Jesus, Miracles, Virginbirth and the Nazarenes
-
Salam .
Marium was never married. Al-Quran always calls a married woman by the name of her husband.
And that is why Jesus/Eesa is called "ibne/son of Marium", and not because his mother was more prominent than his father. Because their was no father.
Virgin birth.
Nowhere does the Quran imply Jesus was born in an unnatural way. God doesn't brake His laws. Of course He can, but He says in the Quran He will not brake them, this includes laws of Nature. The comparison of Adam and Jesus, is that like the first peoples, Jesus had gone through normal development as a foetus, just like the first humans were developed through guided evolution. Adam comes from adami, meaning mankind. Many times the plural use is used with adam, showing it is not one person.
People ask me 'Why then is Jesus's father not mentioned?' But people forget he is. Jesus is called Messiah, which refers to him being a decendant of David. mary wasn't family of David, but of Aaron. Joseph was decendant of David. Only through Joseph being his father, could Jesus being called Messiah. Also Jesus's father is not mentioned because he has no importance for us. Moses's father is also not mentioned, but no one doubts about Moses being born naturaly.
People are thaught to see a virgin-birth in those verses. Even when people follow the Quran alone, still they grew up with this concept, or have heard about it, and by thus, their subconciousness is filled in with the virgin concept. They fill in the blanks themselves, which is very dangerous. It is what you can call a mass-illusion.
One of the important injunctions of the Qur'an is that Allah makes Laws as He wills in the World of Command and enforces them in the World of Creation i.e. the Universe (754, 8516). And then, He never changes them. The grand empire of human learning, development, invention, science and technology would have failed to come off ground if Allah?s physical Laws in the Universe were to keep changing. Pregnancy requires the union of the male and the female chromosomes. Allah never changes His Laws. Therefore, the idea of a virgin birth, although popular among the Christians and Muslims, is non-Qur?anic and absolutely erroneous.
Jesus is referred to as son of Mary because his mother was more prominent and also because his father, Joseph the craftsman(refering to being a specialist in his work, not carpenter, again a mistranslation of the Gospels), died at an early age. The Bible also refers to Jesus as son of man and as son of David. In fact three of the four Gospels in their gealogies name Joseph as the father of Jesus.
Mary was a descendant of Prophet Aaron. Even generations after a prominent person, it was customary to call the descendants by his or her name. In Luke 15 Elizabeth, the wife of Prophet Zachariah, is referred to as, ?One of the daughters of Aaron?. Similarly, Mary is referred to as sister of Aaron in the Qur'an 1928.
In 1922-23 Mary is shown grieving, then talking to her husband. Although married, thay made a violation of the normal sanctuary rules, as she became pregnant in the non-holy months, so she fled the temple for a while and labor pains all add to her grief which she is expressing. This is why her family acted so offended, and said she had done wrong.
Now a few more important concepts given in the Qur?an that strongly negate the fallacy of the ?virgin birth? of Jesus
Allah does all things according to His Laws (340,199) You will never find Allah?s Laws changing or deviating (634, 6116, 1064, 1777, 1827, 3338, 3362, 3543, 4085, 4823)
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 (359)
By Adam is meant all mankind (711)
All humans are created from dust, then from a zygote, the union of male and female gametes. (Verses too many to mention).The Qur?an emphatically and repeatedly states that all human beings are procreated from both male and female chromosomes, without exception. (Again, verses too many to mention, but Surah Al-Baqarah should suffice).
Even God won?t have an offspring since He never had a mate (6101).Verse 1922 narrates of Mary moving far off from her village. Since Mary had broken the normal rules of the shrine, she and her family kept the marriage with Joseph carpenter confidential.
The Qur'an describes Zechariah and wife begetting Yahya a. s. against some odds but not against Allah's Laws. 340 Zechariah prayed to Allah, but then wondered, ?My Lord! How could I have a son when old age has overtaken me already and my wife is barren?? He said, ?So it will be, Allah does everything according to His Laws.? (The infertility in his wife was cured 2190).
343 She (Mary) was told by malikah to gather courage, quit monasticism, submit to the Command of her Lord and join her family for leading a normal life bowing to the design that Allah has ordained for people.
345 Malikah said, ?O Mary! Allah gives you the good news through a word from Him. ----.
347 Mary exclaimed! ?O My Lord, How shall I have a son when no man has touched me?? He said, ?Just as Allah creates everyone according to His Laws (340). When Allah decrees a matter, it starts happening.?
