Virgin Birth of Isa
-
Lobster
Exactly.
Lobster
Not so easy dear lobster, problems won't solve that easy.
You seem to follow what you wrote and after reading your posts i feel ONE OF THE MOST CONFUSED PERSON on the forum is you.
People may be wrong or right we cannot decide about that but they have faith in what they believe and they start the quest from that belief.
But if we start from confusion we end in confusion most of the time.I am sorry in advance if i said something which you donot like but I spend a time reading your various posts.
That was a rather hypocritical post.
Exactly.
According to your standards, Lobster is a apostate/kafir and should be put to death. Here you are agreeing with a "disbeliever" over "Muslims".
Not so easy dear lobster, problems won't solve that easy.
You seem to follow what you wrote and after reading your posts i feel ONE OF THE MOST CONFUSED PERSON on the forum is you.
People may be wrong or right we cannot decide about that but they have faith in what they believe and they start the quest from that belief.
But if we start from confusion we end in confusion most of the time.I am sorry in advance if i said something which you donot like but I spend a time reading your various posts.
And when your personal belief is struck, apparently he's confused ;D
-
Salam All,
I read some of this post and replies, and I can't help but wonder,....why would jesus not be Virgin in essence of his making? You see, from what I understand, Adam was the only man, (first created mortal) who was not born from a mother and a father. God created him and said "Be" and he was. The same was applied to Jesus. God created him and said "be" and he was. The only difference is Jesus was sent through the vessel of his mother to be on this mortal earth, where as adam was sent down directly from God. However, they are both the same in the making. They are Distinct from any other, they were only made with dust and the command of god. they were not made by two mortals via god's blessing.
So therefore in my opinion, Jesus and Adam are of virgin births. Now does that mean Mary was a virgin? We will never know. Unless it is stated that she was a virgin, in the Quran (?). In logical essence she is a virgin in pregnancy with Jesus. She was not pregnant from sex, whether or not she had had sex before in her life.
So, this is my opinion and what I see, tell me what you think? What is your perspective?
Honor
-
Peace Honor,
They are Distinct from any other, they were only made with dust and the command of god.
We were all made from dust and the command of God. They are not distinct at all.
The only difference is Jesus was sent through the vessel of his mother to be on this mortal earth
Isn't that a pretty big difference?
According to you understanding
Adam was the first person, no parents, no friends, no other people whatsoever.
Also, he appeared out of nowhere - no pregnancy.
Presumably already a thinking and speaking man.Isa was born of a mother, from a womb, presumably for 9 months, in a very populated Earth. He was a baby and grew up to be a man.
Isn't that completely different?
The qur'an clearly tells us what the similarities are Dust, and "Be". There's no need for us to dig any further. The answer is right there. They were created the way God creates anything "Be"
And they were created from the same as the rest of us DustPeace,
Tay -
OPF
According to your standards, Lobster is a apostate/kafir and should be put to death. Here you are agreeing with a "disbeliever" over "Muslims".
hahahahha bravo
I forgot what do they call the persons who grow in age but their IQ remains the same as was in child hood? can any one help? -
The qur'an clearly tells us what the similarities are Dust, and "Be". There's no need for us to dig any further. The answer is right there. They were created the way God creates anything "Be"
And they were created from the same as the rest of us DustPeace,
TayShe said "How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?"
Qalat anna yakoonu lee ghulamunwalam yamsasnee basharun walam aku baghiyyanHe said "So Thy Lord saith, 'that is easy for Me and to appoint him as a Sign unto men and a Mercy from Us'It is a matter decreed."
Qala kathaliki qalarabbuki huwa AAalayya hayyinun walinajAAalahu ayatan lilnnasiwarahmatan minna wakana amran maqdiyyan
They were created from dust as rest of the us but the process through which we pass during our birth as also detailed in Quran is different for those two mentioned above. That is why Allah has pointed out these two in following Ayat.
The example of Jesus, as far as GOD is concerned, is the same as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him, "Be," and he was.
Honor does it answer your queries too.
-
Peace Raj-ah,
but the process through which we pass during our birth as also detailed in Quran is different for those two mentioned above. That is why Allah has pointed out these two in following Ayat.
If that was truly why God pointed these 2 out, God would have mentioned it in the ayah, ie created from dust, said to him "be", and neither was born like the rest of you.
Unfortunately, we only have dust and "be", which happens to be the same as everyone else.
Seems to me the message in the ayah is not that they were different from us, but the same.Furthermore, nowhere in th qur'an does it even explain Adam's spawning. All we have is 711 ...And We created you, then We shaped you...
Again, exactly the way everyone else is created.
How about his spouse? Where did she come from? If this was more spontaneous spawning, shouldn't the example of Isa be like Adam and his spouse?
