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

Society Religion & Philosophy
381

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

Lol. Your replies are now getting hilarious.

You need reference to know if humans require food ? Be it jinn humans or humans in general ? Humans are BOUND to eat. What do you need reference about ? Angels in human form need food too. Bottom line is, when you're human, you need food. Period. But hey, neither jinn nor any angel were sent to mankind as messenger. So that is out of question. Jinn or angel in human form need food, and also if they are jinn or angel in human form, they dont become prophet. As simple as that. You are fooling yourself.

Shirk in general sense is to associate partners with Allah. How about you stop breathing, stop eating and stop drinking and then wait for Allah to save you? what kind of logic are you bringing here ? I'm telling you.. listen to this for the very last time.. food is the 'source' or 'means' from Allah to sustain humans. Use the hadith you posted on yourself. Tie your camel then trust Allah. Same way, eat your food and then trust Allah. Everything eventually IS from Allah. I hope you dont ask this stupid question about shirk again. You do realize the belief you hold is shirk. Allah is the sustainer, but Allah says no prophet was sent whose bodies did not need food. Allah also says all prophets were men (humans). You are telling me Allah is sustaining Jesus a.s in some other way than food...(thereby violating verse which says they needed food, and also that he may not be a human being/prophet at all, nauzubillah ).

You have objections after objections, not on what im saying, but rather on the verses of Quran, making Jesus a.s exception. Making him life God, who doesnt eat and is still alive. This is shirk !

Read what i wrote carefully with open mind.

382

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

Angels in human form need food?

Really?

That's not what I believe ... Another difference between you and I

Read the tafsir of Surah 15 verse 51 and 52

Reagrding the eating stopping breathing, question ... Well there are plenty of people who do stop eating, many of them die, others get hospitalised ... There are people patients who are fed with nutrients directly into their veins .... They don't eat food either. The fact is all of this is the means ... Food is a means of receiving nourishment ... And if we talk allergies one man's food is another man's poison ...

383

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

I think you guys are making things unnecessarily complicated. keep it simple please

384

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

[QUOTE]

Reagrding the eating stopping breathing, question ... Well there are plenty of people who do stop eating, many of them die, others get hospitalised ... There are people patients who are fed with nutrients directly into their veins .... They don't eat food either. The fact is all of this is the means ... Food is a means of receiving nourishment ... And if we talk allergies one man's food is another man's poison ...

[/QUOTE]

So what is the point? Whether you eat or get food through IV, body is getting some form of food to survive and why did you mention allergies? yar, itna na soocha karein.

385

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

psyah is unnecessarily making things complicated. He still cant decide what he has objection with. Whether its the objection that humans CAN live without food, the meaning of qad khalat, or the objection that 'all' prophets are not mentioned in the verse as passed away/dead.

Unless and until he's not clear about what he is debating about, there really is no point of this discussion.

386

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

Peace Mr.Popat

I have clear objection on your assertion that this verse in any way proves Isa (AS) has died. I showed this because it does not say anywhere in the verse that he died ... Rather this verse demonstrates that he may be alive because it is not constructed in same way it could have been constructed with the other verse that we have compared it with.

Also ... I have clearly said this verse with reference to eating is not in the past perfect tense ... It is past imperfect ... Which means that when the event was observed the act was being done ... But there is no information on whether it has stopped being done. In the other thread you rightly called it maadi istimrari ... But you wrongly described what istimrari means.

You can't have something that is 'continuous' and yet 'completed' at the same time and that is what you have said in the other thread.

Qad Khalat in both verses does not provide any meaning of death to either the prophet Muhammad (SAW) nor does it do so for prophet Isa (AS) either ... In both cases it is there to ask people to look at past examples of prophets that have come and gone ...

You have asked a secondary question about ... How they have gone ... And this is a mixed bag ... Besides completely irrelevant because it does not bear on the clause of the sentence at all.

The context of the one is being slain or killed and the context for the other is were eating ...

To die or to eat are two different verbs and both of them are ungodly ... My further contention was expressed at your attempt to say that eating was done ... To jump to conclude that eating is not done now ... To make the final jump to therefore they have died ...

I say.

A) the phrase is not past perfect so we can't say it is done and dusted
B) as a result we can't conclude eating is not done now
C) we can also not conclude that eating IS being done, because there are other ways Allah (SWT) may choose to sustain life.
D) to say Isa (AS) has died from this is flawed ... And against the accepted opinion of the scholars. Who use the clear ahadith telling us that Isa (AS) ibn Maryam (AS) will return.

