom a Bible itself first, and then my comments:

THE NEW ENGLISH BIBLE
WITH THE APOCRYPHA

INTRODUCTION TO THE OLD TESTAMENT
Page XV
3rd paragraph and 4th paragraph

In the second century A.D. or even earlier the Rabbis, the Jewish religious leaders, compiled a test from such manuscripts as had survived the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and on this basis was established the traditional or Massoretic text, so called from the Hebrew word massorah ‘tradition’. This text incorporated the mistakes of generations of copyists, and, in spite of the care bestowed on it, many errors of later copyists also found their way into it. The earliest surviving manuscripts of this text date from the ninth to eleventh centuries A.D. and it is this text, as printed in R. Kittel’s Biblia Hebraica (3rd edition, 1937), which has been used for the present translation.

The traditional text was originally written only in consonants, but in order to preserve what they regarded as the correct pronunciation of the words the Rabbis added vowel-sighs to the text. Of the various systems of vowel-signs, which were devised, that developed at Tiberias in the fifth to sixth centuries ultimately prevailed and is still used in our printed Bibles. The vowels are here represented by means of strokes and dots added to the consonantal text, and this method of vocalization made it possible for the Rabbis to indicate variant readings which they preferred, without meddling with the consonants: they put in the margin of their manuscript the consonants of the reading which they wished to adopt and added the vowel-signs of this reading to the consonants in the text which they were rejecting. The reader knew that he was to pronounce the consonants in the margin with the vowels in the text.

Page XVI
1st & 2nd paragraphs

One variation of this convention is of special importance, inasmuch as it affects the divine name. This personal proper name, written with the consonants YHWH, was considered too sacred to be uttered; so the vowels for the words ‘my Lord’ or “God’ were added to the consonants YHWH, and the reader was warned by these vowels that he must substitute other consonants. This change having to be made so frequently, the Rabbis did not consider it necessary to put the consonants of the new reading in the margin. In course of time the true pronunciation of the divine name, probably Yahweh, passed into oblivion, and YHWH was read with the intruded vowels, the vowels of and entirely different word, namely ‘my Lord’ or ‘God’. In late medieval times this mispronunciation became current as Jehovah, and it was taken over as Jehovah by the Reformers in Protestant Bibles. The present translators have retained this incorrect but customary form in the text of passages where the name is explained with a note on its pronunciation (e.g. Exodus 3. 15) and in four place-names of which it forms a constituent element; elsewhere they have followed ancient translators in substituting ‘Lord’ or ‘God’, printed as here in capital letters, for the Hebrew name.

So much for the text of the Hebrew Old testament as it lies before us; but it is certain that this does not always represent what was originally written. The translator must often go behind the traditional text to discover the writer’s meaning. For this purpose he may have recourse first to the Scrolls; but these cover only a very small part of the Old Testament writings. Secondly he may have recourse to the Samaritan Pentateuch, which, though extant only in late manuscripts, the earliest being dated about the eleventh century A.D., may be somewhat earlier than the Scrolls and represents the text of the five books of the Law (Genesis to Deuteronomy), which the Samaritans took with them when they seceded from Judaism. It differs from the traditional Hebrew text in a considerable number of small and mostly unimportant points.

Page XVII
4th paragraph

In spite of this wealth of ancient versions, and even when the earliest known form of the text has been established, many obscurities still remain in the Hebrew Scriptures. The classical Hebrew vocabulary as known today is small, with the consequence that the meanings of an unusually large number of words is uncertain or unknown. In such cases recourse may be had to the cognate languages. Already medieval scholars had begun to use the Arabic language for this purpose, and in later centuries Syriac and Ethiopic also were used. In more recent times scholars have had access to the vast literature in Babylonian, Assyrian, and kindred dialects which has been helpful in clearing up an obscurity in the Hebrew text. But in the last resort, the translator may have to arrive at the sense of a word from the context alone, or he may even have to emend what is demonstrably faulty; such corrections of the text, except when only the vowels are affected, are recorded in the notes of the present translation.

THE BIBLE
A NEW ENGLISH TRANSLATION
Planned and Directed by Representatives of

THE BAPTIST UNION OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND
THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND
THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND
THE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH IN ENGLAND AND WALES
THE COUNCIL OF CHURCHES FOR WALES
THE IRISH COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
THE LONDON YEARLY MEETING OF THE SOCIETY OF FRIENDS
THE METHODIST CHURCH OF GREAT BRITAIN
THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF ENGLAND
THE BRITISH AND FOREIGN BIBLE SOCIETY
THE NATIONAL BIBLE SOCIETY OF SCOTLAND

Oxford University Press
Cambridge University Press
1970

This is exact introduction (without any editing) from Bible approved and published by that many authorities. You can find this Bible and look for yourself.

