The "Immaculate Conception" of Jesus
-
Highlight above is from me.
I read the article and here is my opinion.
The author does not believe in IMMACULATE CONCEPTION of Jesus, pbuh. He is trying to find a ?LOGICAL? explanation for the birth of Jesus. In that case the birth will no longer be considered miraculous!
The Qur?aan clearly tells us that Mary was a virgin at the time Jesus was conceived. See verses 345-47 below
(Remember) when the angels said "O Maryam (Mary)! Verily, Allah gives you the glad tidings of a Word from Him, his name will be the Messiah '?sa (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary), held in honour in this world and in the Hereafter, and will be one of those who are near to Allah.
"He will speak to the people in the cradle and in manhood, and he will be one of the righteous.
She said "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man has touched me." He said "So (it will be) for Allah creates what He wills. When He has decreed something, He says to it only "Be!" - and it is.
According to The Qur?aan,
? No one, but Jesus, has been called WORD of GOD.
? Mary confesses that NO human has touched her, meaning she was a VIRGIN at the time.
? Jesus is always referred to as son of MARY, meaning he did not have a natural human father.
? Verse 4157 below, informs us that Mary was being falsely accused of not being chaste, meaning she had Jesus out of wedlock.
And because of their (Jews) disbelief and uttering against Maryam a grave false charge (that she has committed illegal sexual intercourse).
Peace,
KhalilSalam,
your words echo my understanding of the message. But the question remains, How was it done ? (This is probably coming from my scientific background). Allah is the master of all science and knowledge, surely, there is a way He did it, and it would be nice to know how.
PEACE
------------------------- Student of Allah -
Salam,
your words echo my understanding of the message. But the question remains, How was it done ? (This is probably coming from my scientific background). Allah is the master of all science and knowledge, surely, there is a way He did it, and it would be nice to know how.
PEACE
------------------------- Student of AllahHighlights are from me.
Yes, "it would be nice to know how." Like I said it before, it wouldn't be a MIRACLE any longer! ;D
Peace,
Khalil -
Highlight above is from me.
I read the article and here is my opinion.
The author does not believe in IMMACULATE CONCEPTION of Jesus, pbuh. He is trying to find a ?LOGICAL? explanation for the birth of Jesus. In that case the birth will no longer be considered miraculous!
The Qur?aan clearly tells us that Mary was a virgin at the time Jesus was conceived. See verses 345-47 below
(Remember) when the angels said "O Maryam (Mary)! Verily, Allah gives you the glad tidings of a Word from Him, his name will be the Messiah '?sa (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary), held in honour in this world and in the Hereafter, and will be one of those who are near to Allah.
"He will speak to the people in the cradle and in manhood, and he will be one of the righteous.
She said "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man has touched me." He said "So (it will be) for Allah creates what He wills. When He has decreed something, He says to it only "Be!" - and it is.
According to The Qur?aan,
? No one, but Jesus, has been called WORD of GOD.
? Mary confesses that NO human has touched her, meaning she was a VIRGIN at the time.
? Jesus is always referred to as son of MARY, meaning he did not have a natural human father.
? Verse 4157 below, informs us that Mary was being falsely accused of not being chaste, meaning she had Jesus out of wedlock.
And because of their (Jews) disbelief and uttering against Maryam a grave false charge (that she has committed illegal sexual intercourse).
Peace,
KhalilPeace be with you, Khalil.
You said you read the article, but I find it quite difficult to believe granted the length of it, and the fact that our posts our only 21 minutes apart. It must have taken you a few minutes to realize my post, as well as to type your response. I'd make a fair assumption then that you spent about 10-15 minutes "reading" the article if you are a speed-reader and had resources on hand to type your response really quickly. Unless you have read it before (which you didn't indicate), it is impossible for you to have read it, cross-referenced, and studied enough to make a valid response. No offense.
Also, the points you've raised are completely obliterated by the author. I don't mean to get into a huge debate about it, but I must say I feel my post was greatly undermined by your response.
However, giving you the benefit of the doubt that you may have already read it prior to my post, I'll quick reiterate some points in response to the ones you've listed, and if you'd like to analyze them, you can refer back to the article as it is what I am using to make my points.
Bold is from you. The quotes are from the article in the original post as I find it explains it in the best way already.
The author does not believe in IMMACULATE CONCEPTION of Jesus, pbuh. He is trying to find a ?LOGICAL? explanation for the birth of Jesus. In that case the birth will no longer be considered miraculous!
Correct. The point being proven is that the birth is NOT miraculous. Why do you believe it should be? No where in the Quran said that the birth of Jesus was a miracle. This is a belief from Christianity that has trickled it's way into Islam via hadith and word of mouth.
The Qur?aan clearly tells us that Mary was a virgin at the time Jesus was conceived. See verses 345-47 below
No, it does not. The word used is NOT "virginity" and it was NOT at the time of conception, it was at the time of her receiving the news that she would give birth to the messiah.