387

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

I will keep this reply very short.

Verse on Muhammad PBUH starts like this >> "And Muhammad is only a Messenger. Verily, Messengers have passed away before him'' 3-144

Verse on Isa a.s starts like this >> " The Messiah, son of Mary, was only a Messenger; surely, Messengers like unto him had indeed passed away before him"

Verse on Isa a.s have 2 parts to it. I've stated one. The part of eating is for Christians. For they believe God to have come in form of human. Jesus a.s ate along with his mother. Either they're both dead or both alive. Though, the first part of both the verses states prophets before him passed away, and so did Muhammad PBUH and Jesus a.s.

[QUOTE]
Also ... I have clearly said this verse with reference to eating is not in the past perfect tense ... It is past imperfect ... Which means that when the event was observed the act was being done ... But there is no information on whether it has stopped being done. In the other thread you rightly called it maadi istimrari ... But you wrongly described what istimrari means.

You can't have something that is 'continuous' and yet 'completed' at the same time and that is what you have said in the other thread.
[/QUOTE]

Yes, you can have an act being done continuously in the past and then the act can never happen again. Because something used to happen in past does not in any way mean it still happens.

[QUOTE]
Qad Khalat in both verses does not provide any meaning of death to either the prophet Muhammad (SAW) nor does it do so for prophet Isa (AS) either ... In both cases it is there to ask people to look at past examples of prophets that have come and gone ...
[/QUOTE]

Qad khalat in both verses is pointing to the prophets who 'died' yes, died before them. You're unnecessarily and purposely taking the literal meaning of that term to mean 'come and gone' and leaving it at that, without further stating what 'come and gone' means to you.

Muhammad PBUH was a messenger. Messengers have passed away before him. Does it mean Messengers have passed away before him, but Muhammad pbuh did not pass away ? We do know messengers have passed away before him (including isa a.s), and so did Muhammad PBUH.

Remember the example i gave way before.. "Henry is just a human. Humans tend to make mistakes" You are taking the meaning as "Since henry is a human , humans make mistake but Henry cannot make mistake " Which is obviously wrong.

Likewise, Isa a.s was just a messengers, and messengers like him have passed away. Does it mean Jesus a.s has not ? What more clear proof do you need ?

[QUOTE]
You have asked a secondary question about ... How they have gone ... And this is a mixed bag ... Besides completely irrelevant because it does not bear on the clause of the sentence at all.

The context of the one is being slain or killed and the context for the other is were eating ...
[/QUOTE]

The question of how you are taking 'come and gone' is very much relevant. You cannot just run away after saying this. Context of one is being slain and killed, glad you admitted. Lets talk about that verse .. Prophets before Muhammad PBUH have passed away in a way that some were killed and some died a natural death. Jesus a.s was just before Muhammad PBUH. There is no way you can find any other way of passing away when it comes to talking about prophets.

Context for the other verse has eating as an example. That is the 2nd part of that verse. First part is in which Jesus a.s is included in prophets who passed away.

[QUOTE]
To die or to eat are two different verbs and both of them are ungodly ... My further contention was expressed at your attempt to say that eating was done ... To jump to conclude that eating is not done now ... To make the final jump to therefore they have died ...

I say.

A) the phrase is not past perfect so we can't say it is done and dusted
B) as a result we can't conclude eating is not done now
C) we can also not conclude that eating IS being done, because there are other ways Allah (SWT) may choose to sustain life.
D) to say Isa (AS) has died from this is flawed ... And against the accepted opinion of the scholars. Who use the clear ahadith telling us that Isa (AS) ibn Maryam (AS) will return.
[/QUOTE]

To die or to eat are both ungodly. Ok fair enough. You are using the exact two qualities on Jesus a.s. He has not died and he does not eat. Therefore, upgrading his status to that of God or the like of God nauzubillah.

A) if eating alone was the only example that Allah needed to give, then He could have said he a.s eats food. But we see a past tense being used. Something that he used to do along with his mother. Strange ?

C) To answer your point C, ill quote 2 verses from Qur'an.

[QUOTE]
[21:7] And We sent none as Messengers before thee but men to whom We sent revelations. So ask the people of the Reminder, if you know not.
[21:8] And We did not give them bodies that ate no food, nor were they to live for ever.

[/QUOTE]

All messengers were men(humans).
Their body required food.

