Mary and Jesus

[allhers]

Faith101:

i didnt think it was a huge secret…i mean if i have access to it, the whole world probably does.

I guess I come from a different background, where no one can change/add/delete anything from divine revelation. THe same standard is not held for the Bible by Christians i suppose.

IF it is added later and it is something they “wish Jesus could have said and done” then how can someone use it as proof for anything if they KNOW that it didnt come from him, but from someone who wished it did?

Also, if they could add this part, then how can someone be sure that they didnt add or delete other parts of the Bible. Yes, you know about this particular incident (and i think there are a few others that are added as footnotes in the Bible) …but how many others are there that you dont know about? How can you trust the Bible if you dont know if all of it originate from Jesus?

I think it is quite clear that you really didn’t come here seeking any answers, but instead to just rant on about some pre-conceived agenda you had. We have faith in Jesus and His Church, you clearly don’t. I provided you with much to research, if you don’t do that, then it is apparent you really didn’t want an answer to begin with.

 

[Edris]

JimG:

I would be far less likely to trust the Quran, which came 600 years after the events of Jesus birth, to be a reliable source than I would the Apostles and the gospel writers who were contemporaries of Jesus.

I am not aware of any scholarly source-analysis or historical critical analysis of the Quran, but coming 600 years after the fact, I would have to guess that the sources were heretical Jewish or Gnostic Christian sects…

What you’re saying is true if the Qur’an was from a man. But since the Qur’an is from God, and God knows the past, the present, and the future; then knowing what happened 600 years before He sent His Prophet Muhammad pbuh would be an easy matter for Him.

“This is a part of the news of the Ghaib (unseen, ie the news of the past nations of which you have no knowledge) which We inspire you with (O Muhammad) You were not with them, when they cast lots with their pens as to which of them should be charged with the care of Maryam (Mary); nor were you with them when they disputed” (Qur’an 3:44)

“This is of the news of the unseen which We reveal unto you (O Muhammad), neither you nor your people knew them before this So be patient Surely, the (good) end is for the Muttaqûn (pious)” (Qur’an 11:49)

“This is of the news of the Ghaib (unseen) which We reveal by Inspiration to you (O Muhammad) You were not (present) with them when they arranged their plan together, and (also, while) they were plotting” (Qur’an 12:102)

 

[Edris]

Can you please clarify with the statement that the virgin birth is not recorded in the bible, because they were actually recorded in the bible!

Matt 1: 20 -21 " … For it is by the Holy Spirit that she was conceived. She will have a son, and you will name him Jesus - because he will save his people from their sins".

Luke 1:31, 34 You will become pregnant and give birth to a son, and you will name him Jesus. … Mary said to the angel, “I am a virgin. How then can this be?”

BTW, how respected in this person Sh. Ahmad Deedat with regard his authority on the bible?

The ascension was recorded so that now we hear that (1)Jesus had risen from the dead and (2) he ascended to heaven.

Does the fact that the ascension was mentioned only in the two gospels cause any problem?

I didn’t claim that, I was quoting JimG. Return to my post and check it.

But now, since you also brought it up and mentioned the verses from the Bible. I have to say, you better take the story of the birth from the Qur’an, because the two verses that you mentioned the first one doesn’t prove anything about Mary being virgin “For it is by the Holy Spirit that she was concieved” if a non-christian reads this verse he’d think the Holy Spirit is the father and that Mary is not virgin. The second verse you quoted from Luke "Mary said to the angel, “I am a virgin. How then can this be?” also Mary is saying the she is a virgin but is that enough to make people believe that it’s true?. Specially the children of Israel whom they belied Moses pbuh after he split the sea infront of them.

