Islam and the Virgin Birth of Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter Psalter
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
**paul is no where in the Quran because he was not any apostle of Jesus. He was a staunch enemy of Jesus. He killed many followers of Jesus.He never spent a day with Jesus. he never knew the teachings of Jesus.He reversed all the good wotks of Jesus, even called the law of Moses as a curse. What could be worse?

Quran does not mention him and the four gospels (The real ones) also do not mention paul.**
Great! Abu Leheb is in the Koran because he was a great Muslim. Pharaoh is in the Koran because he was a great follower of Moses. The story of Abraham’s folk, who wanted to burn him, is in the Koran because all those people were Abraham’s true followers. Thanks for the laughter dear planten :rotfl:

More, Mohammad’s ghost haunts the world now and murders Christ’s followers. This proves Mohammad cannot be a true messenger of God! Thanks for agreeing with us and denying Mohammad! 😃
 
Please when you choose to corrupt the Bible to support your bogus concepts, get the information correct.

Paul was born a Roman citizen. It was the captain of the guard that purchased citizenship.

My brothers and sisters in Christ have answered the other lies already, so there is no need for me to do the same.

Why was Jesus born of a Virign?

Who is his Father?

What did he inherit from him?

By what means was she made pregnant?
 
Please when you choose to corrupt the Bible to support your bogus concepts, get the information correct.

Paul was born a Roman citizen. It was the captain of the guard that purchased citizenship.

My brothers and sisters in Christ have answered the other lies already, so there is no need for me to do the same.

Why was Jesus born of a Virign?

Who is his Father?

What did he inherit from him?

By what means was she made pregnant?
Silence of the ones with no answer LOL

Maybe it is wrong of us to expect the followers of a promiscuous messenger to comprehend the notion of virginity and chastity. 😉
 
Paul was born a Roman citizen. It was the captain of the guard that purchased citizenship.
**

Good catch by you…right? But not really because that little “catch” at the end of my post was purposely, to make sure you read my posts carefully and then start thinking independently as I knew that as per Paul he was a born citizen and it was that commander who came to him and said to him:“Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?”
“Yes,” Paul answered.
Then commander replied, “I acquired this citizenship for a large sum of money.”
Then Paul said: “But I was born one.”

At once those who were going to interrogate Paul backed away from him, and the commander became alarmed** when he realized that he was a Roman citizen and that he had had him bound.

Then another purpose was to show you that it was not easy to punish a Roman who was a citizen by birth. Moreover Paul has been working for Roman authorities.
 
Good catch by you…right? But not really because that little “catch” at the end of my post was purposely, to make sure you read my posts carefully and then start thinking independently as I knew that as per Paul he was a born citizen and it was that commander who came to him and said to him:“Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?”
“Yes,” Paul answered.
Then commander replied, “I acquired this citizenship for a large sum of money.”
Then Paul said: “But I was born one.”

At once those who were going to interrogate Paul backed away from him, and the commander became alarmed when he realized that he was a Roman citizen and that he had had him bound.

Then another purpose was to show you that it was not easy to punish a Roman who was a citizen by birth. Moreover Paul has been working for Roman authorities.
Proof?
 
**Paul is a Herodian (Roman 16:11) “[He] had been the implacable advocate of freedom of Gentiles from the laws of the Mosaic covenant and, especially in Galatia, had refused to allow attempts to impose them on Gentile converts to the gospel. He had witnessed the personal hostilities that developed between the adherents of the two faiths and had written his strongly worded Letter to the Galatians against those Jewish Christians who were seeking to persuade Gentile Christians to adopt the religious practices of Judaism.”

He has been teaching on his own gospel. (Romans 16:25) which is as per Catholci NAB: “Paul’s gospel reveals the mystery kept secret for long ages: justification and salvation through faith, with all the implications for Jews and Gentiles that Paul has developed in the letter.”

