Regarding virgin births and Jesus (and Adam).

jonny_k

Salam,
Forget abt the consort thing 4 a min. Ok lets say GOD cannot have a son without a consort. So? This still doesnt mean tht Jesus was not born without a human father coz Jesus had NO father. We see this when Jesus is referred as Isa ibne Maryam. This in Arabic is ONLY done when theres no father. Otherwise the ibn wld refer 2 the male not the female. 'hlatif' also posted verses above which u ignored reagrding the 'unreached vagina' n also tht Jesus only addressed his mother in Quran n NEVER his father indicating he did not have one. So Jesus had no father. He was CREATED specially by GOD. Otherwise the relation of 'Jesus' with 'Adam' in the Quran doesnt make any sense. Y wld GOD make such a relation wth Jesus n not humans in general`Coincidence? GOD Bless!

TheNabi

Salaam Khizar,

To me the message is that people need people to reproduce with as per the design which God has determined. That's why God uses Itself as an example for this method. Can you consider it or are you set in your ways already?

Joe

jonny_k

Salaam Khizar,

To me the message is that people need people to reproduce with as per the design which God has determined. That's why God uses Itself as an example for this method. Can you consider it or are you set in your ways already?

Joe

Khi- No tht verse only states tht it's a blaphemy 2 say GOD had begotten a son. Period. It by NO means implies tht GOD will never intercede into wht we call the laws of nature. Nowehere in the Quran do we find such a statement. Quite on the contrary the miracles/signs shown or mentioned in the Quran show the opposite. GOD Bless!

Idris

peace be upon you,

Salam,
Forget abt the consort thing 4 a min. Ok lets say GOD cannot have a son without a consort. So?

are you saying The God can't have son without a mate but Mary can? are you suggesting Mary is more powerful than God? maybe you should convert to Catholicism than lol

This still doesnt mean tht Jesus was not born without a human father coz Jesus had NO father. We see this when Jesus is referred as Isa ibne Maryam. This in Arabic is ONLY done when theres no father. Otherwise the ibn wld refer 2 the male not the female.

i guess the rule doesn't apply here, probably because that was his "title" in whatever language he spoke, history says its aramaic

And Zachariah and John, and Jesus, and Elias; all were from the upright.
And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot; and each We have preferred over the worlds.
And from their fathers and their progeny and their brothers We have also chosen; and We guided them to a straight path. (685-87)

'hlatif' also posted verses above which u ignored reagrding the 'unreached vagina' n also tht Jesus only addressed his mother in Quran n NEVER his father indicating he did not have one. So Jesus had no father. He was CREATED specially by GOD.

If Mary is an example to the women (6612) and her supposed life-long virginity is so important do you expect women to take her example and remain a virgin and maybe concieve a son just as she?

i guess in 235, 2430-31, and 7029 the believers are those that stay virgins roll

many of the prophets never mentioned their parents, I guess they were born out of thin air, you seem to underestimate Mary's importance as an example for women and sign to the knowledgeables, I have no idea why Jesus's father is never mentioned or why he isn't called bin (insert name of father here) but I think because somebody is called bin (insert father's name here) doesn't mean they don't have a mom just like if somebody is called bin maryam doesn't mean they don't have a father

Otherwise the relation of 'Jesus' with 'Adam' in the Quran doesnt make any sense. Y wld GOD make such a relation wth Jesus n not humans in general`Coincidence? GOD Bless!

Adam is an allegory to mankind in general as shown in 238, i'm going to borrow what Nabi said

let me explain why the argument of 'like Adam' is incorrect.

In the Scripture it is said that Man is created from clay.

And your Lord said to the Angels ?I am creating a human from a hardened clay. So when I perfect him, and blow of My spirit in him, you shall submit to him.? (1528-29)

He said ?I am not to submit to a human You have created from a hardened clay.? (1533)

Fast forward to Man years later.

His friend said to him while discussing with him ?Have you disbelieved in the One who created you from dirt, then from a seed, then He evolved you into a man?? (1837)

Now pay attention.

