Quran/NT parallelism & Jesus' birth

[exoflare]

Joseph Alison started this topic in another thread, and I’m continuing it here. It leaves off like this…
Joseph Alison:

Salaam everyone;
What I try to do here is some parallelism between the Qur’an and the NT. I took the miraculous birth of Jesus (PBUH) as an example because both books give an account of the event but with sticking differences.

The Holy Qur’an states that the Jews knew about the miraculous birth of Jesus because he spoke in defense of his mother who has been accused of an evil act, in the Bible however -and according to the answer I got from exoflare- they did not. My question is: why is it that in the Bible the Jews did not know that Jesus was born miraculously from a virgin mother? Or did they?

The holy Qur’an states that the people accused Mary to have done an evil act when she brought the baby Jesus in her arms, in the NT I found nowhere such an accusation. Why? Thanks.

Salaam.
Joseph.

You seem to be wondering why, if the Quran copies directly from the Bible (this is not really what is claimed), such differences exist within the accounts of the Quran and the NT. The reason why is that Mohammed wasn’t limited to the Bible as his only source of the traditions he heard from all the people he met. Some, for example, were taken from various apocryphal scriptures like the Arabic Infancy Gospel. It’s in this book that you find Jesus speaking from the cradle.

From the Arabic Infancy Gospel:

1. We find what follows in the book of Joseph the high priest, who lived in the time of Christ. Some say that he is Caiaphas. He has said that Jesus spoke, and, indeed, when He was lying in His cradle said to Mary His mother: I am Jesus, the Son of God, the Logos, whom thou hast brought forth, as the Angel Gabriel announced to thee; and my Father has sent me for the salvation of the world.

 

[Joseph_Alison]

Although I still think the original thread where I posted the above was the right place, but I thank Brother exoflare to have started this thread for me. I hope Brother Rodrigo would join us in this discussion.

Salaam.
Joseph.

 

[exoflare]

It wouldn’t let me edit the post again, so I just wanted to add this for those who were interested. More info on the Arabic Infancy Gospel.

wikipedia article: Arabic Infancy Gospel

 

[Joseph_Alison]

exoflare:

You seem to be wondering why, if the Quran copies directly from the Bible (this is not really what is claimed), such differences exist within the accounts of the Quran and the NT.

No, brother exoflare, that was not my point exactly.

In the Holy Qur’an, the miraculous birth of Jesus (PBUH) was made public because of the speaking of the baby Jesus in defense of his mother. Only a miracle (the baby speaking) could convince people of the miraculous virgin birth. There was no way the pious Mary could convince her people that her baby was conceived in her womb miraculously without a male intervention.

In the Bible however, and according to you, the common people did not seem to know that Jesus was born miraculously.
Why is it that a Christian living in the 21st century knows about the miraculous birth of Jesus while those to whom he was sent and interacted with did not? Was not the miraculous birth of Jesus intended to be a sign from God to those to whom Jesus was sent? I know it is a great sign and a central tenet to the faith and belief of my Christian Brothers and Sisters. Why would God plan a miraculous event only to order it afterwards to be hidden from the people of Jesus’ time (through the angel who supposedly visited Joseph in a dream)?

Salaam.
Joseph.

 

[George_Waters]

Joseph_Alison:

No, brother exoflare, that was not my point exactly.

In the Holy Qur’an, the miraculous birth of Jesus (PBUH) was made public because of the speaking of the baby Jesus in defense of his mother. Only a miracle (the baby speaking) could convince people of the miraculous virgin birth. There was no way the pious Mary could convince her people that her baby was conceived in her womb miraculously without a male intervention.

In the Bible however, and according to you, the common people did not seem to know that Jesus was born miraculously.
Why is it that a Christian living in the 21st century knows about the miraculous birth of Jesus while those to whom he was sent and interacted with did not? Was not the miraculous birth of Jesus intended to be a sign from God to those to whom Jesus was sent? I know it is a great sign and a central tenet to the faith and belief of my Christian Brothers and Sisters. Why would God plan a miraculous event only to order it afterwards to be hidden from the people of Jesus’ time (through the angel who supposedly visited Joseph in a dream)?

Salaam.
Joseph.

Did Jesus need to have a miraculous sign to be believed? Time and time again the people asked for miracles only to forget and discount them later. Was the virgin birth so much a miracle planned by God or the nature of Jesus’ human birth as willed by God? Are not Jesus’ words and actions proof enough? Jesus did bless those who believed without seeing. Just my thoughts.

