Jesus, Miracles, Virginbirth and the Nazarenes
-
Peace
...neither Jesus nor Adam required two parents to be created.
Jesus had Mary, who did Adam have?
None.
I didn't say that both of them didn't require any parents at all.
Where was Adam's parent?
Nowhere.
Jesus required one. Adam didn't.
So then isn't Adam as unlike to Jesus as Jesus is unlike to the rest of us?
We = 2 Parents
Jesus = 1 Parent
Adam = 0 Parents
No. He is closer to Jesus than the rest of us. Because 1 is closer to 0 than 2.
The way they are similar is that they were created by dust and the "be" command.
That can apply to all of us . And God uses this command for anything .
'Do you disbelieve in Him Who created you from dust and then from a sperm drop, then He fashioned you into a man.'
But verse 18/37 mentions another ingredient that 3/59 does not the sperm drop.
The verse is not even remotely suggesting that they had parents like other men.
God gives us all the command to be born, to shape us, of the stuff of the earth (dust - dirt).
We also require two parents and the sperm drop. They didn't.
-
Peace,
5336 Nay, did he never hear of what was in the Scrolls of Moses?
5337 And of Abraham who fulfilled his obligations.So what were in those Scrolls of Moses? What was already proclaimed before Jesus?
5338 - i That no laden one shall bear the load of another.
5339 - ii And that every human being shall be responsible for, and
compensated for, his labor.
5340 - iii And that his effort (and not the outcome) will be seen.
5341 - iv And then he will be given the full wage.
5342 - v And that to your Lord is the final destination. (Your goal shall be the
Lord?s Rule on earth).
5343 - vi And that He it is Who makes laugh, and makes weep. (Nations that
establish His Rule will have inner happiness, whereas the others will be in
misery).
5344 - vii And that He it is Who gives death and gives life. (The rise and fall
of nations follow His Laws).5345 - viii And that He it is Who creates the two companions, the male and
the female (pairs and opposites among His creation).
5346 From gametes that unite.What, was this already in the Scrolls of Moses? This means people before Jesus also were made out of the male and female........
I am not disputing that there were no males and females before Al-Quran. What I was saying is that there can exceptions. I gave examples from 2/185 and 5/116 and from Marium's story.
-
Peace Fahad,
If the Qur'an said that they were unlike other men, you'd have a leg to stand on. Nay, the Qur'an does not say that.
I have two legs to stand on since Jesus was born without any man touching her mother(347 and 1920-22). That is very unlike other men.
It tells us that all messengers were men, that Isa and Mariam had to eat food like the rest of us,
They ate food like us , yeah.
and that none should be held in higher esteem than another. Yet, if we accept this fallacy of specialness that's been placed upon these 2, then we MUST hold Adam and Isa above all prophets and messengers, for they were not created from a sperm and an egg but from a divine command outside of the God-created laws of nature that the rest of us are bound by.
Allah has blessed some over others. Nothing wrong with that.
And what about Musa?
Are both of his parents mentioned?
If not, was he also born miraculously?Jesus' birth was miraculous because he was born without any man touching her mother, not only because his father is not mentioned.
The fact is, brother, Allah's words do not run out. If He so chose, He could have named every parent of every person mentioned in the Qur'an. But He chose not to. Why? Probably because that knowledge would serve no purpose in our guidance.
The actual answer to the "Why?" is found in 347 and 1920-22.
Allah could have chosen alot of things. But what He did choose was the similarity between Isa and Adam. He further blessed us by explaining the similarity to us created from dust, via the "be" command. It's crystal clear. No need to add or search for more similarities. Allah already told us. No guesswork necessary.
What did I add? And also, did you notice the lack of "sperm drop" in that verse?
If anything Allah would not leave out of the Qur'an, it would be spelling out in unambiguous language that Isa had no father. There would be entire surat explaining the process and purpose for something so monumentally against the grain of what we understand. Imagine, multiple ayat on monetary laws and a mere riddle to discover Isa's virgin birth?
