What does Islam believe about Jesus' Ressurection? (crucified, pray, worship)

[Apple Pie]

Greetings anders,

Thanks for your comments…

Let's take an English sentence from a manual, describing machine maintenance: "Remove clogs from the line". Two "possible" interpretations, using dictionaries: 1) "Take away the wooden shoes from the (for example, chalked) line"; 2) "Clean the tube". Which one do you prefer?

Many words look the same (especially in Arabic written without vowels) but have different meanings. Very clear from this example is that you must choose the one which makes sense in the given context.

First of all, you must remember that the Classic Arabic (in which the Koran was written), is not the same as the Modern Arabic of today. Furthermore, the “original” Koran was not written with vowel markings. Hence, proper exegesis includes incorporating Lexical aids that focus on the ancient Koranic Arabic – not modern Arabic.

Proper exegesis of the scriptures requires not only comprehending the possible meanings of the word(s) under study (including roots, etc), but the surrounding text that it resides within, as well as how and where it may be used elsewhere in scripture.

I appreciate that you have already acknowledged the importance of context…however; you seem to have failed to put that into practice with your reply below…

You write "the root “salaba/saliba”, which means TO PUT TO DEATH BY CRUCIFIXION". Well, the root Saluba/Saliba means "to be or become hard, firm, solid, stiff or rigid, solidify, harden, set, stiffen". You confuse this root with the root Salaba. The noun Sulb in the ayah (hard, firm, solid, stiff, rigid, spinal column, backbone, loins) clearly comes from the first root as any first year student of Arabic can tell you; the word Salb (crucifixion) (not in the ayah) comes equally clearly from the second root. So, there is no ground whatsoever for your claim. You very clearly are wrong about the root.

Let’s examine it again with vowel markings…

يَخْرُجُ مِنْ بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَائِبِ

From 86:7…
صُّلْبِ = “ssulbi” = Backbone; Loins; Spine = from the root, SALABA



Compare to the other Koranic ayahs referencing Crucifixion…


From 4:157…
مَا صَلَبُوهُ = “ma salaboohu” = They did not cause death by crucification = from the root, SALABA


From 5:33…
يصلبوا = “yusallaboo” = They will crucify till death = from the root, SALABA


From 12:41…
فيصلب = “fayuslabu” = Will be crucified till death = from the root, SALABA



From 7:124, 20:71, 26:49 …

ولاصلبنكم = “walaosallibannakum” = I will surely crucify till death = from the root, SALABA


References:

The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an
Abdul Mannan Omar
p. 318

The Koran
Complete Dictionary & Literal Translation
Mohamed Ahmed
p. 71



As you can see for yourself, ALL the Crucifixion ayahs in the Koran have the same root “salaba”.

I have to wonder, first of all, why you failed to compare 86:7 to the other ayahs in the Koran that mention the same thing. Remember that proper exegesis includes examining where the word, or in this case, root, is used elsewhere in scripture.

Additionally, you have not even bothered to look at how it relates to the direct context of the ayahs that surround it in Sura 86…..why is that?

Furthermore, you have not referenced anything in your reply. All of this makes for a very weak position for the one that you hold…..does it not?


Thus, when you said:

The noun Sulb in the ayah (hard, firm, solid, stiff, rigid, spinal column, backbone, loins) clearly comes from the first root as any first year student of Arabic can tell you;

I have to agree. “Sulb” comes from the root “salaba”.

Furthermore, “salaba” clearly means to put to death by crucifixion – of which, is blatantly supported by ALL of the other Koranic Crucifixion ayahs.



Take care…

[anders]

Do you agree that bat, bit, bet are different words in English? If you do, you must agree that Salb and Sulb are different words. Sulb can't come from the root Salaba/Saliba, but must be a derivation from the different root Saluba, as is clearly seen from the vowels. (As you can see, I use capital S for the emphatic Saad, to distinguish it from the non-emphatic siin.)

You don't have to know a single word of Arabic to understand that of the two sentences "between the breastbone and the crucifixion" and "between the breastbone and the backbone", the first one is ridiculous in any context, and the second one is the only one that makes sense.

I have studied Classical Arabic and Modern Standard Arabic, so I am not influenced in any way by modern vernaculars. If you want references fo my statemens: I have for Arabic to English used the dictionary of Hans Wehr, which is the standard work used in universities all over the world. I also checked with al-Mawrid. To be entirely on the safe side, I back-translated using The Oxford English-Arabic Dictionary and one from the well-known German publishers Langenscheidt. As to my statements on vowels in nouns vs. verbs, the normal thing is that a fu'l noun stems from a fa'ula verb and that a fa'l noun corresponds to a fa'ala/fa'ila verb. That is too well known to need any reference.

You wrote "Furthermore, the “original” Koran was not written with vowel markings. Hence, proper exegesis includes incorporating Lexical aids that focus on the ancient Koranic Arabic – not modern Arabic." I hope that you don't mean that the vowel points may be wrong in the Qur'an as published today. I discuss the vowel that you yourself have quoted, and have used appropriate aids.

I agree with you that Salaba/Saliba means crucify, and that this is the meaning everwhere this root is used, but its corresponding noun is Salb, not the Sulb of the ayah. (Sulb is, according to my concordance, not ocurring anywhere else in the book.)

I repeat: there are two Sal-ba roots, and you have confused them.

[Apple Pie]

Greetings anders,

Thanks for your comments…

You don't have to know a single word of Arabic to understand that of the two sentences "between the breastbone and the crucifixion" and "between the breastbone and the backbone", the first one is ridiculous in any context, and the second one is the only one that makes sense.

With all due respect, we already both understand the rendering of the ayah. The point that is contested is the root of صُّلْبِ “ssulbi”.