 

[inJESUS]

The virgin birth of Jesus is written in their prophecies. If any jew knew well the prophecies, and was willing to look for this one, well he could have asked and known but the OT and the NT say that He came and the world did not know him. I doubt that the jews cared about this specific point since their doubt started with the idea that Jesus claimed to be a king , coz he was not a literal political king as they thought. The virgin birth is a sign to those who want to look for the truth and believe. The virgin birth is very important but it is not the most important; it is just one of the signs, along with all the prophecies about the Messiah. Jews now, ( not all) reject Jesus inspite of the hundreds of prophecies because they project on the Messiah their own criteria, so it is no wonder if they didnt even care about this specific point. Like Jesus said, had they known their scriptures, they would have understood who He is.

 

[exoflare]

Joseph Alison, I really doubt you care this much about the virgin birth of all things. It sounds like you’re just really eager to find a question people can’t answer for you to trumpet it around as “proof” of the Bible’s errancy. When it’s not the virgin birth it will be something else. On and on and on.
Joseph Alison:

In the Bible however, and according to you, the common people did not seem to know that Jesus was born miraculously.

^^ Please show me where I ever said this. Now you’re just putting words in my mouth. The Bible doesn’t make a comprehensive list of every single person who knew of the virgin birth during the whole lifetime of Jesus. It’s because this isn’t important unless you want to nitpick useless details. In fact I just now got deja vu as I was writing this and remembered that another Muslim tried the very same line of questioning on this board.

You say that all that was needed for Jesus to do to convince people of the virgin birth (ergo, that he was the Messiah) was to perform a miracle in front of some people, and after that they would believe even though they had not witnessed the virgin birth take place… Why then, are the several miracles Jesus performed in the NT not sufficient evidence of his own claim that he was the Messiah (hence, born of a virgin)?

Anyway, a miracle is not necessarily enough to convince someone of anything you tell them. People doubt miracles all the time, even those that are made manifest to everyone who is open to seek them out. Jesus performed miracles to back up his claim of being the Messiah, but in his time most of the people didn’t want to accept that possibility so they decided to condemn him no matter what due to their hardness of heart. Just as today when evidence of dozens of miraculous occurences survives throughout the world, but people are too adamant on believing what is convenient for them rather than what is the truth. For those people, no amount of “proof” will ever suffice.

 

[Joseph_Alison]

Salaam everyone and thanks to those who answered.

I give below my own interpretation as to why the virgin birth was not reported in the bible as being known to the Jews and in the same time why it was not reported that the pious Mary faced accucations of fornication.

The virgin birth was a supposedly a written prophesy in the Jewish’s books about the coming Messiah. If it was the case and in order for the Jews -to whom Jesus was sent- to believe that Jesus was the awaited Messiah, that virgin birth should have been clearly established to them first.
It does not seem to be the case in the Biblical account; to the contrary, Mary in that account was supposedly Joseph’s wife when she was pregnant with Jesus, and therefore Jesus was the son of Joseph to many people looking to Mary from outside.

If at the birth of Jesus someone told the people that here is the virgin birth they were for so long expecting, no one would have believed it, because to them Joseph was the Baby’s father; except if Joseph himself denied that, in which case Mary would have faced an accusation for fornication she would never be capable to refute; as a result the virgin birth could never be established to those expecting it, except if the account of that birth happened as it is reported in the holy Qur’an.

It is only according to the account as reported in the holy Qur’an that the virgin and miraculous birth of Jesus (PBUH) has been established to those who attacked the honor of the pious Mary.

We know from the Biblical account that Joseph did not expose Mary; an angel supposedly visited him in a dream and told him to keep her, he told him it was holy what was in her womb.

The two accounts, the one in the Bible and the one in the holy Qur’an differ mainly because of one man: Joseph!

If Joseph is removed from the picture, Mary would have faced the same accusations as reported in the holy Qur’an and God would have come to her rescue.

The Bible writers made Joseph a husband to Mary because of one other goal: the coming Messiah would be a descendant of King David! Apparently the Bible writers wanted to conciliate between two irreconcilables prophesies: the virgin birth of Jesus (meaning no earthly father) and his belonging to King David’s lineage (meaning an earthly father, hence Joseph, supposedly from the house of David).