Read 347 and 1920-22. These are no riddles.
Does that make any sense?
575 The Messiah son of Mary, is no more than a messenger; like whom messengers have passed away; and his mother was trustworthy, they used to eat the food. See how We clarify the signs for them, then see how they deviate.
Were all the other messengers born of virgin mothers?
Why would Allah use the example of "they used to eat food", if not to explain to us that they were exactly like all other people?To show that they ate food like others did.
-
Peace Fahad,
What did I add?
The virgin birth myth and the idea that they were different from mankind. It's not in the ayah. You added it.
did you notice the lack of "sperm drop" in that verse?
Exactly like the ayah that mentions how Allah created us all.
Peace,
Tay -
Peace Fahad
I fear that you are going about an interpretation the wrong way. If you put things together the picture will be more clear and I think you will perhaps see that a virgin birth miracle is not mentioned at all. Yes 3/59 may be the crux of your argument that Jesus is different, but it also does not mention that he was created from seeds which would mean that he was not born of a mother either. That is not the case in my opinion because it is shown that we are created from seeds . You are saying that because 3/59 does not mention what is scattered elsewhere in the quran, it should not apply to Jesus. I say no, it is wrong to do it that way because the piture is drawn best from adding all its components up.
I have two legs to stand on since Jesus was born without any man touching her mother(347 and 1920-22).
I do not think that is saying that Mary was NEVER touched by any man whatsoever (that is sexually), especially since she had child. It seems to imply that at this point Mary was still a virgin so she inquired about this nonesense of her having a child. God percieves into veils which our eyes cannot pierce and revealed a portion of the unseen to her. "It will be so" says God to her, pointing out that even though she is virgin now, she will soon have a son with a man who will fulfill this vision. That man perhaps was the malaika who came to her, & whether he died before Jesus was born, or was away and stayed in his land not coming back with Mary to her people is a matter of conjecture.
Joe
-
peace
I was thinking that virgin birth would make sense (even when it is not part of God's way and law) if Jesus and his family were not people at all.
although now I'm thinking that the quran intends jesus to be a person like anyother.
The reason I can't deny the virgin birth is that it seems like that's what the ayah is implying. Because the malaika says that she will have a son, and she says 'no man has ever touched me'.
I don't think any other girl I know would say that if I told her she'll have a child. Most women know they'll have a child, even when they are virgins. And if she is a nun or something, she wouldn't say 'no man has touched me,' but 'no man will ever touch me.'
That, for me, is the crux of the issue. -
I am not disputing that there were no males and females before Al-Quran. What I was saying is that there can exceptions. I gave examples from 2/185 and 5/116 and from Marium's story.
Peace,
The verses clearly say that all humans are created to the merging of male and female cells, and this is refered to into the books of Moses and Abraham. This is before Jesus. There are no exceptions mentioned in the Quran. 2185 and 5116 have nothing to do with a virgin birth. The story on Mary tells she was not touched by men only when she was told she was gonna have child. It doesn't say at all she would have a virgin birth. This is a forced interpretation of the story. The cross-reference shows that Allah will not deviate from His laws, and that this Law of male and female cells merging also was present before Jesus. No exceptions are mentioned in the Quran.
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. So there is no exception made.
Jesus is as adam
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.
Adam means all mankind
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.Allah doesn't change His creation, again NO exceptions
1827 And recite what has been inspired to you from your Lord's Scripture, there is no changing His kalimat, His Commands, Decree's, Plan, Design and Creation. And you will not find besides Him any refuge. -
I am not disputing that there were no males and females before Al-Quran. What I was saying is that there can exceptions. I gave examples from 2/185 and 5/116 and from Marium's story.
The verses clearly say that all humans are created to the merging of male and female cells,
All humans? Where is that?
and this is refered to into the books of Moses and Abraham. This is before Jesus.
Before Jesus? So what?
There are no exceptions mentioned in the Quran.
