Historical Errors in the Quran: Difference between revisions

m
[checked revision][checked revision]
Line 47: Line 47:
   
   
====Historical accuracy of the polemic====
====Historical accuracy of the polemic====
However, it has also been pointed out that "son of god" did not denote any kind of quasi-divine status in Judaism but rather is common language in the Hebrew Bible. In [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Chronicles%2028&version=NIV 1 Chronicles 28:6] Solomon is chosen to be god's son. Even in the Talmud, a voice from heaven calls at least two other Rabbis, Yishmael ben Elisha,<ref>[https://www.sefaria.org/Berakhot.7a.4?ven=hebrew|William_Davidson_Edition_-_Vocalized_Aramaic&lang=bi Berakhot 7a] - Safaria.org</ref> and Hanina ben Dosa as "my son".<ref>[https://www.sefaria.org/Berakhot.17b.4?lang=bi Barekhot 17b], [https://www.sefaria.org/Taanit.24b.14?lang=bi Taanit 24b], and [https://www.sefaria.org/Chullin.86a.5?lang=bi Chullin 86a] - Sefaria.org</ref>
However, it has also been pointed out that "son of god" did not denote any kind of quasi-divine status in Judaism but rather is common language in the Hebrew Bible. In [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Chronicles%2028&version=NIV 1 Chronicles 28:6] Solomon is chosen to be god's son. Even in the Talmud, a voice from heaven calls at least two other Rabbis, Yishmael ben Elisha,<ref>[https://www.sefaria.org/Berakhot.7a.4?ven=hebrew|William_Davidson_Edition_-_Vocalized_Aramaic&lang=bi Berakhot 7a] - Sefaria.org</ref> and Hanina ben Dosa as "my son".<ref>[https://www.sefaria.org/Berakhot.17b.4?lang=bi Barekhot 17b], [https://www.sefaria.org/Taanit.24b.14?lang=bi Taanit 24b], and [https://www.sefaria.org/Chullin.86a.5?lang=bi Chullin 86a] - Sefaria.org</ref>


It may be that Q. 9:30 means no more than that the Jewish scholars (particularly those who follow the Jerusalem Talmud) are like Christians and disbelievers of old in terms of applying "son of god" language to a revered figure, and in ascribing legislative authority to such a man or men which in monotheism belongs to Allah alone (Q. 9:31).
It may be that Q. 9:30 means no more than that the Jewish scholars (particularly those who follow the Jerusalem Talmud) are like Christians and disbelievers of old in terms of applying "son of god" language to a revered figure, and in ascribing legislative authority to such a man or men which in monotheism belongs to Allah alone (Q. 9:31).
Editors, em-bypass-2, Reviewers, rollback, Administrators
3,486

edits