Ezra son of God - Error

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 40
  • Views Views 19K
Re: Error in the Quran

Simply and easly Mr guest!
have you ever seen a christian says : jesus is a prophet?...have you heard about unitarians...they are christians but do they say that jesus is GOD?
tell us if you know.

the verse- Mr/ guest- says that some jews claim to say that u'zair is son of god, and if you give your mind few mins to imagine jews in the age of the prophet Muhamad you would be able to** believe** that if the jews in his age know that there wasn't any one before who claim that u'zair is the son of god then it would be easy for jews in this time to argue with the prophet mohammed and to show all arabs that the quran has errors but we all know that this didn't happen at all..

Mr guest
the prophet immigrated to al-madinah where the majority of the jews in the arabia lives

at least if he was a lair he would erase it if one of the jews around just claim that it never happened in the history of judaism. but actually non of jews at his time has any problem to listen to this verse..and it wasn't an argument point with jews at the prophet (SAAW) time

but non of this happened at all MR-guest

enjoy your stay here and welcome to the fourm :)
 
Last edited:
Re: Error in the Quran

Guest said:
Where and when did I state that I was a "Christian"? Do you mind showing me where I said this? I simply stated what Christians believe, you made the assumption that since I disagreed with the Islamic belief that I am a Christian.
Click to expand...


Lol right here bro

Guest said:
Christians do not speak of Jesus in the Past tense, but we say that Jesus is the Son of God. .
Click to expand...
 
Re: Error in the Quran

:sl:
I responded to this issue in the thread:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/7668-questions-christian-friend.html

Again,
Ansar Al-'Adl said:
Muhammad Asad is a jew who converted to Islam and this is what he says about this verse:
This statement is connected with the preceding verse, which speaks of the erring followers of earlier revelation. The charge of shirk ("the ascribing of divinity [or "divine qualities"] to aught beside God") is levelled against both the Jews and the Christians in amplification, as it were, of the statement that they "do not follow the religion of truth [which God has enjoined upon them]".
As regards the belief attributed to the Jews that Ezra (or, in the Arabicized form of this name, `Uzayr) was "God's son", it is to be noted that almost all classical commentators of the Qur'an agree in that only the Jews of Arabia, and not all Jews, have been thus accused. (According to a Tradition on the authority of Ibn `Abbas - quoted by Tabari in his commentary on this verse - some of the Jews of Medina once said to Muhammad, "How could we follow thee when thou hast forsaken our giblah and dost not consider Ezra a son of God?") On the other hand, Ezra occupies a unique position in the esteem of all Jews, and has always been praised by them in the most extravagant terms. It was he who restored and codified the Torah after it had been lost during the Babylonian Exile, and "edited" it in more or less the form which it has today; and thus "he promoted the establishment of an exclusive, legalistic type of religion that became dominant in later Judaism" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1963, vol. IX, p. 15). Ever since then he has been venerated to such a degree that his verdicts on the Law of Moses have come to be regarded by the Talmudists as being practically equivalent to the Law itself: which, in Qur'anic ideology, amounts to the unforgivable sin of shirk, inasmuch as it implies the elevation of a human being to the status of a quasi-divine law-giver and the blasphemous attribution to him - albeit metaphorically - of the quality of "sonship" in relation to God. Cf. in this connection Exodus iv, 22-23 ("Israel is My son") or Jeremiah xxxi, 9 ("I am a father to Israel"): expressions to which, because of their idolatrous implications, the Qur'dn takes strong exception. (Asad, Message of the Qur'an)​
More info here:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/ezra.html
Click to expand...

...the quote that I gave from Muhammad Asad, a former Jew himself, who pointed out that, as mentioned in At-Tabari's tafsir, some Jews came to the Prophet Muhammad pbuh and said, "How can we follow you when you do not believe Uzayr is the son of God?". Noice that the Qur'an doesn't say that the Jews believe Uzayr is the son of God, but the Qur'an is very precise in saying that the Jews say Uzayr is the son of God. Thus, it cannot be a contradiction in any way since the Qur'an is only responding to the verbal proclamation of a group of Jews!