Now it clear why any account relating that Jesus (PBUH) spoke in the cradle in defense of his mother, or any account relating that Mary was accused of an evil act have been dismissed as apocrypha by the Bible compilers. Such accounts would mean that the Jews knew that Mary brought a fatherless baby and therefore any claim before them that the new baby was their king would be immediately and strongly opposed, because they would claim high and strong that it is impossible: being fatherless the new baby did not have the blood of the house of David streaming in his veins. That is the reason why the true virgin birth account has been truncated in the obvious aim to fit Jesus into two schemes at the same time.

Alhamdulillah (praise be to Allah), He has re-established the truth, the virgin birth was demonstrated to those doubting it and the mission of Jesus (PBUH) was that of a prophet and messenger from Allah (SWT) to the straying Children of Israel.

Salaam.
Joseph.

 

[inJESUS]

The jews did NOT expect a divine messiah; for the jews, the messiah should be a normal human being, a political leader; the jews did NOT understand their scriptures as Jesus said ; thats why the virgin birth or all the other miracles are not important to them coz they do not expect them; they expect a political king who will defeat their ennemies.

 

[inJESUS]

Lets see what the jews did in regard to miracles especially after Jesus rose Lazarus from the dead:

45 Then many of the Jews which came to Mary, and had seen the things which Jesus did, believed on him.

46 But some of them went their ways to the Pharisees, and told them what things Jesus had done.

47 Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. **
48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation. **

We see that those who were interested to know about Jesus asked Mary as well and they believed.
On the other hand, we see the rulers who did NOT care about his miracles even thou they ACKNOLEDGED them, because they were focusing on their own kingdom istead of the Heavenly Kingdom. Jesus did not come to grant the jews their earthly desires for power, but to give them eternal life;They expected a rich political king, thats why they rejected Jesus on the spot because He is poor and with no army; the jews reflected on the Messiah their earthly desires and kept asking him : if you were a king, then where is your kingdom? to which Jesus replies : my kingdom is not from here.
No matter what Jesus did regarding miracles, they didnt care; all they wanted is a king to defeat the romans; since Jesus didnt do it, they rejected him EVEN THOUGH he made miracles.

In conclusion, those who wanted to know the truth searched for it; those who cared about their own wishes were blind and disregarded all the signs ( as Jesus said). This is the core of faith. God does NOT need to give you concrete proof of who He is; if you want to know it, you ask God and He guides you. If Jesus rose the dead and they refused to believe, do you think if He spoke as a baby they would have believed? no, they would have called him demon-possessed because the King of the Jews cannot come from a poor family of Mary and Joseph.

Here is Herod after the birth of the messiah:
When King Herod heard this, he was greatly troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.
4
Assembling all the chief priests and the scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Messiah was to be born. 4
5
They said to him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it has been written through the prophet:
6
‘And you, Bethlehem, land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; since from you shall come a ruler, who is to shepherd my people Israel.’”

The messiah was thought to be a human, political ruler thats why they did not care about the prophecy about the virgin birth or didnt understand it; the prophecy says that his birth is a sign;
But this sign is no greater than the signs Jesus performed during his ministry- the jews were stuck with their criteria about the messiah and all they wanted is a political ruler- Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies and miracles of his first coming, but the jews did not want to believe.Those who knew the scriptures , believed him, and jews nowadays are turning back to Jesus.

mohammad stole this idea from an apocryphic bible but changed the words of Jesus to suit his cult.

 

[inJESUS]

Now it clear why any account relating that Jesus (PBUH) spoke in the cradle in defense of his mother, or any account relating that Mary was accused of an evil act have been dismissed as apocrypha by the Bible compilers.

are you sure this this the only reason wht it was considered apocryphal?

So you think this miracle really happened? then how come Jews did not believe Jesus then?

But great; lets suppose this apocryphal bible said the truth; then how come mohammad changed Jesus’ words and islamized them? why didnt He stick to the real words of the book? maybe coz they dont fit his intentions?

 

[inJESUS]

The Arabic Infancy Gospel is one of the texts found in the New Testament apocrypha concerning the infancy of Jesus. It is based on the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, and **was compiled in the sixth century. ** It contains a number of embellishments on the earlier text, however, including a diaper (of Jesus) that heals people, sweat (of Jesus) that turns into balm, curing leprosy, and dying cloth varied colours using only indigo dye. It also claims earlier encounters for Jesus with Judas Iscariot, and with the thieves with whom he is crucified.

do you believe he was crucified?