I agree with you that Salaba/Saliba means crucify, and that this is the meaning everwhere this root is used, but its corresponding noun is Salb, not the Sulb of the ayah. (Sulb is, according to my concordance, not ocurring anywhere else in the book.)

I repeat: there are two Sal-ba roots, and you have confused them.

Sulb can't come from the root Salaba/Saliba, but must be a derivation from the different root Saluba, as is clearly seen from the vowels. (As you can see, I use capital S for the emphatic Saad, to distinguish it from the non-emphatic siin.)

I have already shown you that “sulb” originates from the root “salaba”.

Furthermore, you have already acknowledged that “salaba” means crucify.

This can be verified by anyone willing to take the time to look it up.

The only thing holding you back now appears to be your pride and religious convictions…am I right?

I have studied Classical Arabic and Modern Standard Arabic, so I am not influenced in any way by modern vernaculars. If you want references fo my statemens: I have for Arabic to English used the dictionary of Hans Wehr, which is the standard work used in universities all over the world. I also checked with al-Mawrid. To be entirely on the safe side, I back-translated using The Oxford English-Arabic Dictionary and one from the well-known German publishers Langenscheidt. As to my statements on vowels in nouns vs. verbs, the normal thing is that a fu'l noun stems from a fa'ula verb and that a fa'l noun corresponds to a fa'ala/fa'ila verb. That is too well known to need any reference.

Unfortunately, both Hans Wehr and Al-Mawarid are not dictionaries of the classical Arabic. They each are dictionaries of Modern Arabic – not the Arabic in which the Koran was written.

In addition, you have once again avoided referencing the points in which you are attempting to make other than in a passing manner…again, adding to the lack of weight of your position…

“The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an”, by Abdul Mannan Omar, which I frequently reference, is a Dictionary that integrates the most highly celebrated classical Arabic Lexicological works within its pages.

Here are some of the classical lexicons integrated into Omar’s work:

1) The Arabic English Lexicon, by E.W. Lane
2) Lisan al-Arab, by Jamal al-Din Abu al-Fadzl Muhmmad bin Mukarram bin Manzur
3) Al- Mufradat fi Gharib al-Quran, by Abdul Qasim al-Husain al-Raghib
4) Taj al-Arus min Jawahir al Qamub, by Muhammad al Murtadza Husaini

When studying the classic Arabic, it is prudent to use lexicography tailored to that which is being studied….is it not?



Since you are extremely reluctant to show the context of ayah 7 with its neighbor ayahs, I have taken the liberty to demonstrate how it is beyond any reasonable doubt that this Sura is referring to a Death by Crucifixion Event, followed by a Resurrection Event…

86:4 إِنْ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ لَمَّا عَلَيْهَا حَافِظٌ
In kullu nafsin lamma AAalayha hafithun

That truly all/everyone soul/spirit/punishment/blood to gather on it a protector/safe keeper.



86:5 فَلْيَنظُرْ الْإِنسَنُ مِمَّ خُلِقَ
Falyanthuri al-insanu mimma khuliqa

So the human/mankind has an intimate connection should expect/consecrate from that which he was created.



86:6 خُلِقَ مِنْ مَاءٍ دَافِقٍ
Khuliqa min ma-in dafiqin

He was created from water pouring/jetting/flowing forcefully.



86:7 يَخْرُجُ مِنْ بَيْنِ الصُّلْبِ وَالتَّرَائِبِ
Yakhruju min bayni alssulbi waalttara-ibi

He comes out/emerges/appears from between the backbone/loins/spine and the breast bone/rib bones.



86:8 إِنَّهُ عَلَى رَجْعِهِ لَقَادِرٌ
Innahu AAala rajAAihi laqadirun

When His (is) upon/near/above He returned/was brought back the one who has power over.



It should be very clear now, regarding the event(s) that are described by the Arabic…

I have to ask…..how could anyone miss it?


Take care…

[ray]

i was just wondering about islam and jesus

i think muhammad was right in saying therir is only one God. that, i think, was a major force in the right direction for those once pagan arabs
but i think he made some mistakes in his forming of islam
i mean, first of all with jesus. In the Quran, jesus is acknowledged to be the messiah, but he is relegated to normal prophet status. but, i was just thinking, isent this contrary to the bible?
i mean, doesnt the bible say that jesus was God's son, ofcourse not in the physical sense, but that prior to his coming on earth, he had been like an angel in heaven.

and the resurrection thing, like i was reading that the prophet daniel prophesised that mesiah the leader would be cut off in death.
so, i was just thinknig, do you really beleive that the quran could be right?

[ray]

just wondering about islam and jesus

i think muhammad was right in saying therir is only one God. that, i think, was a major force in the right direction for those once pagan arabs
but i think he made some mistakes in his forming of islam
i mean, first of all with jesus. In the Quran, jesus is acknowledged to be the messiah, but he is relegated to normal prophet status. but, i was just thinking, isent this contrary to the bible?
i mean, doesnt the bible say that jesus was God's son, ofcourse not in the physical sense, but that prior to his coming on earth, he had been like an angel in heaven.

and the resurrection thing, like i was reading that the prophet daniel prophesised that mesiah the leader would be cut off in death.
so, i was just thinknig, do you really beleive that the quran could be right?

[Paw]

Yes, I do. Did Jesus (pbuh) ever say, "I am God's Son"? No. Did he say "Worship God?" Yes. Why didn't he just simply say "Worship me"? Because you should not worship him. He is only a Prophet. And he is not an angel.

and the resurrection thing, like i was reading that the prophet daniel prophesised that mesiah the leader would be cut off in death.

I don't really understand that. Could you say it again? Sorry.