Do you still expect me to take your words and accept your sources? I don't think so! Beside that Hebrew was not the language of the Bible or OT, read:
http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/hebrew.htm



sbwus
ISLAM IS THE ONLY SOLUTION
http://www.islam-is-the-only-solution.com/
_________________
"An uninformed person cannot conceptualize the essence of knowledge nor its sublimity. One who fails to conceptualize something, its significance will never become rooted in the heart."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Denis Giron



Joined: 30 Mar 2004
Posts: 163
Location: Darul-Kufr, NYC, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2005 9:27 pm    Post subject: Re: Muslims: What happened to Jesus Reply with quote

sbwus wrote:
Perhaps, this may shock you, but I have to break this news to you that there is no Jesus in Islaam.


Shaheed bin Wahid's oft-repeated claim that Jesus is no where to be found in Islam is humorous, but rather hard to defend. The reality is that Soora Maryam (i.e. the 19th chapter of the Qur'an) bares striking resemblance to the first chapter of Luke. The similarities are so great that, were the Qur'an not the center of a major world faith (i.e. imagine a world where historians found the Qur'an but there were no Muslims), it would rightfully be concluded that it represents the theology of a heterodox Christian sect living in Arabia in the first millennium of the common era.

But let us explore this further. Note that only one person in the Qur'an is given the title المسيح (al-MaseeH), which is the exact title Arabic Christians give to Jesus. In Hebrew the title is המשיח (ha-Mashiach) and in Aramaic it is משיחא (Masheechaa). Removing the various definite articles (Arabic: "al" at front, Hebrew: "ha" at front, and Aramaic: alif as suffix), the exact spelling of each word is MSYH (or some might prefer M$YX). It is the exact same word, similar to the case with RHMN in each language (i.e. Arabic الرحمن {ar-Rahman} = Hebrew הרחמן {ha-Rachaman} = Aramaic רחמנא {Rachamanaa}), meaning "the merciful one".

So what does this word mean? It means Messiah, or Anointed, or CHRIST. So one man in the Qur'an is given this title in the Qur'an, and it is claimed this man was the result of a miraculous virgin birth. It seems plainly obvious that the story of Eesa al-Maseeh in the Qur'an is a reworking of the story of Jesus Christ (Y'shua ha-Mashiach) in various Christian texts (both canonical and non-canonical).

All that we're left with is the name. The name difference between Eesa and Jesus might be the reason Shaheed thinks these are not references to the same character. The name عيسى as found in the Qur'an differs from the name most Arabic Christians give to Jesus: يسوع. The latter is identical in spelling to the Hebrew and Aramaic name of Jesus: ישוע. The different name in the Qur'an has been baffling, but one hypothesis is that the name was confused with that of the Biblical Esau (especially since Jews used to associate Christianity with Esau). The Arabic rendering of the name Esau is عيسو, which is nearly identical to the Qur'anic name for Jesus (i.e. ayn-yaa-seen-alif_maqsoora vs. ayn-yaa-seen-waw).

The difference is simply between an alif and waw, which is not a big deal in transitions from Hebrew or Aramaic to Arabic. For example, take any triliteral (i.e. thre-lettered) root common to both Hebrew and Arabic (e.g. R1R2R3). In Arabic, the active participle of the first (fa'ala) verb stem is spelled R1-alif-R2-R3. In Hebrew, the active participle of the first (pa'al) verb stem is spelled R1-waw-R2-R3 (note: the Hebrew waw is often now pronounced "vav"). So consider the active participles of common roots in each language:
  1. F'aL root for "to do", one who does: فاعل (faa'il {FA'aL}) = פועל (po'el {FW'aL}).
  2. KTB root for "to write", writer: كاتب (kaatib {KATB}) = כותב (koteb {KWTB}).
  3. KFR root, disbeliever/infidel: كافر (kaafir {KAFR}) vs. כופר (kofer {KWFR}).
  4. QTL root for "to kill", killer: قاتل (qaatil {QATL}) vs. קוטל (qotel {QWTL}).
And of course the switch from alif to waw or vice versa has even happened within Arabic, case in point being the way salaat is spelled in the Qur'an (صلوة) vs. the way it is spelled in modern Arabic (صلاة). The former, by the way, is identical to the Hebrew/Aramaic word for prayer צלות (tselot).

So in conclusion, the story about Eesa in the Qur'an seems to closely parallel various stories about Jesus, and the title assigned to him (along with the miraculous birth ascribed to him) points heavily in favor of the seemingly obvious conclusion that the author intended this to be a story about Jesus. As for the name of given to Jesus in the Qur'an, while I will not go so far as to positively assert the Esau polemic, it seems the name in the Qur'an is closer to the Arabic version of "Esau" than it is to the Arabic, Aramaic, or Hebrew version of "Jesus".

I look forward to any comments Shahid may have, though I doubt he will have any comments based on past experiences.

-Denis Giron

Post Script: I used a lot of Hebrew and Arabic script, claiming that various words had the same spelling. For those wishing to convert Hebrew and Arabic characters into one another, try the following Arabic-to-Hebrew conversion chart:



...or the following Hebrew-to-Arabic chart:

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Faith Freedom International Forum Index -> The Quran and Hadith All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

 

  Search the Forum