1920 She said, "How can I have a son when no man has ever touched me? For, never have I been a loose woman!? (346, 192.About 345-47 please again note that Mary is only engaged and not yet married to Joseph. We also don't know the age when this is told, she could have been 14 or 20. Also growing up in a mostly celibacy temple, her surroundings were negative against marriage and sexual relationships.
-
Peace,
Al-Quran always calls a married woman by the name of her husband.
The celibacy laws in the Nazerene Temple determined that people only got married for offspring, and get divorced after the birth of the second or third child. So Mary could not have been called after Joseph as they were already divorced. Secondly Joseph died at a young age as far as we know. Also all other people were called after their father or male ancestor as they were known or prominent and also had normal marriage rules. The Nazarenes were quite weird when it came to marriage. They only allowed marriage between royal families. Your idea that because all people were named after their fathers or husbands, then you can also say that Jesus is mentioned between Messengers who all had fathers
684 And We granted him Isaac and Jacob, both of whom We guided; and Noah We guided from before; and from his progeny is David, and Solomon, and Job, and Joseph, and Moses, and Aaron. It is such that We reward the good doers.
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.Also only adopted children are ordered do be called after their father, not ordinary biological children.
But i know you don't use history as an extra, so here is the proof
4913 O mankind, We created you from a male and female, and We made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely, the most honourable among you in the sight of God is the most righteous. God is Knowledgeable, Expert.
The verse says clearly 'Oh mankind'. This means ALL humans were created through male and female. Otherwise it would have said 'O mankind, except Jesus'.
5345 And He is the One who created the pair, male and female.
5346 From a seed that is put forth.That which is translated as seed, literally means 'ejaculated drop'. Only the seed of a male is ejaculated, not the egg of a woman. If this was different with Jesus, then it would have said 'except with Jesus'. But the verse doesn't make any exceptions, it clearly says mankind. God would not make such mistakes, or you must claim that Jesus was not one of the humans, if you do not claim this, then Jesus fell under the same rule. And Jesus is compared to Adam, and thus is a human and thus falls under the above rules.
762 We have created the human from a seed that is mixed, We test him, so We made him hear and see.
And again ALL humans are made of a mixture between seed and an egg. No exceptions being made. God has no wife or son (6101).
Then of course you have the verse
359 The example of Jesus with God is similar to that of Adam; He created him from dust, then He said to him "Be" and he was.So the question here is Who is Adam then? Well adam comes from Adami, which means blackskinned male as well mankind in total. For example, in 711
711 And We created you, then We shaped you, then We said to the Malikah "Submit to Adam=humankind;" so they submitted except for Satan, he was not of those who submitted.
The word koen in 359 refers to the proces of creation, but is a slow process as a Yaum=timespan for God is 1000 yaums=timespans for us.
Just like all humans, Jesus was made out of a mixture of male and female cells, God even makes it extra clear that Jesus is just like any other human by comparing him to adam, all mankind. Adam, or the first humans, as is shown by the second meaning of 'blackskinned human', was made in stages and was a khalifah, a successor of the earlier human species (and i know about your theory on David being the khalifah, but we humans are also called khalifah in verse 6133, so this theory doesn't hold for me, as the bloodshed refers to the prehistoric man who were violant). So it doesn't matter if you translate Adam with all of Mankind or just with the first humans, we all have been created in stages. That it refers to all of mankind is also clear from the verses 1837, 225 and 3020, where all humans are reminded they are created out of dust. And also the first humans were created through stages of guided evolution
- God created every moving thing from water One crawls on its belly, one walks on two legs, another moves on four. God creates whatsoever He will. Indeed God has power over everything.
7114 And He created you in stages/phases.
7117The divine planner(Allah) has raised you up from the earth in the form of a (geneological) tree.6133 "If (God) wills, He destroys you and in your place appoints whom He wills as SUCCESSORS just as He brought you forth from the descendants of other peoples."
- Man We fashioned from fermented clay dried tingling hard,
"With the making of the first step to the primal soup which contains all basicelements for life to a living organism, we stumble upon a lot of problems. One of the problems is the UV-radiation of the sun. We are protected by our skin and the earth's ozonlayer from the worst radiation. The young earth didn't have a protecting ozonlayer, so the UV-radiation reached freely the atmosphere and the top waterlayers. A second problem is that the most simple organic substances can move in all directions in a watery substance. For life to emerge, it is necassery that the substances remain together, a third problem is the sensitivity of DNA and RNA, mainly the carbonic-sugars, which brake apart easy.
