Islam and the Virgin Birth of Jesus

[dzheremi]

That is not fair, using idle words in sacred books and disowning the real meanings of things like “brothers”. If you can do that then gate is open to transport anything every where.

You would be right if it were an idle word, but it isn’t. Christians are brothers and sisters in Christ. When we are baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (as Jesus Himself said to baptize), we join the community of Brothers and Sisters. It is the best family to be a member of!

Besides, if you have trouble with calling your co-religionists “Brother” or “Sister” because you can only recognize the carnal meaning of words (this is something I’ve seen in other posts of yours), then perhaps you’d like to tell me why Muslims still use these terms with each other in similar ways? Does that mean that those terms are “idle words” for Muslims too? Does anything mean anything at all to you, Planten? Virginity is not virginity, Brothers and Sisters in your religion are not that to you either… (then why would you bother to go to the mosque?)

Then the son also does not mean anything. We often call others children as our sons.

Just because you do not attach any meaning to words doesn’t mean that no one else does, either. I’m just telling you why Christians do and say what they do, as far as I understand things.

1. Calling every one a sinner, even a new born baby.

It is not that the baby has committed a specific sin. As I understand it, the doctrine of original sin entails that Man (note the capital “M” - not the specific baby, but mankind in general) has inherited a sinful nature from the original sin of Adam and Eve. The thought is that sin did not exist prior to their fall, and really, how could it? “Right” and “wrong” (or “sin” and “non-sin”) can not exist unless the will to stick to one or the other exists. If we as human beings have the will to sin, to turn away from God (and I think you’d agree that we do, or else why isn’t everyone Muslim already?), then this exists in a baby as surely as it does in an adult man or woman. The baby does not sin because it does not know right from wrong. Once it does, then it will sin. I don’t know why it’s so terrible to you that we recognize it and have a means to correct it and control the instinct that drives it (confession and appealing to Man’s higher nature, respectively). Does Islam not believe that man is sinful? I have read here about this idea of “fitra” or inclination towards what is good that is naturally present in all Men. I have no problem acknowledging that, but I would add to it that Man also has an inclination towards what is bad and sinful for the reasons given above.

But you want to keep Jesus out of that trouble.

Jesus is God. God does not need any doctrine to keep Him from sin.

Perhaps Mary too. Otherwise Jesus will be the son of a sinner.

Huh? Jesus is the Only Begotten Son of GOD. No need to worry for Him, either.

Why are babies called sinners. You will give different reasons but one reason seems to be that you consider the meeting of husband and wife also as a sin.

I do not understand this question. The intimate meeting of husband and wife is absolutely not a sin. That doesn’t change the fact that we don’t believe that any such meeting ever happened between Mary and Joseph or Mary and anyone else. Chastity is not a sin, either.

That is why you are not permitting Mary to have any sex even after the birth of Jesus, because that would be a sin.

You are missing the point. It is not that we are “not permitting” Mary to have sex with anyone. As I said in my previous point, her marriage to Joseph had a higher purpose than what you are ascribing to it, as though it is the same as the marriage of any one person to any other person. It isn’t.

I am sure you cannot explain all these things.

And I’m sure that even though I just did, you still won’t listen.

We Muslims have all good ideas about Jesus and his mother and it is written in the Quran. You cannot show just more than an ordinary few words about Mary from the bible. You have nothing about her.
If youhave anything then please present it and do not formulate from yourself. Let your book talk about it. Let us have all about Mary from your book please.

I agree that it is a good thing that it is written in your Quran that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, even though you don’t want to believe it. As we see in the Holy Bible (that apparently has nothing in it about Mary other than a “few ordinary words” - what nonsense!), the Virgin Birth is a FACT:

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. (Matthew 1:18)

I do not have to say. She is Married and it is not a sin to meet the husband. That is the difference as I pointed out in above para. Even if she has sex with her husband, we do not consider it a sin. But you do think like that for some reason.

For the millionth (and hopefully last!) time: Marital relations, in and of themselves, are NOT a sin. We simply do not believe that any such relations took place between Mary and Joseph.

