7:157

[Hamzeh]

Asalamu Alaykum brother Jospeh

I was reading your article Ahmad

I would just like to know if I am understanding the article correctly and would like to know your humble best assumption because I am assuming that it can only be as best seen. I do believe that only Allah alone knows the whole Quran.

First according to verse 61:6 I am assuming that this statement you made below is probably what you think it means best?  I also find that your one of your main cause for the article was to prove to the people of the book and anyone that the Quran does not state that Ahmad is mention in the Bible?

"Equally, it is implausible to assume that the Bible writers captured every single conversation that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) was ever part of.

 
In this manner, the debate could well have been with regards messengership in general. This would explain the possible theological question as to why Prophet Jesus (pbuh) deemed it necessary to mention another messenger after him while the same audience was not prepared to instil faith in his own messengership."


I also would like to know a little more of what you mentioned below. I looked up viz a viz.  Not really sure what it means exactly.  Like face to face? Similar characteristics? I just couldn't understand the point. And also would you say viz a viz the Bible and the Torah also since 7:157 mentions both?

On the strength of verse 7:157 alone, what the Quran is likely referencing viz a viz the Bible are clear indications of the nature of a true Prophet such as Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) that should be followed and not a Prophet of a particular name.

Reason I am interested is because lots of talk about this subject and I seen videos that many muslims used to try to prove that Bible and Torah mentions the prophet Muhammad(pbuh). And it used to be convincing especially when I cant understand the people of the books language.  Im not saying that those doing the videos are doing it on purpose. Just maybe they feel thats the truth.


Take your time brother Joseph I know you very busy


Salam

[Zack]

Hello Hamzah,

I might add something before Br Joseph replies. The passage that is used for applying "Ahmad" to Muhammad is John 14:15-31. In using "Ahmad", we read....
- The "Ahmad" (counsellor) is the Holy Spirit 14:17
- The disciples of Nabi Isa know the "Ahmad"  14:17
- The "Ahmad will teach the disciples of Nabi Isa  14:26

Numerous other aspects of "Ahmad" refering to Ahmad being Gods divine presence being felt in the lives of those who follow God, and that when Nabi Isa leaves, people will not be left alone, but God's presence (Ahmad) will be with them.

I will be honest writing from a Christian perspective, when they hear of the above passage being applied to the prophet Muhammad, it discredits Islam and presents a great misunderstanding of Islam in the eyes of a Christian. It leaves the impression that Islam is a religion applying deity status to Muhammad as a desperate effort to be legitimate. If only Islam could leave such things, let the Qur'an and the Prophet Muhammad be what they originally were meant to be, there would be so much more positive response.

Wasalam
Daniel

[AbbsRay]

Salaam,

Ahmed is short for Muhammad.
Just like the name Abed is short for Abduallah.

chapter 36 of the Quran,  "Yaseen"  is another name of Muhammad as well. Listen to the verse from the beginning.  God is directly talking to Yaseen, it can't be anyone else as Prophet Muhammad was the only one who the Quran was revealed to.

[Hamzeh]

Asalamu Alaykum Br Daniel and Abbsrayray

Thank you for sharing that. In my opinion that would make sense if the passage from the Quran 61:6 did not mention that a rasoolan messenger whos name is Ahmad will come after me.  But what is interesting to note that the Quran did not say that its mentioned in the Bible.


And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!"

Since the above verse is speaking that a messenger is coming after Jesus(pbuh). I dont think its possible that the word Ahmad is referring to Gods divine presence. Since prophet Jesus(pbuh) is giving news of  glad tidings of a messenger to come after him. Which wouldn't make sense in my humble opinion.

And your right Daniel that trying to impose meaning on another script when its not the right meaning it will discredit a religion in the eyes of others.

I think what Br. Joseph indicated that its possible that the disciples of Jesus(pbuh) did not write all his sayings. And since the Quran does not say that 61:6 is in the book of the Bible. Its possible he said it. At the end Allah knows best.

Hi Abbsrayray.  I dont think we can just say Ahmad is short for Muhammad. Though Ahmad may be a possible referance to him. But no one would of known that till the presence of Muhammad(pbuh) came to life.