"The Qur'an uses the word to mean chastity (ahsaan) and not virginity. A woman is chaste if she lives with her lawful husband or more generally speaking is innocent of unlawful sexual intercourse. She is unchaste if she entered into sexual relationship with different people before or after marriage. The question of chastity came because in verse 1920 Mary questioned how can she have a child since she is not unchaste. The logical conclusion is she can still have a child and remain a chaste woman provided she comes in contact with a lawfully wedded husband.
Many Muslims, including some scholars indicated that had there been a husband for Mary she would not have been a chaste. In saying so, these Muslims are ascribing slurs on their own mothers and good women in general. Since when a lawfully wedded, monogamous woman became unchaste? Those who say so, let them ask what about their own mothers, are they unchaste just because they were legally married and monogamous and had sons and daughters through lawfully wedded husbands?
Question came up whether Mayam was virgin or not. Yes she was a virgin when the prophecy came to her. Based on this she cannot be called Virgin Mother, because, right at this moment she has not conceived yet let alone being a mother. She was a virgin when she talked to the angels and expressed her anxiety. Please note that when Mary was talking to the angels, she did not use word denoting 'virginity'. She knew like any other woman, that she may be virgin today, but after marriage she will not remain virgin anymore. Her concern was not virginity, rather 'chastity' (ahsaan)."
"He will speak to the people in the cradle and in manhood, and he will be one of the righteous.
And praise be to Allah. What does this have to do with his BIRTH again?
She said "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man has touched me." He said "So (it will be) for Allah creates what He wills. When He has decreed something, He says to it only "Be!" - and it is.
347 She said ""O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said "likewise (Kazaliki) Allah creates what He wills. When He had decreed , He then only say to it "be" and it is.
I'm assuming you believe that when Allah replied her belly instantly grew big with baby Jesus and she gave birth right then and there? Why do you not assume the same when Allah said the same thing to Zakariya and Sarah (Abraham's wife)?
"Two of them, Zakariya and Ibrahim got their children normally beyond any reasonable doubt, but in case of Mary there is all the doubt!! If Mayram was impregnated in a miraculous way, then by the same analogy Zakariya and Ibrahim should also have received their sons without their wives in a miraculous way. BUT the wives were cured and they received the sons through conjugal relations in a normal way. So Kazalika was not a wild card to cause pregnancy in a miraculous way. It suggests the normal course of affair and no more."
340 "O my Lord ! How shall I have a son,seeing that I am very old and my wife is barren". He said "Kazalika."
5129-30 But his wife (Sarah) came forward, clamouring and she smote her face and said "An old barren woman!". They said "Likewise, says your Lord"...
Or when the Egyptians were overthrown...
2657-59 So We expelled them, from gardens and springs and of treasure and every kind of honorable position, - likewise (Kazalika) We gave them as inheritance to the Children of Israel.
"The word Kazalika did not throw out the Egyptians overnight, rather over a period of time they were expelled normally as it should happen."
"In verse 2532, the mode of revelation of the Qur-an is mentioned. It took 23 long years to reveal the entire Quran, bit by bit and at intervals, not instantly. Look at the reply to the question why not instantly"
2532 And those who reject faith say Why is not the Quran revealed to him all at once? Likewise (kazalika)
"Here Kazalika did not create any instant revelation of the entire Quran. It still continued to be revealed in pieces over a period of time. The word Kazalika did not create any supernatural thing in case of the Quran."
According to The Qur?aan, ... No one, but Jesus, has been called WORD of GOD.
Are you certain of the things you claim The Quran has said?
339 Allah does give you glad tidings of Yahya, confirming the truth of a word (kalimah) of Allah ...
"With regards to other uses of the word Kalimah, Allah mentioned that the whole creation has been created as a manifestation of His command. You may verify the word in 18109, 3127, 634, 6116, 1064, 1827 verses."
18109 Say "If the ocean were ink fthe words of my Lord, surely the ocean would be exhausted before the words (kalimah) of my Lord be exhausted" - and even though We brought another like it to add.
3127 And if all the trees in the earth were pens and the oceans - with seven oceans behind this, the Words (kalimah) of Allah would not be exhausted..
According to The Qur?aan, ... Mary confesses that NO human has touched her, meaning she was a VIRGIN at the time.
The word virginity was never used, like I pointed out above. And at that time, she was receiving the glad tidings of giving birth to the messiah, not conceiving him at that time. She still went through the natural process Allah has set in place.
Jesus is always referred to as son of MARY, meaning he did not have a natural human father.
Yes, he is referred to as the son of MARY, but that's because she was the most righteous. This doesn't mean Jesus never had a father.
"As I said, although prophet Muhammad's(pbuh) father is not mentioned in the Qur-an, we do not argue about whether or not he had father. However, there is clear mention of the father of prophet Jesus(pbh), yet we strongly believe that he did not have a father. In a way we are refusing to accept the truth propounded by the verse, or Quran in general.