 

[dzheremi]

Joseph was married to Mary. I hope you will not deny that. What is the purpose of marriage? Or what was the purpose of that marriage? Why was it necessary? We Muslims do not blame Joseph or Mary or Jesus for anything. They were human beings and lived like a human. But you deny something and it is definitely wrong to feel the way you do.

You deny the divinity of Jesus…next to that, your accusations directed at us are nothing. Don’t get into “who denies what” with me, sir. I won’t have that argument here. I am not going to repeat myself over and over to you, since I know you won’t hear it.

I will not believe those things. You are free to believe what has been taught to you.

As I’ve said to you I don’t know how many times, Planten, I am not asking you to accept anything you don’t want to accept. I am telling you the Christian viewpoint, as I understand it. Others are free to correct me, should I have spoken wrong on any account. I’m pretty sure I understand the meaning of “virgin”, though…

Sure I would not like anything bad about Mary or Jesus or Muhammad. That should be enough for you. But the problemis that you think something bad (husband and wife relation) while I do not think that is bad. That is the problem. I have the universal approach. You have special feelings and special approach which could be un-natural. Do not blame me for anything which I do not consider as sin.

Why are you repeating this argument over and over? You know my answer. It’s not going to change, no matter what you believe.

You want me and the world to believe that? Just for you? And if ever I said something about Muhammad that the angel brought to him the messages from God, you will deny it.

No, I don’t want you to believe anything for me.

And, yes, if this thread were about Muhammad’s prophethood (which it isn’t, by the way, so Muhammad can exit stage right as far as I’m concerned), I would absolutely deny it. I’ve addressed why Muhammad is unacceptable to Christianity, though it should be plainly obvious to anyone who knows even the most basic ideas of Christianity. I hope that one day you will understand at least these basic ideas, Planten. I honestly want you to know them.

Therefore it is better for me to deny what you have written. How could that marriage have special meanings? And why?. That would be a show piece marriage and something to cheat the whole world.

You will not understand this until you understand what marriage means to begin with. If you ask “how could they not have sex? they were married!”, then I don’t know what to tell you that I haven’t already said. Sometimes people are married for non-carnal reasons. When my stepfather married my mother, for instance, she was very sick with cancer. I’m sure they must’ve had sex at least occasionally, but probably not very often, or certainly not as often as a normal, healthy couple would have. It didn’t matter. He married her anyway, and cared for her as she needed to be cared for, as I was too young to do so. Would you say that such a marriage is a mere “show piece” or a “cheat”? Only if you were the biggest heartless jerk in the world.

Please show me from your book that Joseph the carpenter is the protector of mothers, fathers, and families, travellers, and working people.

It is not there, as far as I know. It is the belief of the Roman Catholic Church that he functions specially in that capacity, by extension of his role as protector in the life of Mary and head of the Holy Family, and his work as a tradesman (these attributes ARE attested to in the Bible, but I will leave them to someone else to find, should they choose to; I am tired and have already written much).

You were too quick in calling for his intercession.

So says you. It worked. Score 1 for God, 0 for Planten’s opinion.

He is dead and cannot hear you.

So you’re a Protestant Fundamentalist now, too?

It is better that you pray to One God only and hope for the best.

I do. All the time. A prayer for intercession on behalf of the saints is not praying to someone other than God. It is as if you ask a friend to pray to God on your behalf. You don’t stop praying to God just because they are also praying to God because you have asked them to.

 

[Angelos]

Planten’s absurd supposition that the sense of the word “brother” is always associated with sex (carnal relation) is unsurprisingly rebutted by his own scripture:

Surah [7.65]
And to Ad (We sent) their brother Hud. He said: O my people! serve Allah, you have no god other than Him; will you not then guard (against evil)?

**Surah [7.73] **
And to Samood (We sent) their brother Salih. He said: O my people! serve Allah, you have no god other than Him.

Surah [7.85]
And ** to Madyan (We sent) their brother** Shu’aib. He said: 0 my people! serve Allah, you have no god other than Him.

The Koran teaches that a prophet can be designated as the brother of his folk! Planten will probably object to this usage of the word and try to correct his scripture too.

 

[planten]

You would be right if it were an idle word, but it isn’t. Christians are brothers and sisters in Christ. When we are baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (as Jesus Himself said to baptize), we join the community of Brothers and Sisters. It is the best family to be a member of!

