How do Muslims understand Sura 61:6

As I fully accept the Quran as God’s Word I wish to explore this sura to find out more about it from knowledgeable Muslims.

How do Muslims explain to Christians about sura 61:6 and how do they understand it themselves? I.e. Where is Ahmad mentioned in the Gospel?

And when Jesus son of Mary said, “O children of Israel, I am God’s Messenger to you, confirming what is available of the Torah, and bringing good news of a messenger who will come after me, whose name is Ahmad.” But when he came to them with clear evidence, they said, “This is obvious magic.”(61:6)

Salam

It's the original translation of what is now translated as "comforter" (later this happened, before it was translated as "praised/thanked one") and I've made a thread about Shiite hadiths paralleling the Gospels. It can be said everything Isa (a) said about himself was to prepare for Mohammad (s) having same position.

And "Ahmad" is used here, to interpret what Mohammad (s) means.

Mohammad (S) is not just praised, but his name means he is praised to the degree that he lacks none. And Ahmad, is not just that Mohammad (s) is the most praised, it's that he is praised (Mohammad) without anything opposite to it, without any "neglect" of praise.

What does this mean?

It means Mohammad (s) never alters from the most praised utmost exalted way of acting.

Now Three of his successors also are named "Mohammad", and so share this utmost perfection.

And of course, if his family didn't, they would not be his family, as they would be worlds apart from him.

Mohammad (s) is far exalted above all exalted ones, when Adam (a) realized this, he wished to be of his station and have his endless authority. Iblis knew this, and so whispered deep inside him and then came outwardly and swore, that the God of Mohammad (s) is a false god that is just trying to keep him from reaching the highest rank, and that he the true God would want him to reach the exalted position and authority doesn't cease and for him and his wife to become King and Queen (malakayn) of the universe.

And the Torah talks about exalted ones and that Iblis tricked Adam (a) to be wanting to be of them, and a way to translate John about God's word is that the word was the exalted ones.

But Adam (a) was tricked through his love of proximity to God, he didn't hate Mohammad (s) and his family (a), he just wished to be of their rank but this envy was beneath Adam (a) and burn his protective barriers, and exposed a deep secret, that he was human, and humans are vulnerable, weak, and easily misguided.

But then he turned to God through tawasul of Mohammad (s) and his family (a), and God told him if he sought help from Mohammad (S) and his family (a) when faced with doubts, he would've been protected from falling.

Adam (a) was truthful in nature and his truthfulness was taken advantage of, but it was still beneath his station to do this. However, his repenting right away and never swerving after, showed he was of God's exalted and chosen, and benefited from Iblis' lies.

In the Torah, the exalted family is known by "Ali" and they are all exalted ones, and in the Gospels, both, and ultimately, said to be praised, and so with the name exalted, they are praised to the extent of being exalted above all others and also recall that three are mentioned:

Jesus (a) is not "Elijah"
Not "the Prophet"
But rather is the "The messiah" (anointed king who will rule from the offspring of David at the end times).

Link said:

Salam

It's the original translation of what is now translated as "comforter" (later this happened, before it was translated as "praised/thanked one") and I've made a thread about Shiite hadiths paralleling the Gospels. It can be said everything Isa (a) said about himself was to prepare for Mohammad (s) having same position.

And "Ahmad" is used here, to interpret what Mohammad (s) means.

Mohammad (S) is not just praised, but his name means he is praised to the degree that he lacks none. And Ahmad, is not just that Mohammad (s) is the most praised, it's that he is praised (Mohammad) without anything opposite to it, without any "neglect" of praise.

What does this mean?

It means Mohammad (s) never alters from the most praised utmost exalted way of acting.

Now Three of his successors also are named "Mohammad", and so share this utmost perfection.

And of course, if his family didn't, they would not be his family, as they would be worlds apart from him.

Mohammad (s) is far exalted above all exalted ones, when Adam (a) realized this, he wished to be of his station and have his endless authority. Iblis knew this, and so whispered deep inside him and then came outwardly and swore, that the God of Mohammad (s) is a false god that is just trying to keep him from reaching the highest rank, and that he the true God would want him to reach the exalted position and authority doesn't cease and for him and his wife to become King and Queen (malakayn) of the universe.

And the Torah talks about exalted ones and that Iblis tricked Adam (a) to be wanting to be of them, and a way to translate John about God's word is that the word was the exalted ones.

But Adam (a) was tricked through his love of proximity to God, he didn't hate Mohammad (s) and his family (a), he just wished to be of their rank but this envy was beneath Adam (a) and burn his protective barriers, and exposed a deep secret, that he was human, and humans are vulnerable, weak, and easily misguided.

But then he turned to God through tawasul of Mohammad (s) and his family (a), and God told him if he sought help from Mohammad (S) and his family (a) when faced with doubts, he would've been protected from falling.