In surah An-Aam verse 84-87 Allah mentions names of 18 prophets at a stretch. Of these, verse 86 specifically mentions name of Isa as ".. And Zakariyya, and Yahya and Isa and Ilyas - everyone was of the righteous." After stating the names of the 18 prophets, in the very next verse 88 Allah goes on to say that"
688 (To them) and to their fathers, and progeny and brethren. And We chose them and We guided them towards the Right Path.
Verse 4157 below, informs us that Mary was being falsely accused of not being chaste, meaning she had Jesus out of wedlock.
So because she was accused of it, it means it was true? So is Muhammad a false prophet/magician? He was accused of that. Was Jesus a false prophet? He was accused of that.
Further more, look at the verse you posted
And because of their (Jews) disbelief and uttering against Maryam a grave false charge (that she has committed illegal sexual intercourse).
Think about it. One can still be chaste, while married. They can believe she was unchaste, but still married. Or neither. Point is, they were wrong.
And those are only a FEW of the points made in the article. If you had actually read and studied it, you wouldn't have these beliefs and I wouldn't have had to copy and paste the portions to bring them to your attention.
May peace be with you.
-
Salam,
your words echo my understanding of the message. But the question remains, How was it done ? (This is probably coming from my scientific background). Allah is the master of all science and knowledge, surely, there is a way He did it, and it would be nice to know how.
PEACE
------------------------- Student of AllahPeace, sister,
I strongly suggest you read the article I posted in the original post. It will clear the air about all of these things.
In regards to your need for a scientific argument, read the sections titled "Process of Procreation" and "Chromosome Theory" located towards the bottom of the page.
May Allah guide us all to the truth.
-
You said you read the article, but I find it quite difficult to believe
The first time you posted it, I responded, but the site went berserk and your post and my response got lost along with so many others. I had read the article.
The point being proven is that the birth is NOT miraculous. Why do you believe it should be?
I never claimed that the birth of Jesus, pbuh, was miraculous; on the contrary his birth was quite as normal as any other normal childbirth, and Mary was no longer a virgin after Jesus' birth.
What I claimed to have been miraculous regarding Jesus is his CONCEPTION, not his birth. According to The Qur?aan the instance of Jesus? CONCEPTION was indeed MIRACULOUS, and it was indeed the WORD of GOD, i.e. ?BE?, or ?KUN? (in Arabic), which was breathed into Mary?s womb via the holy spirit, Gabriel, and INSTANTANEOUSLY caused the CONCEPTION of Jesus. The name of that particular WORD according to verse 345 was, the Messiah '?sa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary).
(Remember) when the angels said "O Maryam (Mary)! Verily, Allah gives you the glad tidings of a Word from Him, his name will be the Messiah '?sa (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary), held in honour in this world and in the Hereafter, and will be one of those who are near to Allah.
The word used is NOT "virginity"
Can you explain what the expression, ?no man has touched me?, which uttered by Mary, means? Doesn?t it mean she was a VIRGIN? Doesn?t it mean that since no man had touched her, she is a CHASTE woman too?
The question of chastity came because in verse 1920 Mary questioned how can she have a child since she is not unchaste. The logical conclusion is she can still have a child and remain a chaste woman provided she comes in contact with a lawfully wedded husband.
The verses 1920-22 below clearly informs us that at the time of CONCEPTION Mary was a VIRGIN and that she was not an unchaste woman. She was wondering how can it be possible to have a son while STILL being a VIRGIN. In 1921 she is told, that is easy for GOD and that Jesus was to be appointed as a SIGN/miracle for the people. In 1922 Mary gets pregnant with Jesus and goes to a far away hiding place not to be seen by the people.
She said "How can I have a son, when no man has touched me, nor am I unchaste?"
He said "So (it will be), your Lord said 'That is easy for Me (Allah) And (We wish) to appoint him as a sign to mankind and a mercy from Us (Allah), and it is a matter (already) decreed, (by Allah).' "22
So she conceived him, and she withdrew with him to a far place
One can ask why she?d do such a thing if she had nothing to hide and were lawfully married? In 1927,28, and after the birth of Jesus, she brings him home to her family and they start questioning her regarding the baby and her chastity. In 1929-34 the miracle becomes tangible and the newborn Jesus starts talking in defense of his chaste mother and his mission from GOD.
I'm assuming you believe that when Allah replied her belly instantly grew big with baby Jesus and she gave birth right then and there? Why do you not assume the same when Allah said the same thing to Zakariya and Sarah (Abraham's wife)?
Just like you said it. It?s only your ASSUMPTION. I do not believe what you are assuming I believe.
If Mayram was impregnated in a miraculous way, then by the same analogy Zakariya and Ibrahim should also have received their sons without their wives in a miraculous way.
Again, this is your assumption, because in Mary?s case there was no husband of any other man involved, but for Zechariah and Abraham their wives were right there with them.