Besides, if you have trouble with calling your co-religionists “Brother” or “Sister” because you can only recognize the carnal meaning of words (this is something I’ve seen in other posts of yours), then perhaps you’d like to tell me why Muslims still use these terms with each other in similar ways? Does that mean that those terms are “idle words” for Muslims too? Does anything mean anything at all to you, Planten? Virginity is not virginity, Brothers and Sisters in your religion are not that to you either… (then why would you bother to go to the mosque?)

Just because you do not attach any meaning to words doesn’t mean that no one else does, either. I’m just telling you why Christians do and say what they do, as far as I understand things.

It is not that the baby has committed a specific sin. As I understand it, the doctrine of original sin entails that Man (note the capital “M” - not the specific baby, but mankind in general) has inherited a sinful nature from the original sin of Adam and Eve. The thought is that sin did not exist prior to their fall, and really, how could it? “Right” and “wrong” (or “sin” and “non-sin”) can not exist unless the will to stick to one or the other exists. If we as human beings have the will to sin, to turn away from God (and I think you’d agree that we do, or else why isn’t everyone Muslim already?), then this exists in a baby as surely as it does in an adult man or woman. The baby does not sin because it does not know right from wrong. Once it does, then it will sin. I don’t know why it’s so terrible to you that we recognize it and have a means to correct it and control the instinct that drives it (confession and appealing to Man’s higher nature, respectively). Does Islam not believe that man is sinful? I have read here about this idea of “fitra” or inclination towards what is good that is naturally present in all Men. I have no problem acknowledging that, but I would add to it that Man also has an inclination towards what is bad and sinful for the reasons given above.

Jesus is God. God does not need any doctrine to keep Him from sin.

Huh? Jesus is the Only Begotten Son of GOD. No need to worry for Him, either.

I do not understand this question. The intimate meeting of husband and wife is absolutely not a sin. That doesn’t change the fact that we don’t believe that any such meeting ever happened between Mary and Joseph or Mary and anyone else. Chastity is not a sin, either.

You are missing the point. It is not that we are “not permitting” Mary to have sex with anyone. As I said in my previous point, her marriage to Joseph had a higher purpose than what you are ascribing to it, as though it is the same as the marriage of any one person to any other person. It isn’t.

And I’m sure that even though I just did, you still won’t listen.

I agree that it is a good thing that it is written in your Quran that Jesus Christ was born of a virgin, even though you don’t want to believe it. As we see in the Holy Bible (that apparently has nothing in it about Mary other than a “few ordinary words” - what nonsense!), the Virgin Birth is a FACT:

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: when His mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit. (Matthew 1:18)

For the millionth (and hopefully last!) time: Marital relations, in and of themselves, are NOT a sin. We simply do not believe that any such relations took place between Mary and Joseph.

So there was a conract between Joseph and Mary of celibacy of a life time? Can you prove it from bible or it is the way you want it to be. That would be wishful thinking.

If Mary was found pregnant by the holy spirit (Impossible) and Joseph was told about it by an angel (I do not believe in any of your angels too), so let it be that Jospeh was informed about it not to discard the lady, perhaps it was another clause of the treaty that he should never go near her as a man goes to his wife for the whole lifetime. It is all unbelievable. Then you have got hold of Joseph the carpenter as a tool for life time.

I had read that Joseph and Mary used to close their doors on the world for about 14 years as a husband and wife. What was the message, the meaning in that? They were doing some drama? No. They were living like husband and wife.

And then where goes all that geneology mentioned in Mathew and luke. If Joseph is out of the whole affair (did not beget Jesus) then Jesus has nothing to do with king David. It means the geneology is another drama?

I am sorry. You have got it all mixed up rather too much. Joseph the carpenter is legally married to Mary. He lives with her as her husband. Every one knew about it. But no one knew that he never goes near his wife. That is the people there did not know about it. But the christians of today know all about it.

Since it is all a Jewish affair. It should better be put up before the Jews to get a more clear picture of what went on in those days. The church should at least drop the geneology of Jesus. Because, all the persons mentioned in that geneology were begotten in one single normal way except at the end, Joseph did not do anything. He is the odd man out.

