Details of interpreting verses from the Qur'an and obvious blunders

[psyah]

Re: Details of interpreting verses from the Qur’an and obvious blunders

@Mr.Popat

How does one ‘come and go’ ? What does that ‘came and gone’ mean when it was used for prophets? 1) before Muhammad PBUH, 2 ) before Isa a.s. ?

The term qad khalat is not a rocket science as you’re implying it to be. Even like the way you are explaining it, it still means the same thing. Look at your history of prophets that have come and gone, (by getting killed and by dying a natural death). If Muhammad PBUH ‘come and go’ the same way, then will you turn your back on him (s.a.w).? That is how it is.

Lets take your explanation for the other verse as well. Look at the history of prophets that have come and gone before Jesus a.s. Jesus a.s was a prophet just like those who have come and gone. His mother was a truthful woman. Both, Jesus a.s and His mother used to eat. If we consider prophets BEFORE Isa a.s to have come and gone, and take that come and gone to mean passed away(in english or even in urdu it means died), then the verse says Jesus a.s was a prophet just like them. If they all died, then so did Jesus a.s, as Allah is not making any exception here. He is including jesus a.s with all those prophets who passed away.

He used to eat. You insist in saying that he ‘ate’ food and that the quality of ‘eating’ makes im mortal and not anything like Deity. If he ate food, and if he is NOT eating food now, then it automatically makes him someone like Deity! ( if hes not dead ). You forget about the other side of the verse completely. You say one thing and then cannot back it up with anything.

If he a.s is not eating, and Allah says he alone is the one who is paak from this, then you are associating partner with Allah!!

Peace Mr.Popat

The way I am explaining it detaches it from the clause of the ayat, by taking the meaning (look at your history of those past prophets) … but you are connecting it to the clause …you are saying that the verse is talking about the said prophet has died, but you are ignoring those parts of the verse that qualify the clause - i.e. in the case of Muhammad (SAW) it mentions others were slain or died and in the case of Isa (AS) it mentions how others ate food. So you conclude that statement in red above, but since qad khalat is only providing the basis for look at the example of those previous prophets … didn’t they eat food? So your statement should say “Jesus (AS) was a prophet like them in their eating habits” … whereas previously Sayyidina Muhammad (SAW) was a prophet like some of those who have come, because they were killed or like most were known to have died. (AS) ..
This also proves the condition that he (SAW) had died in … there are references that suggest the poison that he (SAW) was fed tormented him until he (SAW) died …

Also the way you are explaining it makes it appear the verse is talking about all previous prophets in both cases, but I am saying that it does not include all prophets of the past, but it wants you to look at similar examples from the sea of past prophets to find similarity in their stories.

To summarise:

Qad khalat does not give context to the verse, it is setting the conditions from which the context is being generated - you have not recognised this.

The verse is not making a definitive statement regarding the pattern of ALL previous prophets - you have not recognised this either.

My conclusion is that these verses do not show that Isa (AS) has died yet … rather if anything demonstrate that he (AS) has not died yet, when compared together.