339 Allah does give you glad tidings of Yahya, confirming the truth of a word (kalimah) of Allah ...
In 339 Yahya, pbuh, was sent to confirm the coming of the WORD, i.e. Jesus. And yes the whole creation consists of countless WORDS of GOD, Almighty. But the word mentioned in 345 is a particular WORD, namely, ?BE?. The name of this particular WORD was the ?Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary.?
Yes, he is referred to as the son of MARY, but that's because she was the most righteous. This doesn't mean Jesus never had a father.
Can you show us at least one similar case in The Qur?aan other than Jesus, that is CONSISTENTLY being called as son or daughter of his or her mother/father? Doesn?t it tell us something that is completely different about Jesus, pbuh?
So because she was accused of it, it means it was true?
It is not the question of being true or untrue. It is the nature of ACCUSATION in itself. Those accusations did not come out of the blue, especially when it comes from your own immediate family as it is the case in verse 1928. It clearly tells us that Mary was not married when became pregnant with Jesus.
Peace,
Khalil -
Peace,
688 (To them) and to their fathers, and progeny and brethren. And We chose them and We guided them towards the Right Path.
The "to" is imprecise and causes contradiction.
687
and from their fathers and their descendents and their brethren
and We chose them and We guided them to a path, straight.wamin/and from denotes a subset, otherwise would make each have descendants (plural) to Noah guided to a path straight. That's minimum of 2 descendants (brethren) which after 34 generations x 40 years average is over 8.5 billion people in only 1,360 years!
1 1
2 2
3 4
4 8
5 16
6 32
7 64
8 128
9 256
10 512
11 1024
12 2048
13 4096
14 8192
15 16384
16 32768
17 65536
18 131072
19 262144
20 524288
21 1048576
22 2097152
23 4194304
24 8388608
25 16777216
26 33554432
27 67108864
28 134217728
29 268435456
30 536870912
31 1073741824
32 2147483648
33 4294967296
34 8589934592 -
Peace, Khalil.
First of all, I wholeheartedly apologize for my comments about you not reading the article. I had no idea my original post saw the light of day before the site crashed as it happened within a short span of time.
Also, the article was aimed at a widespread of Muslims who believe in the "immaculate conception" which includes an instant birth as well. I jumped the gun and included you in this fold. Therefore all the mentioning of the birth from here on out can be omitted as we're only talking about the point of conception and agreeing on a regular term of pregnancy.
What I claimed to have been miraculous regarding Jesus is his CONCEPTION, not his birth. According to The Qur?aan the instance of Jesus? CONCEPTION was indeed MIRACULOUS, and it was indeed the WORD of GOD, i.e. ?BE?, or ?KUN? (in Arabic), which was breathed into Mary?s womb via the holy spirit, Gabriel, and INSTANTANEOUSLY caused the CONCEPTION of Jesus. The name of that particular WORD according to verse 345 was, the Messiah '?sa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary).
(Remember) when the angels said "O Maryam (Mary)! Verily, Allah gives you the glad tidings of a Word from Him, his name will be the Messiah '?sa (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary), held in honour in this world and in the Hereafter, and will be one of those who are near to Allah.
The argument that "Be!" is not instantaneous still stands.
"There are several verses in the Qur-an indicating similar thoughts, like 2117; 673; 1640; 1935; 3682. The fayakun in response to the command Kun is by no means instant. All human beings are created and destroyed by the word Kun. Let us read a verse regarding the command Kun from Surah Al-Mu'min.
4068 It is He Who gives life and death. And when He decided upon an affair, He says to it "Be" and it is. "
The breathing of the Spirit also has nothing to do with an instantaneous conception.
"327-9 He who created all things in the best way, and He began creation of man from clay, and He made his progeny from a quintessence of despised fluid; then He fashioned him in due proportion, and breathed into him His spirit. And He gave you hearing and sight and understanding. Little thanks do you give!
This verse relates to man in general and not necessarily to Adam. If you read minutely the process of embryology as mentioned in the Quran, you will find that conception first occurs in the womb by infusion of semen. Thereafter, when the fetus grows to a certain stage, Allah breathes in His Spirit. In other words, He infuses the human soul into the child lying in the womb.
To sum up, breathing is done inside the fetus, after the fertilization, after the fetus has grown inside the womb. Breathing of Spirit and infusion of semen are two different thing occurring at two different stages of birth of a human being."
Can you explain what the expression, ?no man has touched me?, which uttered by Mary, means? Doesn?t it mean she was a VIRGIN? Doesn?t it mean that since no man had touched her, she is a CHASTE woman too?
She was a virgin at the time of the announcement. She said "no man has touched me" because she was wondering if it would happen right at that moment, but Allah answered with "Kazalika" which means things will happen in due time with their natural process, just like the situations with Zakariya and Ibrahim. This by no means indicates that there was conception while she was a virgin. In time, whether she was married or going to get married, she will get pregnant and give birth to the messiah.