 

[John-the-Seeker]

I am approaching your question from the same direction, although unstated, as others seem to have which is 'Gee never considered that."
Also I am wondering if your question truly is why did they not practice their religion and kill the woman or do you have another agenda?
Working on the basis that yours is a truly valid question, I for the first time ever am considering the questions raised.
1) Did they know that this was the Messiah? I conclude that it was a topic of discussion of the day as three kings had visited not to mention angels singing in the Heavens. Also King Herod killed a lot of boys in an attempt to get rid of Jesus. **Was it believed? ** I believe as today there were some who accepted Truth which is Jesus and some who rejected Him.
** 2) Did they know of the virgin birth requirement? ** Yes as already has been pointed out through Isaiah. Then why not condemn her? If you believe the messiah story, there is no adultery. If you don’t believe it then Joseph is the father, so still no adultery.
I could also point out that they fled into Egypt to avoid King Herod murderous attempts and so were not likely to be around people who were first hand knowledgable about this being the Messiah, although there were many who experienced the miraculous influence of Mother Mary. One being the mother of Dismas, the good thief saved on the cross due to her belief and sacrifice.
Hope this answers your questions.

 

[Reuben_J]

Edris:

I didn’t claim that, I was quoting JimG. Return to my post and check it.

But now, since you also brought it up and mentioned the verses from the Bible. I have to say, you better take the story of the birth from the Qur’an, because the two verses that you mentioned the first one doesn’t prove anything about Mary being virgin “For it is by the Holy Spirit that she was concieved” if a non-christian reads this verse he’d think the Holy Spirit is the father and that Mary is not virgin. The second verse you quoted from Luke "Mary said to the angel, “I am a virgin. How then can this be?” also Mary is saying the she is a virgin but is that enough to make people believe that it’s true?. Specially the children of Israel whom they belied Moses pbuh after he split the sea infront of them.

Now what did I try to argue about here?

With a Muslim background you may not fully understand the verses I just quoted.

By asking for “proof” would not help. You cannot approach the Bible like how you do a story book. (I don’t know how you approach the Quran).

Biblical writers could not write all what they saw or heard because if they did, even this world would not contain them. Thus what written in the Bible are important and relevant and help us to understand. The verses quoted are enough to show that Jesus was concieved by a virgin Mary.

As for the reference to disbelief … this applies to everybody. Even if Abraham were to come back from heaven alive, the unbeliever would still not believe.

My other questions on your previous comment - Ahmad Deedat and the ascension. You have not addressed them.

 

[George_Waters]

Faith 101,

Forgive me if I sounded as if I was accusing you of trying to start a debate, that was not my intent. This is a valid question, I just honestly figured this would have been addressed by Islam.

Peace

George

 

[ronald]

Edris:

What you’re saying is true if the Qur’an was from a man. But since the Qur’an is from God, and God knows the past, the present, and the future; then knowing what happened 600 years before He sent His Prophet Muhammad pbuh would be an easy matter for Him.

“This is a part of the news of the Ghaib (unseen, ie the news of the past nations of which you have no knowledge) which We inspire you with (O Muhammad) You were not with them, when they cast lots with their pens as to which of them should be charged with the care of Maryam (Mary); nor were you with them when they disputed” (Qur’an 3:44)

“This is of the news of the unseen which We reveal unto you (O Muhammad), neither you nor your people knew them before this So be patient Surely, the (good) end is for the Muttaqûn (pious)” (Qur’an 11:49)

“This is of the news of the Ghaib (unseen) which We reveal by Inspiration to you (O Muhammad) You were not (present) with them when they arranged their plan together, and (also, while) they were plotting” (Qur’an 12:102)

The Qur’an is from God. That’s what The Qur’an said. I just don’t believe it. You of course don’t believe what we believe. I just believe the words from His ( in Heaven now ) first followers who were with Him rather than the words from a man ( in grave now ) 600 years later.

 

[Edris]

Ok, i didn’t want to address those questions so that we don’t stray from the main topic. And as i said before i mentioned the ascension just as an example of what’s going on in the Bible.

Before answering those questions, there is something you mentioned in your last post, that I think you should reconsider

Biblical writers could not write all what they saw or heard because if they did, even this world would not contain them. Thus what written in the Bible are important and relevant and help us to understand.

My friend this statment doesn’t apply to neither the OT nor the NT. I can bring you many stories from the Bible that are irrelevant to anything, and that hold zero importance.
Reuben J:

BTW, how respected in this person Sh. Ahmad Deedat with regard his authority on the bible?

The ascension was recorded so that now we hear that (1)Jesus had risen from the dead and (2) he ascended to heaven.