 

[inJESUS]

Here is what Jesus said in this apocryphic book:
I am Jesus, the Son of God, the Logos, whom thou hast brought forth, as the Angel Gabriel announced to thee; and my Father has sent me for the salvation of the world."

According to your reasoning, this book speaks truth; do you believe this truth as well? Is Jesus the Son of God?
your prophet called Jesus Al Masih…did he even know who is the promised Messiah or just wrote a word he doesnt understand its implications?

Hennecke writes in “New Testament Apocrypha”, pub. by Lutterworth, page 369:
"The basis of all the vast later literature constituting the apocryphal infancy gospels is the so called Protevangelium of James, probably of the 2nd century, particularly for the birth, childhood and motherhood of Mary, and the Gospel of Thomas, not much later in its original form, for the miracles of the child Jesus."

 

[Joseph_Alison]

InJESUS:

The Jews did NOT expect a divine messiah; for the Jews, the messiah should be a normal human being.

Salaam Brother InJESUS;

I am not sure I understand what you mean by divine Messiah.
Jesus was human like any other human. If you say that Jesus was divine, we can apply the same criteria and say the same thing about Adam whose creation was more miraculous, no father, no mother.

If Jesus was divine as you said, why is it that the prophecy in DEUT 18:18 is explained to be about Jesus? Was Moses divine?

If as you said, the Jews were expecting a human Messiah born a normal way, then you just gave another clue as to why the virgin birth account did not mention that the Jews knew of that special birth: for the outsiders, not knowing what Joseph knew, and according to the Biblical account, Jesus looked like Joseph’s son, in other words Jesus looked like a human born a normal way, I can deduct that those who wrote the Biblical account worked hard to fit Jesus into the Jewish’s prophecy about the upcoming Messiah.

According to the Biblical account, the Jews knew nothing about a divine intervention in the creation and birth of Jesus, so saying that they were NOT expecting a divine Messiah is not accurate, it would have been if they knew, but the Biblical account says they did not.

Salaam.
Joseph.

 

[inJESUS]

Salaam Brother InJESUS;

I am not sure I understand what you mean by divine Messiah.

then maybe you should read the messianic prophecies.

Jesus was human like any other human. If you say that Jesus was divine, we can apply the same criteria and say the same thing about Adam whose creation was more miraculous, no father, no mother.

Jesus was not created like Adam. He is eternal.

If Jesus was divine as you said, why is it that the prophecy in DEUT 18:18 is explained to be about Jesus? Was Moses divine?

i’ll check this when i come back .

If as you said, the Jews were expecting a human Messiah born a normal way, then you just gave another clue as to why the virgin birth account did not mention that the Jews knew of that special birth:

sure coz jews expected a ruler, a king, a political messiah, because they did not understand their scriptures as Jesus said : if you believe moses, then you should believe me coz he wrote about Me. Jesus often rebuked them for not knowing their scriptures.

for the outsiders, not knowing what Joseph knew, and according to the Biblical account, Jesus looked like Joseph’s son, in other words Jesus looked like a human born a normal way, I can deduct that those who wrote the Biblical account worked hard to fit Jesus into the Jewish’s prophecy about the upcoming Messiah.

did you read the messianic prophecies and how jewish christians understood them? did the disciples work “hard” to fit all of these prophecies? did Jesus ask people to give him vinagar to fulfill a prophecy? did he say to Judah to accept 30 pieces of gold to betray him and fulfill a prophecy? was Jesus able to fit himself in prophecies that depended on others to do not himself? there are HUNDREDS of prophecies…if Jesus only fulfiiled lets say 50, including the virgin birth, then calculate the law of probaility…i’ll get to this point later.

According to the Biblical account, the Jews knew nothing about a divine intervention in the creation and birth of Jesus, so saying that they were NOT expecting a divine Messiah is not accurate, it would have been if they knew, but the Biblical account says they did not.

the scriptures are the same, it is the jews’ interpretation that was wrong; they expected a political ruler to defeat the romans.

 

[Joseph_Alison]

Salaam Brother InJESUS;

InJESUS:

Here is what Jesus said in this apocryphal book:
I am Jesus, the Son of God, the Logos, whom thou hast brought forth, as the Angel Gabriel announced to thee; and my Father has sent me for the salvation of the world."