It seems his teachings were pre-calculated.
Paul was free in regard to all kinds ofpeople. He makes himself a slave to all so as to win over as many as possible. To the Jews Ihe wants to became like a Jew to win over Jews; to those under the law he becames like one under the law–though he himself not under the law–to win over those under the law. To those outside the law he becames like one outside the law to win over those outside the law. To the weak he becames weak, to win over the weakand he does all this for what? Just for the sake of his own gospel.

Before his so-called “vision”, Suals’ goal was to capture followers of The Way and bring them to public trial and execution. He was even present when the first follower of Jesus - martyr-Stephen was killed by an angry mob:

“But they cried out in a loud voice, covered their ears, and rushed upon him together.They threw him out of the city, and began to stone him. The witnesses laid down their cloaks at the feet of a young man named Saul. As they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” Then he fell to his knees and cried out in a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them”; and when he said this, he fell asleep.
Now Saul was consenting to his execution.On that day, there broke out a severe persecution of the church in Jerusalem, and all were scattered throughout the countryside of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. Devout men buried Stephen and made a loud lament over him.” – Acts 7 (57 - 60) - Acts 8 (1-2)

The what Saul/Paul did later on? He “tried to destroy the church; entering house after house and dragging out men and women, he handed them over for imprisonment.”

When Saul/Paul presented his first defense speech he says:
“My brothers and fathers, listen to what I am about to say to you in my defense.” … “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in this city. At the feet of Gamaliel I was educated strictly in our ancestral law and was zealous for God, just as all of you are today. I persecuted this Way to death, binding both men and women and delivering them to prison. Even the high priest and the whole council of elders can testify on my behalf. For from them I even received letters to the brothers and set out for Damascus to bring back to Jerusalem in chains for punishment those there as well.” (Acts 22:1-to-5)

As per his statement he seems a deout Jew yet was busy inkilling innocent followers of the Way.
Do you think he being a Roman citizen by birth, did all this without any approval of Romans or their assignment given to him?​
**
 
You have not defined your version of virginity. So there is no reply from Muslims. That is because you have many wrong notions about various words.
you dont need our version…it’s there in the Quran…Mary became pregnant without a man touching her…
 
you dont need our version…it’s there in the Quran…Mary became pregnant without a man touching her…
That is not correct. When news of a son was given to her in the temple, she was unmarried and untouched, and no hope of any marriage. There was no news that no man will ever touch her.

We will come to some understanding after knowing what you understand by the virginity of Mary. To me a lady is a virgin for life if she has not seen any man before her marriage and her own husband. What do you say? Agree or not? Welcome.

If you do not reply then we will understand that you have nothing with you except scandals.
 
That is not correct. When news of a son was given to her in the temple, she was unmarried and untouched, and no hope of any marriage. There was no news that no man will ever touch her.

We will come to some understanding after knowing what you understand by the virginity of Mary. To me a lady is a virgin for life if she has not seen any man before her marriage and her own husband. What do you say? Agree or not? Welcome.

If you do not reply then we will understand that you have nothing with you except scandals.
What an absurd and pointless argument fitting the Islamic mentality. 😃

How can a lady be considered a VIRGIN after her sexual intercourse with a man (her husband or someone else)? Dear planten, you are talking through your Muslim hat again LOL
 
Paul is a Herodian (Roman 16:11)
This is scraping the bottom of the barrel dumb.

Rom. 16:11
ασπασασθε ηρωδιωνα τον συγγενη μου ασπασασθε τους εκ των ναρκισσου τους οντας εν κυριω

“Greet Herodion my kinsman,” the name wasn’t uncommon.
“[He] had been the implacable advocate of freedom of Gentiles from the laws of the Mosaic covenant and, especially in Galatia, had refused to allow attempts to impose them on Gentile converts to the gospel. He had witnessed the personal hostilities that developed between the adherents of the two faiths and had written his strongly worded Letter to the Galatians against those Jewish Christians who were seeking to persuade Gentile Christians to adopt the religious practices of Judaism.”
Acts 9:1-2 shows where he got his approval and assignment, ,the Jewish authorities.