Does the fact that the ascension was mentioned only in the two gospels cause any problem?

Now back to your Questions:

Ahmed Deedat’s authority on the Bible. I don’t know what you mean by authority. I have encountered this “authority” question many times in this forum. Every person has the right to read the Bible and to question what’s going on inside that book; same goes to the Qur’an. Infact, many verses in the Qur’an urges every person who reads it to reflect on its verses, to think and to consider everything mentioned in the Qur’an, and to see if there are contradictions or errors in it.

Ok, you mentioned two reasons for why the ascension was mentioned in the Bible. Fair enough, but why was the verses of the ascension omitted in previous versions of the Bible. I really can’t understand this on your part. The fact that some verses and words have been deleted, restored, added, deleted without being restored back again, changed in the Bible; doesn’t that make you wonder about the authenticity of the Bible that you have today?

The fact that the ascension was mentioned in only two Gospels, actually troubles me; this is a major event in the life of Jesus Christ. Yes, i think it should’ve been mentioned in the four Gospels, but this is not the problem; the problem as i see it is why the fact that Jesus pbuh rode the donkey into Jerusalem is mentioned in the four Gospels, yet the ascension is mentioned in only two? which one do you think is more important here.

 

[Faith101]

exoflare:

The Quran’s account of Jesus talking from the cradle was not copied from the Bible. It was copied from one of the heretical “Infancy Gospels” that was never included in the Bible. Some stories were taken from the Bible, but there were other sources to be sure.

EDIT: specifically, the Arabic Infancy Gospel here contains this account…read the passage (1:2). Of course, the “Son of God” part differs from theirs, but you get the jist.

webcom.com/~gnosis/library/infarab.htm

That is exactly why i asked the question in the first place. Because the miracle about Jesus peace be upon him talking while he was still a baby is NOT in the Bible.

In the Quran…Mary becomes pregnant, gives birth, brings the baby back to her people, they ridicule her, she says NOTHING (i believe she was fasting from speaking) and Jesus peace be upon him defends himself and his mother. They didnt kill her, obviously, because the believed she was a virgin being that normal babies dont talk like that.

Coming from this background, i wanted to know why Mary was not killed according to Christians’ belief…b/c the story of Jesus talkin is not there.

I honestly thought it was going to be answered in a direct, simple way. But it was not…and throughtout, i have been attacked about my intentions and my refusing to accept something clearly explained or that i was nitpicking.

SubhanAllah…in any case, thanks again for those who responded kindly even though my question was not answered.

 

[Faith101]

exoflare:

Another thread dealing with the John 8 “forgery” for those interested. It cleared some things up for me, anyway.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=61225

i read through their replies…can you just summarize what was cleared up by it? thanks

 

[JimG]

The story of baby Jesus talking is apparently remarkably similar to a story found in an Arabic apocryphal fable from Egypt called “The First Gospel in the Infancy of Jesus Christ” This reinforces my notion that much of these sorts of things found in the Quran have their origin from early Gnostic sects.

 

[JimG]

Faith101:

thats interesting you brought that up.
what is your opinion of this religioustolerance.org/john_8.htm

I would not give much credence to that particular website considering that one of the sources cited is from the notoriously unreliable “Fellows of the Jesus Seminar.”

However, even one of the bullet points in that site states:

Bruce Metzger, author of the “Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament” writes that the passage is “obviously a piece of oral tradition” and that it “has all the earmarks of historical veracity.”

Having “all the earmarks of historical veracity” would seem to contradict it being a “forgery.”

 

[Faith101]

JimG:

The story of baby Jesus talking is apparently remarkably similar to a story found in an Arabic apocryphal fable from Egypt called “The First Gospel in the Infancy of Jesus Christ” This reinforces my notion that much of these sorts of things found in the Quran have their origin from early Gnostic sects.

subhanAllah…have you ever even read the Quran. How can you even say that it was copied from anything? that just amazes me, honestly.

in any case, it doesnt answer the question of why there is a hole in the story…and why Islam fills it.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

There is no “hole in the story”–what we have here is one faith tradition (Christianity) and another faith tradition (Islam). As a Christian, I don’t find any “holes” in my scripture. I am sure that as a Muslim you likewise don’t find “holes” in yours.

