Isa is not Jesus, and Isa and Jesus are both a mystery !

[Awaal_Muslim]

If you read my post properly, all I am doing is saying that the same Arabic word occurs in two places, see http://corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?q=Hrb . Regarding Ethiopian, I actually quote from an academic book. So again, I ask you, why is the word Maida the same as used by the Ethiopians to refer to the Eucharist?

I find your tone to be rude and discourteous. How can you write like that and then wish me peace?
Actually, Solomon's temple was destroyed; Zachariah was praying in the rebuilt temple. There are probably hundreds of places called 'harb', but there is a well known story amongst Eastern Christians how Zachariah looked after Mary in the Temple. This story refers to this event, and everyone knew about it. If
Names from prior revelation are carried over phonetically and not according to meaning in order to ensure there is no question as to whom or what is being referred to, then surely the same stories serve the same intention, i.e. to enable identification!
Then why not translate it as 'white-eyed ones'? I am merely referring to what I have read, namely that it comes from the Ethiopic word to send, hence 'apostles'-'sent ones' in Greek.

And I don't remember mentioning the word Injil, although the Arabic language could have adopted it to mean 'good news' before Muhammad's arrival. Anyway, probably like 'Iblis', Greek shares some root words with Semetic languages.

The quotation naming David then Jesus is just for illustration. I also know of other verses in the Quran where the names of the prophets are in differing orders. I am relating it to the story of Zachariah living after Solmon (defended just above).
How can the names Isa and Esau be the same?
Isa is عيسى
Esau is عِيسُو‎

Esau ends in a Waw, like the Hebrew. I am angry about the way I am ridiculed for not knowing Arabic (when I merely consulted a Quranic dictionary), yet here two different names are said to be the same!!

Regarding the name Isa, again please read my post http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602327.msg321983#msg321983
Additionally, thinking about it, on icons the name Jesus is written in shorthand Greek as

~
IC

Which is in English letters

~
IS

Perhaps 'Isa' comes from this? It all depends on how Muhammad was referring to Jesus before the Quran was sent to him. Syriac influence? Ethiopic influence? Etc.
No one is twisting. Some things are symbolic, others not. We differ on whether sister of Aaron (etc) is symbolic or not.

Please, take time to consider your response, and write cordially.
Richard

Brother Salaam

Verily We have revealed the Book to thee in Truth, for mankind. He, then, that receives guidance benefits his own soul: but he that strays injures his own soul. Nor art thou set over them to dispose of their affairs. 39:41

The first House (of worship) appointed for mankind was that at Bakka: Full of blessing and of guidance for all kinds of beings: 3:96

Ramadhan is the (month) in which was sent down the Qur'an, as a guide to mankind, also clear (Signs) for guidance and judgment (Between right and wrong). 2:185

Mankind: Naas

If we reflect on the Ayats above it is quite simple to understand that Quran exists from day one as a for mankind.   Similarly the first house is for mankind is Kabba and the language of the Quran is Arabic because it is the most detailed and comprehensive language.  Now in the light of Quranic Ayats  your historical views have no credibility whatsoever. Also, I am wondering that you are not implying that Muhammad forged the Quran "Or do they say, "He forged it"? say: "Bring then a Sura like unto it, and call (to your aid) anyone you can besides Allah, if it be ye speak the truth!"10:38 I hope not.

We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur'an, in order that ye may learn wisdom. 12:2

And if We had made it a non-Arabic Qur'an, they would have said, "Why are its verses not explained in detail [in our language]? 41:44

Allah further confirms that there no other books before this before this book.
Say: "Do ye see what it is ye invoke besides Allah? Show me what it is they have created on earth, or have they a share in the heavens bring me a book (revealed) before this, or any remnant of knowledge (ye may have), if ye are telling the truth! 46:4

Peace

[Soittosondhani]

Quote from: https://quranguideblog.wordpress.com//?s=Mariam&search=Go

The relationship between man and Allah is obviously not a biological one such as biological father and his biological son but to mean ?everything? as mentioned with the phrase ?Al Rahman Al Raheem? (الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ) in the very beginning and so many other places in the Quran to make us understand that He is the only actual mother and father of everything. This is because everything emerges from Him and merges back in Him on return as He is the only Source of life, Creator, Producer and Owner of everything.  Quranic words ?ابن? (Ibn) and ?ابناء? (abna?) do not refer to ?son? or ?sons? but correctly means ?build?, ?made? and ?constituted?. Whereas, according to the linguistic rules the only word ?بن? (Bin) is used in the middle of two names to mean ?son?. Hence, the pashion of taking the word ?ابن? (Ibn), coming between two names, to mean ?son? has been invented and introduced by early Islam Persian Imams who have deliberately destroyed the correct understanding of the Quran by their false translation and fake literature.