Thanks for showing yet again what a waste of time this is.
 
**

Good catch by you…right? But not really because that little “catch” at the end of my post was purposely, to make sure you read my posts carefully and then start thinking independently as I knew that as per Paul he was a born citizen and it was that commander who came to him and said to him:“Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?”
“Yes,” Paul answered.
Then commander replied, “I acquired this citizenship for a large sum of money.”
Then Paul said: “But I was born one.”

At once those who were going to interrogate Paul backed away from him, and the commander became alarmed** when he realized that he was a Roman citizen and that he had had him bound.

Then another purpose was to show you that it was not easy to punish a Roman who was a citizen by birth. Moreover Paul has been working for Roman authorities.
is it acceptable to lie in order to further the Islamic point? That is what you are admitting to.

Paul was executed by the Roman emperor, and placed under house arrest by him. Yep. He must have been big friends with him.
 
Wow. I learn so much from these threads. Apparently the Islamic definition of virginity is about the same as the Islamic definition of marriage…

And here I thought that I and many, many other people had pointed out the very verses from the Quran where it says Mary birthed Jesus though she was “not unchaste”. There are also other verses like 66:12 that talk about how Mary “guarded her Chastity”. The Virgin Birth is, as far as I can tell, an absolute fact in Islam, unless God’s “last revelation” contains some errors in it! (Which obviously it does or else we would get an actual answer someplace in this thread…though the Virgin Birth is one place the Quran got it right, though it doesn’t know why!)

What gives, Planten? Are you so ashamed to share something in common with the Christians that you have to make “virginity” mean something other than what it means? 🤷
 
Wow. I learn so much from these threads. Apparently the Islamic definition of virginity is about the same as the Islamic definition of marriage…

And here I thought that I and many, many other people had pointed out the very verses from the Quran where it says Mary birthed Jesus though she was “not unchaste”. There are also other verses like 66:12 that talk about how Mary “guarded her Chastity”. The Virgin Birth is, as far as I can tell, an absolute fact in Islam, unless God’s “last revelation” contains some errors in it! (Which obviously it does or else we would get an actual answer someplace in this thread…though the Virgin Birth is one place the Quran got it right, though it doesn’t know why!)

What gives, Planten? Are you so ashamed to share something in common with the Christians that you have to make “virginity” mean something other than what it means? 🤷
I believe in virgin birth of Jesus but you have not defined what you mean by the virgin birth. The Quran supports that Mary was a virgin, untouched by any man, of course while she was in the temple. What happened to her virginity when she left the temple is your business. You describe it please.

And if you say that a ghost made her pregnant then I do not believe it could do that.

Of course it appears by the verses of the Quran (what you are trying to say) but it is not necessarily so. Unless it is mentioned that no one ever touched Mary after she left the temple. And that is no where in the Quran.
 
I believe in virgin birth of Jesus but you have not defined what you mean by the virgin birth. The Quran supports that Mary was a virgin, untouched by any man, of course while she was in the temple. What happened to her virginity when she left the temple is your business. You describe it please.

And if you say that a ghost made her pregnant then I do not believe it could do that.

Of course it appears by the verses of the Quran (what you are trying to say) but it is not necessarily so. Unless it is mentioned that no one ever touched Mary after she left the temple. And that is no where in the Quran.
Platen, why don’t you convince your fellow Muslims of your Ahmadi beliefs, and then try to convince us.
 
is it acceptable to lie in order to further the Islamic point? That is what you are admitting to.
**It was not a lie, because:

- I have been quoting and talking about your NT and about the person whose books (letters) are dominant in the whole NT.
  • To re-check, you will/have to go back and read again (if you haven’t before) to see whether it was Paul or that Commander who bought his citizenship by paying lot of money.
  • Lastly, this is a forum where I and you and other have a chance to come back and answer further doubts/questions/accusations. So I was going to reveal it myself later, incase if you somehow skipped/overlooked it, but my intention was to show what? To show that it was not easy to punish a Roman national (such as Paul, an early persecutor of followers of the Way) who was a citizen by birth. Moreover Paul has been working for Roman authorities.
Now consider this scenario:

On the one hand Jesus says this:

Mark 4:10-13**
10 - And when he was alone, those present along with the Twelve questioned him about the parables.