The verses 1920-22 below clearly informs us that at the time of CONCEPTION Mary was a VIRGIN and that she was not an unchaste woman. She was wondering how can it be possible to have a son while STILL being a VIRGIN. In 1921 she is told, that is easy for GOD and that Jesus was to be appointed as a SIGN/miracle for the people. In 1922 Mary gets pregnant with Jesus and goes to a far away hiding place not to be seen by the people.
BTW this is why I originally thought you might have believed in a miracle birth, because most people do when reading these events so closely together.
Anyhow, how do these verses show there was a conception instantly? She asks how can she give birth when she is a virgin, and Allah gives an all encompassing answer that indicates it will take it's time. Like the article shows, Allah's answer (kazalika) was applied to many different situations, all which took it's appointed time to happen and did not happen instantly. It would be jumping to conclusion to say this happened instantly.
"In the verse 1921, Mary is talking about two possibilities (1) coming in touch with a man lawfully and (2) coming in touch with a man unlawfully. However, in her own admission, she is not unchaste. So the possibility #2 is out of consideration. This leaves behind the only one possibility - that of coming in touch with a man.
In verse 347, Mary is talking of just one possibility - no man has touched her.
In reply to both the instances Allah said 'even so' or more appropriately, 'likewise'. The word 'likewise' in a way sends back Mary's question in the form of an answer. She can have a child the way she thinks it is possible - without becoming unchaste, by coming in touch with a man legally.
If the readers think that 'kazaliki' Mary became pregnant with the word 'kun' or by blow of spirit, please go back to the above discussion to understand the significance of 'kun' and 'blow of spirit'. This word is not a magical wild card to cause pregnancy."
So she conceived him, and she withdrew with him to a far place
One can ask why she?d do such a thing if she had nothing to hide and were lawfully married? In 1927,28, and after the birth of Jesus, she brings him home to her family and they start questioning her regarding the baby and her chastity. In 1929-34 the miracle becomes tangible and the newborn Jesus starts talking in defense of his chaste mother and his mission from GOD.
This is just an assumption though, it doesn't mean she was trying to hide from accusations of being unchaste, or else why would she later return knowing she'd receive them anyway? Keep in mind, she got news that she is pregnant with the MESSIAH. Do you have any clue how many Jews would have wanted to kill Mary while she was in her most vulnerable state giving birth? Hence the description of the pain she was in. When she was strong again, she returned and people accused her of being unchaste. And like I said before, the accusations mean nothing as virtually every holy person was accused of being the opposite of what they were.
In 339 Yahya, pbuh, was sent to confirm the coming of the WORD, i.e. Jesus. And yes the whole creation consists of countless WORDS of GOD, Almighty. But the word mentioned in 345 is a particular WORD, namely, ?BE?. The name of this particular WORD was the ?Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary.?
OK, agreed Jesus was called the Word. But this is the point I was trying to make, that the WORD doesn't mean it has to be some specially conceived messiah. It's simply Allah's messages and signs. It's used it many places. No doubt the messiah is a special prophet and a word from Allah. He confirmed the message before him and announced the one coming. This doesn't mean he had to be immaculately conceived. And the article shows "Be" has been used in other places that took time to happen as well.
Can you show us at least one similar case in The Qur?aan other than Jesus, that is CONSISTENTLY being called as son or daughter of his or her mother/father? Doesn?t it tell us something that is completely different about Jesus, pbuh?
No, but that doesn't automatically mean Mary didn't have a husband nor Jesus a father, does it? Or that she was some kind of prophet or something higher like the Catholics believe. The mentioning of Maryam is because of how righteous she was and that she received the revelation from Allah that she will give birth to the messiah, and believed it. That's all. She was a noble woman. Does this mean she had an immaculate conception or was anything more? No. The Quran constantly mentions she is revered for her righteousness, it NEVER associates her being the only woman in history to conceive without intercourse and break all systems of conception set by Allah. Wouldn't that be something worth mentioning at least once?
Also, in other situations that would exclude Jesus if he didn't have a father
685 And Zachariah and John, and Jesus, and Elias; all were from the upright.
686 And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot; and each We have preferred over the worlds.
687 And from their fathers and their progeny and their brothers We have also chosen; and We guided them to a straight path.Or what about the natural order of conception in The Quran?
"The Quran describes in detail about the entire process of procreation or childbirth. The verses are detail and describes the process, starting with the need of sperm (327-8; 7720; 7537; 865-7 etc), union of male and female gametes or pairs (133; 3636; 4312; 4913, 5149; 5345 788etc.) to the ultimate statement in verse 6102 about Allah Himself.
All these verses are broad statements applying to all human being and all living being in general. There are no scope of any exception in any statements and nowhere Allah said He will cause an exception in case of Jesus(pbh). So when Jesus(pbh) is viewed as a person born without a father, there is serious contradiction. Either Allah caused serious discrepancy in several verses (nauzubillah!) or it is the human being who are creating the discrepancy based on our poor understanding and lack of investigative research.
Need of sperm for procreation
327-8 And He began the creation of man from clay. Then He made his progeny
from an extract of a liquid held in light estimation.