In the end, I confirm that Muslims believe in the miraculous birth of Jesus and so do I.

 

[ralphinal]

So there was a conract between Joseph and Mary of celibacy of a life time? Can you prove it from bible or it is the way you want it to be. That would be wishful thinking.

If Mary was found pregnant by the holy spirit (Impossible) and Joseph was told about it by an angel (I do not believe in any of your angels too), so let it be that Jospeh was informed about it not to discard the lady, perhaps it was another clause of the treaty that he should never go near her as a man goes to his wife for the whole lifetime. It is all unbelievable. Then you have got hold of Joseph the carpenter as a tool for life time.

I had read that Joseph and Mary used to close their doors on the world for about 14 years as a husband and wife. What was the message, the meaning in that? They were doing some drama? No. They were living like husband and wife.

And then where goes all that geneology mentioned in Mathew and luke. If Joseph is out of the whole affair (did not beget Jesus) then Jesus has nothing to do with king David. It means the geneology is another drama?

I am sorry. You have got it all mixed up rather too much. Joseph the carpenter is legally married to Mary. He lives with her as her husband. Every one knew about it. But no one knew that he never goes near his wife. That is the people there did not know about it. But the christians of today know all about it.

Since it is all a Jewish affair. It should better be put up before the Jews to get a more clear picture of what went on in those days. The church should at least drop the geneology of Jesus. Because, all the persons mentioned in that geneology were begotten in one single normal way except at the end, Joseph did not do anything. He is the odd man out.

In the end, I confirm that Muslims believe in the miraculous birth of Jesus and so do I.

How is it impossible that she be pregnant by the Holy Spirit and yet it was a miraculas birth? Either it is possible and there was a miracle or it is impossible and there is no miracle.

 

[Angelos]

How is it impossible that she be pregnant by the Holy Spirit and yet it was a miraculas birth? Either it is possible and there was a miracle or it is impossible and there is no miracle.

Planten is talking through his Ahmadiyya hat again

 

[Angelos]

So there was a conract between Joseph and Mary of celibacy of a life time? Can you prove it from bible or it is the way you want it to be. That would be wishful thinking.

If Mary was found pregnant by the holy spirit (Impossible) and Joseph was told about it by an angel (I do not believe in any of your angels too), so let it be that Jospeh was informed about it not to discard the lady, perhaps it was another clause of the treaty that he should never go near her as a man goes to his wife for the whole lifetime. It is all unbelievable. Then you have got hold of Joseph the carpenter as a tool for life time.

I had read that Joseph and Mary used to close their doors on the world for about 14 years as a husband and wife. What was the message, the meaning in that? They were doing some drama? No. They were living like husband and wife.

And then where goes all that geneology mentioned in Mathew and luke. If Joseph is out of the whole affair (did not beget Jesus) then Jesus has nothing to do with king David. It means the geneology is another drama?

I am sorry. You have got it all mixed up rather too much. Joseph the carpenter is legally married to Mary. He lives with her as her husband. Every one knew about it. But no one knew that he never goes near his wife. That is the people there did not know about it. But the christians of today know all about it.

Since it is all a Jewish affair. It should better be put up before the Jews to get a more clear picture of what went on in those days. The church should at least drop the geneology of Jesus. Because, all the persons mentioned in that geneology were begotten in one single normal way except at the end, Joseph did not do anything. He is the odd man out.

In the end, I confirm that Muslims believe in the miraculous birth of Jesus and so do I.

Instead of making silly comments on what you don’t know, please do something nice and reasonable by trying to explain this issue from the Islamic viewpoint and reconcile the contradictory accounts in the Koran concerning Jesus’ nativity and infancy.

 

[dzheremi]

I’m trying to find anywhere in my reply where I said that there was a contract between Mary and Joseph of celibacy for life…it’s not there, just like Planten’s evidence of Mary’s other children.

Also, I find it odd that Planten says that he doesn’t believe in any of “our” angels when the Quran itself is said to have been revealed to Muhammad by the angel Gabriel! What a strange form of Islam that you practice, sir. It’s unlike any that I’ve ever encountered.