Therefore, according to the linguistic rules the word ?ابن? (ibn) coming between ?عیسی? and ?مریم? in the Quranic phrase ?عیسیٰ ابن مریم? does not actually stand for ?Isa son of Mary? but correctly means ?Isa constitution of Miriam? or ?Miriam?s constitution Isa?. The Quran further clarifies the same thing by its phrases such as ?Isa Ruhu Allah? and ?Kalimatullah? to make us understand that Isa is actually Allah?s revelation, Allah?s words, Allah?s sprit constituted, made or build of  Miriam.  The phrase ?أَبْنَاءُ اللّهِ? of the verse 5:18 also refers to ?Allah?s made?, ?Allah?s build? or ?Allah?s constituted?

There are so many technical things without fully clarification and comprehension of which this subject is difficult to understand for those who learn the Quran by its fake translation or with the false exegesis of their scholars.

This is the reason why I write extensive articles with substantial details of Quranic words so that people can erase from their memory the false meaning of Arabic words of the Quran, which they have memorized from the fake literature of Islam and false dictionaries of the Quran.

Hence, as I have said in my earlier reply that it is not possible to make things clear in one go but we need a series of in depth research articles with substantial information, evidence and references so that people can digest them and understand the truth mentioned in the verses of the Quran.

Also, the translation of the whole Quran is not only wrong but complete false and totally misleading. Therefore, any question with the reference of the false translation will not be understood until we have complete word to word analysis and correct translation of relevant verses of the Quran, which require one full length independent research article for each and every verse of the Quran.

However, in the meantime please conduct some research on the words ?ابن? (ibn) and ?بن? (bin) as to where they are properly used in Arabic language, and in which shape they correctly come with someone?s name to take them to mean ?son? or ?daughter?. You also need to know if ?ابن? (ibn) means ?son? then what is the meaning of popular phrase ?ابن الوقت? (ibn al waqt)? Is it ?son of time??

Moreover, I always reiterate to correctly understand the Quran please read my each and every article and pay attention to the analysis and correct meaning of Quranic words and grammar mentioned in these articles so that you will be able to understand and correctly translate the Quran without taking any help from anyone.

Had you read my article ?CORRECT UNDERSTANDING OF QURANIC VERSES 11:77, 11:78 & 11:79 REGARDING THE NATION OF LUT? you would have understood the correct meaning of the word ?بَنَاتِي? (banati) which is falsely translated to mean ?daughters? of Prophet Lut. Whereas, the correct meaning of this Quranic word ?بَنَاتِي? (banati) is ?my constituted?. How can a sensible person hand over his daughters to the corrupt evils to have sex with them without their wishes of going with them?

The ignorant scholars and their blind followers who use ?تصریفِ آیات? (Tasreef-e-Ayat) to balance their lies invented in their translation they use ?بَنَاتِي? (banati) to mean Prophet Lut?s daughters, they don?t ponder upon their evil act of altering the statements of the Quran with their blind aim of taking the same meaning of Quranic words in each and every verse no matter if they clashed with the context. Hence, without taking into account any linguistic rule, the ?Tasrifi evils? translate Quranic words ?ابن?, ?بن?, ?بنات? and their derivatives to mean ?son? and ?daughter? throughout the Quran and fill the translation of the Quran with the pagan myths, false stories of stone-age and ancient polytheist beliefs and pagan rituals.

Actually, the founders of the religions have purposely muddled up the names of the revelations with the names of the prophets. The Quran rarely uses the names of the prophets but it normally and mostly uses the names of God?s revelations and most of them are adjectives of His revelations.