Although the above saying states the son hip of Jesus to God and salvation through him -a common Christian belief- the Bible compilers were correct to themselves to reject it. As I said before, according to the Biblical account, and looking to Mary from outside, Jesus was the son of Joseph and not the son of God as the above saying states. Jesus claiming to be the son of God in his childhood would deprive the Bible writers of the possibility to make out of him the heir of King David’s throne in order to fulfill another supposed prophecy about the upcoming Messiah. The Bible compilers had no other choice but to reject as apocrypha the saying you quoted.

This supposed saying of Jesus depicts him as speaking to his mother, reminding her of who he supposedly was, as if she did not know! Did she doubt the announcement made by the Angel Gabriel in order for her own son to remind her?

Jesus (PBUH) spoke not to remind his mother who he supposedly was but to defend her before the people who faced her with a grave accusation, otherwise she would, according to the Jewish law, end up stoned to death for adultery; she would never be able to defend herself and convince her people that the baby she brought was a virgin fatherless birth.

For those who did not witness the virgin birth, did not hear the Jesus baby speaking and who may accuse Mary of an evil act or may accuse Jesus (PBUH) to be an illegitimate child, Allah (SWT) strengthened him with the holy spirit and gave him the power to perform miracles which would inspire the people that the man was not an evil doing, but a sign to them from Allah (SWT) who would never allow his prophet to be called an evil name.

According to your reasoning, this book speaks truth; do you believe this truth as well? Is Jesus the Son of God?

Partially yes, the book speaks the truth: the baby Jesus spoke, but not to say what it is reported by the quote you brought up.

There is one instance where Jesus (PBUH) spoke to his mother and it was when she gave birth to him, she wished if she died before that moment and be forgotten. She knew her people would accuse her of adultery and stone her to death, she knew she would never be able to convince them otherwise. Jesus spoke to her, telling her to remain silent and speak to no one if asked. When she brought him back to her people, they started making bad comments; she simply pointed to him speechless; it is at that moment that the baby Jesus spoke to defend his mother by telling who he was. The story is detailed in the holy Qur’an. The Biblical account dismissed the episode about the speaking of Jesus (PBUH) in defense of his mother for obvious reasons as I said before.

Your prophet called Jesus Al Masih, did he even know who is the promised Messiah or just wrote a word he doesn’t understand its implications?

Massih is the Arabic term for anointed. The act of anointment has nothing to do with prophesy. Anointed may have different meaning. I could mean appointed to high office and Jesus (PBUH) was appointed to high office by Allah (SWT), He selected him, after his second coming, to be the one by who the world will end, He also raised him to Himself.
It could mean to be somebody’s protégé, and Jesus (PBUH) was the protégé of Allah (SWT) who strengthened him with the Holy Spirit and protected him and his mother from those who accused them of evil things, He also protected him by saving him from those who wanted to kill him.
This is how I personally understand the word Massih to mean. It is Allah (SWT) who anointed Jesus (PBUH) by appointing him to high office before Himself and by protecting him against all sort of hardships.

Salaam.
Joseph.

 

[Joseph_Alison]

inJESUS:

the scriptures are the same, it is the jews’ interpretation that was wrong; they expected a political ruler to defeat the romans.

Salaam Brother InJESUS;
History teaches us that, circa 70 AD, the Jews revolted against the Romans; consequently that revolt was crushed, the second temple leveled to the ground and Jerusalem torched. What did happen? Did the Jews despair waiting their OT prophesies about their political ruler -who will help them defeat the Romans- come true?

Salaam.
Joseph.

 

[exoflare]

Joseph_Alison:

inJESUS:

Salaam Brother InJESUS;
History teaches us that, circa 70 AD, the Jews revolted against the Romans; consequently that revolt was crushed, the second temple leveled to the ground and Jerusalem torched. What did happen? Did the Jews despair waiting their OT prophesies about their political ruler -who will help them defeat the Romans- come true?

Salaam.
Joseph.

You don’t seem to have a sufficient grasp of basic human nature. They stuck to their old ways out of hardness of heart and sheer stubbornness. Why do you think all these end-time apocalypse cults don’t disband, even when the date they initially set for the rapture passes by? They just make up another date to look forward to and go on because they are too stubborn to admit they were wrong. It’s a very human reaction, and nothing to be surprised about. Humans either choose to live in the way of the flesh or the way of the spirit, and people like this choose to live in the flesh.