5345-46And that He has created the pairs - male and female, from the sperm cell
when it is adapted
7720 Did We not create you from a weak fluid?..
7537 Was he not a sperm out of an ejaculation ejaculated? ..
865-7 So let men consider what he is created of. He is created out of a liquid poured
forth, - coming out from between the back-bone and the breast-bone..Need of pairs and mates for procreation
1672 And Allah makes for you mates from among yourselves and through your
mates He gives you sons and daughters.
5149 And of all things We have created pairs, that perhaps you may be reflecting
3636 Glory be to Him Who creates pairs in everything of it out of what the earth
grows, and among themselves and among what they do not know.
4211 Originator of the heavens and the earth. He has made for you mates from
among yourselves, and mates of the cattle. He multiplies you through it...Based on the above verses, particularly 1672, how can Mary have a son born to her without mates? Please note, there is no scope of any exception in any case. So Jesus(pbh) cannot have been born without a sperm cell - in other words, without a father. "
May peace be with you.
-
read this post and its links
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9602219.msg275609#msg275609Peace, Wakas,
This "sex" thing is quite intriguing. ;D
-
Another perspective
Jewish tradition at the time of Jesus held that if a woman conceived before her first menstrual cycle, she had in fact conceived as a virgin. Miraculous? Scientifically, no. Statistically, yes.
It also has to take into account the larger teachings about Jesus. This is where most of you may disagree with me, but I believe the Quran is a clarification. What it explicitly changed needed to be changed (such as the trinity), but what was revealed that was still intact it left alone or confirmed. Therefore, the teachings of Jesus as contained in the gospels are not abrogated by the Quran.
Given this, from where did Jesus get his "culture", in terms of his habits, views of the world, his sense of purpose, etc? Most of us get our culture from our parents. Even though Joseph may have been Jesus' biological father, he did not provide Jesus with his sense of purpose and culture. God did. When you look at Jesus' teachings in, for instance, Matthew chapters 5-7, you can see a world view that would not be typical of a Jewish stonecutter or carpenter living under Roman occupation, not a view of the world Jesus learned from Joseph. Jesus learned it from God, so in one sense, God played more of a paternal role in Jesus' life than his actual father. Jesus' actual parenting in human terms was done by Mary, which is why he is called "son of Mary" in the Quran.
-
Given this, from where did Jesus get his "culture", in terms of his habits, views of the world, his sense of purpose, etc? Most of us get our culture from our parents. Even though Joseph may have been Jesus' biological father, he did not provide Jesus with his sense of purpose and culture. God did. When you look at Jesus' teachings in, for instance, Matthew chapters 5-7, you can see a world view that would not be typical of a Jewish stonecutter or carpenter living under Roman occupation, not a view of the world Jesus learned from Joseph. Jesus learned it from God, so in one sense, God played more of a paternal role in Jesus' life than his actual father. Jesus' actual parenting in human terms was done by Mary, which is why he is called "son of Mary" in the Quran.
Interesting view.. which I tend to agree...
- I do believe that Jesus does have a 'biological' father, given Y-chromosome is needed for a baby boy..
- A pregnant virgin (read being pregnant without 'coitus' is hardly a miracle nowadays... have anybody heard of something called 'artificial insemination' a.k.a tube baby?
- I'm always AMAZED and DAZZLED to the fact of how people seems to be 'obsessed' with Jesus virgin birth while nobody pay any attention to the 'miracle' of Isaac and John "OLD MAID BIRTH". Born from an old maid who has passed her menopause without any eggs in her womb.. That's something harder to replicate even with today's technology.
- In the Quran it was said "the similarity' of Jesus is with Adam... which I believe it's true, both have God as their 'father' (guiding / teaching / mentoring figure) although I do believe that both Jesus and Adam does have a biological father and mother.
Salam / Peace
-
Interesting view.. which I tend to agree...
- I'm always AMAZED and DAZZLED to the fact of how people seems to be 'obsessed' with Jesus virgin birth while nobody pay any attention to the 'miracle' of Isaac and John "OLD MAID BIRTH". Born from an old maid who has passed her menopause without any eggs in her womb.. That's something harder to replicate even with today's technology.
- In the Quran it was said "the similarity' of Jesus is with Adam... which I believe it's true, both have God as their 'father' (guiding / teaching / mentoring figure) although I do believe that both Jesus and Adam does have a biological father and mother.
Salam / Peace
#3 Absolutely. Completely agree.