There must have happened two things will the substances of the primal soup evolve to something more complicating, to life. The substances must remain together and protected against harmfull influences from outside. The second most important theory is that of the clayparticles. These particles are common on earth. They're layered, smaller then two micrometre and can bind all organic molecules and make them react with each other. On the surface of the clayparticles, can by example, RNA been build up from simple molecules. Next to that, enhance the clayparticles, the forming of fatty-acids, in which an enviroment can evolve which is seperated from the outside world. The walls of every cell, of plants, animals and fungies, are build up out of double layered fatty-acids. In a solution of fatty-acids together with clayparticles, bindings emerge of double layered fatty-acids. If on the surface of the inclosed clayparticles, molecules get 'stuck', this can be most important for the origins of life, then by this theory can we explain the build of the primitive cell."
Professor dr. Stephen B.J.Menken, Chief Evolutionbiologist of Amsterdam UniversitySo lets summarize it again
1.ALL humans are made out of sperm and an egg, NO exceptions made.
2.ALL humans are created from male and female, NO exceptions made.
3.Jesus is like Adam, which both means 'first humans' and Mankind in total, which both are created in stages and phases according to Allah's law of creation. And Allah never changes His laws (634, 6116, 1064, 1777, 1827, 3338, 3362, 3543, 4085, 4823).
4.If the common believe of virginbirth was not there, i would doubt you would ever have questioned my article or would have read virginbirth from the Quran. The common filled subconciousness has determined the interpretation more then people like to admit.
-
Marium was never married. Al-Quran always calls a married woman by the name of her husband.
And that is why Jesus/Eesa is called "ibne/son of Marium", and not because his mother was more prominent than his father. Because their was no father.
peace
How does not married = virgin? maybe there is a small possibility that she had sex outside of marriage?good post, though, Arnold. BTW, I havn't read the article yet, just wanted to reply to Fahad's post.
-
Peace,
Where does it say she is not married when she had Jesus? Nowhere. When the Malikah told her she was going to have a child, she only reacted with 'no man has touched me'. We don't know when this was told to her. Maybe she was 10, 14, 18. It was clear she was not married yet and did not know she was chosen to have a child. This is the problem with most people while reading the Quran. When events are told in an order, suddenly these things are happening right after each other in small time span. In reality most things happen with much time in between. So the time between the Malikah telling Mary about her upcoming child and her real pregnancy can be 2, 5 or 10 years, we don't know. So to believe that denial of a man ever touching her is equal to having a virgin birth is nonsense and is purely inspired by the already established belief in virginbirth and miracles.
-
Peace,
Al-Quran always calls a married woman by the name of her husband.
The celibacy laws in the Nazerene Temple determined that people only got married for offspring, and get divorced after the birth of the second or third child. So Mary could not have been called after Joseph as they were already divorced. Secondly Joseph died at a young age as far as we know. Also all other people were called after their father or male ancestor as they were known or prominent and also had normal marriage rules. The Nazarenes were quite weird when it came to marraige. They only allowed between royal families.
Temporary marriage! This is what you get when you add details from Hadiths and Bible etc to Al-Quran. These stories are inspired by the shayateen, the enemies of the prophets. (6112)
Your idea that because all people were named after their fathers or husbands, then you can also say that Jesus is mentioned between Messengers who all had fathers
684 And We granted him Isaac and Jacob, both of whom We guided; and Noah We guided from before; and from his progeny is David, and Solomon, and Job, and Joseph, and Moses, and Aaron. It is such that We reward the good doers.
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.Jesus is mentioned among these prophets because of being a "good doer", "upright" or "preferred over the worlds". Not because of having a father like they had.
But i know you don't use history as an extra, so here is the proof
4913 O mankind, We created you from a male and female, and We made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely, the most honourable among you in the sight of God is the most righteous. God is Knowledgeable, Expert.
The verse says clearly 'Oh mankind'. This means ALL humans were created through male and female. Otherwise it would have said 'O mankind, except Jesus'.
Jesus is pre-quranic, unlike this "O minkind". So this "o minkind" does not include Jesus. Or do you think that Al-quran was a guidance for pre-quranic mankind as well?(2185) Since it is called "a guidance for mankind".
...And Allah never changes His laws (634, 6116, 1064, 1777, 1827, 3338, 3362, 3543, 4085, 4823).
The criterion for us, to decide what Allah's sunnat is, is al-quran. And Allah's sunnat is that Al-Quran always calls a married woman by her husbands name.
