Taurat and Injil during Muhammad's time

kid

albatross posted on 22-11-2014 03:52 PM
Friend, the verse does not say that. The verse says that the Christians should judge by the Injil. ...

Yes the verse said that Christian to judge using the Injil, but the point is, everything we do in this life, every choice we made, is actually will be judged by God Himself in the hereafter.

So if Christian insist to judge by corrupted Injil, God allow that. God will tell them what they do wrong, and they will be judged by what they did later.
If they chose to go ashtray, that is because their wishes!! Not God sent them ashtray.

That was my point. In the end God will judge everyone. (If you believe in hereafter). So the verse talking about hwo Christian judge, but in the eyes of God, He will judge them by "what they have" (and did of course).

If you don't believe in herefater, then it is diffcult to understand.

albatross

sam1528 posted on 22-11-2014 05:34 PM
Ok then , since you want to take the literal understanding we will address it.

Go back 2 verses ...

The answer to your question is answered by Truth.8 in post #37: there is no "Injeel" that is brought down to "3eesa" through the angel Gabriel. heck, "3eesa" never even existed. The word Injil is not even an Arabic word, nor is it Hebrew, nor is it Aramaic. The word "injil" is a loan word that Muhammad took from hearing that the Christians talk about having, but he had no clue what it was. So then he made up this story about "3eesa" having received a book called "Injil". The word "Injil" stems from the greek word "euangel". The Christians held on to books called "euangelion", and this was later made into a loan word into semitic languages, an turned into "Injil" into Arabic. So unless you believed that God revealed a Greek book to "3eesa", then yes, the Muslim version of the "Injil" never existed.

But Muhammad couldn't have read what was the "Injil" at his time, since the Injil was probably in syriac, which is a version of Aramaic, in Arabia during Muhammad;s time.Nor could any of his followers tell him what was in the "Injil", since neither of them could read Syriac. So by conjecture, he thought that the "Injil" was a revelation brought by Gabriel to "3eesa", not knowing that the Injil were actually writings about the ministry of Jesus and the testimony of his Life, Death and Resurrection.

kid

But Muhammad couldn't have read what was the "Injil" at his time, since the Injil was probably in syriac, which is a version of Aramaic, in Arabia during Muhammad;s time.Nor could any of his followers tell him what was in the "Injil", since neither of them could read Syriac. So by conjecture, he thought that the "Injil" was a revelation brought by Gabriel to "3eesa", not knowing that the Injil were actually writings about the ministry of Jesus and the testimony of his Life, Death and Resurrection.

Exactly.. Muhammad didn't know what is Injil at that time because he can't read it.
So it is almost impossible for Muhammad to copy Injil as many thought.

The real Injil was indeed God revelation to Isa, then few hundred years after his death, people started writing about his life, death etc and added them into original Injil.

sam1528

albatross posted on 22-11-2014 05:40 PM
He was talking to Moses. Read the context. Moses was asking Allah for mercy, then Allah said, IN REPLY TO MOSES, it started with "HE SAID". here's the verse in context: "He said: I smite with My punishment whom I will, and My mercy embraceth all things, therefore I shall ordain it for those who ward off (evil) and pay the poor-due, and those who believe Our revelations;Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them"

The issue here is that this is in the Quran. Therefore Allah is narrating the story of Prophet Moosa(as) to Prophet Muhammad(saw). I really don't understand your logic.

Because that is already given! when you say "THE taurat" without saying anything else, it refers to the actual, original Tawrat unless specified! That's what people would understand when you put a definite article in front of an object, that the speaker is referring to the actual thing!

Already given? The Torah doesn't mean the original Torah during the time of Prophet Muhammad(saw). The definate article , which we have covered means that we are referring to what is understood to be available. You have missed this point by a mile. Actual thing doesn't mean the original thing. Actual <> original. Where do you get the notion that actual = original? Sorry to say but this is a very weak argument which centre on the claim that actual = original.

albatross

kid posted on 22-11-2014 06:31 PM
Exactly.. Muhammad didn't know what is Injil at that time because he can't read it.
So it is al ...

That was my point. Muhammad couldn't read the Injil that is with them, so he and his followers couldn't know that it utterly contradicted it's message. Thus this gave Muhammad a free pass to claim that the Injil that they had with them was brought down by Gabriel to a prophet called "3eesa" containing the teachings of Islam.