As a Christian, there are elements of Jewish scriptures (what we call the Old Testament) which we believe were inspired by God. But we do not hold ALL Jewish scriptures as inspired by God, and Jewish scripture after the 1st century AD we certainly do not hold as God inspired, because as Christians we believe that the WORD, or Logos, of God, Jesus the Christ, marked with His Life, Death, and the institution of His Church through His command to His disciplines to “spread the gospel throughout the world, in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and make of all men disciples” the summit and END of God’s revelations to humanity.

Over the early centuries, as the Christians grew in numbers and were able to escape from persecution, the oral traditions taught by the apostles to their successors and the people, coupled with the inspiration of the Spirit, leading the Church, to evaluate the Jewish scriptures AND the works of the early Christian evangelists, led to the canon of the Bible being developed in the 4th century, some 300 years before Mohammed pbuh. During this time, many OTHER works of the Jewish people AND of early Christian writers were extensively reviewed AND, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, were found to be not the inspired words of God (unlike those works of the Bible). Some of those texts contain various stories (like the Protoevangelium of James) which talk about the young Jesus, or give stories about Mary’s early life. There are likely to be (as in the case of the gnostic gospels) not only many variants of the written stories, but many variants of oral legends and traditions.

Considering the culture of the people of Mohammed’s time (though it is only slightly after, I refer you to any of the Arabian Night stories), the “Mary” story you give, when compared to Luke’s infancy narratives, the Didache, or even (secular) the works of Ovid and Virgil (1st century AD) is far less “Judeo Christian” or even Hellenistic in its typology, and far more culturally connected with the early Muslim/Arab cultural typology, IMO.

 

[allhers]

Again, there are no “holes in the story” and we don’t believe anything was kept hidden from them, or us.
Now, have you read any of the sources yet that I gave you?
Obviously not.
One other obvious point, if they were going to stone her, don’t you believe they would have done it when it was obvious that she was “with child” and not that they would have waited until she had the child?

 

[Reuben_J]

Edris:

Ok, i didn’t want to address those questions so that we don’t stray from the main topic. And as i said before i mentioned the ascension just as an example of what’s going on in the Bible.

Yes, we seem to be straying … Hope the orignator of the thread doesn’t mind for this last one!

Edris:

Before answering those questions, there is something you mentioned in your last post, that I think you should reconsider
My friend this statment doesn’t apply to neither the OT nor the NT. I can bring you many stories from the Bible that are irrelevant to anything, and that hold zero importance.

Other Christian like **Tantum ergo ** would probably address this better than I do. I’d give you some biblical verses for references though they might not mean much to you.

16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 **Timothy 3:16-17 **

Edris:

Ahmed Deedat’s authority on the Bible. I don’t know what you mean by authority. I have encountered this “authority” question many times in this forum. Every person has the right to read the Bible and to question what’s going on inside that book; same goes to the Qur’an. Infact, many verses in the Qur’an urges every person who reads it to reflect on its verses, to think and to consider everything mentioned in the Qur’an, and to see if there are contradictions or errors in it.

Frankly, I must say that you are more “open minded” than other Muslims that I encountered here. Many months back when I was at this forum, a Muslim member said something like Ahmad Deedat was too biased in his analysis of the Bible and therefore cannot be reliable for impartial reference. On the other I am often told by Muslims that I must use interpretation of the Quran from “accepted” Muslim scholars only. Generally I would agree with you that we should be free to question the Bible or the Quran according to our own opinions. I guess in term of discussion we have to have same rules to be applied equally to both sides.

Edris:

Ok, you mentioned two reasons for why the ascension was mentioned in the Bible. Fair enough, but why was the verses of the ascension omitted in previous versions of the Bible. I really can’t understand this on your part. The fact that some verses and words have been deleted, restored, added, deleted without being restored back again, changed in the Bible; doesn’t that make you wonder about the authenticity of the Bible that you have today?