And We created you, then We shaped you, then We said to the Angels ?Submit to Adam;? so they submitted except for Satan, he was not of those who submitted. (711)

You???? Is God talking to Adam, or to Ahmad? Is God talking to you, or to Jesus?

What do you make of this passage below?

O mankind, if you are in doubt as to the resurrection, then We have created you from dirt, then from semen, then from a clot, then from a lump of flesh developed and undeveloped so that We make it clear to you. And We allow it in the wombs as We wish to an appointed time, then We bring you out a child, then you reach your maturity, and of you are those who are taken, and of you are those who are sent to an old age where he will not be able to learn any new knowledge after what he already has. And you see the land still, but when We send down the water to it, it vibrates and grows, and it brings forth of every lovely pair. (225)

Dirt? Were you made from dirt, or from sperm? Adam and Jesus are made from dirt right? Also notice the evolving that is referred to in verse 1837.

We have created mankind from a structure derived from mud. (2312)

Who is mankind that is created from mud? Us?

And We had made a pledge to Adam from before, but he forgot, and We did not find in him the will power. (20115)

And your Lord took for the children of Adam from their backs, their progeny; and He made them witness over themselves ?Am I not your Lord?? They said ?Yes, we bear witness.? Thus you cannot say on the day of resurrection that you were unaware of this. (7172)

Is this the one and the same covenant for Mankind? Is Jesus not like the rest of mankind, created from mud/dirt and a sperm drop? Where Mankind has moms and dads you would deny Jesus his father? Do you also deny that Jesus is exempt from death?

If Jesus is the likeness of Adam than he is no different from how the rest of us are created. That is from dirt, sperm, a clot, etc. Why his father is not mentioned? There can be many reason perhaps. Maybe his father was one of those guys that leaves mommy to do all the work, or maybe daddy was not involved, or affiliated with anything in regards to Jesus out of personal choice. Perhaps dad died while Jesus was in the womb!

Idris

peace be upon you,

Khi- No tht verse only states tht it's na blaphemy 2 say GOD had begotten a son. Period. It by NO means implies tht GOG will never intercede into wht we call the laws of nature. Nowehere in the Quran do we find such a statement. Quite on the contrary the miracles/signs shown or mentioned in the Quran show the opposite. GOD Bless!

nowhere does that sign say such a thing, your own extrapolations again, it says how can God have a son when he has not taken a mate? God won't intercede into His law of procreation just like he won't intercede into the rest of His prescribed laws, the so-called "miracles" are merely allegories

hlatif

Salaam all,

Idris said

And Zachariah and John, and Jesus, and Elias; all were from the upright.
And Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot; and each We have preferred over the worlds.
And from their fathers and their progeny and their brothers We have also chosen; and We guided them to a straight path. (685-87)

The word fathers and in arabic ABAA is a male plural word, which is sex inclusive. This means that it actually is talking about fathers and mothers as well as grandparents of all the sexes. Lisan AlARAB talks about that.

If Mary is an example to the women (6612) and her supposed life-long virginity is so important do you expect women to take her example and remain a virgin and maybe concieve a son just as she?

i guess in 235, 2430-31, and 7029 the believers are those that stay virgins

The Ayat that I mentioned talk about the virginity at the time of conception. It did not talk about what happens after that.

Salaam

Hussein

truth

Dear Hussein,

You mention the "time of conception" - when was this exactly and how do you correlate your explanation with the birth of Yahya and the announcement of his birth.

When was Yahya's "time of conception" in relation to the announcement of a child to come.

Jesus' birth is not a miracle - how can people of the time believe it's a miracle - how would anyone else witness that there was no man involved.

The virgin birth is a Christian myth - how does it affect your belief to see rationality and understand that he was conceived just like you and me?

Would your entire faith system be shaken by Jesus being an ordinary man?

How about your Christian brothers?

In whose interest is it to propagate such a myth - especially when several of us have demonstrated from the Koran (and scientific fact) that Jesus cannot have been anything but a man born from a normal conception?