To say Allah may choose to sustain life in other ways goes against clear teaching of the above verses. If the prophet does "NOT" require food to survive, we conclude that :
1) He a.s is not a human

2) He a.s is not a messenger
3) If he a.s is sustained in some other way, then he can be anything except for a messenger and a human, nauzubillah.

PS: reply got long. I apologize.

388

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

[QUOTE]

D) to say Isa (AS) has died from this is flawed ... And against the accepted opinion of the scholars. Who use the clear ahadith telling us that Isa (AS) ibn Maryam (AS) will return.

[/QUOTE]

The fact that Isa (as) has died and that it is evident from the subject verse has been highlighted enough. you are simply beating about the bush. btw, which scholars are you following. Imam Malik (ra)' s was of the view that Jesus(as) indeed has died. As per my knowledge, other three imams remained silent on this issue and didn't comment against Imam Malik(as)'s verdict. If you have something in this regard then please bring it in. Imam ibn hazm(ra) was also of the similar opinion.

389

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

:hehe: Mr.Popat

Man your logic skills are so poor …

Let’s entertain your logical construct:

Henry is a human. {} Humans make mistakes - therefore >>> Henry makes mistakes

This is what you are saying … but this is logically flawed. It will only be true if you put the word ALL in the position of those curly brackets.

**Qad Khalat

**1) In both verses it does not say all prophets … it ask us to entertain examples from the group of prophets that have come and gone.

  1. In the verses the context is not regarding the death of those who passed before them but it is setting an appeal to look at previous prophets examples.

  2. The parts that tell us how we are to consider the prophets that have come and gone are different in both verses …

Slain or killed in one verse
To eat in the other verse

Regarding your statement that I have highlighted in blue - yes there is another way … Ascension/Translation - The prophets have left by this mechanism as well. Isa (AS) was one of them. This adds to the reason why “Qad Khalat” has been used and not “mawt”

Regarding your statement that I have highlighted in green - you cannot say this because as stated in 1) above in this reply it does not say ALL and hence Isa (AS) can be excluded from this example - rather Isa (AS) should be excluded from this example because he did not die not was he slain (AS).

Regarding the attribute of death - It is not that to be alive that is Godly and to be dead is ungodly - but rather to be able to die that is an attribute of creation and for death to be impossible to be the Attribute of God.

So it is irrelevant that Isa (AS) is alive - the fact that we believe **he (AS) can die and will die **removes any blame from us - that you so desperately want to pin on us.

So it is also irrelevant that Isa (AS) is eating or had eaten in the past - the fact that we believe **he ate - **removes any blame that you want to pin on us of him in any way being godly for not eating now … No … God never eats … So please get it right.

Conclusion: This verse does not prove Isa (AS) has died to say so is not only wishful thinking - but self-deluding.

390

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

Peace kchughtai

Imam Malik (R) believed Isa (AS) has died? I have not heard of such a thing … may be you are right … (the fact is we follow the majority opinion, but for academic reasons I need more than this) … I checked up where you got this from …

I found a reference in your articles referring to a book written by a Shi’a scholar

***Majma Biharul Anwar (1694 AD) - by Mulla Muhammad Baqir

Now I need to check this book to see where and how this scholar gets the idea you are portraying - given that your article has correctly cited this too.

Can anyone give me a link to a copy of this book?

:hehe: This link says that Imam Malik wrote this book !!! :eek:

Claims of the Promised Messiah

391

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

You did not even acknowledge the ahadith; and of course we know the reason why.

MGAQ ibn Chiragh Bibi has rejected these ahadith and thrown them into waste bin the ahadith as they were not in line with his ‘ so called wahi’.

To my previous post:

You answered thus:

1) Yes Hz. Isa Ibn Maryum (as) ate food while on Earth like all mortals do. How do you know he is not eating now?
You are relying on and hiding behind the false ‘wahi’ on Mr. MGAQ ibn Chiragh Bibi. And you ‘other’ logic is flawed as pointed out by brother psyah.

God has revealed to me in this special inspiration that Maseeh Ibne Marym (Jesus) is dead - *(Tauzeeh-e-maram, Roohany Khazaaen, vol.3 p.402*)

I have been informed about the grave of Jesus (in Kashmir). And I have been informed by holy Quran and God’s revelation to me about the death of Jesus – **Roohany Khazaen, vol. 18, p 358, 361**

This false claim was just to get Hz. Isa Ibn Maryum (as) out of the way to lay claim to the vacancy thus ‘created’.