 

[planten]

Planten’s absurd supposition that the sense of the word “brother” is always associated with sex (carnal relation) is unsurprisingly rebutted by his own scripture:

Surah [7.65]
And to Ad (We sent) their brother Hud. He said: O my people! serve Allah, you have no god other than Him; will you not then guard (against evil)?

**Surah [7.73] **
And to Samood (We sent) their brother Salih. He said: O my people! serve Allah, you have no god other than Him.

Surah [7.85]
And ** to Madyan (We sent) their brother** Shu’aib. He said: 0 my people! serve Allah, you have no god other than Him.

The Koran teaches that a prophet can be designated as the brother of his folk! Planten will probably object to this usage of the word and try to correct his scripture too.

**" Their brother" is different to “His brother”. Jesus had brothers. Also Haroon is mentioned with Moses as “His brother” or Moses says “My brother”.

You have the habit of using loose terminology, first, some harmless word, such as son. When that works and no objection is raised, you make him the son of God. Then you make him the real son of God. Then you progress onto the begotten son (god forbids it). Then further you progress that jesus is the only begotten son of God. All gradually.**

 

[planten]

I’m trying to find anywhere in my reply where I said that there was a contract between Mary and Joseph of celibacy for life…it’s not there, just like Planten’s evidence of Mary’s other children.

Also, I find it odd that Planten says that he doesn’t believe in any of “our” angels when the Quran itself is said to have been revealed to Muhammad by the angel Gabriel! What a strange form of Islam that you practice, sir. It’s unlike any that I’ve ever encountered.

I believe in all the angels of the Lord and all His revealed books and I believe in all the prophets. I believe in angels.

But when I see that christians do not believe in the angel mentioned with Muhammad, I become surprised. So I have no option except that I disbelieve all reports about angels visiting Joseph and Elizabeth etc. mentioned in the bible.

 

[dzheremi]

In other words, “WAAAAAH! The Christians don’t believe as I do!” :crying:

I’ve explained this to you before, Planten. We cannot believe in Muhammad and be Christians. We DO believe that the angel Gabriel exists, but we do not believe that he appeared to Muhammad and dictated the final word of the Lord in the form of the Quran. Even if he had, we would have to still disbelieve the Quran, for all the reasons I gave you last time I answered your complaints about Christians not believing in Muhammad (namely, we are told that we are not to believe in other gospels, even if an angel were to bring them from heaven).

 

[planten]

In other words, “WAAAAAH! The Christians don’t believe as I do!” :crying:

I’ve explained this to you before, Planten. We cannot believe in Muhammad and be Christians. We DO believe that the angel Gabriel exists, but we do not believe that he appeared to Muhammad and dictated the final word of the Lord in the form of the Quran. Even if he had, we would have to still disbelieve the Quran, for all the reasons I gave you last time I answered your complaints about Christians not believing in Muhammad (namely, we are told that we are not to believe in other gospels, even if an angel were to bring them from heaven).

** There is no harm in what you have written. You cannot believe that any angel visited Muhammad. I also cannot believe that any angel visited and told something to Joseph the carpenter. I also cannot believe that The holy ghost or holy spirit which we believe to be the angel gabriel made Mary Pregnant. No ghost can make a lady pregnant.

This is all in good faith. So you keep your beliefs and I will keep mine too. You say angel never revealed anything to Muhammad. I say that spirit never made Mary pregnant and angel did not tell Joseph that mary was already made pregnant and that he should not go near her. I will not believe any of that. I hope you won’t mind it and in future will not ask me to believe all that. thanks.

I do not believe in any angel mentioned in the bible.**

 

[Angelos]

**" Their brother" is different to “His brother”. Jesus had brothers. Also Haroon is mentioned with Moses as “His brother” or Moses says “My brother”.

You have the habit of using loose terminology, first, some harmless word, such as son. When that works and no objection is raised, you make him the son of God. Then you make him the real son of God. Then you progress onto the begotten son (god forbids it). Then further you progress that jesus is the only begotten son of God. All gradually.**

Is this all you can do to be evasive? So weak and pathetic. Playing with words to deny the metaphorical usage of the word “brother” in the Koran only because it is used with a plural qualifier?

The Koran also calls Maryam Aaron’s sister! What have you got to say against this? You will not take refuge in the loose terminology of the Koran and the supposed metaphorical sense of the word “sister” in this context, will you?