But that of course, didn't stop Muhammad from copying stories he heard from apocryphal gnostic writings, such as the Infancy Gospel of Thomas and the Protoevangelium of James, where Jesus made birds from clay and talked in the crib.

Once again, the so called "Injil" in Islamic thought never existed. The word "Injil" itself is a loan word from Greek, which would mean that Allah revealed to Jesus a greek kitab. This arises out of Muhammad's ignorance that the word Injil is derived from Greek, thinking that it refers to some sort of revelation to "3eesa", who never existed in the first place.

albatross

sam1528 posted on 22-11-2014 06:57 PM
The issue here is that this is in the Quran. Therefore Allah is narrating the story of Prophet Moo ...

Ok simple question. Did Allah utter those words to Moses or not? If he did, then yes, he was talking to Moses. If he didn't, then your Allah is a liar, since he related a story to Muhammad which never happened.

So since I would think you wouldn't call Allah a liar, then what would Moses understand when "THE Taurat", with the definite article, is referred to?

kid

That was my point. Muhammad couldn't read the Injil that is with them, so he and his followers couldn't know that it utterly contradicted it's message.

Contradicted according to who? if you ask Christian of course they said Qur'an is contradicting with Injil at that time

While Qur'an told that God sent down Qur'an because Injil has been corrupted thus contradicting God's original teaching.

The word Injil was Arabic term for the book of Isa, Isa didn't not speak Arabic and his book might be called something different! Even his real name might not be ISA? But of course God use the language/knowledge which is used in the Arab language during that era (of course).

Well I think this discussion goes nowhere, it is clear to me what your real intention is, which is to undermine Qur'an with whatever tool you wish. So I'm off from this useless topic.

See you again.

sam1528

albatross posted on 22-11-2014 06:05 PM
he answer to your question is answered by Truth.8 in post #37: there is no "Injeel" that is brought down to "3eesa" through the angel Gabriel. heck, "3eesa" never even existed. The word Injil is not even an Arabic word, nor is it Hebrew, nor is it Aramaic. The word "injil" is a loan word that Muhammad took from hearing that the Christians talk about having, but he had no clue what it was. So then he made up this story about "3eesa" having received a book called "Injil". The word "Injil" stems from the greek word "euangel". The Christians held on to books called "euangelion", and this was later made into a loan word into semitic languages, an turned into "Injil" into Arabic. So unless you believed that God revealed a Greek book to "3eesa", then yes, the Muslim version of the "Injil" never existed.

But Muhammad couldn't have read what was the "Injil" at his time, since the Injil was probably in syriac, which is a version of Aramaic, in Arabia during Muhammad;s time.Nor could any of his followers tell him what was in the "Injil", since neither of them could read Syriac. So by conjecture, he thought that the "Injil" was a revelation brought by Gabriel to "3eesa", not knowing that the Injil were actually writings about the ministry of Jesus and the testimony of his Life, Death and Resurrection.

How do you know that there is no Injeel revealed to Prophet Eesa(as)? Arabic is a sister language of Hebrew and the defunct Aramaic. FYI , Koine Greek (the original language of the NT) does not come close. Yeshua is about the same as Eesa but very different from the Jesus. You have no grounds to contest the name Eesa.

Do you know that your argument actually negates your bible. Lets go thru the logic
(1) Jesus is a Prophet (Matthew 11:9; Mark 6:15; Luke 7:16; 24:19 [parallel to Matt 21:11]; John 7:40; 9:17) - Baker Evangelical Dictionary
(2) A Prophet receive revelation from God
(3) Jesus received revelation from God making him a Prophet.

We don't have to put a name for the revelation but in the case for Islam , it is called the Injeel. The bible also attest that Jesus receive revelation from God. Rev1:1-2

1 The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John,
2 who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ.

If you now claim that Jesus did not receive any revelation. That means
(1) He was not a Prophet as he was a Prophecy-less Prophet
(2) He did not receive revelation from God
(3) If he did receive revelation , it must be from other sources.

You willing to go down that path?

sam1528

albatross posted on 22-11-2014 07:15 PM
Ok simple question. Did Allah utter those words to Moses or not? If he did, then yes, he was talking to Moses. If he didn't, then your Allah is a liar, since he related a story to Muhammad which never happened.