11 - He [Jesus] answered them, "The mystery of the kingdom of God has been granted to you. But to those outside everything comes in parables,

12 - so that ‘they may look and see but not perceive, and hear and listen but not understand, in order that they may not be converted and be forgiven.’"

13 - Jesus said to them, "Do you not understand this parable? Then how will you understand any of the parables?

Then later Mark is telling us:

34 - Without parables he [Jesus] did not speak to them, but to his own disciples he explained everything in private.

But when:

19 The high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and about his doctrine.

20 Jesus answered him, "I have spoken publicly to the world. I have always taught in a synagogue or in the temple area where all the Jews gather, and in secret I have said nothing.

21 Why ask me? Ask those who heard me what I said to them. They know what I said." —John 18:19-21

But as per Mark 4:10, Jesus did teach in private when he was alone with his disciples. No? Yes, ofcourse. Now how do you reconcile these two clear seeming contradictions? This appears as a lie, no? Especially if you have found this kind of stuff in Islamic scriptures, do you think you would have tolerate it?

Are you going to blame Jesus that he lied to the High Priest? And here an another funny thing I want you to keep in mind that it was this same office of High Priest who later “prophecised” that Jesus will die to"save" his nation, otherwise the whole nation will perish through the hands of Romans and from that day on Jews planned to kill him, otherwise Jesus had no plan to die willfully for you or me or any Japanese/Chinease. His own life was in danger why shoudl he die for you who were not even born yet? ]

Lastly, what your beloved Paul used to do? Paul was free in regard to all kinds of people. He makes himself a slave to all so as to win over as many as possible. To the Jews he wants to became like a Jew to win over Jews; to those under the law he becames like one under the law–though he himself not under the law–to win over those under the law. To those outside the law he becames like one outside the law to win over those outside the law. To the weak he becames weak, to win over the weakand he does all this for what? Just for the sake of his own gospel. Right? Ofcourse that is what he did . This is a real issue/problem. Do you have a problem with him?

 
It was not a lie, because:

- I have been quoting and talking about your NT and about the person whose books (letters) are dominant in the whole NT

That is the most bogus excuse for lying that I have ever seen. A lie is false information passed off as true intentionally. You have lied
  • To re-check, you will/have to go back and read again (if you haven’t before) to see whether it was Paul or that Commander who bought his citizenship by paying lot of money.
No, I do not. I know the verse in question. Quite well. You may have a bogus, altered Muslim approved bible that you use, but, like all Muslim Scriptures, it is tainted.
  • Lastly, this is a forum where I and you and other have a chance to come back and answer further doubts/questions/accusations. So I was going to reveal it myself later, incase if you somehow skipped/overlooked it, but my intention was to show what? To show that it was not easy to punish a Roman national (such as Paul, an early persecutor of followers of the Way) who was a citizen by birth. Moreover Paul has been working for Roman authorities.
He worked for them how? Prove it? This accusation is an attept to derail a thread (there is ZERO RELEVENCE TO THIS CONVERSATION) and to cast doubt upon Paul, a true man of God.
Now consider this scenario:
On the one hand Jesus says this:
Mark 4:10-13
10 - And when he was alone, those present along with the Twelve questioned him about the parables.