Peace

[AbbsRay]

Salamun Alaikum Hamzeh,

Verse 61:6 Allah tells us what Jesus says.

Now the Gospels that Jesus preached is in Syriac..  Which is pronounced "Manahma". 

There is no doubt in my mind that Jesus was NOT referring to Gods presents. Nor the Holy Spirit, Christians think the Holy Spirt is one of the three of the Trinity which is linked to God, Which is certainly not true.

"Hi Abbsrayray.  I dont think we can just say Ahmad is short for Muhammad. Though Ahmad may be a possible referance to him. But no one would of known that till the presence of Muhammad(pbuh) came to life. "

The name Ahmed IS referring to prophet Muhummed, there is absolutely no uncertainty about that. Why?

1. Allah says it in the Qur'an, and I believe Allah's word over anyone, it is not a case of maybe one is not understanding the verse and what it's meaning is. Verse 61:6 it is a straight forward self explanatory meaning.

2. There was NO other prophet that was after Prophet Issa besides Prophet Muhummed. God says that throughout the Qur'an, that Prophet Muhummed was the seal of the prophets and that he came after Jesus.

I do not think it discredits Islam, Now in a rational respectful way, people of different faiths and beliefs should be able to refer to verses in their scriptures that did in fact come from God without getting offended or troubled about it.

How can it be that Islam be implying a deity to prophet Muhummed? Because we say what Allah says in the Qur'an? But the bible says Holy Spirit which is reference to God?


As for the disciples did not write it down, I do not agree with that. Why? Because Allah is telling us what's is in the Torah and Injil. He certainly would not have mentioned "Ahmed" about Prophet Muhummed if it was not in the Bible. That is my belief thou, from me pondering on these verses and throughout the Qur'an listening to these ayas many many times.
 Remember that the Qur'an also is for the people of the kitab before Prophet Muhummed who have been told all this, so that they might take heed.

The only thing that is difficult and too bad is the original Gospels text in the Language prophet Issa left, is not around or there is no record of it. (This is based on what was researched by Christian scholars)

It comes down to this in my view, It really does not matter if it is obvious in the Torah or Injil. Whoever want to believe, believe, whoever does not want to, do not have to, it is their right and choice either way, as Allah tells us.
What is so great about Allah is, He, gives people signs and revaluations and they are to believe in what they want.
Lets just say, Allah/God has been extremely merciful on the human race by several scriptures and Prophets/Messengers with warnings over and over again. In reality, He easily could have decided to have one scripture sent to us and one prophet, but that was not His plan..

I am so against people who try to convert others, whether it is Muslims, Judaism or Christians. Though we see it more from Muslims and Christians.  People should talk about their beliefs and why their scripture say what they say, but the whole, convert or your going to hell whether it is Muslims or Christians saying that is not okay with me. Someone who believes and raised in Christianity all their life, simply is not going to drop their faith that they believe in and follow Islam, same with Muslims..

[AbbsRay]

My apologies. . Verse 61.6 only mentions Torah. 

[AbbsRay]

Salaam Hamzeh,

I just read Brother Josephs article about "Ahmad" in the Bible after I commented.
Indeed he wrote a GREAT article with precise information and possibilities.

But I do still stand with the name Ahmad being prophet Muhammad. If you go to Surat 36, Ya Sin. It also is prophet Muhammad Allah is referring to. Reading beginning of the Aya's and throughout, Allah is addressing the individual at many times who received the Holy Quran, which is Prophet Muhammad.

At the very end, we know what the Quran says and believe in it. As Allah says throughout the Quran one can believe or not believe. We need Him, He created us, and does not need us.

p.s If you watch Passion of Christ, the film is in Aramaic language and you can here Ahmed being said when he is washing the feet of the disciples. He says Manahma.

Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic languages are all Semitic languages which have a unique vocabulary system. Verbs and nouns have a three-consonant "root," meaning every word with those three consonants is conceptually related. You here him say God, in the language they are speaking that almost sounds as Allah. All the Arab Christians and Arab Jews always refer to God as Allah in Arabic.

Again, BJ article says it all. Whether people accept it or not, is their own decision. 

[Zack]

Salamun Alaikum Hamzeh,

Verse 61:6 Allah tells us what Jesus says.