So since I would think you wouldn't call Allah a liar, then what would Moses understand when "THE Taurat", with the definite article, is referred to?

Of course Allah muttered such to Prophet Moosa(as). However what Allah revealed to Prophet Moosa(as) is not the same as what was in the hands of the Israelites at the time of Prophet Muhammad(saw).

This is simple logic and there is evidence to confirm that corruption has taken place.

You are just arguing on the language that 'The Tawrat' means the original Tawrat whereas the grammatical ruling for definate article does not even support your argument.

Your argument is facile

albatross

sam1528 posted on 22-11-2014 07:41 PM

Of course Allah muttered such to Prophet Moosa(as). However what Allah revealed to Prophet Moosa(as) is not the same as what was in the hands of the Israelites at the time of Prophet Muhammad(saw).

This is simple logic and there is evidence to confirm that corruption has taken place.

You are just arguing on the language that 'The Tawrat' means the original Tawrat whereas the grammatical ruling for definate article does not even support your argument.

Your argument is facile

Sam, that's not even my own original argument to begin with, that's YOUR ARGUMENT. That's YOUR LOGIC. You said, as there's only one Torah text at that time, then the use of the definite article "the" signifies that the speaker must be referring to the only Torah that is available at that time. Of course, at that moment, you didn't realise that Allah there in that verse was not talking to people of Muhammad's time, Allah was talking to Moses. So then I've shown you in that verse, that Allah spoke to Moses, during Moses's time. So what Torah did Moses have with him?  What would Moses understand by Allah saying "THE Tawrat" during his time? Again using YOUR OWN LOGIC, YOUR OWN ARGUMENT, that it must be referring to the only Tawrat that was available during the time, what was the Tawrat that Moses had? The original, or the corrupt?

albatross

sam1528 posted on 22-11-2014 07:37 PM
How do you know that there is no Injeel revealed to Prophet Eesa(as)? Arabic is a sister language  ...

Here you are setting up strawmen. I never said Jesus was not a prophet. I never said that Jesus never gave out any revelations. What I am saying is that Jesus did not give out a "kitab" that he "received" from "Allah" through the mediation of the angel "Jibril" called the "Injil". How do I know this? because the word "Injil" is a loan word from Greek! Why would God give a Greek kitab to an Israelite prophet who spoke Aramaic? Don't you realise how ridiculous that is?

sam1528 posted on 22-11-2014 07:37 PM
Arabic is a sister language of Hebrew and the defunct Aramaic. FYI , Koine Greek (the original language of the NT) does not come close.

That's my whole point! Why would Allah reveal a Greek revelation to an Aramaic speaking Israelite prophet?

sam1528 posted on 22-11-2014 07:37 PM
Yeshua is about the same as Eesa but very different from the Jesus. You have no grounds to contest the name Eesa.

No it is not. There's a specific reason why Our Lord came to us with the name "Yeshua". In the Judeo-Christian tradition, a name of a person has a specific importance, as the name holds a specific meaning. Yeshua means that "God is Salvation", signifying the salvific nature of His coming. The alphabet "Yod" in Hebrew comes from the name of God YHWH. The Arabic cognate of the letter Yod is "Ya" in Arabic. but Muhammad comes up with a name "3eesa", starting with an "Ayn", completely disqualifying any meaning that resembles the meaning of the name of the Lord in Hebrew, or Aramaic, or Arabic! That's why Arab Christians don't refer to the name of their Lord as "3eesa", but as "Yasu3", as they know that if they use that name, they would be speaking of another different person entirely! So no, the True Jesus will never be the Muslim "3eesa", who's probably some non-existent character that Muhammad made up.

mashimaru83

albatross posted on 22-11-2014 11:14 PM
Sam, that's not even my own original argument to begin with, that's YOUR ARGUMENT. That's YOUR L ...

I'm trying to understand the definate article used in this discussion.