Adam (a) was truthful in nature and his truthfulness was taken advantage of, but it was still beneath his station to do this. However, his repenting right away and never swerving after, showed he was of God's exalted and chosen, and benefited from Iblis' lies.

In the Torah, the exalted family is known by "Ali" and they are all exalted ones, and in the Gospels, both, and ultimately, said to be praised, and so with the name exalted, they are praised to the extent of being exalted above all others and also recall that three are mentioned:

Jesus (a) is not "Elijah"
Not "the Prophet"
But rather is the "The messiah" (anointed king who will rule from the offspring of David at the end times).

Click to expand...

Thanks Link. I remember when I was a child, that passage in the Bible was translated as Paraclete, then they changed it to comforter.

loverofhumanity said:

Thanks Link. I remember when I was a child, that passage in the Bible was translated as Paraclete, then they changed it to comforter.

Click to expand...

Salam

No problem. Another way Mohammad (s) is in the Bible, is to find him in the Torah but with noticing Tahreef to two concepts. This has to do with two verses which as to do with two concepts.

(1) Ahlulbayt of Ibrahim (a) concept, with Ismail (a) included and vindicating Ismail (a) and that Sarah (a) is the true mother of Ismail (a).

If you can vindicate that, you can see there is covenant through Ismail (a) that will anoint twelve princes (which means there is a King they inherit) from his offspring.

The verse about twelve sons of Ismail (a) is not that they are princes, but that God by his wisdom gave him twelve sons which mirror the number of twelve successors of Mohammad (s). This is for wise reasons.



(2) Ahlulbayt of Haroun (a) concept (related to the above) and the prayer of Musa (a) about the "the one who you will send" to relief the knot on the tongue of Musa

The wisdom is that Haroun (a) and his family (a) is a chosen Ahlulbayt (a) like Ibrahim's (a).

And part of that wisdom, is that Haroun (a) is the true successor and Dawood (a) and Isa (a) are from the offspring of Haroun (a).

God out of his wisdom chosen Ibrahim (a) to have Sarah (a) and put the chosen offspring in him, rather then Lut (a) although Lut (a) is part of the Ahlulbayt (a) of Ibrahim (a).

He chose Haroun (a) rather then Musa (a) out of wise reasons, to have his offspring be the covenant. Now whole sections of the Torah exist about Ahlulbayt (a) of Haroun (a) and in the "sea scrolls", you find that the covenant was taken with the "righteous" of Haroun's (a) offspring and so this was not all offspring.

The 180 that God does to Haroun (a) and his offspring (a) and that Mariam (a) Sister of Musa (a) and Haroun (a) got Haroun (a) to vie with Musa (a) about leadership, goes against Quran.

So we can say the story of how Haroun (a) died is against the Quran. And so Haroun (a) being older then Musa (a) is also against the norm of how God appoints leaders, he always makes the younger subordinate to the older, but this lie was to diminish Haroun (a) and his position.

And much of Quran is about not "distinguishing" between Prophets and Messengers, and so there is no Musa (a) is better and more important then Haroun (A) because is the initiator and Haroun (a) the successor. This is part of how Bani-Israel were misguided in disobeying Haroun (a). They belittled Haroun (a) and said we will obey Musa (a) when he comes back when they worshipped a statue calf because of a little a bit of magic in the way it moved.

Ibrahim - Sarah - Lut (nephew of Ibrahijm) - Ismail - Isaac - Yaqoub - Yusuf - other branches, are all holy and equally important in terms of belief.

This is why the concept of "Ahlulbayt" is important.

If this is understood, it can be easily seen, that an "Ahlulbayt" from the offspring of Ismail (a) will come, and Ahlulbayt (a) from offspring of Isaac (a) will come, two covenants.

But part of the change was to diminish this truth about Ahlulbayts in the Torah and Gospels and books between.

To do that, the metaphorically children of Jacob (a) were said to be all physically blood offspring of Jacob (a).

They were however, not only not all offspring of Jacob (a) per Quran in the normal sense of the word, but also not even all offspring of Nuh (a). Rather, they were offspring of the believers carried with Nuh (a). So we see that believers originating from all different type lineage were known as "children of Israel".

Why Israel (a) and not Yusuf (a)? Or someone else. Yusuf (a) was given government position and held in high regard by society before Musa (a) came. That can be seen in that they (enemies of God) said "there will be no Messenger after Yusuf", so this means Yusuf (a) message was changed and Pharaohs being "gods" or "incarnations" or "avatars" was linked to his message and his message hidden.