4.If the common believe of virginbirth was not there, i would doubt you would ever have questioned my article or would have read virginbirth from the Quran. The common filled subconciousness has determined the interpretation more then people like to admit.
If you hadn't been deceived by the stories created by the shayateen, the prophets' enemies, I doubt you would have questioned the virgin birth, no offense. Only the authors of the Bible, the shayateen, have worked so hard to produce a father for Jesus. The stories created by shayateen don't explain Al-Quraan.
6/112 We have made for every prophet enemies, shayateen human and jinn, to inspire each other with fancy saying, in order to deceive?
-
Peace,
Where does it say she is not married when she had Jesus? Nowhere. When the Malikah told her she was going to have a child, she only reacted with 'no man has touched me'. We don't know when this was told to her. Maybe she was 10, 14, 18. It was clear she was not married yet and did not know she was chosen to have a child. This is the problem with most people while reading the Quran. When events are told in an order, suddenly these things are happening right after each other in small time span. In reality most things happen with much time in between. So the time between the Malikah telling Mary about her upcoming child and her real pregnancy can be 2, 5 or 10 years, we don't know. So to believe that denial of a man ever touching her is equal to having a virgin birth is nonsense and is purely inspired by the already established belief in virginbirth and miracles.
If the malaika was telling Marium about 10 years in the future, why would she say "no man has touched me" ?! She said it because she was pregnant right at that time. Thats what the malaika was telling her. Not about the future.
-
Peace,
The celibacy laws in the Nazerene Temple determined that people only got married for offspring, and get divorced after the birth of the second or third child. So Mary could not have been called after Joseph as they were already divorced. Secondly Joseph died at a young age as far as we know. Also all other people were called after their father or male ancestor as they were known or prominent and also had normal marriage rules. The Nazarenes were quite weird when it came to marraige. They only allowed between royal families.
Temporary marriage! This is what you get when you add details from Hadiths and Bible etc to Al-Quran. These stories are inspired by the shayateen, the enemies of the prophets. (6112)
It is hard for people to find the right criterion for history. But i showed you Quranic verses to make my point, and you want to ignore them all.
Jesus is mentioned among these prophets because of being a "good doer", "upright" or "preferred over the worlds". Not because of having a father like they had.
Jesus is pre-quranic, unlike this "O minkind". So this "o minkind" does not include Jesus. Or do you think that Al-quran was a guidance for pre-quranic mankind as well?(2185) Since it is called "a guidance for mankind".
Excuse me? Does this mean only the people AFTER the Quran are made by male and female? The Quran clearly says ALL humans are made by the mixing of the two cells. This includes past and present.
The criterion for us, to decide what Allah's sunnat is, is al-quran. And Allah's sunnat is that Al-Quran always calls a married woman by her husbands name.
Where is your proof this is the only way possible? Plus if she was divorced, she wouldn't be called by her husbands name would she? I have no Quranic proof she was divorced, and you have no proof she wasn't so this cannot be used as an argument.
If you hadn't been deceived by the stories created by the shayateen, the prophets' enemies, I doubt you would have questioned the virgin birth, no offense. Only the authors of the Bible, the shayateen, have worked so hard to produce a father for Jesus. The stories created by shayateen don't explain Al-Quraan.
6/112 We have made for every prophet enemies, shayateen human and jinn, to inspire each other with fancy saying, in order to deceive?
Indeed he has decieved you and many. The Quran has talked clearly, ALL humans are made from sperm and egg. You have not given ANY Quranic evidence to support your claim or disproven mine. I have ONLY 1 little part of history, the rest of my post, 80% is ALL Quran which you still have not disproven.
If the malaika was telling Marium about 10 years in the future, why would she say "no man has touched me" ?! She said it because she was pregnant at that time. Thats what the malaika was telling her.
Does the verse say this or is this your personal interpretation? I believe it is the last. You always hammer on only Quranic evidence, and i have given it.
Peace
-
Jesus is pre-quranic, unlike this "O minkind". So this "o minkind" does not include Jesus. Or do you think that Al-quran was a guidance for pre-quranic mankind as well?(2185) Since it is called "a guidance for mankind".
Excuse me? Does this mean only the people AFTER the Quran are made by male and female? The Quran clearly says ALL humans are made by the mixing of the two cells. This includes past and present.
Are you saying that whenever "mankind" is mentioned, it is referring to ALL mankind of past as well?!
The criterion for us, to decide what Allah's sunnat is, is al-quran. And Allah's sunnat is that Al-Quran always calls a married woman by her husbands name.