How does it apply to 'The Bible'? Which Bible does the 'The' refer to in regards to many version/revision of the Bible?

sam1528

albatross posted on 22-11-2014 11:14 PM
Sam, that's not even my own original argument to begin with, that's YOUR ARGUMENT. That's YOUR LOGIC. You said, as there's only one Torah text at that time, then the use of the definite article "the" signifies that the speaker must be referring to the only Torah that is available at that time. Of course, at that moment, you didn't realise that Allah there in that verse was not talking to people of Muhammad's time, Allah was talking to Moses. So then I've shown you in that verse, that Allah spoke to Moses, during Moses's time. So what Torah did Moses have with him?  What would Moses understand by Allah saying "THE Tawrat" during his time? Again using YOUR OWN LOGIC, YOUR OWN ARGUMENT, that it must be referring to the only Tawrat that was available during the time, what was the Tawrat that Moses had? The original, or the corrupt?

Talk about strawman , this is what you are doing. Can you pinpoint where in Quran7:157 that Allah is talking to Prophet Moosa(as)? Quran7:157 (sahih international)

Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel, who enjoins upon them what is right and forbids them what is wrong and makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil and relieves them of their burden and the shackles which were upon them. So they who have believed in him, honored him, supported him and followed the light which was sent down with him - it is those who will be the successful.

Since you argue based on definate article ,

We use the definite article in front of a noun when we believe the hearer/reader knows exactly what we are referring to.

&#8226; because there is only one:

The Pope is visiting Russia.
The moon is very bright tonight.
The Shah of Iran was deposed in 1979.

This is why we use the definite article with a superlative adjective:

He is the tallest boy in the class.
It is the oldest building in the town.

&#8226; because there is only one in that place or in those surroundings:

We live in a small village next to the church.          =          (the church in our village)
Dad, can I borrow the car?         =         (the car that belongs to our family)
When we stayed at my grandmother’s house we went to the beach every day.          =          (the beach near my grandmother’s house)
Look at the boy in the blue shirt over there.          =         (the boy I am pointing at)


&#8226; because we have already mentioned it:

A woman who fell 10 metres from High Peak was lifted to safety by a helicopter. The woman fell while climbing.
The rescue is the latest in a series of incidents on High Peak. In January last year two men walking on the peak were killed in a fall.

We also use the definite article:

&#8226; to say something about all the things referred to by a noun:

The wolf is not really a dangerous animal (= Wolves are not really dangerous animals)
The kangaroo is found only in Australia (= Kangaroos are found only in Australia)
The heart pumps blood around the body. (= Hearts pump blood around bodies)

We use the definite article in this way to talk about musical instruments:

Joe plays the piano really well.(= George can play any piano)
She is learning the guitar.(= She is learning to play any guitar)

&#8226; to refer to a system or service:

How long does it take on the train.
I heard it on the radio.
You should tell the police.

&#8226; With adjectives like rich, poor, elderly, unemployed to talk about groups of people:

Life can be very hard for the poor.
I think the rich should pay more taxes.
She works for a group to help the disabled.
The definite article with names:

We do not normally use the definite article with names:

William Shakespeare wrote Hamlet.
Paris is the capital of France.
Iran is in Asia.

But we do use the definite article with:

&#8226; countries whose names include words like kingdom, states or republic:

the United Kingdom; the kingdom of Nepal; the United States; the People’s Republic of China.

&#8226; countries which have plural nouns as their names:

the Netherlands; the Philippines

&#8226; geographical features, such as mountain ranges, groups of islands, rivers, seas, oceans and canals:

the Himalayas; the Canaries; the Atlantic; the Atlantic Ocean; the Amazon; the Panama Canal.

&#8226; newspapers:

The Times; The Washington Post

&#8226; well known buildings or works of art:

the Empire State Building; the Taj Mahal; the Mona Lisa; the Sunflowers

&#8226; organisations:

the United Nations; the Seamen’s Union

&#8226; hotels, pubs and restaurants*:

the Ritz; the Ritz Hotel; the King’s Head; the Déjà Vu

*Note: We do not use the definite article if the name of the hotel or restaurant is the name of the owner, e.g.,Brown’s; Brown’s Hotel; Morel’s; Morel’s Restaurant, etc.

&#8226; families:

the Obamas; the Jacksons

Can you now pinpoint where in the definition of Definate Article when mention for example 'THE' Torah , it means the original Torah?

You are making up things as you go along.