 

[Angelos]

** There is no harm in what you have written. You cannot believe that any angel visited Muhammad. I also cannot believe that any angel visited and told something to Joseph the carpenter. I also cannot believe that The holy ghost or holy spirit which we believe to be the angel gabriel made Mary Pregnant. No ghost can make a lady pregnant.

This is all in good faith. So you keep your beliefs and I will keep mine too. You say angel never revealed anything to Muhammad. I say that spirit never made Mary pregnant and angel did not tell Joseph that mary was already made pregnant and that he should not go near her. I will not believe any of that. I hope you won’t mind it and in future will not ask me to believe all that. thanks.

I do not believe in any angel mentioned in the bible.**

In order to do retaliate Christian disbelief, you must get rid of the accounts in the Koran adopted from some apocryphal Gospels.

 

[dzheremi]

Indeed, Angelos. Planten manages to disbelieve his own scriptures for the sake of showing his contempt for Christianity. It is strange and puts him outside of both camps.

Planten: As I have told you before, I am not asking you to believe Christianity, only telling you why and what Christians believe. This particular issue is confusing to me because this is one point on which the Quran and the Bible are in agreement (though I’m assuming for different reasons; I would know why the Quran says what it does if anyone would actually answer the question that started this thread), and yet you say you don’t believe it because Christians don’t believe that an angel of God revealed the Quran to Muhammad. These two historical items (the Virgin Birth and Muhammad’s Quran) do not depend on one another, so I do not understand your logic. You say you believe in the “miraculous birth” of Jesus, but when the Quran says that Mary was not unchaste, you don’t believe it. What other kind of miracle is it referring to, then? It is not my concern whether or not you believe in your own scripture, but it is probably a matter of some concern to other Muslims what one of their brothers in the faith does, and certainly it must be a concern to Allah. Either way, you have more than a message board’s opinion of you to be concerned about, though that is certainly slipping as well.

“Good faith” requires just that: Faith.

 

[Angelos]

Indeed, Angelos. Planten manages to disbelieve his own scriptures for the sake of showing his contempt for Christianity. It is strange and puts him outside of both camps.

Planten: As I have told you before, I am not asking you to believe Christianity, only telling you why and what Christians believe. This particular issue is confusing to me because this is one point on which the Quran and the Bible are in agreement (though I’m assuming for different reasons; I would know why the Quran says what it does if anyone would actually answer the question that started this thread), and yet you say you don’t believe it because Christians don’t believe that an angel of God revealed the Quran to Muhammad. These two historical items (the Virgin Birth and Muhammad’s Quran) do not depend on one another, so I do not understand your logic. You say you believe in the “miraculous birth” of Jesus, but when the Quran says that Mary was not unchaste, you don’t believe it. What other kind of miracle is it referring to, then? It is not my concern whether or not you believe in your own scripture, but it is probably a matter of some concern to other Muslims what one of their brothers in the faith does, and certainly it must be a concern to Allah. Either way, you have more than a message board’s opinion of you to be concerned about, though that is certainly slipping as well.

“Good faith” requires just that: Faith.

Amen!

 

[inJESUS]

Nothing yet …

 

[planten]

Is this all you can do to be evasive? So weak and pathetic. Playing with words to deny the metaphorical usage of the word “brother” in the Koran only because it is used with a plural qualifier?

The Koran also calls Maryam Aaron’s sister! What have you got to say against this? You will not take refuge in the loose terminology of the Koran and the supposed metaphorical sense of the word “sister” in this context, will you?

** You cannot run away. It is written in bible. People said to Jesus “your brothers and sisters are here.” So please do not dodge the issue. You are in great problem.

May I remind you of another instance when Jesus was preaching and the people were very impressed by his talk. They showed surprise and said, “is he not the son of Joseph (or Mary) whose daughters are in our homes?” You will again have some excuse to avoid that issue too. I do not remember exact words. may be they said “is he not the same person whose sisters are in our homes?”

What you will do about that?. Too much denial of everything will bring you down to nothing.