Where is your proof this is the only way possible? Plus if she was divorced, she wouldn't be called by her husbands name would she? I have no Quranic proof she was divorced,
To be divorced, she has to married first. And to suggest that she was married would be un-Quranic. And Biblical.
and you have no proof she wasn't so this cannot be used as an argument.
This is THE argument. Let me show you again
If the malaika was telling Marium about 10 years in the future, why would she say "no man has touched me" ?! She said it because she was pregnant at that time. Thats what the malaika was telling her.
Does the verse say this or is this your personal interpretation?
The verse is saying it. Suppose, someone tells a girl "You are gonna get pregnant after 5 or 10 years", the girl might say "really? ...oh, ok."
But if she is told "You ARE pregnant!", her response would be "how?! Since no man has touched me!". Just like Marium's response.
It means that when the malaika gave her the good news...
- She was not married. Since she was called by her name, and not by her husband's name.
- And she was not divorced either, since she said that no man had touched her.
So you see now, why she wasn't married? And thats why she was called by her name. And thats why it is not just my personal interpretation.
-
Peace Brother Fahad,
Only the authors of the Bible, the shayateen, have worked so hard to produce a father for Jesus. The stories created by shayateen don't explain Al-Quraan.
That's odd. Those who decided what the Bible consists of in a meeting in Nicea rejected all books and gospel that claimed that Jesus had a father, so that they could easier call him the son of god, as far as I know. They did infact do the opposite of what you accuse them of.
The authors of the bible have nothing to gain by producing a father for Jesus, they have on the contrary everything to lose by such. The divinity of Jesus is the cornerstone of christianity.
Nadeem
-
This is clearly a contradiction. It says all mankind is made of sperm and eggs, but then it says Jesus was not. Maybe baby Jesus was the son of God.
I agree with Fahad that a girl would never have the reaction Mary did if she was told she would be pregnant some time in the future. It's like someone telling me I'm going to die eventually. I would say "of course." It's not surprising news or anything.
Can you explain this bit, Arnold? -
Do you actually think it's more logical (which it clearly isn't)?
It clearly is. It is evident from Marium's response.
or is that part of your blind belief in the quran (or at least your interpretation of it)?
I showed why it is not just my interpretation.
-
Peace bro.
Peace Brother Fahad,
Only the authors of the Bible, the shayateen, have worked so hard to produce a father for Jesus. The stories created by shayateen don't explain Al-Quraan.
That's odd. Those who decided what the Bible consists of in a meeting in Nicea rejected all books and gospel that claimed that Jesus had a father,
I was talking about whoever claimed that Jesus had a father, in the bible or gospel, whatever.
so that they could easier call him the son of god, as far as I know. They did infact do the opposite of what you accuse them of.
They were producing a father anyway.
The authors of the bible have nothing to gain by producing a father for Jesus, they have on the contrary everything to lose by such. The divinity of Jesus is the cornerstone of christianity.
They are enemies of the prophet. They deceive people about the prophets. Thats what they gain.
-
Peace,
Excuse me? Does this mean only the people AFTER the Quran are made by male and female? The Quran clearly says ALL humans are made by the mixing of the two cells. This includes past and present.
Are you saying that whenever "mankind" is mentioned, it is referring to ALL mankind of past as well?!
Where is your proof this is the only way possible? Plus if she was divorced, she wouldn't be called by her husbands name would she? I have no Quranic proof she was divorced,To be divorced, she has to married first. And to suggest that she was married would be un-Quranic. And Biblical.
To say she was not married when being made pregnant is also un-Quranic. And when it comes to procreation, the Quran is clear that it has used the same system always for humans.
The verse is saying it. Suppose, someone tells a girl "You are gonna get pregnant after 5 or 10 years", the girl might say "really? ...oh, ok."
But if she is told "You ARE pregnant!", her response would be "how?! Since no man has touched me!". Just like Marium's response.
It means that when the malaika gave her the good news...
When i would walk up to you and say i was gonna push you and you will fall and it will hurt. Does this immediately mean i will do it right that moment? No. And you can react'How? You haven't even touched me!', but does this imply at all you were already hit? No. Does this reject the notion i can hit you 2 years from now? No. The same holds with Mary. She was told she was gonna get pregnant of Jesus, it doesn't say she was MADE pregnant right there on that moment. No timespan is given. And her reaction is the same like yours would be on my news that i was gonna push you "how? i haven't been touched?". To believe that telling the good news also implies that she was made pregnant right at that moment is non-Quranic. To believe her rejection of being touched when she was told she will have a child, immediately implies she will never be touched by a man is again non-Quranic. She was raised in a temple. This almost always implies celibacy, and being raised to keep celibacy. Her response is normal for a person who has been raised as a nun.