Now the Gospels that Jesus preached is in Syriac..  Which is pronounced "Manahma". 

There is no doubt in my mind that Jesus was NOT referring to Gods presents. Nor the Holy Spirit, Christians think the Holy Spirt is one of the three of the Trinity which is linked to God, Which is certainly not true.

OK, I will stand by what is written in the article http://www.quransmessage.com/articles/ahmad%20FM3.htm as correct as far as I can see. Re when Jesus was speaking in John 14:26, not referring to the Holy Spirit.... well to come to that conclusion we have to simply throw out the Injil and say it is not true... Pages of the words of Jesus refer to the one coming after him as the Holy Spirit such as "But the counsellor, the HOLY SPIRIT, will teach you all things." We are not talking about the trinity, simply the belief that God will not leave mankind alone and distant....

Wasalam
Daniel

[Hamzeh]

Asalamu Alykum Abbsrayray


as you stated "There is no doubt in my mind that Jesus was NOT referring to Gods presents. Nor the Holy Spirit, Christians think the Holy Spirt is one of the three of the Trinity which is linked to God, Which is certainly not true."


Lets keep in mind what the Bible says and not what the Christians in a whole say. I am not a scholar either of the Bible and have not completely read it. Though from many people even from muslims, I hear that the Bible does not claim such a trinity. Im talking about the Bible in the language it came down with or was present at the time of prophet Muhammad. The Bible in english can be no different than the translations of the Quran in english where many translators keep in mind for example that prophet Jesus is coming back and they would mis translate verse 3:55 and many other verses. But an example below
"Yusuf Ali
Behold! Allah said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute."

where the word "Mutawafeeka" has not even been included in the translation. The translators might not of known or just tried giving their best explanation. please see article for more clarifications. http://quransmessage.com/pdfs/Second%20Coming.pdf

now, according to the Holy Quran, it does not say that Ahmad is mentioned in the Bible or the Torah. It does not even ask the People of the Book Jews and Christians to go to the book that was present with them at the time of the prophet Muhammad and to see if the word Ahmad is mentioned in their books.

7:157 "Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper."


now verse 7:157 does not contain the word Ahmad. I find this verse here is speaking completely to the Jews and Christians only. The reasons why is because its telling those who follow the prophet who is not from them(Jews and Christians) a prophet who never been knowledgeable about the religion of Allah before this and Who is written in their own Torah and Bible. But the key point is that he is NOT mentioned by NAME as Ahmad or Muhammad. I feel like its something written in the books of the Torah and Bible that refers or gives an example of this or its not any different from what was in their own books? Not sure.


back to your your points you mentioned

"The name Ahmed IS referring to prophet Muhummed, there is absolutely no uncertainty about that. Why?

1. Allah says it in the Qur'an, and I believe Allah's word over anyone, it is not a case of maybe one is not understanding the verse and what it's meaning is. Verse 61:6 it is a straight forward self explanatory meaning. "


I agree with you thats what Ahmad is referring to prophet Muhammad but It does not say that in verse 61:6 that Ahmad is mentioned or written In the actual Torah or Bible that was present at the time the Quran was being revealed. It does not say go to your books open it up and see. Its stating thats what Jesus said. But it is Not something that was nessessarly written down by his disciples.

you stated also "2. There was NO other prophet that was after Prophet Issa besides Prophet Muhummed. God says that throughout the Qur'an, that Prophet Muhummed was the seal of the prophets and that he came after Jesus. "


Verse 61:6 does not mention a prophet thats going to come after him, but mentions messenger(rasoolin). Though in my views I still think its referring to prophet Muhammad. Though there was messengers present other than Prophet Jesus at his time or after him. Zakariya, Yahya etc. Correct me if I am wrong.