Like I stated your argument is facile.

sam1528

albatross posted on 22-11-2014 11:45 PM
Here you are setting up strawmen. I never said Jesus was not a prophet. I never said that Jesus never gave out any revelations. What I am saying is that Jesus did not give out a "kitab" that he "received" from "Allah" through the mediation of the angel "Jibril" called the "Injil". How do I know this? because the word "Injil" is a loan word from Greek! Why would God give a Greek kitab to an Israelite prophet who spoke Aramaic? Don't you realise how ridiculous that is?

LOL , you are the one who stated as follow in your post#42

there is no "Injeel" that is brought down to "3eesa" through the angel Gabriel. heck, "3eesa" never even existed.

Therefore you are denying that Prophet Eesa(as) or Jesus in the bible received revelation. A prophet receives revelation from God. Like I stated in my last post , we don't have to put a name to the revelation but we muslims go one step further and called it the Injeel. I did not say Prophet Eesa(as) got his revelation thru archangel Jibreel , only you stated so. However in rev1:1 , your own bible confirm that Jesus received revelation. TQ , you negated your own bible.

In you christians getting a Greek Kitab from an aramaic speaking person is a sure sign that the New Testament is a corrupted text.

That's my whole point! Why would Allah reveal a Greek revelation to an Aramaic speaking Israelite prophet?

The revelation to Prophet Eesa(as) was in his language. Your bible writers decided to write the NT in Greek. This is a sure confirmation that the NT is a corrupted text. Why are you blaming Allah for what you guys did?

No it is not. There's a specific reason why Our Lord came to us with the name "Yeshua". In the Judeo-Christian tradition, a name of a person has a specific importance, as the name holds a specific meaning. Yeshua means that "God is Salvation", signifying the salvific nature of His coming. The alphabet "Yod" in Hebrew comes from the name of God YHWH. The Arabic cognate of the letter Yod is "Ya" in Arabic. but Muhammad comes up with a name "3eesa", starting with an "Ayn", completely disqualifying any meaning that resembles the meaning of the name of the Lord in Hebrew, or Aramaic, or Arabic! That's why Arab Christians don't refer to the name of their Lord as "3eesa", but as "Yasu3", as they know that if they use that name, they would be speaking of another different person entirely! So no, the True Jesus will never be the Muslim "3eesa", who's probably some non-existent character that Muhammad made up.

Ok then , lets have a look at the word Yeshua in Hebrew (Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old        Testament, H. W. F. Gesenius, p 373)

- Yeshua` - This name is rooted in the word "yasha`"  meaning "safety" in    Hebrew

This is transliterated to Jeshua by the bible writers - ezra2:2 , 1chro24:11 , 2chron31:15 , neh3:19. It doesn't mean 'God is Salvation'. It means 'he is saved'.

The aramaic version of Jesus is as follows :

pronounced 'Eesho M'sheeka' (M'sheeka means maseeh or anointed) ; Eesho is his name in Aramaic.

A comparison between aramaic and arabic

Compare the characters that make up sho and sa (2nd from right) from Eesho and Eesa.

The Hebrew Characters


RHS , 2nd from bottom. The Hebrew pronounce the 'shin' as 'seen'.

Therefore the Quran is right. The characters of Eesa from Eesho remain the same but the pronounciation changed which is typical of a language.

You guys come around and give him the name of Jesus ..... a million miles off the mark.

albatross

sam1528 posted on 23-11-2014 09:40 AM
Talk about strawman , this is what you are doing. Can you pinpoint where in Quran7:157 that Allah  ...

Sam, you yourself agreed that Allah spoke those words to Moses! Post #49! So why this taqiyya? but again I tell you, read the verse in context. Moses prayed to Allah for mercy and forgiveness. then Allah responded, TO MOSES: "I smite with My punishment whom I will, and My mercy embraceth all things, therefore I shall ordain it for those who ward off (evil) and pay the poor-due, and those who believe Our revelations;Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them"

Second, Sam, you yourself said, when Allah is referring to "THE Tawrat", he is referring to the only Tawrat available during that time. So what was the Tawrat available to Moses?

sam1528

albatross posted on 23-11-2014 12:02 PM
Sam, you yourself agreed that Allah spoke those words to Moses! Post #49! So why this taqiyya? but again I tell you, read the verse in context. Moses prayed to Allah for mercy and forgiveness. then Allah responded, TO MOSES: "I smite with My punishment whom I will, and My mercy embraceth all things, therefore I shall ordain it for those who ward off (evil) and pay the poor-due, and those who believe Our revelations;Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them"

Second, Sam, you yourself said, when Allah is referring to "THE Tawrat", he is referring to the only Tawrat available during that time. So what was the Tawrat available to Moses?