More questions that will lead to more questions that would not be there in the first place if we didn't bring preconceptions to God's guidance, in this case, a myth that predates the qur'an by thousands of years.
Peace,
Tay -
Peace,
Peace,
Ruh means Wind, it stood for the Human Self as the human mind could go in any direction just as the wind blows in any direction. Ruh stood also for Aid/Support or Mercy as the wind brings rain and it was also used for Revelation in the Quran as Revelation is blown into Man as it was wind.
Shakir's translation is the best one as he understood the context in 6612 where Ruh and the Scriptures are connected directly, and so the Ruh that Mary receives is the inspiration, revelation.
1785 And they ask you about the soul. Say The soul is one of the commands of my Lord, and you are not given aught of knowledge but a little.
Shakir uses the word soul for what the text writes as ''ruuhumin'' and you Arnold are able to tell me what it means. Thank God I have the Qur'an!
6612 And Marium, the daughter of Imran, who guarded her chastity, so We breathed into her of Our inspiration and she accepted the truth of the words of her Lord and His books, and she was of, the obedient ones.
Arnold, is it possible that the ''fiihi'' found in 6612 makes it specific as to where the blowing occured, precision which is not mentionned in the use of ''fiihaa'' found in 2191 ?
Arnold, may I just suggest that you keep your certitude closer to yourself, your ''assureness'' could perhaps lead others astray in their comprehension.
adjwi
-
Peace adjwi,
Indeed I overlooked the ending of Feehi and looked only to the context, thank you for pointing that out in such a friendly manner.
In the Quran, as far as i have seen is Ruh always blowin into people, not into organs. So the Feehi in 6612 refers to Jesus in the womb, the same words are used with Adam
1529
Fa-itha sawwaytuhu wanafakhtu feehi min roohee faqaAAoo lahu sajideenaSo in 6612 it refers to Life being blown into Jesus. The Feeha in 2191 refers to the Ruh being blown into Mary, and since she is alive already, the Ruh has to be Revelation.
This is my humble opinion -*
-
Peace Arnold,
''So the Feehi in 6612 refers to Jesus in the womb, the same words are used with Adam''
''So in 6612 it refers to Life being blown into Jesus. The Feeha in 2191 refers to the Ruh being blown into Mary, and since she is alive already, the Ruh has to be Revelation.''
Are you understanding that Jesus was in the womb, then the ruh was blown? I'm trying to understand how you order the sequence.
Is it the case that the feeha is directed to the feminine (word) and that the feehee is directed to the masculine (word)? What would be that masculine word referred to then in 6612? Could it be the vagina that she had safeguarded?
adjwi
-
Peace,
Show me a place in the Quran where the Ruh of Allah is used on organs.
-
Peace,
Peace,
Show me a place in the Quran where the Ruh of Allah is used on organs.
Sorry Arnold but my questionning was about ''feehee'', to what word in this case does the ''...hee'' refer to.
For the rest, do you understand Jesus was already in the womb??? As for searching the rest of the Qur'an to prove or disprove the relation with organs an ruhh, I don't see the point of adventuring myself in such direction, as this was not an object of mine.
adjwi
-
Peace,
You try to link the Feehi with the Fajara, so to prove the Ruh is blown into an organ to create Jesus, you must first show this also happens with other cases of Ruh. As far as I know, Ruh is always blown into persons to make them live or receive inspirations, it is not blown into organs to create a person, it is blown into an already physical body that can contain the Ruh.
-
Peace all,
Peace,
You try to link the Feehi with the Fajara, so to prove the Ruh is blown into an organ to create Jesus, you must first show this also happens with other cases of Ruh. As far as I know, Ruh is always blown into persons to make them live or receive inspirations, it is not blown into organs to create a person, it is blown into an already physical body that can contain the Ruh.
I'm asking the question to what word does feehi refer to? Indeed, can we not read in this particular instance that because of the linguistic it would refer to the fajara? Let's begin here as the subject of this thread pertains to Jesus, doesn't it?
adjwi
-
Peace,
The Feehi does not need to refer to a word present in the sentence, it refers to something Male, be it a male word or a male being. There was something Male present with Mary. I believe it was Jesus the foetus inside her womb, as Ruh as far as I have seen only goes into a body that can contain the Ruh, I do not believe it refers to Faraja, although a male word, as this refers to her private parts.
God has no mate, so the Ruh cannot be understood as some divine sperm which made Mary pregnant. There had already to be something in her womb for the Ruh to go into.
Mary is also called ahsahnat in the verse, one who protects herself, fortifies herself against unlawful sex mostly through marriage. I had a discussion with Samia on this where the thought came up that ahsanat in the Quran is 99% used for already married women, so it is logical to believe she was already married and she became pregnant of her husband and then fulfilling the Prophecy the Malikah said to her before that she will become pregnant and give birth to a Prophet, something she was astonished to hear when they told her.