For example, the Quran mainly uses the word Isa (عیسیٰ) for God?s revelation conceived by Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) but in the translation of the Quran Prophet Moses and Aaron?s sister Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) was replaced with Virgin Mary of Christians and she was falsely made the mother of Jesus. If you carefully read the translation of Quranic verses 3:38 to 3:42 you will find for yourself how our liar scholars transferred the pregnancy of Zechariah?s wife to Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) and eventually in the translation of the further verse 3:45 they invented Virgin Mary and her son Jesus. In the mainstream translation of the verse 3:38 Zechariah is shown praying to have his offspring. In the translation of the next verse 3:39 the angels give him a good news of having a son. In the translation of the next verse 3:40 Zechariah is shown unconvinced or not believing in this and argues with His Lord as to how will he be having a son in his old age when his wife is also a barren woman, who cannot conceive a pregnancy. In the translation of the next verse 3:41 unconvinced Zechariah demands from his Lord to show him a sign as if he is really having a son and in the translation of the next verse 3:42 the angels give a news to Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) that she was chosen, and in the translation of the verse 3:45 the angels give the good news to Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) of having a son whose name will be Isa al Maseih (الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى).

Wonderful!?.. Zechariah wanted offspring, he was given a news of having a son, whose wife was not able to become pregnant being a barren woman, Zechariah himself was not able to become a father being an old man and as s token of sign Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) became pregnant and she had a son!

Curse on those evil liars who invented the above mentioned false story from the clear words of the Quran in which Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) conceives, retrieves, constructs or makes God?s revelation Isa al Maseih (الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى), which was the good news given by angels. If a blind layman looks at the words ?اللّهَ يُبَشِّرُكِ بِكَلِمَةٍ مِّنْهُ اسْمُهُ الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى? of the verse 3:45 he will correctly translate these words to mean: ?God gives you glad tidings with Word from Him its name will be Isa al Maseih? but in the fake translation the evils invented ?Jesus Christ? and made him a prophet and son of virgin Mary!

What is the meaning of the phrase ?بِكَلِمَةٍ? (bi kalimati hi)? Don?t the evil translators of the Quran know the correct meaning of Arabic word ?کلم? (KLM) and its derivatives such as ?کلام? (Kalam) and ?كَلِمَة? (Kalimah)? They are those who read ?كَلِمَة الشھادۃ? (kalimah ash shadah) when they convert someone into Islam they also read the same Kalimah when they take funeral to the graveyard, and they call ?کلام مجید? (Kalam Majeed) to the Quran or to ?God?s Communication?, to ?God?s words? and to ?God?s Revelation?. They also know the Kalam (کلام) of so an so poet or so and so author but they forgot to correctly translate the same word Kalimah in the phrase ?بِكَلِمَةٍ? of the above verse 3:45. The forthcoming verse 3:49 ?وَرَسُولاً إِلَى بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ? confirms that it is a message sent towards Bani Israil. The word ?رَسُولاً? (Rasoolan) is a product of ?رسل? to mean messaging, sending consignment, delivery and courier.

If Isa or Jesus was a Prophet then according to the following verse of the Quran all people of the book including Muslims must take him as their prophet instead of Muhammad and Muslims should also be called the followers of Jesus. However, if you correctly take the words ?وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَلَمْ يُفَرِّقُواْ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ? of the verse 4:152 to correctly mean: ?and those who adhere with/comply with/take oath with Allah and His sent message they don?t make difference/cut off/take away any of them? in which ?رُسُلِهِ? (rusulihi) is not prophet or their plural (prophets) but the product of ?رسل? (RSL) + ?هِ? (hi) a third person singular objective pronoun of Allah to mean ?His?. Hence, ?رُسُلِهِ? (rusulihi) correctly means ?His sent message?. There is nothing plural in the phrase ?رُسُلِهِ? (rusulihi) but the liar translators falsely took it as a plural word and invented prophets from the singular phrase ?رُسُلِهِ? (rusulihi).