Regards.

Idris

peace be upon u hlatif,

The word fathers and in arabic ABAA is a male plural word, which is sex inclusive. This means that it actually is talking about fathers and mothers as well as grandparents of all the sexes. Lisan AlARAB talks about that.

ok so now Isa has a father and a mother, point proven, thanx be to God, end of debate, it actually works better that it means fathers and mothers, well, it doesn't matter really because we all knew isa had a mother

peace

TheNabi

Salaam,

No tht verse only states tht it's na blaphemy 2 say GOD had begotten a son. Period.

I do not agree. I think the author of the quran is trying to make a point that people must have a consort to have children. Thus God asks how can he have a son without a consort. Unless Mary is to be God's mate which nobody believes . It could have read God does not have sons and daughters and we read already that God begets not so it is clear. I do not think I am explaining it good enough for you to understand my perception of what is going on. Why would it be said God cannot have a son without a consort if we already know God can do all things?

Joe

hlatif

Salaam Truth,all,

brother truth said

When was Yahya's "time of conception" in relation to the announcement of a child to come.

the word that was used related to Yahya was Nubashshiruka which means to give you the good news. Therefore it happened soon after.
The word that was used for Mary was AHAB which means Give you and it was given by the RUH (spirit) that was visiting her at that time. The stories are similar to an extent and then they differ.

Would your entire faith system be shaken by Jesus being an ordinary man?

No

In whose interest is it to propagate such a myth - especially when several of us have demonstrated from the Koran (and scientific fact) that Jesus cannot have been anything but a man born from a normal conception?

NO ONE of you addressed the AYAT that I presented to you in the previous post. When you guys address them in a reasonable pattern, we will see.

Salaam and have a beautiful day

Hussein

hlatif

salaam Idris, all,

Idris said

ok so now Isa has a father and a mother, point proven, thanx be to God, end of debate, it actually works better that it means fathers and mothers, well, it doesn't matter really because we all knew isa had a mother

peace

Whe it is sex inclusive it means Fathers OR mothers OR both. It does not mean father and mothers.

Now I want to address 6101
There is NO Can in the AYAH by the way. The ANNA is a question that means How and why and when and where altogether. So GOD is asking people to explain the specifics of hiim having a son, and as he asks that question people will not be able to answer. The other point is that the absence of the female partner is added as a comlicating factor and not as a condition. Third point is that What applies to GOD does not necesarily apply to man and what applies to man does not necessarily apply to GOD.

This is How I translate the AYAH
6101 To him is due the primal origin of the heavens and earth. How and why and where and when does he have a son?! And he does not have a female partner, and he created everything and he knows about everything.

Salaam

Hussein

truth

Peace Hussein,

I think everyone is avoiding the main points of the other side and looking at side issues in many cases. I have made some fairly important points (as far as I see them) regarding contradictions and God's absence of contradiction which has fallen on deaf ears (blind eyes?).

In any case I have enjoyed sharpening my points on this question so that I can address it more completely than I could have before.

I just want to come to one important issue you raised.

What applies to GOD does not necesarily apply to man and what applies to man does not necessarily apply to GOD.

I think that you have to be careful here. It's true that nothing compares to God, however when God narrates the reading to us He brings it to the human level - so that we are able to understand. Note that when God narrates the history of the 'feud' in heaven in relation to Adam's creation the narration reads as a dialogue between God and Satan when God has no mouth or ears. The narration merely conveys to us that an interaction took place but the exact nature is impossible to know for us.

Now when God mentions requiring a partner, then it is framed in the human perspective so that we can understand. The act of human conception according to God therefore requires sperm/egg - ie. a partner or paired creation (remember everything in pairs) and thus the point is made in the way it is. We understand that it is not possible nor fitting for God to have a partner or a son - but the example is presented from the human framework with the human requirements for conception - thus Jesus needs a father in order to come into being.