#4. I'm sure you know that "son of ..." doesn't mean literally the offspring of someone/something. In the gospels, Jesus calls himself "son of man" in the greek text (huios anthropos). But if the greek text is a transliteration from hebrew/aramaic (which is likely since there are a lot of Hebrew idioms), then Jesus would have referred to himself as "ben adam", or "son of man/Adam", since the name of Adam is also one of the Hebrew words for a man. So it is entirely likely that Jesus considered himself to be a similarity to Adam. Just as the Quran calls him. )Peace,
Joel -
#4. I'm sure you know that "son of ..." doesn't mean literally the offspring of someone/something. In the gospels, Jesus calls himself "son of man" in the greek text (huios anthropos). But if the greek text is a transliteration from hebrew/aramaic (which is likely since there are a lot of Hebrew idioms), then Jesus would have referred to himself as "ben adam", or "son of man/Adam", since the name of Adam is also one of the Hebrew words for a man. So it is entirely likely that Jesus considered himself to be a similarity to Adam. Just as the Quran calls him.
Of course.. the terminology of Hebrew "Ben Elohym" (translated as Son Of God), a singular version of plural "Beney Elohym" (Children/Sons of God) is a Hebrew idiom. It must be understood within Hebrew cultural context and not paganistic concept.
Even Jesus himself clearly clarify what it meant.. as recorded in Gospel according to Matthew..
"Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God (Hebrew Beney Elohym)"
Matthew 59If one read the Psalm and Songs of Solomon carefully.. David and Solomon too are being called "Son Of God" (Ben Elohym).
All of this mess started when Judaism started to meet Hellenistic Paganism.. and form a 'synchretic culture' which is now known as "Christianity". Within the pagan world; they too have a mythology of "Hercules Son of Zeus" and "Horus Son Of Isis". They figured; this terminology "Son Of God" must be similar in meanings to the conception of "Son Of God" within their existing understanding of "Hercules Son Of Zeus" or "Horus Son Of Isis". (A God mate with another God or a human female named 'Alcmene' in Hercules case; which the give birth to a new God which is kind of a hybrid species of God and human)
I've found an interesting writing from "Early Christians Fathers" about a debate on how Peter blatantly rejected the idea proposed by "Non Jewish Christian Convert" named Simon of the notion that "The Son Of God must be God as well" (as Hercules is a God because he is Son of Zeus which also a God). An idea which proved to be prevalent in the christian world today.
"Peter answered Our Lord (Jesus) never asserted that there were gods except the Creator of all, nor did he proclaim himself to be God, but he with reason pronounced; 'blessed him who called him the Son of that God who has arranged the universe'. And Simon answered ?Does it not seem to you, then, that he who comes from God is God?? And Peter said Tell us how this is possible; for we cannot affirm this, because we did not hear it from him!"
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=10408.msg53129#msg53129
http//www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iv.xix.xv.htmlQuran seems to be avoiding this misused hebrew idiom of "Ben Elohym" or "Beney Elohym" altogether and makes it clear that Jesus is a human like us. Which is understandable given the main audience of the Quran is yet another culture with deep root in paganism and idol worshiping.
Salam / Peace
-
I appreciate all the long answers to the original post. Quite simply, however, being a Koran Aloner means just that and actually accepting what the Koran says. It is plain for even the most biased reader that Mary was a virgin as she states quite clearly that she hasn't been touched. Surely that is the point. What else is there to say, and surely that is the point that God is getting across that yes, she was a virgin, but the Almighty can do what He wants because He rules. Sometimes the intellectualising just goes a little too far.
Peace. -
I appreciate all the long answers to the original post. Quite simply, however, being a Koran Aloner means just that and actually accepting what the Koran says. It is plain for even the most biased reader that Mary was a virgin as she states quite clearly that she hasn't been touched. Surely that is the point. What else is there to say, and surely that is the point that God is getting across that yes, she was a virgin, but the Almighty can do what He wants because He rules. Sometimes the intellectualising just goes a little too far.
Peace.Highlights are from me.
EXACTLY.
Peace,
Khalil -
Of course.. the terminology of Hebrew "Ben Elohym" (translated as Son Of God), a singular version of plural "Beney Elohym" (Children/Sons of God) is a Hebrew idiom. It must be understood within Hebrew cultural context and not paganistic concept.
Absolutely.
I've found an interesting writing from "Early Christians Fathers" about a debate on how Peter blatantly rejected the idea proposed by "Non Jewish Christian Convert" named Simon of the notion that "The Son Of God must be God as well" (as Hercules is a God because he is Son of Zeus which also a God). An idea which proved to be prevalent in the christian world today.
"Peter answered Our Lord (Jesus) never asserted that there were gods except the Creator of all, nor did he proclaim himself to be God, but he with reason pronounced; 'blessed him who called him the Son of that God who has arranged the universe'. And Simon answered ?Does it not seem to you, then, that he who comes from God is God?? And Peter said Tell us how this is possible; for we cannot affirm this, because we did not hear it from him!"
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=10408.msg53129#msg53129
http//www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iv.xix.xv.htmlInteresting that you quoted the Clementine Epistles. Scholars think that Simon Magus in these letters are really referring to the "apostle" Paul. They changed his name because the Jewish Monotheist followers of Jesus were pretty quickly dismissed by the Greek Christians, and since the Jewish followers of Jesus were no longer accepted by the Jewish community because they did not follow Bar Kochba, they were on their own and were afraid of persecution from both Jews and Greek Christians.