In the next verse 4:153: ?يَسْأَلُكَ أَهْلُ الْكِتَابِ أَن تُنَزِّلَ عَلَيْهِمْ كِتَابًا? question about revealing or bringing down a book itself telling us that it is not the context of the prophets but the context of revelation or bringing down a book, which is also being clarified with the phrase ?رُسُلِهِ? (rusulihi) of the earlier verse 4:152 that does not say ?His prophets? but ?a compilation? or ?a product of His sent message?. The next verse 4:154 is talking about their covenant (بِمِيثَاقِهِمْ) which is again a compliance of the statement of the above verse 4:152 about taking oath, obeying or complying with God and His sent message (آمَنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ). The next verse 4:155 again talks about the compliance of their oath (مِّيثَاقَهُمْ) and declared them ungrateful rejecters who reject Allah?s verses (وَكُفْرِهِم بَآيَاتِ اللّهِ). The further words ?وَقَتْلِهِمُ الْأَنْبِيَاءَ بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ وَقَوْلِهِمْ? of the same verse 4:155 refer to the forthcoming incident mentioned in the next verse 4:156 in which Prophetess Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) was accused of having a child without a legal father. Hence, the words ?وَبِكُفْرِهِمْ وَقَوْلِهِمْ عَلَى مَرْيَمَ بُهْتَانًا عَظِيمًا? of the verse 4:156 correctly means: ?and with their rejection and their taunting on Miriam a severe accusation? (word to word correct translation of Quranic verse 4:156) make it clear that the statement ?وَقَتْلِهِمُ الْأَنْبِيَاءَ بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ وَقَوْلِهِمْ? of the previous verse 4:155 counts Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) among Prophets and their dilution, attenuation, making them low or degrading of the prophets (وَقَتْلِهِمُ الْأَنْبِيَاءَ) and taunting or criticising them (وَقَوْلِهِمْ) is not right (بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ). So, the words ?وَقَتْلِهِمُ الْأَنْبِيَاءَ بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ وَقَوْلِهِمْ? of the verse 4:155 correctly means: ?and their degrading of the prophets and their criticism not right? directly refer to their insulting or degrading remark or talk on the severe accusation on Miriam. This verse 4:155 of the Quran not only tells us the true history that Miriam (מִרְיָם/مریم) did not have a child without father but she was accused and Isa (عیسیٰ) which was actually God?s sent message (proven from the above explained context) was rejected by them and they falsely turned it into Miriam?s child Isa (عیسیٰ) born without having his father. Therefore, in the above context the Quran itself reveals and explains how sent message of God or God?s revelation Isa (عیسیٰ) or Isa al Maseih (الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى) was falsely made son of Virgin Mary and how this false belief was established and made viral.

The verse 4:177 urges all people of the book including Muslims as they are also counted among the people of the book: ?لاَ تَغْلُواْ فِي دِينِكُمْ وَلاَ تَقُولُواْ عَلَى اللّهِ? do not yield in your religion and do not press lie on God ?لاَّ الْحَقِّ إِنَّمَا? except the right which is that ?الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولُ اللّهِ? The Masheih (observation/thought/retrieval/discovery) Isa constructed by Miriam is sent message of God ?وَكَلِمَتُهُ? and His word ?أَلْقَاهَا إِلَى مَرْيَمَ? revealed/ diction/ thrown/delivered it to Miriam ?وَرُوحٌ مِّنْهُ فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ? and spirit of its is to be complied with/to be obeyed/to be adhered with God and His sent message ?وَلاَ تَقُولُواْ ثَلاَثَةٌ انتَهُواْ? and don?t say/invent three gods.