Remember Marium's kid?
2185 and 5116 have nothing to do with a virgin birth.
These verse show how there can be exceptions.
If they don't have anything to do with Jesus' birth, then 4913 doesn't have anything to do with Jesus' birth either. So stop presenting it as an argument.
-
Allah doesn't change His creation, again NO exceptions
1827 And recite what has been inspired to you from your Lord's Scripture, there is no changing His kalimat, His Commands, Decree's, Plan, Design and Creation. And you will not find besides Him any refuge."Sunnat of Allah" verses not working anymore?
This proves nothing against the virginbirth. It is referring to His words. For example , if He says "be"(His word) to make something happen, it cannot be changed. Same for all His other words.
-
Peace,
Kalimat means more then 'words', it refers to design and command in the creation. And this is His sunnatilleh. I don't know what youa re thinking, but till now you haven't brought in any real evidence. Only a personal intepretation on what Mary's reaction means, which is completely subjective and contradicting with other verses of the Quran.
-
I don't know what youa re thinking, but till now you haven't brought in any real evidence. Only a personal intepretation on what Mary's reaction means, which is completely subjective and contradicting with other verses of the Quran.
Not a personal interpretation, but the only logical understanding of Mary's reaction.
-
Peace Fahad
I fear that you are going about an interpretation the wrong way. If you put things together the picture will be more clear and I think you will perhaps see that a virgin birth miracle is not mentioned at all. Yes 3/59 may be the crux of your argument that Jesus is different, but it also does not mention that he was created from seeds which would mean that he was not born of a mother either. That is not the case in my opinion because it is shown that we are created from seeds .
Jesus was definitely born of a mother. He is not called "son of Marium" for nothing.
On the other hand, Adam is not called son of any woman, so he was not born of a mother either. Neither of a father, because the verse doesn't mention the sperm.
So they were created from dust and the "be" command only. Not the sperm.
You are saying that because 3/59 does not mention what is scattered elsewhere in the quran, it should not apply to Jesus. I say no, it is wrong to do it that way because the piture is drawn best from adding all its components up.
It should not apply to Jesus and Adam because of the reasons I have given above, not because it is scattered elsewhere in the quran. It means that the picture is already complete without adding these "sperm" components.
I do not think that is saying that Mary was NEVER touched by any man whatsoever (that is sexually), especially since she had child.
I have explained a number of times already. You write
It seems to imply that at this point Mary was still a virgin so she inquired about this nonesense of her having a child...
You left her inquiry incomplete. She inquired about "this nonesense of her having a child" without a man touching her.
God percieves into veils which our eyes cannot pierce and revealed a portion of the unseen to her. "It will be so" says God to her, pointing out that even though she is virgin now, she will soon have a son with a man who will fulfill this vision.
The malaika's reply to Marium's inquiry was "it is easy for God". What is easy for God? The "nonsense of her having a child" without a man touching her . Period.
If he had meant that a man will soon touch her (sexually), he would have said so unambiguously.
And I don't anymore hear anyone say "God doesn't run out of words" about this. It shows that some participants here are biased.
-
1927 Then she came to her people carrying him. They said "O Mary, you have come with something totally unexpected!"
1928 "O sister of Aaron, your father was not a bad man, and your mother was never unchaste!"
The above helps clarify the matter; her people implied the same "who's the father" accusation.
-
Peace,
This only says 2 things
1.They didn't knew she was having a child now.
- She did something against custom. Bagiyaa in 1928 means 'to go beyond the bounds of normal conduct'.
We know she grew up in a Temple. Almost all temples on earth require celibacy, which explains Mary startlement at being chosen to carry a child. But she was from the family of Aaron. The Hebrews tried to keep this bloodlines alive as we know from the Dead Sea scrolls. Her family gave her to the Temple, and so didn't expect to come back, and especially not with a child. We now through the Quran, that Jesus was born in September, because of the ripe dates. September is a non-holy month for the Jews, and so explains why Mary 'broke the bounds of normal conduct'. Royal offspring may only be born into Holy Months. This can still be seen today with certain Jewish sects.