- She was not married. Since she was called by her name, and not by her husband's name.
The verses in the Quran that talk about her becoming pregnant were told when she was not married yet. The verses that tell about her pregnancy and deliverance of Jesus, she was already divorced as custom in the Nazarene Temple. Plus, you have no law that says people can only be called by her husbands name. In the Quran you can see it used when the husband is also a subject in the Quran like the pharoah or Abraham. Since Jesus's father has no significance, he is not part of the Quranic story, and thus Mary is not named as her ex-husband. All wives that do carry their husbands name, have husbands that are part of the Quranic message.
- And she was not divorced either, since she said that no man had touched her.
We only know that she was not touched on the moment. To say that this means she was not gonna get married after the malikah's visit is conjecture.
Till now you have only defended weak personal interpretation. The Quran says clearly ALL of mankind is made out the mixture of 2 cells. And God doesn't change His ways. So the virginbirth interpretation of the verses do not stand, and are to be rejected.
Peace
-
Sorry arnold,your 'interpretation' of marys suprise at being informed of a pregnancy is not logical or tenable....You have used your own interpretation of dubious arbitrary historical references to justify YOUR personal theory on what you think the quran is saying...Fahads and phoenixs- point still stands unanswered....why do you guys go to such strange illogical lengths to prove and justify your own 'pet' theories and interpretations....you guys are acting like priest and gods.....You guys are just saying 'unquranic this' and 'unquranic that', but arnold many of your assertions are backed by 'unquranic' sources and references,in fact your logic is sometimes unquranic,are you reading between gods lines or are you a special interpretor for the modern times.....? You are becoming pretty dogmatic,i think phoenix is the only open-minded person left...
ps; i know you are A good thoughtful human arnold,but please think more on what you are saying,and dont become a slave to your own theories,admit your mistakes/infallibility now and again,and take other peoples advice and opinions on board as well....Take it easy... -
peace arnold,
If she was raised as a celibate, then she wouldn't have said "no man has ever touchED me" That is past tense. She is saying that she cannot have a child because no man has ever touched her in the PAST. I would agree with you if she said "no man is supposed to touch me," or "i've vowed celibacy" or "no man is going to touch me".
Plus, in every other scripture it is a virgin birth, but not in the quran? why not?
This is either a contradiction, or you are right, or we don't know what this actually means yet. Whatever the case, I'm not finding your explanation very convincing.
It is possible (and likely) that this is a parable (a FICTITIOUS story with moral or lesson), and not a historical account. A virgin birth is not possible just as moses splitting the sea is not possible. -
Peace,
Sorry arnold,your 'interpretation' of marys suprise at being informed of a pregnancy is not logical or tenable....
When a person is raised as a nun in a Temple, and she didn't know she was selected for marriage and suddenly 2 beings tell you will have a child. It is not so unlogical she would go into defense immediately.
You have used your own interpretation of dubious arbitrary historical references to justify YOUR personal theory on what you think the quran is saying...Fahads and phoenixs- point still stands unanswered....
The Quran says that ALL humans are made out of male and female, so this shows you cannot approach the story of Mary from a virginbirth point of view.
why do you guys go to such strange illogical lengths to prove and justify your own 'pet' theories and interpretations....you guys are acting like priest and gods.....You guys are just saying 'unquranic this' and 'unquranic that', but arnold many of your assertions are backed by 'unquranic' sources and references,in fact your logic is sometimes unquranic,are you reading between gods lines or are you a special interpretor for the modern times.....?You are becoming pretty dogmatic,i think phoenix is the only open-minded person left...
I give my interpretation. It doesn't matter if you accept or don't. And what is your definition of dogmatic? That i believe the Quran is divine? If that still is your definition of dogmatic, then yes, i'm dogmatic. For the rest i'm trying to understand the Quran from a scientific point of view. Nothing more. I'm no master of the Quran and i always stay open to suggestion. To say i don't do this is nonsense dear Asif, as you know i've always been open minded. I have always backed down when proven wrong. Most of my ideas i get from ancient commentators who already said these things 1400 years ago. I believe i have clearly answered their questions. If you believe it is not so, then we must agree to disagree as i'm not convinced at all by his arguments. If this is closeminded by your standards, then this means i must lose my scientific empirical demands and standards before i'm 'openminded'.
Peace bro