Quran seems to be avoiding this misused hebrew idiom of "Ben Elohym" or "Beney Elohym" altogether and makes it clear that Jesus is a human like us. Which is understandable given the main audience of the Quran is yet another culture with deep root in paganism and idol worshiping.
Salam / Peace
Since the Quran is the final and universal revelation, I'm not surprised that it is free of these idioms found in previous revelations.
Peace,
Joel -
I appreciate all the long answers to the original post. Quite simply, however, being a Koran Aloner means just that and actually accepting what the Koran says. It is plain for even the most biased reader that Mary was a virgin as she states quite clearly that she hasn't been touched. Surely that is the point. What else is there to say, and surely that is the point that God is getting across that yes, she was a virgin, but the Almighty can do what He wants because He rules. Sometimes the intellectualising just goes a little too far.
Peace.Peace,
All issues surrounding the topic were discussed using the Quran alone.
Secondly, many things may seem clear to us when read superficially. However, we later find things to have a much deeper meaning or a completely different one altogether once you begin cross-referencing and taking the Quran as a whole, rather than a bunch of stand-alone verses. By your ideology, it seems we should simply accept that there is middle prayer, that it is acceptable to beat women in order to resolve marital issues, and that thieves should have their hands cut off simply because that is what we read at first glance. Many of the insights we are privileged to have already are because of lengthy discussions like this one.
May Allah guide us all.
-
Absolutely. )
Interesting that you quoted the Clementine Epistles. Scholars think that Simon Magus in these letters are really referring to the "apostle" Paul. They changed his name because the Jewish Monotheist followers of Jesus were pretty quickly dismissed by the Greek Christians, and since the Jewish followers of Jesus were no longer accepted by the Jewish community because they did not follow Bar Kochba, they were on their own and were afraid of persecution from both Jews and Greek Christians.
I don't subscribe to this 'scholar view' that this Simon Magus is actually Paul a.k.a Saul of Tarsus for many reasons, some of those are
- The notion of the discussion indicate that this "Simon Magus" character are lacking the basic understanding of jiewish culture and/or Judaism. His lack of understanding on the basic hebrew idiom of "ben elohym" and also his 'strange' propositions that 'those who came from God is also a God' clearly show his lack of understanding of basic judaism/israelite conception of "God" which differs greatly to the hellenistic and paganism conception of "gods" and "deities".
- While Saul of Tarsus is a jew; he was once a "Judaism Pharisee Fundamentalist", he was once a "Mutaween" (Religious Police) of the Rabbanical Judaism Sanhedrin. Pharisee was the most strict orthodox sect within Judaism during those era; And similar to the "Wahhabis" of today; they tend to over-emphasize on "monotheism" and "tauhid" also ruthlessly hit those who are 'against the religion' and/or trying to 'bend the akedah' (note akedah means bonding was originally a hebrew terminology as well). They persecute Jesus and John's telmudim (students) under the accusation of spreading heresy and 'false prophets'. (Which according to judaism law should be stoned to death)
Saul of Tarsus might made some mistakes and / or he was not a truly honest person; however we should not treat him as 'scapegoat' by putting accusations of things which he didn't do, such as but not limited to; introduction of trinity and other paganistic element within today's christianity.
He did have some debates and/or differing opinions with Peter, James (Jesus's brother, presumably also a son of Mary) and others on the 'applicability of mosaic rites and rules' for those who are non-jewish. Such as circumcision, sabbath day, kosher food (especially pork) etc.. Peter and friends think that those mosaic laws are also applicable for non-jews while Paul think otherwise.
Since the Quran is the final and universal revelation, I'm not surprised that it is free of these idioms found in previous revelations.
Mind you that the Quran never claim it was the final revelation.. show me the verse which show that..
And I do think that it was not the final revelation.. God's revelation is an ongoing process which still happening until today and well up into the future including our children generation..
Muhammad, Jesus and others are dead now but God is forever living....PS I'm not a 'quran aloner' I prefer to call myself as "God alone"..
Salam / Peace
-
Another perspective
Jewish tradition at the time of Jesus held that if a woman conceived before her first menstrual cycle, she had in fact conceived as a virgin. Miraculous? Scientifically, no. Statistically, yes.
Peace,
This is very interesting, thank you for sharing. I'm going to look into this. I understand that Mary was very young at the time as well.
-
Peace Jafar,
You have definitely done your homework. If you are interested in another view of Paul, you might see if you can get a copy of "Paul The Mythmaker" by Hyam Maccoby. He raises some good points, like why would a "Pharisee of Pharisees" work as hired muscle for a Sadducean High Priest?
I personally use some of Paul's writings from time to time, but I do not believe that he honestly presented himself in his letters.
I think the Quran is the final authority of revelation for this particular time. I do not believe there will be another revelation, though God can do what he wants. IF another revelation comes, it will not be a good thing because it means that things have gotten very, very bad.
Peace,
Joel