Also interesting is Dr. Muhammad Mohar Ali's comments on this issue:
Of course there is no evidence in the extant Old Testament about it; but the Qur'an was not referring to what is written in the Old Testament about 'Uzayr but to the belief and assertion of some of the Jews of the time who regarded 'Uzayr as the son of God. In fact the 'ayah in question, 9:30, starts with the expression: "And the Jews say". The commentator Al-Baydawi, to whome Watt refers a number of times in his book, (fn. Watt, Muhammad's Mecca, 108, note 2 to Chapter 1 and notes 2 and 10 to Chapter III) makes it clear with reference to this 'ayah that because the Old Testament was given its present form by 'Uzayr, many of the Jews of the time considered him a "son of God" and that specifically at Madina there was a group of Jews who held that belief. Al-Baydawi futher points out that the 'ayah in question was read out and recited as usual but no Madinan Jew came forward with a contradiction (fn.Al-Baydawi, Tafsir, I, second Egyptian impression, 1968, p. 412). It is to be noted that this 'ayah is unanimously regarded as Madinan. Hence the silence of the Jews of the place on the matter is suggestive enough, particularly as they were avowed critics of the Prophet.
Not only Al-Baydawi but also other commentators mention that the 'ayah refers to the views of a particular group of the Jews. For instance, Al-Tabari bives a number of reports together with their chains of narrators specifically mentioning the leading Jews of Madina who considered Uzayr a son of God. The most prominent of those Jews were Finhas, Sullam ibn Mishkam, Nu'man ibn Awfa, Sha's ibn Qays and Malik ibn al-Sayf (fn. Al-Tabari, Tafsir, XIV, 201-204). Similarly, Al-Qurtubi mentions the same fact and the same names adding that the expression "the Jews" occuring at the beginning of the 'ayah means "some particular Jews", just as the expression "people told them" (qala lahum al-nas) means not all the people of the world but some particular people. He further says that the Jewish sect who held that 'Uzayr was God's son had become extinct by his (Al-Qurtubi's) time (fn. Al-Qurtubi, Tafsir, Pt. VIII, 116-117). (Muhammad Mohar Ali, The Qur'an and the Orientalists, Jam'iyat 'Ihyaa' Minhaaj Al-Sunnah 2004, p. 66)​
So as for what he quotes,
Notice the words "proposed" and "assumption". There are no records from any Jewish community that believed Ezra was the Son of God!
Click to expand...
First of all, this is the fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantium which we can refute with the expression, "absence of proof is not proof of absence". In other words, just because we don't have Judaic records that shows that Jews believed this, does not prove that no Jews ever believed this!

Secondly, as was previously mentioned, there are specific historical narrations related by Qur'anic commentators like Al-Baydawi and At-Tabari which state the names of specific Jewish leaders who came forward to the Muslims and said "We cannot believe you since you do not accept Uzayr as the son of God". And notice that the Qur'an doesn't say that the Jews believed Uzayr was the son of God, it says quite clearly that they said he was the son of God. So, the Qur'an was responding to an explicit proclamation of the Jews. Either the Jews were intentionally lying, or they actually believed what they said - but in any event the Qur'an can't be wrong since the Jews of Madinah actually said this.
Click to expand...

:w

Guest wrote:
Take a look at the context, if that Sura says that Jews at "ONE POINT" believed that Ezra was the Son of God, then Christians at "ONE POINT" believed that Jesus was the Son of God.​
Yes, it does not speak about the beliefs of anyone - it says the Jews SAY, i.e. it was responding to a verbal statement made by the Jews of Madinah.
 