 

[exoflare]

Joseph_Alison:

Although the above saying states the son hip of Jesus to God and salvation through him -a common Christian belief- the Bible compilers were correct to themselves to reject it.

What on earth are you talking about?! This is such a blatant falsehood… are you trying to convince us, or yourself? Good luck, either way.

 

[Reuben_J]

Peace to you, bro Joseph.

I’ve just read thru this thread and hope you don’t mind if I comment on your post (if you’re still around here).

I must say that I found the argument to have the verse of the talking baby Jesus in the infancy story to be quite attractive but frankly, I doubt the wisdom of its inclusion.

Your rationales for the inclusion of the talking baby Jesus in the Quran are as follow. (Please correct me if I understand wrongly):-
1.To save Mary from the scandal of adultery and its consequences, like stoning and badmouthing of her and Jesus’ reputation.

2.To be a sign to the Jews that Jesus was chosen by God as a prophet. His virgin birth showed this uniqueness.

This story would be in line with the Quran’s contention that Jesus was a mere prophet. You also said that Joseph was a necessity in the Christian Bible to link Jesus to the lineage of King David to fit the prophecy of Jesus being the Messiah (paraphrase mine).

In the light of the Bible’ message and content, your rationale though reasonable, does not make any tangible difference to the outcome of what the Bible wants to convey (nor to the Quran’s, I think).

1.Mary was betrothed to Joseph. She was saved from the negative scandal of adultery because of Joseph, who was gracious to own responsibility to take Mary as his wife at the behest of the angel of God. Similarly, later on, the child Jesus was saved from being murdered by King Herod. Thus God saved His chosen one to enable His plan to be carried out.

2.The fact of virgin birth to be made known to the Jews. Is this really necessary? From what we know, Jesus’ life as a child, a youth and a young man was but a normal son, who assisted his father to work as a carpenter. There was nothing extraordinary about his youthful life. He did not perform any miracle because “his time had not yet come” (Jn 2:4).Thus it is rather puzzling why the Quran says otherwise. On the other hand, just imagine what would happen if the whole Jewish nation knew that here is this young child destined to be the Messiah! He would not likely to live long enough to do what he ought to do. Remember, Herod was a ruthless competitor! There probably would be a nasty civil war as Jewish nationalists would be inspired to take up arms to fight for the cause of the Messiah whom they thought would deliver them from the Romans and to set up a Jewish nation. In fact, it is this very act that caused the destruction of the temple and the remaining whatever it was of the Jewish entity by the Romans in AD 70.

3.A number of times, in the 3 years of Jesus’ public ministry, whenever it was revealed that he was the messiah or the Son of God, he would warn his disciples not to tell anybody else. Why? Because his mission had not been accomplished yet. In order to achieve it, timing is everything. The premature disclosure of the uniqueness of Jesus’ birth would surely contravene this. And rightly so that this is not made known to the people of Israel.

Thus the inclusion of the talking baby Jesus, though makes sense in humans’ term, is of no big consequence to the outcome of the Bible as a whole in bringing the message that Jesus was born of Virgin Mary. On the contrary, if this fact is made known to the entire Jewish people, it can cause unnecessary distraction to the original purpose of the coming of the Messiah. Remember it was a sensitive political era for the Jews. Big attention to a child Messiah/King would surely bring complication to the ruling Romans officials and the Jewish King Herod.

I seem to notice that people who take issue with the Bible do like to take it as a legal document that requires alibi to prove as evidence on whether an incidence took place or not. Thus we sometimes have them (not you) asking, “if Jesus is God, why is there no verse in the Bible in which Jesus says, ‘worship me’?”

Though it is reasonable to want that kind of statement included in the Bible as proof, it is not really necessary to be there. Are not other statements that allude to Jesus being divine not sufficient to show us that he is one? Anyway, just because Jesus says so is not a guarantee that people would believe him. That’s why it is not there. In fact I think this would have an opposite effect; the people would think that he blasphemous. To believe requires faith, an ingredient that amount to a blessing in oneself.

Christians do not take the Bible strictly as legal document with the entire alibi in a legal sense. It’s enough for us to believe that Jesus was born of a virgin from the narration of the Bible by its writer, who was a witness; the word of an angel and the exclamation of her cousin Elizabeth.

God bless.

Reuben