The verses don't imply at all to a virgin birth. This is filling in the blanks with a Christian mind. The cross reference doesn't allow this belief. Allah doesn't change His Kalimat, His Design of Creation.
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. So there is no exception made.
Jesus is as adam
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.Adam means all mankind
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.Allah doesn't change His creation, again NO exceptions
1827 And recite what has been inspired to you from your Lord's Scripture, there is no changing His kalimat, His Commands, Decree's, Plan, Design and Creation. And you will not find besides Him any refuge. -
Peace Bro Arnold
But she was from the family of Aaron. The Hebrews tried to keep this bloodlines alive as we know from the Dead Sea scrolls. Her family gave her to the Temple, and so didn't expect to come back, and especially not with a child. We now through the Quran, that Jesus was born in September, because of the ripe dates. September is a non-holy month for the Jews, and so explains why Mary 'broke the bounds of normal conduct'. Royal offspring may only be born into Holy Months. This can still be seen today with certain Jewish sects.
We do not interpret the quran in reference to man-made forms of history i.e. dead sea scrolls or hadith. We interpret the quran simply upon it's own merits because God will explain His Verses.
"Royal offspring" to be born of a certain month is a man-made silly rule. The God does not have to conform to it. Furthermore, this is a mix up of quranic verses with jewish interpretation. Was it a malaika that came to Mary or a person coming to make her continue the bloodline? did she run away to the desert because she was afraid she was having a baby when NO MAN HAS TOUCHED HER, or was she afraid of having a baby at a certain "unholy" month deemed by the writers of the dead scrolls? Did they accuse her of being unchaste, or messing up the "procreation calendar for royal bloodlines"?
Furthermore, what was the purpose of including this in the quran, if it only conforms to unauthorized customs of Hebrew Royalty? What purpose does it serve me today?
Your analysis is similar to relying on Bukhari et al in order to understand the quran.
I don't mean disrespect, this is my opinion.
-
Peace,
Dear Boost, you are confusing 2 things here completely. You didn't get the point at all. Allah ignored the man-made Temple rules and just decided for Mary without any keeping to man-made rules, this was seen as a crime and rebellion by the Temple rulers, and so she had to flee the temple, this is why her family says she committed bagiyaa. You have 2 factors here
- What was the custom of the Temple.
The custom of the Temple was mostly celibacy and that they decide when you have children. To deviate from the Temple rules was a grave offense.
- What God decided for Mary.
Which was to have children and without caring about any man-made 'holy' months or celibacy. Because Mary obeyed Allah, she went against the custom. Being from the family of Aaron, the family was surprised she went beyond the bounds of custom, which in their belief was always obeyed. Allah says that He never had promoted celibacy, but the family of Mary made her grow up as a nun, this clearly shows that they believed this was a law of Allah and that Aaron also believed this. So they say 'bagiyaa', that her ancestors also believed in celibacy.
Bagiyaa means 'to go beyond the bounds of custom'. Unchaste is not the real meaning, but an interpretated one.
So it doesn't matter if I use Dead Sea scrolls or not. The matter stays the same. God made decisions for Mary which would create conflicts with the Temple customs, this is why she reacted on the malikah as such, why she had to flee the Temple and why her family reacted as such.
All the things mentioned all point to that Mary broke the Temple customs, not that she had a virgibirth. All the verses involved show that God made her go against the Priesthood rules.
And i'm never offended about an opinion, especially when you confused your point
-
Peace Fahad,
These verses will complete the picture of how Allah created us 4067, 3511, 225, 1837 . Not so for Jesus and Adam.
Again, this is your addition. To accept it, we must ignore the ayat I posted which clearly state there is no change/exception in God's Law/Way.
Peace,
Tay -
Peace
Just goes to show there are no shortcuts
I need to read the thread fully first ;D
Sorry about the mix up