As attributing successors to Yusuf (a) would get them more "oppression", and claiming "following Yusuf" would get them contesting a Prophet that the Pharaoh and his society accepted, they probably settled for Yaqoub (a) and even went by a nickname given to him by God, that emphasizes really there is "a fighter/struggler of God" in every time, so this way kept their religion yet not overly fighting about controversy.

loverofhumanity said:

As I fully accept the Quran as God’s Word I wish to explore this sura to find out more about it from knowledgeable Muslims.

How do Muslims explain to Christians about sura 61:6 and how do they understand it themselves? I.e. Where is Ahmad mentioned in the Gospel?

And when Jesus son of Mary said, “O children of Israel, I am God’s Messenger to you, confirming what is available of the Torah, and bringing good news of a messenger who will come after me, whose name is Ahmad.” But when he came to them with clear evidence, they said, “This is obvious magic.”(61:6)

Click to expand...

Christian scholars interpreted references to the antichrist as referring to Muhammad.
The Islamic prophet Muhammad is not mentioned in the Bible.

KWED said:

Christian scholars interpreted references to the antichrist as referring to Muhammad.
The Islamic prophet Muhammad is not mentioned in the Bible.

Click to expand...

Jewish high priests and the most learned ones of their time interpreted Christ as an imposter so scholars aren’t a benchmark of accuracy. It’s just an opinion. I believe Christians have misinterpreted their scriptures and that Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible.

loverofhumanity said:

Jewish high priests and the most learned ones of their time interpreted Christ as an imposter so scholars aren’t a benchmark of accuracy. It’s just an opinion. I believe Christians have misinterpreted their scriptures and that Muhammad is mentioned in the Bible.

Click to expand...

So you believe that "learned scholars" can't be trusted to interpret ancient scripture - but you can be?

It's all just a game of "my opinion is bigger than yours!" really, isn't it.

KWED said:

So you believe that "learned scholars" can't be trusted to interpret ancient scripture - but you can be?

It's all just a game of "my opinion is bigger than yours!" really, isn't it.

Click to expand...

Not at all. I believe only the Prophets of God know the true meanings of the Holy Books such as Jesus, Muhammad and Baha’u’llah and so on not scholars.

loverofhumanity said:

Not at all. I believe only the Prophets of God know the true meanings of the Holy Books such as Jesus, Muhammad and Baha’u’llah and so on not scholars.

Click to expand...

1. On what do you base that opinion?
2. If they knew the true meaning, why didn't they tell us clearly and unequivocally? Why are their words so easily misinterpreted and often contradictory?

KWED said:

1. On what do you base that opinion?
2. If they knew the true meaning, why didn't they tell us clearly and unequivocally? Why are their words so easily misinterpreted and often contradictory?

Click to expand...

In all the Holy Books a future messiah or prophet is clearly and mentioned will appear. But the religious leaders reject them so the followers blindly follow their leaders.

When one turns to the Manifestation of God and not religious leaders then the truth is very easy to grasp. The reason the prophecies are written in symbolic language is to test the sincerity of the believers.

loverofhumanity said:

In all the Holy Books a future messiah or prophet is clearly and mentioned will appear. But the religious leaders reject them so the followers blindly follow their leaders.

Click to expand...

"Prophets" are "religious leaders".
So, why do you believe only certain religious leaders and not others?
And plenty of scholars accept the content of prophetic scripture, so your response makes no sense.

When one turns to the Manifestation of God and not religious leaders then the truth is very easy to grasp.

Click to expand...

Bahaullah was a religious leader who claimed to be speaking to god. So, why do you believe his claims?
And why do you think most people reject his claims if "the truth is very easy to grasp"?

The reason the prophecies are written in symbolic language is to test the sincerity of the believers.

Click to expand...

That makes no sense.
How does ambiguous and contradictory language "test sincerity"?
If a person has unknowingly misinterpreted scripture and then sincerely follows that flawed interpretation, sincerely believing to be the actual word of god, what has been "tested"?

KWED said:

"Prophets" are "religious leaders".
So, why do you believe only certain religious leaders and not others?
And plenty of scholars accept the content of prophetic scripture, so your response makes no sense.

Bahaullah was a religious leader who claimed to be speaking to god. So, why do you believe his claims?
And why do you think most people reject his claims if "the truth is very easy to grasp"?

That makes no sense.
How does ambiguous and contradictory language "test sincerity"?
If a person has unknowingly misinterpreted scripture and then sincerely follows that flawed interpretation, sincerely believing to be the actual word of god, what has been "tested"?

Click to expand...

In early Christianity and Islam also there were only a handful of believers but now their religions are accepted all over the world. The Baha’i Faith is not yet 200 years old so in time it too will become adopted worldwide. Most people in the early history rejected Christ, Muhammad, Buddha and all the Educators but eventually large numbers accepted Them.