I would like to draw your attention towards the feminine singular pronoun ?هَا? (ha) in the phrase ?أَلْقَاهَا? (alqa ha), i.e. هَا (ha) + أَلْقَا (alqa) = أَلْقَاهَا (alqa ha) in which ?أَلْقَا? (alqa) is a popular word used to mean idea, thought, imagination or anything that comes to someone?s mind or feeling coming in someone?s heart. You might have heard this word ?أَلْقَا? (alqa) is usually used by poets when poetry arrives on them or when poetic thoughts come in their mind, which is also called ?آمد? (aamad), i.e. ?arrival? or ?coming? in Urdu and Persian literature. Whereas, the feminine singular pronoun ?هَا? (ha) in the phrase ?أَلْقَاهَا? (alqa ha) cannot be a pronoun of such a high profiled masculine prophet Isa or Jesus who was supposed to be a man! Hence, the formation of the words of the above verse 4:171 itself discard the lie invented by the liar translators of the Quran, who falsely brought in the translation a man Isa or Jesus by using the feminine pronoun ?هَا? (ha) which has been correctly used as a pronoun of revelation which is feminine. This is the reason why Satan Quranists falsely claim that the Quran was not written according to the grammar and no grammar was used in the Quran so that they can invent in the translation of the Quran whatever they want to spread in the name of the Quran. They should learn Arabic before holding their Quran teaching sessions and stop misguiding innocent people in the name of ?Quran Only? teaching.

Anyway, the word to word correct translation of the above verse 4:171 does not consider that Isa al Maseih or Jesus Christ was a man or human being but God?s revelation constructed or retrieved by Merriam which was reconfirmed by Quranic phrase ?أَلْقَاهَا إِلَى مَرْيَمَ? to correctly mean: arrived, revealed, delivered it to Merriam or its revelation or arrival towards Merriam. Hence, those who are keen to know how revelations used to come to the prophets they should understand the correct statement of the above verse of the Quran in which prophets used to construct or retrieve the words of God. However, in some cases the names of Prophets and their revelation are same just as Newton and Newton?s theory in which the unit of force is also called Newton or someone?s invention or theory is given the name of its retriever or discoverer.

Moreover, the clause ?وَلاَ تَقُولُواْ ثَلاَثَةٌ انتَهُواْ? and don?t say/invent three gods of the same verse 4:171 depicts that the purpose of inventing Isa al Maseih or Jesus Christ was to worship a man making him god along with his mother who was also declared as a god along with the God. Whereas, the word ?انتَهُواْ? is coming from Hebrew title of God ?YHWH? or ?Ya Huwa? which is also called ?JEHOVAH? in Christianity in which ?Ya? or ?Je? is not a part of God?s title ?Hu?, ?Huwa? or ?Huva?.

Hence, this is another false assumption of the Quranists that the issue of father of Isa or Jesus was not there when the Quran was revealed otherwise the Quran would have clearly said that Isa or Jesus had a father. In fact according to the above verses the issue of Virgin Mary and birth of Isa or Jesus without having father was already there when the Quran was revealed. This is the reason why Quran has made it clear and dealt with this falsification very well in which the Quran states that Isa was a revelation of God constructed by Merriam but the inventors of the theory of 3 gods made Merriam?s revelation Isa or Jesus a man and then turned it into a third god together with its founder Merriam who was falsely made a virgin mother of Isa or Jesus.

Therefore, any argument whether Isa or Jesus had father or born without having father is complete rubbish and non-Quranic. So, those who take up this issue in the favour of their false idea that Isa or Jesus was having father and also those who falsely argue that Isa or Jesus was born without having father they must learn the Quran with open eyes and stop spreading non-Quranic false beliefs. They should follow the words of the Quran instead of following the fake translations of their scholars.  Also, the clause ?وَرُوحٌ مِّنْهُ فَآمِنُواْ بِاللّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ? of the same verse 4:171 correctly means: ?and spirit of its is to be complied with/to be obeyed/to be adhered with God and His sent message? urges us to obey God and His sent Message, in which ?رُسُلِهِ? (Rusuli hi) is not any human being or prophet but ?sent message of God? which was on purpose replaced with man (prophet) to obey man instead of God?s message.

The words ?ذَلِكَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ قَوْلَ الْحَقِّ الَّذِي فِيهِ يَمْتَرُونَ? of Quranic verse 19:34: are also in front of us in which ?عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ?, i.e. Isa construction of Merriam is called ?قَوْلَ الْحَقِّ?, i.e. the true statement. How a man can be a statement???

Hence, the verse 19:34: ?ذَلِكَ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ قَوْلَ الْحَقِّ الَّذِي فِيهِ يَمْتَرُونَ? correctly means: ?that Isa construction of Merriam is a true statement in which they dispute?.

The reason of this never ending dispute is that we don?t follow the words of the Quran against our false beliefs.

