Islam and the Virgin Birth of Jesus

[ralphinal]

Analyzer,
Thank you for the attempt, but it does not really answer the question. All you did was put up how Jesus was like all humans according to Islam, which is not an accurate representation of the universe.

Biologically, a human is made when sperm meets an egg. The sperm contains half of the genetic code, the egg the other half. I am 1/2 my mother and 1/2 my father. Different traits may be expressed in me, but there will be some similarities.

If Mary was found to be with Child and she had not been with a man, then the typical biological formula does not work. This would be a miracle, no doubt. As an egg contains only half of the genetic code for a human, part of the miracle would be God filling in the blanks. Now we are getting to my question.

We know that GOd did not have sexual realtions with her. It was a unique act of his Power over creation. Jesus inherited his humanity from his mother. What did he get from his father?

Why is it so had to say that because God’s power caused Mary to be pregnant with Jesus, GOd is his Father?

 

[Americanrevert]

And am still waiting for muslims to adress the OP instead of usual digressions/attacks on the Bible or Paul.

What is OP? What attacks? I ask from your bible and you don’t answer but insinuate I am attacking…come on, be fair.

by Angelos…Since you Muslims believe that of Allah’s revelations, only the one given to Mohammad is authentic and reliable and that of all the Islamic messengers, only Mohammad could establish the so-called true religion of Allah on earth, your tenets/assertions imply that all the former messengers failed to found Islam.

Did we say only the one given to Mohammad was the only authentic one? Again, another insinuation and lie against us. We believe and have stated over and over and over and over again, in eloquent terms, that we must believe in all the books that were given to the prophets of God (peace an blessings be upon them all). We have stated over and over and over again, in eloquent terms how those messages before Mohammad’s were lost and not kept in original form. This is factual and no one can claim they are. They were not kept. All the prophets of God established the oneness of God on earth. It was the people who messed up and got messed up and were disobedient, thus the need for new messages…(you could also say the same about the Messengers before Jesus~were they in vain??? how come you do not follow the commandments and laws?)

Another problem with your argument is that it ignores the immortality of human soul. According to the Koran, even the Islamic warriors and martyrs are considered alive after their physical death.

Again, another assumption. Are you a scholar of Islam to explain? Immortality of human soul?? Everyone knows that the body is what dies and not the soul…what else do you say we don’t believe in again?

What is your conclusion? Here are your contradictory premises:

a) Jesus died a natural death. He is not alive.
b) There is an authentic Hadith that denies my premise a.
c) I cannot deny the Hadith that denies my premise a.

Jesus NEVER DIED according to Islam. He was risen
am clueless of what you are tryin to say here about the hadith…please explain

americanrevert

 

[inJESUS]

Americanrevert, Angelos was not discussing with you so maybe you need to read who he was responding to (Planten) and why before yoou accuse him of anything.

Have you got an answer to the OP?

 

[ralphinal]

Teerminology and Forum Decorum 101

OP: Original Post or Original Poster

LP: Last Post or last poster

Hijack (Also Derail): to force a thread away from the OP by creating new conversations. It may be done when trying to get clarificaiton on a point but more commonly it is done to avoid the topic or kill the thread. As a rule, it is considered rude. In this specific thread, the discussion of the Bible is a blatent attempt to derail this thread by people who will not answer the OP.

Bump: an empty post to push a thread back to the top

IMO: in my opinion (can be IMHO adding humble)

AFAIK: As far as I know

AFAICT: As far as I can tell

LOL: Laugh out loud

ROFL: Rolling on floor laughing

Ad Homin: attacking the poster and not the position. very rude

Even though we are all guilty of it, hijacking a thread is bad. Sometimes it can lead to a fuller understanding, but in most cases it is a cowards act to avoid discussion of difficult topics.

I hope this helps

 

[Angelos]

And am still waiting for muslims to adress the OP instead of usual digressions/attacks on the Bible or Paul.

You cannot be serious. You and your Muslim friends here always repeat the same baseless allegations and go off topic whenever you cannot evade Christian answers/questions. Please judge yourself before judging others.

Did we say only the one given to Mohammad was the only authentic one? Again, another insinuation and lie against us.

Did I say that Muslims said only the Koran was God’s revelation? NO. You are lying and prating as usual in the Islamic slandering mood.