I want to bring the Christian question forward again. Now in the Christian mythology Mary has a virgin birth like the pagan examples that preced her. However it was well recorded that Mary had a husband Joseph. One would think that the originators of the virgin birth myth would have had a hard time erasing the existence of Joseph from the records but I have no doubt that they would have, if they could have.

It's just that the messiah according to their tradition needed to come from two branches of Isaacs family, and the bible shows that both Mary and Joseph came from Isaacs line. Why Joseph would have to is a mystery given that they don't believe his spermline was necessary in any case. The biological father who's been made symbolic by the fabricated myth of the virgin birth.

Joseph's (the father of Jesus) existence in the Christian tradition/bible goes a long way to showing that the virgin birth was a myth fabricated in later times to deify Jesus.

Regards.

Someone

Peace all,

About being made from "dirt, then sperm, then a clot...", I believe that it is literally corret.

The quantity and quality of sperm are closely related to the person's diet. Humans need food to live as any living organism, males need to eat (well)to be able to produce sperm.

And basically, our food (vegetables, meat from animals...) comes from the dirt, the soil. This food is transformed in males body into spem, and then when injected in the female body, it meets the egg and produce a clot.

Literally speaking, we are made from the very constituants of the soil after it had passed by some transformations. Humans are still created everyday by this same process, starting from the dirt. Glory to the god the best creator.

His friend said to him while discussing with him ?Have you disbelieved in the One who created you from dirt, then from a seed, then He evolved you into a man?? (1837)

--

hlatif

Salaam Truth, all

I think that I owe you an apology. You are right, and I should have addressed the points that you made in your original post. Please forgive me.

You said

The problem with Isa being a clone or a parthenogenetic being (thus virgin birth) is that Isa is a MALE - requiring a Y chromosome. This cannot have come from Mary unless one imagines she had a genotypic abnormality - XX/XY mosaicism or chimerism - which results usually in an intersex phenotype. Known as hermaphrodites the genitals of such individuals are usually abnormal. Even then the egg or ovum of a female can only contain the X chromosome - an ovum is the quintessential female cell by necessity having the X chromosome. Similarly the sperm is typified by the Y chromosome.

I do not think that anyone can prove the birth of Jesus, from a mother without a father, in a scientific way. However, if we believe that the rules of the science were created by GOD, then GOD can break them. This is an area of difference between us, that we may not be able to reconcile, because we look at the issue from two different angles.

It is much more credible to believe that the news given to Mary was simply a prophecy of a child to arrive before Mary had been inseminated naturally by her eventual husband.

I think that I addressed this issue that AHAB that was used means GIVE rather than announce. 1919. I cannot change the word that GOD used, not change it's meaning.

Remember that Mary moves away from her family. It would be highly unusual for a girl to leave on her own to some foreign place without her family or any other protection. To think she spent 9 months while the baby grew in her tummy just wandering in the wilderness is absurd.

I look at those statements differently. The word that you are poitning to is INTABATHAT and it means PUT HERSELF in ISOLATION/Put herself separate/away. It came on two occasions
1916 Relate in the Book (the story of) Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place in the East.
1917 She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them; then We sent her our angel, and he appeared before her as a man in all respects.
So, here she merely isolated herself from them, because she put a screen between herself and the family. If she moved away, she would not put a screen

Then comes this
1922 So she conceived him, and she retired with him to a remote place.

So she moved away after the conception. She could have gone with a man, but the man was not the source of the conception. The reason was that the RUH that visited her earlier was the same one the breathed in her and caused the existence of the baby.

When she returns she is accused of being a harlot from the conversations however she is defended by the CHILD (not baby) who had obviously grown to a speaking age.

I disagree for two reasons
1- the people were surprised that she pointed to the kid
2- The word SABIA means Growing and not necessarily child. Another word was MAHD which means cradle. So what they asked was How can we ask this Growing (child/baby) that is in the cradle?

359 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.

The equality is in the BE and IT is part as well as the dust part. It is not in the birth or the parentage.