Re: Error in the Quran

Guest said:
Yes I read your post, the best a answer you have is where is my proof? I don't have to be a scholar to know that the Jews in General do not believe that God has a literal Son, if you have just a little knowledge of Jewish orthodox then you will know that they do not believe that Ezra is the Son of God. It only takes a imple study on Judaism to know factually that this is not a tenet of the Jews.
Click to expand...
oh don't they? but they do not dislike what some of them did? so in effect they agree with them and so are part of them! on the day of judgement u are raised with the ones u love even if u didn't exactly do the same things..
ohh and is this the best thing you got against the quran?

surah 9:32" the disbelievers want to extinguish Allah's light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow except that His light be perfected even though the disbelievers hate it"

see ya irsha!
 
Re: Error in the Quran

Peace to those who follow the Guidance!


first of all you should always read the Qur'an with a good tafsir, or commentary. Every single verse of the Qur'an should be understood within it's proper contexts. A text without a context is a pretext for foolishness.

secondly It is important to know the scriptural context of a verse. What does the Qur'an say right before and after this verse? Are there other verses dealing with the same topic?

Also important is the historical context, meaning what was happening at the time the verse was revealed. This can often shed a lot of light on how the verse was meant to be understood.

:)
 
salam alaikum

what i find exteremely funny is that since people cannot "attack the Quran" in the scientific context they always try and use the historic prespective from 1000's of years before and what happend then.

Wheras the fact about history can be summed up in this little story:

"General Custer - The Great Hero of Yester-years - now exposed to be the villan and instigator through Archeology" - This was rejected by the US and they refused to change their history books stating that historians and archeologists can be wrong.

So basically Archeologists and Historians can "guess" or even make "fairly accurate" guesses at what was going on back 1000's of years ago but they cannot 100% accurately say "this is what happend"

But I find it hilarious when people come attacking the Quran suddenly the word of historians and archeologists becomes "fact"

lol
 
where is guest? has she/he left the forum or something?:?
may Allah guide him/her, ameen!
 
Last edited:
Yeah i haven't seen any other posts by Guest iether. Check her profile to see if ther are any other threads by her.
 
Deuteronomy 14:1 - You are the SONS OF GOD. You shall not cut yourselves, or make any baldness on your head on account of the Dead.
Click to expand...

Actually it is:

"Ye are the children of the L-RD your G-d: ye shall not cut yourselves, nor make any baldness between your eyes for the dead."

And the Hebrew for that part is, בָּנִים אַתֶּם which is "baneem attem"

This is G-d explaining that he does not want his children express their grief by mutilating themselves, since we are all G-d's creation and in an essence G-d's children.

The "son of G-d" that Christians refer to, cannot be supported in Jewish text. I cannot speak for their own text however, but I do believe them to be false.
 
MODERATOR'S COMMENT: 16. No attacks against Islam in any form will be tolerated on this discussion board. This includes, but is not limited to attacks on the Qur'an, Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), his family and COMPANIONS, or any other prophets in Islam, or Islamic scholars, past or present.
 
Last edited:
Salam

It is refering to some jews who did say that. Not all.

If you say that's not possible to mean that, I say go learn something about arabic first, then make that assertion.
 
Link said:
Salam

It is refering to some jews who did say that. Not all.

If you say that's not possible to mean that, I say go learn something about arabic first, then make that assertion.
Click to expand...

Is this not the verse:

"The Jews call ‘Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!"

وَقَالَتِ الْيَهُودُ عُزَيْرٌ ابْنُ اللّهِ وَقَالَتْ النَّصَارَى الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ اللّهِ ذَلِكَ قَوْلُهُم بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ يُضَاهِؤُونَ قَوْلَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ مِن قَبْلُ قَاتَلَهُمُ اللّهُ أَنَّى يُؤْفَكُونَ​

Waqalati alyahoodu AAuzayrun ibnu Allahi waqalati alnnasara almaseehu ibnu Allahi thalika qawluhum bi-afwahihim yudahi-oona qawla allatheena kafaroo min qablu qatalahumu Allahu anna yu/fakoona​

Why would G-d not say "Some Jews"?
 
Last edited:

Similar Threads

Back
Top