Go and read my post once more. I clearly stated that Muslims believed OF Allah’s revelations (this means Muslims believe the Koran is not the only revelation if you have no difficulty understanding English!) only the Koran IS authentic. Don’t you believe this way?

We believe and have stated over and over and over and over again, in eloquent terms, that we must believe in all the books that were given to the prophets of God (peace an blessings be upon them all). We have stated over and over and over again, in eloquent terms how those messages before Mohammad’s were lost and not kept in original form. This is factual and no one can claim they are. They were not kept. All the prophets of God established the oneness of God on earth. It was the people who messed up and got messed up and were disobedient, thus the need for new messages…

Now you are confirming ONCE MORE that only the Koran is authentic and reliable text from above. This is equal to saying that God’s former revelations became worthless as they could not remain in their original form. This is the failure of the Islamic God, who did not preserve His truth until Mohammad’s time, and of all those messengers prior to Mohammad, who could not establish the Islamic teachings on earth firmly and permanently.

(you could also say the same about the Messengers before Jesus~were they in vain??? how come you do not follow the commandments and laws?)

Since we Christians, unlike you Muslims, never claim that all the messengers tried to convert people to the same religion with the same message, that the former revelations became the source of false religions/doctrines , and that the New Testament corrects and replaces the Torah due to its supposed textual corruption, your assertions are condemned to ridicule.

Again, another assumption. Are you a scholar of Islam to explain? Immortality of human soul?? Everyone knows that the body is what dies and not the soul…what else do you say we don’t believe in again?

Are you a scholar of Christianity to criticise basic Christian tenets? Are you a scholar of Islam to rebut my statements?

Before attacking me, you should read planten’s reply to my post and understand why I have to remind him that Islam confirms the immortality of human soul.

Jesus NEVER DIED according to Islam. He was risen
am clueless of what you are tryin to say here about the hadith…please explain
americanrevert

Go and teach that doctrine to your Muslim friend planten, who insists that Jesus died a natural death.

 

[Psalter]

Well, to be fair, inJESUS, I know plenty of Americans who speak very limited English or none at all. But I agree that it does call into question her representation of herself. Perhaps she thought that presenting herself as an American would endear her to the American majority of this board? I don’t know. I asked her a while ago if English was her first language or if she’d prefer to converse with me in Spanish or Russian, but she never responded. I don’t know what to make of that, but people can be sensitive about language issues, so I am not going to press the point (outside of bringing it up in this response…oops).

She said she was a Cherokee Indian…perhaps that explains the poor English?

 

[planten]

Thank you for your reasonable reply, Planten. I am glad you seem to understand what I am trying to say, even if the poster it is intended for might never reach that point.

I must take issue with the quoted portion above. Elsewhere in the post, you say that Muslims believe in parts of the NT. This may be so, but to Christians this is not acceptable. For us, we would say that you cannot accept only part of the truth without implicitly rejecting all of it. If I accept parts of the Quran, a few verses here and there that conform to what I already believe as a Christian, you would definitely not say that I am accepting the truth of Islam as a whole, right? In the great Abrahamic religions, there are no half-truths, just as there can be no half-Muslims, half-Christians, or half-Jews.

Also, we reject Islam outright for theological reasons. In Galatians 1:8 we are warned that we are not to accept any Gospel other than that which is given to us, even if it were to come from an angel of heaven. This means no Quran and no Islam.

Thanks. My comments on your last para only. You reject Islam outright for theological reasoning. Okay. We as Mulims do not reject bible outright for any reasons. So who is at better footing? Be kind and decide

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Hello and good morning,

again, accusations and mean words…can’t anyone discuss without such rudeness goin on?

Do you even know that Maryam had a father named Imran? lol you misunderstood YET AGAIN.

Miriam had a father named Imran, or Amram. Mary had a father names Joachim. The Arabic for both Miriam and Mary is Maryam, which is how the Quran confused the two women separated by over a thousand years. LOL, what a misunderstanding.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

The quote he quoted was from the English translation of the Quran. Not the Bible. *And Maryam’s father was named Imran. *The Quran doesn’t confuse anything. That is your opinion.
No, that’s the QURAN’S opinion Sura 19 "Mary:
27 At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: "O Mary! truly an amazing thing hast thou brought!

28 “O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!”