Now about Mary being called the sister of Aaron. Please remember that Mary was doing duty in service of the temple from very young age. That was the same type of duty as done by Aaron and his children( the Levis). This is a high class statement in the Quran that Mary had similar status as that of Aaron. The Quran did not call her sister of Moses. Why? She could have been sister of Moses too if taken in real sense. But she was called sister of Aaron as I have explained.

She remained in the temple until she had the menses. I hope you will not deny that she had menses too. After she became of age and menses started, she could no longer stay in the temple as per Jewish laws. So he rmarriage had to be arranged which was done by Allah by His special Will. Allah arranged her marriage and chose her husband. That will explain the miraculous birth of Jesus if discussed in detail. Also the virgin birth of Jesus too is confirmed.

You people are missing a lot of good things by denying the Quran.**

 

[planten]

**Please see the verses of bible below:

Mathew 13
53When Jesus had finished these parables, he moved on from there. 54Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. “Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?” they asked. 55"Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56Aren’t all his sisters with us?** Where then did this man get all these things?" 57And they took offense at him.

Have some more here:

Mark 6
1Jesus left there and went to his hometown, accompanied by his disciples. 2When the Sabbath came, he began to teach in the synagogue, and many who heard him were amazed.
“Where did this man get these things?” they asked. “What’s this wisdom that has been given him, that he even does miracles! 3Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph,[a] Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.

The above verses are telling those people, James Judas and Simon were the children of Mary. James is well known to be the brother of Jesus.

He is being referred to as Mary’s son. But christians have made him into the son of God. He sure is the son of a woman, i.e. Mary. That is why Quran addresses him as Ibne Maryam= the son of Mary. It is proved by the words of the bible. There is a special reason for calling Jesus as the son of Mary.

 

[Angelos]

** You cannot run away. It is written in bible. People said to Jesus “your brothers and sisters are here.” So please do not dodge the issue. You are in great problem.**

I am not running away, dear Planten. It is also not true that I am in great problem. I would be in great problem if my scripture were the Koran though.

You forget that those same people also regarded Joseph as Jesus’ biological father. How can you prove that those several brothers and sisters were not mistakenly presumed to be Jesus’ biological siblings?

**
May I remind you of another instance when Jesus was preaching and the people were very impressed by his talk. They showed surprise and said, “is he not the son of Joseph (or Mary) whose daughters are in our homes?” You will again have some excuse to avoid that issue too. I do not remember exact words. may be they said “is he not the same person whose sisters are in our homes?”

What you will do about that?. Too much denial of everything will bring you down to nothing.**

I shall only remind you that those people mistakenly called Jesus Joseph’s son in a biological sense! How can you be sure that they did not make a similar mistake while referring to Jesus as the brother of so many people???

**
Now about Mary being called the sister of Aaron. Please remember that Mary was doing duty in service of the temple from very young age. That was the same type of duty as done by Aaron and his children( the Levis). This is a high class statement in the Quran that Mary had similar status as that of Aaron. The Quran did not call her sister of Moses. Why? She could have been sister of Moses too if taken in real sense. But she was called sister of Aaron as I have explained.**

LOL Thanks for proving my point. You have taken refuge in the metaphorical sense of the word “sister” when the Koran is at stake. This is not fair play

The Koran calls Maryam both the sister of Aaron (Surah 19) and the biological daughter of Imran (Amram) in Surah 3 and 66! More to the point, the Koran never makes any association between Aaron and Mary with regard to the temple service! The account of Mary’s dedication to the temple occurs only in Surah 3, which never calls Mary Aaron’s sister.

**
She remained in the temple until she had the menses. I hope you will not deny that she had menses too. After she became of age and menses started, she could no longer stay in the temple as per Jewish laws. So he rmarriage had to be arranged which was done by Allah by His special Will. Allah arranged her marriage and chose her husband. That will explain the miraculous birth of Jesus if discussed in detail. Also the virgin birth of Jesus too is confirmed.**

According to the narrative in the Koran (Surah 3), it is impossible to know if Mary was married or not. You are completing this vague Islamic version of the story with the help of the Gospel of James, from which the story of Mary’s dedication and pregnancy is adopted into the Koran.

**
You people are missing a lot of good things by denying the Quran.**

We people agree that there are a lot of good things missing from the Koran.