Iesous Not a Word Of Divine Speech

There is a Question Often Raised that In What Meaning Iesous is Called Word Of DEITY
And is He the word Kun. If so whether He be a Creator??
This answer is according to Asha:irah and Maturidiah. [A Proto form]
Speech is one of the Real Attributes of Perfection. There fore Speech is a Necessary Attribute of
Deity. Since As Deity is Absolutely Perfect a Real Attribute of Perfection Necessarily Belongeth
to the Deity. But Speech is a Real Attribute then this is Necessarily an Essential Attribute Of
Deity, not by Divine Will but by Implication of Divine Essence. Al Kala:m An Nafsi is the Idea
of Verbal Non Eternal Speech or the Idea of Divine Verbal Speech [Al Kala:m Al Lafz:i:].
Divine Words are the Active Attributes of Deity. Divine Speech is the Meaning and the words are
connected .
But Iesous is said to be Word Of Deity not in the meaning that it is A Word Of Speech of Deity.
He is a Word in some meaning that a Created word and a Spoken Word.
The Text of Holy Qura:n doeth Imply that Iesous is not a Word in the meaning Of Divine
Speech or in thew Meaning of Words of Divine Speech. Anti Islamic Objection Makers attempt
to resurrect their objection by saying that it is an interpretation and their objection is on the
Uninterpreted Literal meaning if the Sentence. It means that they are rejecting the valid
interpretations and are trying to make an objection on a Meaning of a sentence which is not taken
By Muslims. Not all the meanings of the Sentences of Qura:n are taken in Literal meanings.
This is a basic Axiom and to reject this Axiom is to Deny Islam Itself.
The scheme of then is as fallow:
1] To insist on a meaning of a sentence of Holy Quran
2] To Make an objection on it.
3] If some one point out that it is not in literal meaning they once again attempt to argue to chose
the Literal meaning such that their argument may be valid.
The question is that to take Qura:nic meaning against the reliable meanings is not an scholarship
but some thing anti scholarship.
Dicusion:=

The Words of Deity if considered as Divine Attributes at most be Eternal. But not all words are
like them.
IF Iesous is a Word of Deity, He is either a Word in the Metaphorical/Vertual Meaning or He is a
Created Human Word. In the Later case He is not a Spoken Word Of Deity.
No where in Qura:n Iesous is Written/Said to be a Spoken Word or a Term of Attribute of
Divine Speech.
So He is not a Divine Attribute. It may be noted that the Arabic word Kalimah [Word/Lafz:] is
used for Iesous and not the Word Kala:m/Cala:m [Speech] . A good majority of Ahlussunnah
believe that the Words of the Divine Eternal Speech [Al Kala:m An Nafsi:/Ideal Speech/Speech
the Divine Idea] are not Eternal. Al Kalam Al Lafz:i: [Verbal Speech] is Not Eternal and and is
constituted of Not Eternal Words.
Summary
Majority of Ahlussunnah believe that the Divine Speech [AL KALA:M AN NAFSI] is Eternal
but the Divine Verbal Speech [Al Kala:m Al Lafz:i:] is Not Eternal ,yet they have a
connection/relation. This implieth that each word of the Verbal Speech is Not Eternal.
Yet there is still a difference between a word of a Divine Verbal Speech and a Word that is a
human Being [ Insa:n].
The Problem:
Deity does say the Word Kun/Cun which means Be Prior to the Creation of any Per Se
Possible Thing.
But is word BE is neither the Creator nor a Medium between the Creator and the Created.
Since not this word Be is the Creator but the Deity [Divine Essence] is the Creator.. Similarly it
cannot be a Medium or Mediator or intercessor etc. between the Creator and the Created.
Deity is Omnipotent and Absolute Omnipotent , He Hath the Omnipotence to Create any Thing
whatsoever He Willeth from the Class of Per Se Possibles/Per Se Contingents.[1]
He Hath the Power to Create any thing with out saying Kun/Be .
Further it Must Necessarily be Noted that :=
Both of thses acts (1) Act of Saying (2)Act of Creation of a Thing are independent acts
,Independent from one another.
How ever Deity did the first act Prior to the second.

The relation/connection between the two events are neither NecessaryNor Absurd [Impossible]
but Contingent and Possible. If Deity Willeth to say La: Takun [Do Not Be] yet He Hath the
Omnipotence to Create. Thus If Deity Hath Willed to Say La: Takun [Do Not Be] He Could
Have Created if He Hath Willed to Create.[2]
How ever there are Contingent Relations/Connections between the first act and the second act,
which if cease , these two events shall immediately become unrelated.
So it is clarified once for all that Iesous is not a Word in the meaning of Divine Eternal Speech,
nor a Word of the Divine Non Eternal Verbal Speech. He is a Word Who is called a Word of
Deity either as an Appellation or as a Word in the meaning that He was Created by a Specially
Spoken word of Deity Like the word Be, Specially Spoken for for Him .

Footnotes:
1] If a thing does not exist then there is no difference between a Possible and a
Contingent. The different is only when a thing Existeth, How ever the definition of
the two are different.
A Possible is one that is Not Impossible.
A Contingent is one that is Neither Impossible Nor Necessary.
[2] a) If the word Spoken Kun is considered as a Creation then there is a Necessary
Exception for this word.
Since If Deity speaketh a Kun For Every Kun then it implieth an Infinite Series which
is Impossible. So a Necessary Exception is Necessarily Implied for the Word Kun
itself.
b)The word Spoken is used in the meaning to say but if the word is a creation then
to say is an act of creation. Then what is the difference between Mutazilah and
Ahlussunnah in Regard to the Temporal Act of Divine Speaking is beyond the scope
of this work. How ever Minority Of Ahlussnnah Slafiah and Hanabalah mah have
other answers which are not discussed for the sake of brievity.