29 But she pointed to the babe. They said: “How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?”

30 He said: "I am indeed a servant of Allah. He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet;

31 "And He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me Prayer and Charity as long as I live;

32 "(He) hath made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable;

33 “So peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life (again)”!

34 Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute.

35 It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, “Be”, and it is.

No matter how you look at it, many of the Questions that are being asked from the Muslims side of things, are not being answered truthfully. Very Vague indeed.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Rational/Marysee/Counsel, is that you behind the curtain? LOL

Or behind the veil?
Are you asking for a peak behind the burkah?

 

[Isa_Almisry]

What does this sentence mean?

Perhaps Allah will abrogate it, and give us some better sentence.
Like one that makes sense.
But based on his past track record in naskh, I doubt it.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Agreed. We Muslims feel same for you. What you said above is good and correct. It is nobody’s job to put faith into any one. It is all upto Allah. We only discuss things and pass the message peacefully.

That is also alright. If you believe that Muslims have their points and may be true, it is o.k. We already believe in part of the bible NT. We are nearer to you than you are to us. WE never say that Devil was giving messages to Jesus
No, you say Satan gave verses to Muhammad, which MANY Christians would agree with.

Please think over. We do not say such things and we allow for you what we ask for ourselves from you.

 

[Isa_Almisry]

Thanks. My comments on your last para only. You reject Islam outright for theological reasoning. Okay. We as Mulims do not reject bible outright for any reasons. So who is at better footing? Be kind and decide

Do you cite the Bible, ANY verse, as an authority?
Then what does it mean that you “do not reject the Bible for any reason?”

 

[planten]

**The topic is virgin Mary. The christians have not been able to explain what they mean exactly by virginity of Mary.

And being made pregnant by the holy ghost is another of their problems. Is that the duty of the holy ghost to make ladies pregnant.??
**

 

[Angelos]

The topic is virgin Mary. The christians have not been able to explain what they mean exactly by virginity of Mary.

What else can we explain about Panaghia Mary’s virginity?? You can understand simple English, can’t you?

**
And being made pregnant by the holy ghost is another of their problems. Is that the duty of the holy ghost to make ladies pregnant.??
**

Jesus’ miraculous conception by God’s life-giving Spirit causes no problems. However, Muslims are ashamed of a verse in their Koran which claims that Allah breathed into Mary’s private parts (the original language of the Koran has the word vagina!!!) to make Her pregnant. Is talking of Mary’s private parts the duty of Mohammad’s god or of Mohammad himself?

 

[dzheremi]

Thanks. My comments on your last para only. You reject Islam outright for theological reasoning. Okay. We as Mulims do not reject bible outright for any reasons. So who is at better footing? Be kind and decide

There is no need to ask this question. I am telling you that we CANNOT accept any book of Islam or any other religion and still remain Christians. It is not a matter of who appears to be on better footing. The only good footing to be on is firmly on the rock that is Christ and His Church.

And I’m afraid Muslims DO reject the Bible. Accepting a few verses that you can interpret in a pro-Islam manner (while claiming that anything that contradicts Islam is “corruption”) is not the same as accepting the Bible itself anymore so than accepting that Islam has some truth in it (by virtue of its relation to Christianity) is accepting Islam or the Quran. That was the point in my reply to you when I said that you cannot accept only part of the truth. You must accept all of it or you accept none of it (whether you think “it” is Islam or Christianity), because the claims of the Abrahamic religions are mutually exclusive. Either Christianity is right and Jesus is the Son of God, or Islam is right and He is not.

 

[ralphinal]

**The topic is virgin Mary. The christians have not been able to explain what they mean exactly by virginity of Mary.

And being made pregnant by the holy ghost is another of their problems. Is that the duty of the holy ghost to make ladies pregnant.??
**

I will explain Virgin and Virgin Mary in the most tasteful way I can.

A Virgin is a woman who has not had sex with a man. That is the modern definition. In the era that this was written, it would have been a woman who had not had sex with anyone in any form. Virgin Mary is a woman who was found to be with Child and had never had sex prior to that. SHe gave birth to the child without having had sex as well. Catholic and EO Christians hold that she never had sex.

Being pregnant by the power of the Holy Ghost is not our problem. The Holy Ghost is God and if God wants to manifest himself in this manner, so be it. It was a unique event that only occured once in history,

 

[planten]

You cannot be serious. You and your Muslim friends here always repeat the same baseless allegations and go off topic whenever you cannot evade Christian answers/questions. Please judge yourself before judging others.

