The Quar'an said Mery had NO other Childen after Jesus

[Bill_Pick]

FROM THE QUAR’AN
At first Mary was afraid and troubled by the angel’s words. Being a virgin, Mary questioned the angel, “How will this be?” The angel explained that the child would be God’s own Son and, therefore, “nothing is impossible with God.” Humbled and in awe, Mary believed the angel of the Lord and rejoiced in God her Savior.
This is saying Mary was Jesus only Son

 

[Rence]

Is there anything in the Quar’an that supports what the CC teaches in our John 1:1-5?

 

[Kadaveri]

I don’t see how that passage is saying that Jesus was Mary’s only son. Though anyway it really doesn’t matter to Muslims whether Mary had other children or not.

The teachings of John 1:1-5 are explicitly denounced in the Qur’an (4:171, 5:17, 5:72-73)

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

FROM THE QUAR’AN
At first Mary was afraid and troubled by the angel’s words. Being a virgin, Mary questioned the angel, “How will this be?” The angel explained that the child would be God’s own Son and, therefore, “nothing is impossible with God.” Humbled and in awe, Mary believed the angel of the Lord and rejoiced in God her Savior.
This is saying Mary was Jesus only Son [emphasis mine]

How did you come to this conclusion?

EDIT: Also, what does it mean if the Quran says the Virgin Mary had no other children?

 

[Rence]

I don’t see how that passage is saying that Jesus was Mary’s only son. Though anyway it really doesn’t matter to Muslims whether Mary had other children or not.

The teachings of John 1:1-5 are explicitly denounced in the Qur’an (4:171, 5:17, 5:72-73)

Ok, it could just be me, but I could have SWORN that the title was different when I first saw this post. Bill, am I crazy, or did you change the title on me?

Kadaveri, could you please post those verses out of the Qur’an? I don’t have one, I only have a Catholic Bible. Or, can you please direct me to an online version so I don’t have to trouble you?

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Kadaveri, could you please post those verses out of the Qur’an? I don’t have one, I only have a Catholic Bible. Or, can you please direct me to an online version so I don’t have to trouble you?

Since Kadaveri isn’t on right now, I’ll cover for him. All translations, by the way, are from Yusuf Ali.

S. 4:171:

O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His messengers. Say not “Trinity” : desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs.

S. 5:17:

In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: “Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every - one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things.”

S. 5:72-73:

They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help. They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

 

[aspirant]

S. 5:72-73:

They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help. They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

It’s sad to reflect on how badly Muhammad misunderstood what Christians believe.

 

[Kadaveri]

I don’t doubt that Muhammad probably had little understanding of Christianity. But whoever authored those verses clearly had a very advanced understanding of Christian doctrine; one probably impossible for Muhammad himself to have had, being an illiterate and uneducated camel herder from 7th century Arabia.

 

[dzheremi]

What does it matter what the Qur’an says about this, or anything?

 

[aspirant]

whoever authored those verses clearly had a very advanced understanding of Christian doctrine

The one who authored those verses had not even the most rudimentary knowledge of Christian doctrine. They’re riddled with error regarding what Christians believe.

 

[wwolverine]

I don’t see how that passage is saying that Jesus was Mary’s only son. Though anyway it really doesn’t matter to Muslims whether Mary had other children or not.

The teachings of John 1:1-5 are explicitly denounced in the Qur’an (4:171, 5:17, 5:72-73)

Hi Kadaveri, dont know about the quote mentioned, but I believe you accept it. That means the words mentioned there ‘God’s own son’ is there in the quran.

God Bless

 

[wwolverine]

I don’t see how that passage is saying that Jesus was Mary’s only son. Though anyway it really doesn’t matter to Muslims whether Mary had other children or not.

The teachings of John 1:1-5 are explicitly denounced in the Qur’an (4:171, 5:17, 5:72-73)

Hello Kadaveri, It dont matter if John 1-5 is denounced in quran, but is that the only corruption in the Holy Bible as muslims find, or is the entire Holy Bible corrupted. I am a bit confused now. Cause many muslims say Holy Bible is corrupted ie the old and new testament, but now you talk about only 5 verses.

 

[wwolverine]

I don’t doubt that Muhammad probably had little understanding of Christianity. But whoever authored those verses clearly had a very advanced understanding of Christian doctrine; one probably impossible for Muhammad himself to have had, being an illiterate and uneducated camel herder from 7th century Arabia.

Are you openly denying the authencity of the Quran? And you do accept that quran was the best selling novel of mohammed, same like the greek mytholigies which still sell?

 

[Kadaveri]

The one who authored those verses had not even the most rudimentary knowledge of Christian doctrine. They’re riddled with error regarding what Christians believe.

I don’t see any error.

Hi Kadaveri, dont know about the quote mentioned, but I believe you accept it. That means the words mentioned there ‘God’s own son’ is there in the quran.

The words are only there to denounce such a doctrine.

Hello Kadaveri, It dont matter if John 1-5 is denounced in quran, but is that the only corruption in the Holy Bible as muslims find, or is the entire Holy Bible corrupted. I am a bit confused now. Cause many muslims say Holy Bible is corrupted ie the old and new testament, but now you talk about only 5 verses.