Now when God mentions requiring a partner, then it is framed in the human perspective so that we can understand. The act of human conception according to God therefore requires sperm/egg - ie. a partner or paired creation (remember everything in pairs) and thus the point is made in the way it is. We understand that it is not possible nor fitting for God to have a partner or a son - but the example is presented from the human framework with the human requirements for conception - thus Jesus needs a father in order to come into being.

You have a great point here. GOD posed the question to humanity in 6101 and humanity does not have the answer, and will never have the answer.
Mary asked the exact question, using the same ANNA that was used in 6101 (because she expected no answer)
1920 She said "How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?"
and she received the answer
10921 He said "So (it will be) Thy Lord saith, 'that is easy for Me and (We wish) to appoint him as a Sign unto men and a Mercy from Us'It is a matter (so) decreed."

So GOD asked us a question that we cannot answer. However, when Mary asked the same question to GOD, He answered. There is a big diference.

I want to bring the Christian question forward again. Now in the Christian mythology Mary has a virgin birth like the pagan examples that preced her. However it was well recorded that Mary had a husband Joseph. One would think that the originators of the virgin birth myth would have had a hard time erasing the existence of Joseph from the records but I have no doubt that they would have, if they could have.

Why do we have to worry about the christian issue? I am looking at it from a solely Qur'anic perspective.

Take care brother Truth and please forgive me for not answering your original post. Also forgive the long post here.

Hussein

truth

Mysteriously this post time travelled to before Hussein's post though it was submitted after !

truth

Another post before the insertion point.

I'd asked about the time of the server being corrected some while back... maybe that's happened and thrown off the forum back end.

truth

Peace Huseein,

Salaam Truth, all

I think that I owe you an apology. You are right, and I should have addressed the points that you made in your original post. Please forgive me.

Not at all. I think in the process of wanting to put our own views forward we can miss what the other side considers important, and I am just as responsible in this way.

I want to revisit some things you have mentioned.

It is much more credible to believe that the news given to Mary was simply a prophecy of a child to arrive before Mary had been inseminated naturally by her eventual husband.

I think that I addressed this issue that AHAB that was used means GIVE rather than announce. 1919. I cannot change the word that GOD used, not change it's meaning.

Remember that I have already shown many other children described as GIFTS (ahab) so this is not a unique thing.

Remember that Mary moves away from her family. It would be highly unusual for a girl to leave on her own to some foreign place without her family or any other protection. To think she spent 9 months while the baby grew in her tummy just wandering in the wilderness is absurd.

I look at those statements differently. The word that you are poitning to is INTABATHAT and it means PUT HERSELF in ISOLATION/Put herself separate/away. It came on two occasions
1916 Relate in the Book (the story of) Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place in the East.
1917 She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them; then We sent her our angel, and he appeared before her as a man in all respects.
So, here she merely isolated herself from them, because she put a screen between herself and the family. If she moved away, she would not put a screen

Then comes this
1922 So she conceived him, and she retired with him to a remote place.

So she moved away after the conception. She could have gone with a man, but the man was not the source of the conception. The reason was that the RUH that visited her earlier was the same one the breathed in her and caused the existence of the baby.

The earlier 'screen' is during the announcement and the subsequent move in 1922 is a separate event. To believe she became mysteriously pregnant and hid this from her relatives for 9 months is to my thinking far fetched.

When she returns she is accused of being a harlot from the conversations however she is defended by the CHILD (not baby) who had obviously grown to a speaking age.

I disagree for two reasons
1- the people were surprised that she pointed to the kid
2- The word SABIA means Growing and not necessarily child. Another word was MAHD which means cradle. So what they asked was How can we ask this Growing (child/baby) that is in the cradle?

The 'growing' puts the emphasis on the maturing aspect - ie. the child was in the process of maturing to speaking ability. Mary would not point to the child unless she had spoken to it before and knew it could speak.

Otherwise you are saying that Mary knew the unseen - ie. predicted that the child would be able to speak "miraculously".

Mary knew Isa could talk and was mature enough to otherwise she would not point to it. The onlookers ask how a child could talk to them with any wisdom or sense - most toddlers/children talk about trivial things. They are not surprised that the child should be able to talk, but rather that the child could present a cogent conversation.