2) You are wrong! Allah (swt) says in Quran that He raised Hz. Isa Ibn Maryum (as) up to Himself.

3) No Evidence? I had given you ahadtih – which back up the ayah of the Noble Quran.

*Ibn Abbas said, "When Allah intended to raise 'Eisa to the heavens, he went to his companions ... and 'Eisa ascended to the Heavens through an opening in the top of the house."
(Ibn Abi Hatim 4/431 Hadith 6266, Ibn Kathir 2/449. Ibn Kathir graded it Sahih)

It is narrated from Ummul Momineen Safiya, may Allah be pleased with her, that when she visited Bait Al-Maqdis (i.e. Jerusalem) and finished prayers in Al-Aqsa Mosque she climbed up to Mt. Olives and prayed there as well and said: ‘This is the mountain from where 'Eisa, may Allah bless him, was raised up to the Heavens.’ (Al-Tasrih bima Tawatar fi Nuzul Al-Masih Hadith 74 cf. Tafsir Fath Al-Aziz Surah 95)*

Note: Ummul Momineen Safiya, may Allah be pleased with her is blessed Prophet's (saw) wife!!

4) That’s just your assumption! Islamic beliefs are such that Hz. Isa Ibn Maryum (as) is alive in Heaven ‘body and soul’ and will descend when Allah (swt) Wills to accomplish the mission prearranged for him. And when he dies he will be buried in Madinah next to the Prophet (saw).

392

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

I am stating a fact and Muslims do not need to hide behind false beliefs or prophets to ‘protect’ their beliefs.

I know that you didn’t say He cannot, I’ll vouch for that. But then in the same breath you are putting limits and conditions on Allah Almighty that He won’t do it.

So your mantra is as follow: He (swt) can do what He wishes but He won’t because His laws are Absolute.

The thing you need to understand is that Allah Almighty imposed rules on His Creation when creating it; He is the Lord Absolute, He is accountable to no one and He Will account everyone.

There are no conditions or ‘laws’ binding Him to anything.

*"Originator (is He) of the heavens and the earth; and when He decrees a matter to be, He only says to it ' Be' and it is." Noble Quran 2:117.

When He has decreed something, He says to it only: "BE!" and it is. [Noble Quran 3:47]

Verily! Our Word unto a thing when We intend it, is only that We say unto it: "BE!" and it is. [Noble Quran 16:40]

When He decrees a thing, He only says to it, "BE!" and it is. [Noble Quran 19:35]

Verily, His Command, when He intends a thing, is only that He says to it, "BE!" and it is! [Noble Quran 36:82]

He it is Who gives life and causes death. And when He decides upon a thing He says to it only: "BE!" and it is.
[Noble Quran 40:68]*

The ayahs above clearly show that Allah Almighty is free of any conditions.

You are putting conditions on Allah Almighty to fit in with your Cult’s beliefs.

You are talking about Sunnat of Allah Almighty – Allah Almighty’s way of dealing with issues.

You are consistent in saying that “Allah Almighty doesn’t change His Ways”, I am quoting nearing all the relevant ayahs below,

Please read them in the context they are revealed and then try to interpret them within that context and explain your point.

So far you are interpreting them out of context.

no change can there be in the words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme felicity. 10:64]

thou wilt find no change in Our ways. 17:77]

There can be no difficulty to the Prophet in what Allah has indicated to him as a duty. It was the practice (approved) of Allah amongst those of old that have passed away. And the command of Allah is a decree determined. (33:38)

No change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of Allah. 33:62]

no change wilt thou find in the practice (approved) of Allah. 48:23]

How do explain miracles of Allah with your interpretation of the above ayahs?

393

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

In his various books, MGAQ ibn Chiragh Bibi, had given three different locations for the Grave of Jesus. Which one is correct?

“ Jesus AS buried in Al-Khaleeli (Gulailee).