Although outwardly They appeared as mortal men, They possessed a power not of this world which enabled them to transform both individuals and society. Great civilisations were born with kings and queens recognising Their wisdom and spiritual greatness. So too will it be with Baha’u’llah.

It is a precious gift to come under the shadow of These Great Beings but many are not ready for change so resist Them and turn away. If a person is sincere and pure hearted he/she we believe will be guided to the truth. That is the test, to be fair and just and not simply oppose for the sake of it. But to look humbly into the matter.

loverofhumanity said:

In early Christianity and Islam also there were only a handful of believers but now their religions are accepted all over the world. The Baha’i Faith is not yet 200 years old so in time it too will become adopted worldwide. Most people in the early history rejected Christ, Muhammad, Buddha and all the Educators but eventually large numbers accepted Them.

Click to expand...

You have a very poor understanding of history.
Christianity and Islam spread globally because of militaristic expansion and colonialist conversion.
Bahaism will never grow beyond cult status because it has no military or political power, and has little or no attraction for either sceptics or followers of other faiths.

Although outwardly They appeared as mortal men, They possessed a power not of this world which enabled them to transform both individuals and society. Great civilisations were born with kings and queens recognising Their wisdom and spiritual greatness. So too will it be with Baha’u’llah.

Click to expand...

Ghengis Khan, Napoleon, Hitler and Mao all transformed individuals and society on a scale far beyond anything that Bahaullah has or will ever accomplish. They were revered to a degree rivalling or surpassing the prophets. Are they also "not of this world"?

It is a precious gift to come under the shadow of These Great Beings but many are not ready for change so resist Them and turn away. If a person is sincere and pure hearted he/she we believe will be guided to the truth. That is the test, to be fair and just and not simply oppose for the sake of it. But to look humbly into the matter.

Click to expand...

Just more question begging and platitudes. Many people are genuinely fair and just, many sceptics are genuine and open-minded, but are not convinced by Bahaullah's derivative ramblings.

BTW, what is "just and fair" about homophobia, sexist discrimination and barbaric and disproportionate punishments?

KWED said:

You have a very poor understanding of history.
Christianity and Islam spread globally because of militaristic expansion and colonialist conversion.
Bahaism will never grow beyond cult status because it has no military or political power, and has little or no attraction for either sceptics or followers of other faiths.

Ghengis Khan, Napoleon, Hitler and Mao all transformed individuals and society on a scale far beyond anything that Bahaullah has or will ever accomplish. They were revered to a degree rivalling or surpassing the prophets. Are they also "not of this world"?

Just more question begging and platitudes. Many people are genuinely fair and just, many sceptics are genuine and open-minded, but are not convinced by Bahaullah's derivative ramblings.

BTW, what is "just and fair" about homophobia, sexist discrimination and barbaric and disproportionate punishments?

Click to expand...

The Prophets are still revered by billions. Their influence continues into the future thousands of years after Their passing. Only time will tell with regards to Baha’u’llah. So I wouldn’t be too hasty to make rash judgements about His Faith because it’s so young.

With regards homophobia and punishments what are you referring to? Are you referring to Hiroshima where the skin was melted off innocent people or the gassing of 6 million Jews? What crime were they punished for?

KWED said:

So you believe that "learned scholars" can't be trusted to interpret ancient scripture - but you can be?

It's all just a game of "my opinion is bigger than yours!" really, isn't it.

Click to expand...

I can understand theists worshiping their scholars and loving them as much as God. Because it's the best of both worlds approach, a way to deceive oneself about God and religion, while chasing the Dunya and vanities of it. It's a way to claim to know what God wants but not really care to know what really he truly taught with certainty. It's a lazy way to approach God but people who do it value their community, worldliness and life in general, more then God, so I understand why they do it.

Delegating your mind to others is easily understood by me because it's a way to avoiding seeking truth yourself because Dunya should take more time and knowing what God wants by effort is too much time, a headache, and too much effort.

However, I can't understand you. Why do you worship scholars and make their views an authority?

Link said:

I can understand theists worshiping their scholars and loving them as much as God. Because it's the best of both worlds approach, a way to deceive oneself about God and religion, while chasing the Dunya and vanities of it. It's a way to claim to know what God wants but not really care to know what really he truly taught with certainty. It's a lazy way to approach God but people who do it value their community, worldliness and life in general, more then God, so I understand why they do it.

Delegating your mind to others is easily understood by me because it's a way to avoiding seeking truth yourself because Dunya should take more time and knowing what God wants by effort is too much time, a headache, and too much effort.

However, I can't understand you. Why do you worship scholars and make their views an authority?

Click to expand...

Are you ok?

KWED said:

Are you ok?

Click to expand...

Yes thanks for asking.

loverofhumanity said:

Where is Ahmad mentioned in the Gospel?

Click to expand...

It is like Lilith. Lilith - Wikipedia