You are getting from bad to worse. My post #36 (bit part)

Allah talking to Prophet Moosa(as) in that Quran7:157? Allah is narrating the story of Prophet Moosa(as).

Narrating a story is different from talking to a person.

My post#44 (bit part)

The issue here is that this is in the Quran. Therefore Allah is narrating the story of Prophet Moosa(as) to Prophet Muhammad(saw). I really don't understand your logic.

Which part of the 2 posts that you don't understand that you keep on asserting that Allah is speaking to Prophet Moosa(as)? Can you now pinpoint to me where in Quran7:157 that Allah is talking to Prophet Moosa(as)?

The context is simple. Allah is narrating the story to Prophet Muhammad(saw) from a first person standpoint. Allah provided the Torah to Prophet Moosa(as). The point being is that Quran7:157 is revealed to Prophet Muhammad(saw) , logically it is during Prophet Muhammad(saw) time. Suddenly to you it means that it is the time of Prophet Moosa(as). This is a real facile argument

Therefore it is basic logic and I will try to be as simple as possible
(1) Torah revealed to Prophet Moosa(as) the original
(2) Torah has been corrupted
(3) Torah during Prophet Muhammad(saw) time has been corrupted

Therefore THE Torah in Prophet Muhammad(saw) time is the corrupted Torah.

Please don't continue with the argument of 'actual' and definate article. You have been refuted as the defintion of definate article does not mean original nor actual = original.

When you argue about 'Tawrat available a that time' , what do you mean by that time? The time of Prophet Moosa(as) or Prophet Muhammad(saw)? These are 2 very different times. Quran7:157 is at what time? Prophet Moosa(as) or Prophet Muhammad(saw)?

albatross

sam1528 posted on 23-11-2014 12:45 PM
You are getting from bad to worse. My post #36 (bit part)

Narrating a story is different from t ...

Wow sam. I can't believe that you would stoop this low. You admitted that Allah was talking those words to Moses! I asked you, word for word quotation of my question: "Did Allah utter those words to Moses or not?" THEN YOU SAID, WORD FOR WORD, YOUR OWN WORDS: "Of course Allah muttered such to Prophet Moosa(as)." POST #49. So what happened sam? why this taqiyya?

So again, according to your logic, you said, when "The Tawrat" is said here, it refers to the only Tawrat available at that time. So what Tawrat was available during Moses's time?

albatross

sam1528 posted on 23-11-2014 11:23 AM
LOL , you are the one who stated as follow in your post#42

Therefore you are denying that Prophet Eesa(as) or Jesus in the bible received revelation. prophet receives revelation from God.

Strawman. I did not deny that Jesus gave out revelations or prophecies. I deny that Jesus received a "kitab" called "the Injil" that he was supposed to give to his Aramaic speaking people, which is stupid since "Injil" is a loan word from Greek, which means that an Aramaic prophet gave out a kitab in greek to his Aramaic speaking people.

sam1528 posted on 23-11-2014 11:23 AM Like I stated in my last post , we don't have to put a name to the revelation but we muslims go one step further and called it the Injeel.

Do Muslim gave it the name "Injil", or was it Allah? Don't you Muslims believe in this? That Allah gave the name "Injil" to the kitab? So why would Allah give a Greek name to a kitab that was supposedly given to an Aramaic speaking prophet?

sam1528 posted on 23-11-2014 11:23 AM I did not say Prophet Eesa(as) got his revelation thru archangel Jibreel , only you stated so.

So Answer this now, did this "3eesa" receive his revelation from Jibreel? Yes or No?

sam1528 posted on 23-11-2014 11:23 AM However in rev1:1 , your own bible confirm that Jesus received revelation. TQ , you negated your own bible.