In 1891 Mirza wrote a huge volume, Izala Auham, which ran up to 948 pages. In the second volume of this book, he wrote a detailed, mind boggling explanation trying to prove that Jesus was not taken physically to heavens (as the Muslims believe), but that he was taken down from the cross, went to his native place, Al-Khalil, died and is buried there. He writes:

"This is true that Maseeh went to his native place, and died there, but this is not true that the same body which was buried, became alive again..... verse 3 chapter I of Acts is a testimony about the natural death of Jesus that took place in Al-Khaleeli. After this death, Maseeh was visible to his students as KASHF (vision) for 40 days." (Izala-e-Auham, Roohani Khazain vol.3 p.353-354)

Grave of Jesus in Quds

However, 3 years later, in 1894, Mirza changed his story. In his other book, Atmam-e-Hujjat (Roohani Khazain volume 8) he once again tried to prove that Eisa Ibne Maryam AS is dead. In an attempt to prove that, he gave the testimony of one of his rare Arab Disciple, Molvi Mohammed Al-Saeedi Trabilisi Al-Shaami. He wrote:

"This has to be admitted that Hazrat Eisa is also dead, and interestingly enough the grave of Hazrat Eisa is also in Syria and for further clarity, in the footnote, I include the testimony of My brother, My lover in Allah, Molvi Mohammad Al-Saeedi Trablisi. He is a resident of Tripoli, in the Country of Syria and in his area is the Grave of Hazrat Essa AS (Jesus). If you say that Grave is phoney, then you must provide the proof of this forgery, and prove that when this forgery took place. And in this event we will not be sure about the graves of any prophet and trust will be lost, and we will have to say that all those burial places are fake." (Atmam E Hujat, Page: 18-19, Roohani Khazain vol.8 p.296-297, dated 1894)

Letter of Molvi Mohammed Al-Saeedi Trabilisi:

"O Hazrat Maulana & My Imam. Assalamo alaikum wa rehmatullah wa barakaatohu. I pray that may Allah give you cure (I received this letter of Shaami Saheb during my illness) Whatever you have asked about the Grave of Eisa alaihe assalam and other events, thus I am writing to you in detail, and that is this: Hazrat Eisa alaih assalam was born in Bait-ul-Lehm and between Bait-ul-Lehm and Quds there is a distance of thirty miles and the Grave of Hazrat Eisa alaihe assalam is in the Country of Quds, and is present till now, and there is a Church built on it, and that church is the largest church of all churches, and inside it is the Grave of Hazrat Eisa and in the same church is the Grave of Maryam, the truthful. And both graves are separate." (Atmam-ul-Hujjat, Roohani Khazain vol.8 p.299)
That seems to settle the matter. As far as MGAQ ibn Charagh Bibi was concerned, Jesus was dead and his grave was in al-Quds.

Jesus' Grave in Kashmir:

However 8 years later, Mirza changed the story once again. Now he started propagating his new theory: Jesus is buried in Kashmir.

"It is proved with certainty that Essa AS (Jesus) migrated to Kashmir. After this Allah liberated him with his blessing and he kept on living there for a long time until he died and was included among the dead. And his burial place is still in the city of Srinagar (Tomb of Yus Asif)" (Al-Huda, 12 June 1902, Page 109)

"I have been informed about the grave of Eisa (in Kashmir)." (Roohani Khazain vol 18 p.358, 361)

"The grave of Jesus is in Kashmir." (Roohani Khazain vol 18 p. 320, Nuzool-e-Maseeh, printed in 1909, after the death of Mirza)”

So now we have three different statements of MGAQ ibn Charagh Bibi regarding the grave of Jesus.

My question to Ahmadis is which is the correct one? Al-Khalil or Quds or Kashmir?

You cannot have one body and three graves. :)

Muslims have authentic ahadith that Hz. Isa Ibn Maryam (as)will be buried in Madinah next to Prophet Muhammad (saw)!

394

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

“Mullah version of Islam” is following:

  1. The Noble Quran

  2. The Prophet Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (saw)

  3. Ijmah of The Companions of the Prophet (saw) (May Allah be pleased with all)

  4. Qiyas and Ijtehad

And diligently keeping away from false prophets!

Muslims are not in great confusion; it’s MGAQ ibn Chiragh Bibi who is confused as he has one dead body and three graves and claiming to be man of God?

I beg your pardon, yes you did not make that claim as such but as all Ahmadis tend to throw the word ‘Rationality’ around a lot I assumed that like all Ahmadis you too followed that trend.

Below I am quoting your eminent leader of recent past (Mirza Tahir to be precise)

*The Quran manifestly acknowledges the role of rationality for the attainment of truth without drawing any separating line between religious or secular truths. Truth is the religion of Islam, Islam is the religion of Truth. The truth requires no compulsion for the transmission of its message, the only instrument it needs is rationality.
*
Divine Revelation and Rationality

I think everyone here has taken a note that you gave the following a miss.