The New Testaments do not consist of the Gospels only but also other books. The narration in the Gospels do not have to be identical. Eventhough they were all witnesses they can reported what they like. Example if both of us are reporting a Manchester United Vs Chelsea match, my report might be different from yours though we were at the same match.

Edris:

*“The fact that some verses and words have been deleted, restored, added, deleted without being restored back again, changed in the Bible;” * This is not true at all. Bible is public knowledge and if there is any alteration on the translations, you are not forced to use it. Anyway, you can always refer to the original copies in Hebrew or Greek.

The fact that the ascension was mentioned in only two Gospels, actually troubles me; this is a major event in the life of Jesus Christ. Yes, i think it should’ve been mentioned in the four Gospels, but this is not the problem; the problem as i see it is why the fact that Jesus pbuh rode the donkey into Jerusalem is mentioned in the four Gospels, yet the ascension is mentioned in only two? which one do you think is more important here.

Yes, the ascension was a major event but so was the resurrection and many other events. Explanation for this is the same about the reporter analogy above.

Jesus rode the donkey into Jerusalem which is popularly known as **the triumphant entry into Jerusalem ** is another very important event with deep implication. Jesus knew this was the last time he would be alive because he would be given to be killed. “I must go to Jerusalem and suffer much from the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the law. I will be put to death, but three days later I will be raised to life”. (Matt 16:21) Jesus knew his fate and yet he went to Jerusalem so that God’s plan of salvation of mankind would be fulfilled.

The donkey part is to fulfill the prophecy of ancient prophet Zechariah.(See Zech9:9)
Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion!
Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem!
See, your king [a] comes to you,
righteous and having salvation,
gentle and riding on a donkey,
on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

Thanks for your answers to my questions and God bless you.

 

[Reuben_J]

There is my mistake in quote in my previous post. Here is the correction.

Edris:

The fact that some verses and words have been deleted, restored, added, deleted without being restored back again, changed in the Bible;…

This is not true at all. Bible is public knowledge and if there is any alteration on the translations, you are not forced to use it. Anyway, you can always refer to the original copies in Hebrew or Greek.

 

[Faith101]

Again, there are no “holes in the story” and we don’t believe anything was kept hidden from them, or us.
Now, have you read any of the sources yet that I gave you?
Obviously not.

I tried to go through as many as they can, some of them however were not relevant to the discussion on hand and did not add antying to the conversation. Perhaps i missed something, if so…then is it possible, for time is short, for you to just give me a clear answer here?

One other obvious point, if they were going to stone her, don’t you believe they would have done it when it was obvious that she was “with child” and not that they would have waited until she had the child?

They didnt know she was “with child” because she had withdrew away from them (Chapter Mary verse 16 to about 23 can read it here searchtruth.com/chapter_display.php?chapter=19&translator=2&mac=)).

Does the Bible teach something different?

 

[Faith101]

Tantum ergo:

There is no “hole in the story”–what we have here is one faith tradition (Christianity) and another faith tradition (Islam). As a Christian, I don’t find any “holes” in my scripture. I am sure that as a Muslim you likewise don’t find “holes” in yours.

As a Christian, there are elements of Jewish scriptures (what we call the Old Testament) which we believe were inspired by God. But we do not hold ALL Jewish scriptures as inspired by God, and Jewish scripture after the 1st century AD we certainly do not hold as God inspired, because as Christians we believe that the WORD, or Logos, of God, Jesus the Christ, marked with His Life, Death, and the institution of His Church through His command to His disciplines to “spread the gospel throughout the world, in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and make of all men disciples” the summit and END of God’s revelations to humanity.

Over the early centuries, as the Christians grew in numbers and were able to escape from persecution, the oral traditions taught by the apostles to their successors and the people, coupled with the inspiration of the Spirit, leading the Church, to evaluate the Jewish scriptures AND the works of the early Christian evangelists, led to the canon of the Bible being developed in the 4th century, some 300 years before Mohammed pbuh. During this time, many OTHER works of the Jewish people AND of early Christian writers were extensively reviewed AND, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, were found to be not the inspired words of God (unlike those works of the Bible). Some of those texts contain various stories (like the Protoevangelium of James) which talk about the young Jesus, or give stories about Mary’s early life. There are likely to be (as in the case of the gnostic gospels) not only many variants of the written stories, but many variants of oral legends and traditions.