11 - He [Jesus] answered them, "The mystery of the kingdom of God has been granted to you. But to those outside everything comes in parables,
12 - so that ‘they may look and see but not perceive, and hear and listen but not understand, in order that they may not be converted and be forgiven.’"
13 - Jesus said to them, "Do you not understand this parable? Then how will you understand any of the parables?
Then later Mark is telling us:
34 - Without parables he [Jesus] did not speak to them, but to his own disciples he explained everything in private.
But when:
19 The high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and about his doctrine.
20 Jesus answered him, "I have spoken publicly to the world. I have always taught in a synagogue or in the temple area where all the Jews gather, and in secret I have said nothing.
21 Why ask me? Ask those who heard me what I said to them. They know what I said." —John 18:19-21
But as per Mark 4:10, Jesus did teach in private when he was alone with his disciples. No? Yes, ofcourse. Now how do you reconcile these two clear seeming contradictions? This appears as a lie, no? Especially if you have found this kind of stuff in Islamic scriptures, do you think you would have tolerate it?
Are you going to blame Jesus that he lied to the High Priest? And here an another funny thing I want you to keep in mind that it was this same office of High Priest who later “prophecised” that Jesus will die to"save" his nation, otherwise the whole nation will perish through the hands of Romans and from that day on Jews planned to kill him, otherwise Jesus had no plan to die willfully for you or me or any Japanese/Chinease. His own life was in danger why shoudl he die for you who were not even born yet? ]
Lastly, what your beloved Paul used to do? Paul was free in regard to all kinds of people. He makes himself a slave to all so as to win over as many as possible. To the Jews he wants to became like a Jew to win over Jews; to those under the law he becames like one under the law–though he himself not under the law–to win over those under the law. To those outside the law he becames like one outside the law to win over those outside the law. To the weak he becames weak, to win over the weakand he does all this for what? Just for the sake of his own gospel. Right? Ofcourse that is what he did . This is a real issue/problem. Do you have a problem with him?

Start a new thread if you want to discuss lying. I think you need to. this one is about the Virgin birth.

Who is Jesus’s daddy?

Why is important that he was born of a virgin?

What traits did he inherit from his Father?

If you want a thread to call Jesus a lier, go start it.​
 
**

On the one hand Jesus says this:

Mark 4:10-13**
10 - And when he was alone, those present along with the Twelve questioned him about the parables.

11 - He [Jesus] answered them, "The mystery of the kingdom of God has been granted to you. But to those outside everything comes in parables,

12 - so that ‘they may look and see but not perceive, and hear and listen but not understand, in order that they may not be converted and be forgiven.’"

13 - Jesus said to them, "Do you not understand this parable? Then how will you understand any of the parables?

Then later Mark is telling us:

34 - Without parables he [Jesus] did not speak to them, but to his own disciples he explained everything in private.

But when:

19 The high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and about his doctrine.

20 Jesus answered him, "I have spoken publicly to the world. I have always taught in a synagogue or in the temple area where all the Jews gather, and in secret I have said nothing.

21 Why ask me? Ask those who heard me what I said to them. They know what I said." —John 18:19-21

But as per Mark 4:10, Jesus did teach in private when he was alone with his disciples. No? Yes, ofcourse. Now how do you reconcile these two clear seeming contradictions? This appears as a lie, no? Especially if you have found this kind of stuff in Islamic scriptures, do you think you would have tolerate it?

understand parable first :

A parable is a brief, succinct story, in prose or verse, that illustrates a moral or religious lesson.

a parable’s parallel meaning is unspoken and implicit, though not ordinarily secret

The defining characteristic of the parable is the presence of a prescriptive subtext suggesting how a person should behave or believe. Aside from providing guidance and suggestions for proper action in life, parables frequently use metaphorical language which allows people to more easily discuss difficult or complex ideas

to the disciples Jesus explained everything, to the public He used
parables to explain everything which allows people to more easily understand or discuss difficult or complex ideas

there are no secrets, it’s just how Jesus delivered the message depends on the audience.

Analyzer, are you by any chance americanrevert ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top