Why do we have to worry about the christian issue? I am looking at it from a solely Qur'anic perspective.

The reason is clear. The Christian virgin birth myth precedes its adoption by the traditionalist muslims. While it may be argued that the Koran does not directly nullify the virgin birth argument as evidenced by people being able to support their ideas based on verses - it most certainly does not validate it by stating clearly that Isa had no father.

In fact all the evidence that has been presented for Isa being a normally conceived human being is overwhelming on the weight of the number of supporting arguments as well as their force of logic.

I just want to point out finally that I, like you supported the God can break His rules, He made them after all mentality. But examination of the world and searching within my heart made me realise that this was not the case.

The example I gave of whether God could create a ROUND SQUARE (a contradiction) is important in leading one to understand that God creates in an orderly way, and once He has put it into motion it works reliably without contradicting the laws of causation.

Regards.

hlatif

Salaam Truth and thank you for your response,

I do appreciate your thoughtful responses. I do have some rebuttal to them.

Remember that I have already shown many other children described as GIFTS (ahab) so this is not a unique thing.

to repsond to this point, I will give an example
If your cousin gave you money, then you can say My cousin gave me, or GOD gave me money. Other people cannot claim that they gave you money.

So, for the AHAB. GOD gave the children to all the examples, in different manners. Others cannot claim the same thing unless they did it themselves. The entity that used this term in Mary's case was GOD's messenger and Not GOD 1919. That messenger cannot claim the giving of something that others have done before. This same messenger is also the RUH (spirit) that gives life to all and that breathed in Mary at that same time of encounter.

You can say that This same RUH breathed sense (or the decision to see right and wrong) in the child, very much the same as the argument that was put earlier for Adam. However, this cannot be, because Mary was not touched by a man at the time of this particular conception.

So, the giver was GOD, through the means of his messenger RUH at at time when Mary was not touched by any other man. That, to me , is the difference between Mary's case and the other cases.

The earlier 'screen' is during the announcement and the subsequent move in 1922 is a separate event. To believe she became mysteriously pregnant and hid this from her relatives for 9 months is to my thinking far fetched.

I actually said the same thing, but may be not clearly. She did leave them after the conception. It is not clear how long after, where and when and with whom. All is left for speculation.

Otherwise you are saying that Mary knew the unseen - ie. predicted that the child would be able to speak "miraculously".

I do not know if she knew that the child could speak or not. However she was ordered not to talk.

1926 "So eat and drink and cool (thine) eye. And if thou dost see any person, say, 'I have vowed a fast to (Allah) Most Gracious, and this day will I enter into not talk with any human being'"

So she was ordered not to talk and she pointed to the child. The AYA does not mention whether she expected the child to talk or not. However, she probably expected that some sign will come from the child, as inferred from the order that was given her earlier.

The reason is clear. The Christian virgin birth myth precedes its adoption by the traditionalist muslims. While it may be argued that the Koran does not directly nullify the virgin birth argument as evidenced by people being able to support their ideas based on verses - it most certainly does not validate it by stating clearly that Isa had no father.

My worry here is that you may be using the existence of the story in the bible as a proof that it is untrue. I differ. There are truths in everything around us, including the bible, the hadith and all. The Qur'an sometimes agrees with those stories, and sometimes it offers it's different perspective.
I do see your perspective though. I think that one should scrutinize all. Your scrutiny and mine diverged here.

The example I gave of whether God could create a ROUND SQUARE (a contradiction) is important in leading one to understand that God creates in an orderly way, and once He has put it into motion it works reliably without contradicting the laws of causation.

I will share with you what I believe. Like you, I believe that GOD does not go around breaking his rules every day. However, in the case of the miracles that were mentioned in the Qur'an, He may have done so. Those occasions are super super super rare. I feel that it is impossible to create a Round Square, however, I also believe that for GOD nothing is impossible.

I thank you for this very enriching discussion. GOD bless you and you may have a great day.

hussein

hlatif