Care to explain the above - Don’t tell me it is Kashf or something like that!

The above may seem to be irrelevant to the topic at hand but trust me later on it will be.

And your reply to the ‘Red Ink’ incident in below par – I’ll take it up later, that’s a promise.

395

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

Before you laugh, let me tell you this is not my source and it is actually the first time I got to know this site and when I visited this site, here is what is written over there

Hadhrat Imam Malik - ***The writer of the book ‘Majmaul Bihar’ said although many people say that Hadhrat Isa did not die, Hadhrat Imam Malik used to say that Hadhrat Isa has passed away. (Majmaul Bihar, Vol 1, P286)

Tell me where does it say that it was written by Imam Malik. It is pretty evident from the above statement that someone else wrote this book. I think you are in too much hurry to reply. :slight_smile:

Also Bihar-ul-Anwar is not the only reference in this regard. I will get back to you on this soon

396

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

Yes please ... get back to me ... and you are right about the author ... pity the name of the author was not mentioned ... but yeah please get back to me about Imam Malik and how you know he said what he said regarding Isa (AS) ...

397

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

In the following video, a number of references are mentioned where Imam Malik’s point of view has been mentioned. you can view it all or initial 10 mins or so for the topic at hand

398

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

[QUOTE]

**Qad Khalat

1) In both verses it does not say **all prophets ... it ask us to entertain examples from the group of prophets that have come and gone

[/QUOTE]

"Many Messengers have passed away" means that "some" of them have not passed away. For example, out of 100 Messengers, many may mean 40, 50, 60 or 70. If this is the case what about others who have not passed away? Where are those Messengers: on earth or in the heavens? What is going to be their fate? Are all of them coming back to earth if they are in the heavens? Do not forget that you believe in physical ascension of ONE and only ONE Messenger. Passing away of 99 out of 100 does not mean "MANY". It is presented as "ALL BUT ONE" and in Arabic it is said **"ILLA"

"Alif Laam" used with the word "Al-Rusul" is of the same kind as used with "Al-Nabieen" in the words "Khatam-an-Nabieen". If Al-Rusul in "Qad Khalat min qablehi al-rusul" can mean "many Messengers before him have passed away" why can't it mean in the words "Khatam-an-Nabieen" Seal of many of the Prophets and not all of the Prophets?**

399

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

[QUOTE]

2) In the verses the context is not regarding the death of those who passed before them but it is setting an appeal to look at previous prophets examples.

[/QUOTE]

Mere bhai, yes verse present previous messengers as examples (with no exceptions mentioned whatsoever) to show that Muhammad(pbuh) is a messenger so what if he dies or gets slain (Please note that there was no chance of the holy prophet (pbuh) getting slain since he was pledged protection by Allah). If among the messenger, we have a messenger who came before him and is still alive or have passed other than dying or getting slain then providing open example of the messengers seems imperfect.
There is no chance of slipping in a third option of passing. Death is the only way messengers have passed from this world and it has been clearly mentioned in exposition of 'qad khalat'.

400

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

Peace kchughtai

Thanks for this video … I checked the first reference so far:

Ibn Atiya (Tafsir)

I actually found the very page that was being discussed:

tafser_ateiah

Use zoom buttons and scroll with mouse on screen

As you will see in this page:

The discussion relates various opinions … lots of decoration on why Isa (AS) will return and that he is alive:

Among them two definitions are: A prolonged sleep like state and the second is Qabz (to be grabbed) so these ideas that we are relating have been there from the start. Now the statement of “Malik” in Jaamiul Atbiya … “Isa died at the age of 33 years …” … I think it goes on to say that his body was taken, but he expresses this is a weak opinion.

What is clear is that the full page is testimony that the Isa (AS) is alive … Now regarding the opinion of Imam Malik - unless we see that reference we cannot ascertain what criteria was used by “Malik” - Was it Imam Malik? Other books need to be sourced to follow the chain back. This is where I am at the moment on this follow up.

I notice the people in the video discuss why it cannot be “sleep” … that it would mean he only went to “sleep” after 33 years and that does not make sense … but the counter to that is the type of sleep he may have entered in was “a special prolonged sleep” particular to him alone.

I find it amazing how you can look through a sea of opposing ideas and when you find one weak opinion it becomes your evidence and all else far more established gets rejected … Any way the first reference has not been traced back to Imam Malik yet … so need to carry on tracing.