Why do you keep repeating this? I did not deny Jesus gave revelations. I denied that he received this "kitab" named "Injil".

sam1528 posted on 23-11-2014 11:23 AM

Friend, did you even read the picture that you posted? Or are you just parroting words from answeringchristianity.com? IT SAYS THERE. THE FIRST DEFINITION. A CONTRACTED FORM OF &#1497;&#1456;&#1492;&#1493;&#1465;&#1513;&#1467;&#1473;&#1506;&#1463;. If you don't know how to read Hebrew, &#1497;&#1456;&#1492;&#1493;&#1465;&#1513;&#1467;&#1473;&#1506;&#1463; is YAHUSHUA. Which means: GOD IS SALVATION. But again, instead of actually reading things by yourself, you decided to follow answeringchristianity's answer. Instead of looking at the definition of the NOUN, you (following Osama Abdullah, writer of answering Christianity) decided to SKIP the definition of the noun and went to the definition that is applicable only when to word is used AS A VERBAL ADJECTIVE. it says there clearly, WHEN NOUN, IT REFERS TO NAME "GOD IS SALVATION".

sam1528 posted on 23-11-2014 11:23 AM Therefore the Quran is right. The characters of Eesa from Eesho remain the same but the pronounciation changed which is typical of a language.

No the Quran is NOT RIGHT. THE CHARACTERS DID NOT REMAIN THE SAME. You gave all those alphabets, didn't you read it for yourself? The picture YOU POSTED spelled the name of Jesus as "YODH-SHIN-WAW-AYIN". If the Quran is right, then it would spell it with the Arabic cognates of those letters "YA-SIN-WAW-3AYN", which is the exact way Arab Christians pronounce the way of their Lord, "Yasu3". But Muhammad came up with an entirely different name: spelled "3AYN-YA-SIN-YA" which if applied as the name of Jesus, removed all meaning attached to the name "Yeshua".

The letter "YODH" is important, since it is from the name of God "YHWH". But Muhammad changed it utterly by turning the first letter as "yodh" into "Ayin". What does the "Ayin" stand for in "3eesa"'s name? The name of God? Which God revealed Himself with a name starting with "Ayin"?Then the letter "Shin-Waw-Ayin" is also important as means Salvation. But Muhammad changed it into "Ya-Sin-Ya" which is bereft of what meaning whatsoever, let alone the actual meaning of Salvation. What does "ya-sin-ya" even mean? It doesn't have a meaning.

So no, The Lord Jesus is not "3eesa". The name of Jesus means "God is Salvation", while the name "3eesa" has no meaning whatsoever, and is probably a name Muhammad made up.

sam1528

albatross posted on 23-11-2014 01:31 PM
Wow sam. I can't believe that you would stoop this low. You admitted that Allah was talking those words to Moses! I asked you, word for word quotation of my question: "Did Allah utter those words to Moses or not?" THEN YOU SAID, WORD FOR WORD, YOUR OWN WORDS: "Of course Allah muttered such to Prophet Moosa(as)." POST #49. So what happened sam? why this taqiyya?

So again, according to your logic, you said, when "The Tawrat" is said here, it refers to the only Tawrat available at that time. So what Tawrat was available during Moses's time?

Who is stooping low here? You or me? You refer to my post#49? Ok the said post :

Of course Allah muttered such to Prophet Moosa(as). However what Allah revealed to Prophet Moosa(as) is not the same as what was in the hands of the Israelites at the time of Prophet Muhammad(saw).

Why are you truncating what I stated (leaving out the underlined) and argue on it. I hate to say it , is this Christian Taqiya? You are arguing without head nor tail with your argument of THE Tawrat.

You refer to Quran7:157. Pinpoint to me where in that verse that Allah is talking to Prophet Moosa(as). Until now you have been evading this point.

Now you are asking me :

So what Tawrat was available during Moses's time?

Did you not read my post#56 (bit part)

Therefore it is basic logic and I will try to be as simple as possible
(1) Torah revealed to Prophet Moosa(as) the original
(2) Torah has been corrupted
(3) Torah during Prophet Muhammad(saw) time has been corrupted

Again I ask you , what is the time setting of Quran7:157. In the time of Prophet Moosa(as) or Prophet Muhammad(saw)?

You are not answering but continue asking THE Tawrat , whereas it has already been answered.

albatross

sam1528 posted on 23-11-2014 02:25 PM
Who is stooping low here? You or me? You refer to my post#49? Ok the said post :

Why are you tr ...

Ok. Simple question. Did Allah say those words to Moses. Yes, or no.