I didn’t mean to say that only those 5 verses are false. The Bible as a whole is a corrupt work for a variety of reasons, with some parts suffering more than others. The Gospel of John is one of the worst offenders.

Are you openly denying the authencity of the Quran? And you do accept that quran was the best selling novel of mohammed, same like the greek mytholigies which still sell?

No, just denying that Muhammad authored it. The Qur’an is not a ‘novel’.

 

[Jay53]

I didn’t mean to say that only those 5 verses are false. The Bible as a whole is a corrupt work for a variety of reasons, with some parts suffering more than others. The Gospel of John is one of the worst offenders.

I find that rather interesting about the Gospel of John, since St. John was “the disciple whom Jesus loved”, he was extremely close to Jesus, was present at His Transfiguration, was present at the Crucifixion and was entrusted with the care of Jesus’ own Mother at the Crucifixion.

As a side note, if Muslims believe this about St. John, I find it interesting that planten does not denounce St. John in the same way he denounces that evil Saul of Tarsus.

 

[ralphinal]

How can it be blasphemy to say that Jesus, son of Mary, is the Christ, when Muslims call Jesus the Messiah, which is the same thing?

 

[Kadaveri]

I find that rather interesting about the Gospel of John, since St. John was “the disciple whom Jesus loved”, he was extremely close to Jesus, was present at His Transfiguration, was present at the Crucifixion and was entrusted with the care of Jesus’ own Mother at the Crucifixion.

As a side note, if Muslims believe this about St. John, I find it interesting that planten does not denounce St. John in the same way he denounces that evil Saul of Tarsus.

The Gospel of John was not actually written by said disciple. In the judgment of most Biblical scholars it was written around 90-100 CE by an unknown person.

 

[Jay53]

The Gospel of John was not actually written by said disciple. In the judgment of most Biblical scholars it was written around 90-100 CE by an unknown person.

I disagree.
(emphasis mine)

Facts Support Tradition

The facts are these: The Tradition of the Church, supported by the unbroken line of patristic testimony, as well as internal evidence from the text itself, is that the Gospel is rooted in the testimony of the apostle John, son of Zebedee. Numerous other witnesses in the second and third centuries corroborate St. Irenaeus’s testimony. In addition, various elements within the Gospel strongly suggest John as the author. Most obviously, there is the attestation of the witnesses penning the Gospel that it is the testimony of “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 21:20)—a disciple to whom no one but John corresponds. The source of the Gospel is, quite clearly, a Jew familiar with the conditions of Palestinian Judaism at the time of Christ. He speaks Aramaic and Greek. He knows Jerusalem as it looked before Rome reduced it to rubble in A.D. 70. And he gives countless details which, if they are not the testimony of a first-hand eyewitness who was present at the Last Supper, are a singular occurrence of novelistic realism 19 centuries ahead of its time. That he was part of Christ’s “inner circle” of Peter, James, and John (cf. Gal. 2:9) is even more likely given that he was the disciple at the Last Supper who laid his head on Christ’s breast. He can’t be Peter, who is distinguished from him in the text, and he can’t be James (who died in the early 40s). So it all points to John. Additionally, the patristic tradition that the Gospel was composed in Ephesus also points to John. First, this is the city associated with the Assumption of the Virgin who was commended into his care. Second, the Gospel repeatedly answers a sect devoted to John the Baptist with the reply that John “was not the light” but had only come to “bear witness to the light” (John 1:8). We know from Acts 18:24 and 19:1-7 that there was such a sect centered in Ephesus. Finally, the sophistication of the Gospel fits the fact that the New Testament epistle with the most sophisticated exposition of theology is Ephesians.

So all the evidence points to the accuracy of the Church’s tradition that John published his Gospel in Ephesus in the second half of the first century. catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0711fea3.asp

BTW, What “Biblical Scholars”?

Edit: Interesting fact: I just read that the Church that was built over St. John’s tomb in Ephesus, Turkey was coverted to a mosque in 1330, but the building was destroyed in 1402. The ruins are still there which visitors can see. (No point to this, just thought it was interesting. sacred-destinations.com/turkey/ephesus-basilica-of-st-john )

 

[bridgeforsale]

FROM THE QUAR’AN
At first Mary was afraid and troubled by the angel’s words. Being a virgin, Mary questioned the angel, “How will this be?” The angel explained that the child would be God’s own Son and, therefore, “nothing is impossible with God.” Humbled and in awe, Mary believed the angel of the Lord and rejoiced in God her Savior.
This is saying Mary was Jesus only Son

Hate to point out the obvious, but whenever you rely on the Koran for anything, you implicitly state that you think god really did speak to Muhammad, an illiterate desert merchant who married (and had sex with) a six year old baby girl. Gee, good going god

But hey, why not right, after all your last pope was seen kissing the Koran. I have to say, for all their mean spirited bigoted drool, I have more respect for fundamentalists (and for that matter more trust, that’s right trust). At least they tell you what they really think!

 

[dzheremi]

That’s right, bridgeforsale, insult the entire church for the action of one pope that many of his own faithful do not agree with. Totally reasonable response there.

I agree with you on the first sentence, though, and so I must repeat my question to the OP: What does it matter what the Qur’an says about this, or anything?