Did I say that Muslims said only the Koran was God’s revelation? NO. You are lying and prating as usual in the Islamic slandering mood.

Go and read my post once more. I clearly stated that Muslims believed OF Allah’s revelations (this means Muslims believe the Koran is not the only revelation if you have no difficulty understanding English!) only the Koran IS authentic. Don’t you believe this way?

Now you are confirming ONCE MORE that only the Koran is authentic and reliable text from above. This is equal to saying that God’s former revelations became worthless as they could not remain in their original form. This is the failure of the Islamic God, who did not preserve His truth until Mohammad’s time, and of all those messengers prior to Mohammad, who could not establish the Islamic teachings on earth firmly and permanently.

Since we Christians, unlike you Muslims, never claim that all the messengers tried to convert people to the same religion with the same message, that the former revelations became the source of false religions/doctrines , and that the New Testament corrects and replaces the Torah due to its supposed textual corruption, your assertions are condemned to ridicule.

Are you a scholar of Christianity to criticise basic Christian tenets? Are you a scholar of Islam to rebut my statements?

Before attacking me, you should read planten’s reply to my post and understand why I have to remind him that Islam confirms the immortality of human soul.

Go and teach that doctrine to your Muslim friend planten, who insists that Jesus died a natural death.

**Jesus died a natural death very long time after he fled the scene from palestine and migrated to some other land… But that does not mean he died on the cross. Jesus did not die on the cross. When he was brought down from the cross he had fainted and appeared to be dead. His legs were not broken. He was not buried.

I say that Jesus did not die on the cross. he survived the trial on the cross because he had prayed to his God to save him. God accepted his prayer and miraculously saved Jesus from the bad (cursed) death on the cross.

But since he was a condemned man, he could not appear in public. He never went back to his enemies to show them that he was alive (That he came back from the dead). He rather peacefully, in a hurry, disappeared from the scene. They planned to tell every one that he had gone up to Father so that nobody goes looking for him. Other wise the Jews would catch him again and he would be crucified the second time. (once more).

Angelos, you keep on telling us your theory. But we Muslims know all that happened to Jesus. Thanks angelos for telling us your version of the Jesus story.**

 

[ralphinal]

**Jesus died a natural death very long time after he fled the scene from palestine and migrated to some other land… But that does not mean he died on the cross. Jesus did not die on the cross. When he was brought down from the cross he had fainted and appeared to be dead. His legs were not broken. He was not buried.

I say that Jesus did not die on the cross. he survived the trial on the cross because he had prayed to his God to save him. God accepted his prayer and miraculously saved Jesus from the bad (cursed) death on the cross.

But since he was a condemned man, he could not appear in public. He never went back to his enemies to show them that he was alive (That he came back from the dead). He rather peacefully, in a hurry, disappeared from the scene. They planned to tell every one that he had gone up to Father so that nobody goes looking for him. Other wise the Jews would catch him again and he would be crucified the second time. (once more).

Angelos, you keep on telling us your theory. But we Muslims know all that happened to Jesus. Thanks angelos for telling us your version of the Jesus story.**

Wow. And what proof do you have of this theory? The words of the same person who said that the trinity was God, Jesus and MAry? The same person who had God swear on stars and Muhammed, placing himself under them?

Jesus died on the Cross. He was buried. He said it would happen and he said it did happen To claim otherwise is to call him, his mother, and all of his freinds liers.

 

[planten]

What else can we explain about Panaghia Mary’s virginity?? You can understand simple English, can’t you?

Jesus’ miraculous conception by God’s life-giving Spirit causes no problems. However, Muslims are ashamed of a verse in their Koran which claims that Allah breathed into Mary’s private parts (the original language of the Koran has the word vagina!!!) to make Her pregnant. Is talking of Mary’s private parts the duty of Mohammad’s god or of Mohammad himself?

**There is no such verse about private parts in the Quran. Quran is not as bad the bible in which it is said that angel went into her. What do you understand by the words “Went into her?”

When you read that “Went into her” then please keep in mind the words of the daughters of LOT who used similar words that there was no one who could come into them… See that in the OT.

You want the world to believe the impossibles. That a ghost can make a lady pregnant? How is that. While you do not agree to any other sensible things. Nobody would believe your impossible theology.
**