Considering the culture of the people of Mohammed’s time (though it is only slightly after, I refer you to any of the Arabian Night stories), the “Mary” story you give, when compared to Luke’s infancy narratives, the Didache, or even (secular) the works of Ovid and Virgil (1st century AD) is far less "Judeo Christian" or even Hellenistic in its typology, and far more culturally connected with the early Muslim/Arab cultural typology, IMO.

Thank you for the information, although it had really nothing to do with what we are talking about here.

Please provide proof for your last sentence which i bolded above.

 

[Wildkit]

Faith101:

Thank you for the information, although it had really nothing to do with what we are talking about here.

Please provide proof for your last sentence which i bolded above.

Faith 101:

You asked if I wanted to change topics,……maybe others might, but you are off topic.

I will simply copy my response to you several days ago when you remarked that I was off topic. I continue to wait for my proof for the question that I saw several months ago, yet I don’t believe it can be provided, and so the heresy goes on, according to Belloc.

I will try again,…please respond if you or anyone can. This question is the essence of the continuing dialogue.

Originally Posted by Faith101
i’ll rephrase and take it one step at a time

Was Jesus’ virgin birth known to the children of Israel during his ministry?

I see the essence of your rhetorical question concerning the Blessed Mary’s virginity. CA member allhers gave a good synopsis and tracts for finding further information on your question, but since you already have the answer,……why don’t you share it with us, is that the point of your question?

Yet, before you do, could you please answer the question posed by another thread that I have yet found to be answered by anyone. I believe it will be the substance of this thread and likely many other posts.

July 14, 2005 12:47 AM
Ghosty Quote:
Yes however we believe that many of the people of the book distorted it and changed parts of it. (the Bible)

Herein lies the problem: Prove it.

You can only do so by relying on the Quran, but the Quran relies on the distortion of Scripture being true in order for itself to be true and necessary. In other words, the ONLY testimony that the Quran can give is that Scripture is distorted. We need OUTSIDE proof, seperate from the Quran, to validate the Muslim claim.

For example, you can’t ask a liar if he’s lying. If he is actually an honest man, he will say he is not a liar, and if he is a liar, he will say that he is not a liar. Likewise, if the Quran is truth it will say it is, and if it is a lie it will say it is the truth.

The Scriptures of the Jews do not rely on the writings of the Jews to validate them. The EXISTANCE of the Jews is proof of the Scriptures of the Jews, because the Scriptures claim that God promised them survival as a unique people and culture for all time. No other contemporary people or culture of theirs have survived on any continent. Therefore, while it’s not absolute proof, it does strongly substantiate their claim, and encourages us to look deeper at their other claims. One of their claims, incidently, is that a Messiah will come (around the time that Jesus was born, though later Jews have revised this prediction) and that he will bring the final revelation for all people.

Likewise, the Scriptures of the Christians do not rely upon themselves for validation. There are numerous writings outside of Scripture, some by non-Christians (Josephus, Talmud) that verify the existance and practices of the early Christians. Furthermore, non-Scriptural writings by people who personally knew the Apostles record their teachings as identical to what we find in Scripture, and identical to the Catholic Church today. Christian Scripture states that this is the final revelation for all people.

Now fast-forward 600 years and we have a man who claims to have a message from God, but this message absolutely depends on both the Jewish and Christian Scriptures being distorted in order to be acceptable. This man, and his followers, have not provided any proof (to my knowledge) that these Scriptures are distorted, but rather depend on us taking Mohammed’s word for it.

Please provide proof of the distortion of that you claim from outside of the Quran. When you’ve done that, we can address the issue on reasonable terms.

The essence of whom knew and at what time will not change the ultimate fact and belief of Mary’s virginity. It was prophesized, Christ’s revelation and miracles on earth, the continuing miracles in His Church since his death on Calvary are recurring examples for all of us.

I might add, these continuing miracles,………yes they are a mystery, but why are they predominately/only in Christ’s Church? Is there something wrong with this question/observation?