-
Peace all,
I'm asking the question to what word does feehi refer to? Indeed, can we not read in this particular instance that because of the linguistic it would refer to the fajara? Let's begin here as the subject of this thread pertains to Jesus, doesn't it?
adjwi
Salaam all
I do not think you can solve this linguistically, since both Jesus and faraj are masculine, and can be referred to by the masculine suffixed pronoun in "feehi".
Mary became pregnant because she "ahsanat" farajaha/ got married, not because "God" blew into "her private parts"! I find this too literal and tasteless, like a different way of having sex...I believe that God blew into Jesus to make him a special person, the way He blew into the "bashar" to make him "insaan".
-
Peace,
Salaam all
I do not think you can solve this linguistically, since both Jesus and faraj are masculine, and can be referred to by the masculine suffixed pronoun in "feehi".
Mary became pregnant because she "ahsanat" farajaha/ got married, not because "God" blew into "her private parts"! I find this too literal and tasteless, like a different way of having sex...I believe that God blew into Jesus to make him a special person, the way He blew into the "bashar" to make him "insaan".
What I am seeing is that Jesus is made to be present from the reader. Mary became pregnant because she got married does not come from the literal. Is ''too literal and tasteless'' a criteria of analysis? Is it that the data is not in agreement with your morality and esthetics?
''... I believe...'' is just an expression of faith, no better than someone elses, no?
I believe it was Jesus the foetus inside her womb,
God has no mate, so the Ruh cannot be understood as some divine sperm
Arnold, who's writing about divine sperm other than you? The question is not about a son of god, there is no question to be asked. The question is about a virgin birth. Creating from nothing. Like ''kun faya kun''. Such an interpretation is naturally impossible. For this to be possible you need a kind of quantum leep into the uncreated. Would that fit the story?
Mary gets married, the couple has a child naturally and the child becomes known as ''son of god'' ??? I can't see how that story fits together.
adjwi
-
Peace "lobster",
peace
You think that "before the end of the universe" is not slow?
And if you can reach the truth independently of the quran, what's the quran's role then?JK- Ofcourse the truth can be reached independent of the Quran, since this is the nature of ongoing cause and effect, and there is no problem with that at all. The role of the Quran is TO ACHIEVE THIS EXPONENTIALLY MORE FAST (remember the saying "time is money" and perhaps it would make it clear).
This is exactly what I was talking about. Making the quran an idol which must be obeyed, then coming up with your understanding independently, and then using that idol to promote your understanding. It has "wrong" written all over it with bold capital letters.
JK- Oh man. It's not just my understanding which counts. IT'S THE UNDERSTANDING WHICH COMES ABOUT AS A RESULT OF INDEPENDENT REASEARCHERS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD COMING TO SIMILAR CONCLUSIONS WHILST STUDYING THE QURAN which matters. This has been my point throughout. The mere understanding of one individual doesnt mean much.
The fact is that people are better off directing this effort somewhere else because trying to understand the quran isn't getting them anywhere, and if we agree with you about the nature of the quran, then even with all their efforts doubled they will not get anywhere because the human race hasn't evolved enough yet.
Like Abraham, we must study the signs in nature, in the world around us, and let experience be our teacher.JK- We are evolved enough now to engage in very good archaeological as well as textual research which would be enough to decipher great parts of the Quran. Whatever conclusions come out of there could then be applied in the real world and the development observed. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "lobster",
You also said amongst other thingsEven if you had a "quran alone" government that worked and was free from any corruption, the everyday lives of people wouldn't be any different, or at least wouldn't be any better.
JK- this is where i strongly disagree with you. I believe that with a Quran Alone government even ordinary people would be marvellous scientists helping in the development of sophisticated micro robots and their softwares which would lead that society to travel through space where no man has gone before and erive technology from yet unknown compounds which no one has done before within a relatively very small period of time. Besides this there will be much more honesty, mutual understanding, psychological health and well being and support as all this would be recognized as being beneficial in the long run, thus removing most of the short sightedness that still exists in all societies at present. GOD Bless!
-
A question to those who believe in the virgin birth of Isa How could his mother Mary become pregnant, without a human father ?
Peace
-
Peace,
What I am seeing is that Jesus is made to be present from the reader. Mary became pregnant because she got married does not come from the literal. Is ''too literal and tasteless'' a criteria of analysis? Is it that the data is not in agreement with your morality and esthetics?
Got married comes from "ahsanat". If it is "preserved" the quran uses another verb "hafaza hafazat farajaha", which is also the literal meaning of "to preserve".
As for the "tasteless", it is believing that God "blew into her faraj". Why does God have to blow into the faraj to make her pregnant? What about the "be and he is"?