To prove that Isa was a man the traditionalists invented that Isa was taken up in the heaven without giving him a death and he will be buried right next to Prophet Muhammad in Madina where the place of his grave is already reserved. They follow Ibni Kathir who states that Isa?s demise will take place in Madina, where his Janazah (Burial) Salaat will be performed. He will then be buried beside the holy prophet Muhammad. They also take Imam Tirmizi?s narration in which Trimizi narrates from Abdullah Ibn Salaam, that he said the character of the prophet Muhammad and the fact pertaining to Isa?s burial beside him, was written in the Torah.

Ahmadis, i.e. the followers of Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani have invented Isa?s grave in the locality of Khanyar of the town Srinagar of Indian occupied Kashmir and following the Ahmadis the Quranists (Ahle Quran/Quran Only) also identified Isa?s grave, which is ridiculous. To prove their falsification with their usual style of saying ?this and that? and ?it means this and it means that? they say Isa was not taken up but surely died because Isa used to eat and drink that?s why tasting death was necessary for him.

Where are the clear words of the Quran in which Quran confirms Isa?s death and his burial???

Hence, ?this and that? will not be acceptable anymore and there is no meaning of ?it means this and it means that? we need clear wording from the Quran without any dishonest word engineering as according to the traditional date of revelation of the Quran it was revealed quite after the time of traditional prophet Isa or Jesus. Therefore, the Quran should contain the clear information about the death of Isa or Jesus if he was a human being.

Therefore, it is true that Quran does not mention Mary nor does the Quran talk about her so called virginity. However, our stupid scholars and their nonsense followers have been fighting with each other on the question of Isa?s father!

Traditionalists believe that Isa was born without his father whereas the ?Quran Only?, Quranists or Ahle Quran put their lies together to prove that Isa had a father.

Likewise, Quranic words ?مسیح? (Messih) and ?مسیحا? (Messiah) are adjectives as well as the names of God?s books but they were replaced with persons (human beings) and named them prophets out of which they brought one human in the shape of Jesus or Isa al Maseih and opened the door for another humen ?مسیح? (Messih) to come. This is the reason why Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani took a chance and declared himself the ?مسیح? (Messih), who was supposed to come in the world again, near the end of the world! Interestingly, this fake ?مسیح? (Messih) has ended but the world did not end so who will come next, before ending the world is another interesting question!

Whereas, according to the Quran ?مسیح? (Messih) is the title of God?s revelation as we have seen in the analysis of the above verses of the Quran and in my articles on Ablution (وضوء). Hence, if the same ?مسیح? (Messih) will have to come again it will not be any man but God?s next revelation. However, to keep running their perversion and falsification our Satan clergy have closed the door of God?s revelations. This is because they want us to follow the same filth which they follow and gave us the same filth of their filthy pagan beliefs. I have already challenged the whole world to show me any single verse of the Quran in which Allah has ever said that His revelation has been stopped or no more revelation will come to the world again but so far no one turned up with any clear reference of the Quran regarding this issue. Some Quranist friends tried to convince me by saying ?it means this and it means that? but they did not have any clear proof from the Quran except repeating the same crap views of their founder Quranist scholars that man has grown up and he does not need anymore guidance in the shape of any new revelation etc.

In fact revelation has been called ?Rasool? (رسول) in the Quran which is a Divine certification of a true Prophet of God. So, whoever has claimed to be a Prophet without having his own ?Rasool? (رسول), i.e. without his retrieved or constructed message of Nature he is a false liar.  This is because ?Rasool? (رسول) and Prophet are integral parts of each other. No prophet can be without his ?Rasool? (رسول) and no ?Rasool? (رسول) is revealed without its Retriever or constructing Prophet, and obeying ?Rasool? (رسول), i.e. ?His message? is obeying God but we are not urged to follow any human being in any shape, no matter who is he. To hide this Quranic order the evils have replaced ?Rasool? (رسول) with Prophet and removed the hurdle of worship of men, which is a severe form of idolatry and paganism.

Therefore, the Quran was translated by such perverted evils who have concealed its actual message and gave us the fake beliefs and filth of polytheist paganism, which we have been carrying in the name of Islam.