You stated also "As for the disciples did not write it down, I do not agree with that. Why? Because Allah is telling us what's is in the Torah and Injil. He certainly would not have mentioned "Ahmed" about Prophet Muhummed if it was not in the Bible. That is my belief thou, from me pondering on these verses and throughout the Qur'an listening to these ayas many many times.
 Remember that the Qur'an also is for the people of the kitab before Prophet Muhummed who have been told all this, so that they might take heed.
"

In the Quran as for 61:6 Allah is not telling us that what prophet Jesus sais was ACTUALLY written in any books. The word used is WAITH QALA(mention, remember, recite, what Jesus said). That same word is used many many times. Does not necessarily mean that it must be WRITTEN down in the previous scriptures unless said so.


you stated "The only thing that is difficult and too bad is the original Gospels text in the Language prophet Issa left, is not around or there is no record of it. (This is based on what was researched by Christian scholars)"

Not sure about that. According to many they are still around and present. I am not sure about this. But it is important to find out because as muslims we are expected to believe in them. And If they are still around I don't find it right to say something holy is not available to us when it is. anyways different topic maybe on another thread. Insha'Allah.

You also mentioned "It comes down to this in my view, It really does not matter if it is obvious in the Torah or Injil. Whoever want to believe, believe, whoever does not want to, do not have to, it is their right and choice either way, as Allah tells us. "

Yes who ever wants to believe, believe. But Don't we all want to believe in the Truth. I also believe we should also know the meaning of what Allah tells us in the Quran. And understand it. Before going around spreading rumours.

with respect to everyone.

Salam


articles related to this discussion would be:

Ahmad
http://quransmessage.com/pdfs/Ahmad.pdf

Parakletos
http://quransmessage.com/articles/pklts%20FM3.htm

[Hamzeh]

Asalamu Alykum Daniel

Is it also safe to say that in John 14:13-31 has nothing to do with the word Ahmad?

I just suggested that the word Ahmad does not mean Gods divine presence, so in John 14:15-31 I would read it how it is. And not mix the two up. I understood that Gods divine presence does not mean the trinity and what you meant.

Salam

[Zack]

Asalamu Alykum Daniel

Is it also safe to say that in John 14:13-31 has nothing to do with the word Ahmad?

I just suggested that the word Ahmad does not mean Gods divine presence, so in John 14:15-31 I would read it how it is. And not mix the two up. I understood that Gods divine presence does not mean the trinity and what you meant.

Salam

Yes, you are correct. Sorry, my original response might have been a bit confusing, when I was trying to showing relating John 14 to "Ahmad" or Muhammad was not possible.

And yes, we are not talking about the trinity here, simply John 14 being God's promise to once the prophet Jesus leaves, he will not leave His people abandoned, but there will be a supernatural realisation of Gods presence, known as the Holy Spirit. The background to this is the Hebrew understanding of the Tabernacle / Temple in the Torah, where Gods presence was believed to have dwelt according to David.

[AbbsRay]

Salaam Hamzeh,

OK.. Thanks 

[Joseph Islam]

Dear Hamzeh,

Wa alaikum assalam

Please see my responses to your questions in blue italics.

"First according to verse 61:6 I am assuming that this statement you made below is probably what you think it means best?"

Yes, my views are shared as best possible interpretation from my perspective.

"I also find that your one of your main cause for the article was to prove to the people of the book and anyone that the Quran does not state that Ahmad is mention in the Bible?"

I shared in the final thoughts that "There is no conclusive warrant from the Quran that the name 'Ahmad' is to be found written in the Bible."

At no place does the Quran explicitly state that the name 'Ahmad' is found in the Bible. This was shown in the summary I shared in the article which compared verses 61:6 and 7:157 and how the two verses are usually fused together unnecessarily to derive such an interpretation.

"I also would like to know a little more of what you mentioned below. I looked up viz a viz.  Not really sure what it means exactly.  Like face to face? Similar characteristics? I just couldn't understand the point."

I imply ,'in relation to', 'with regards to' etc.

"And also would you say viz a viz the Bible and the Torah also since 7:157 mentions both?"

When I refer to the term 'Bible' in the main (unless the context implies otherwise), I imply the collective canon texts considered  generally sacred by both Jews and Christians and thus a reference to both the Old Testament and New Testament. In the context of the prophet's ministry, I imply the sacred texts read by the Jews and Christians (People of the Book) at the time and place where Prophet Muhammad was preaching.

I hope that helps, God willing
Joseph

[Hamzeh]

Thank you. I found that your article cleared up many questions and can end many unwarranted arguments. 


Salam