I'm not sure if Jesus' (as) miraculous birth means anything special in Islam. I'm sure there is a reason for his birth being special, but I'm not sure what it is, nor have I ever heard this mentioned by Muslim scholars. Allah SWT knows best.
I was actually thinking about this the other day in terms of how Christians see the Virgin birth of Jesus (as). My understanding is that because Jesus (as) was immaculately conceived he is free of the so-called "original sin" of Adam (as). Well, that's not entirely true if you're going based on this logic. What follows is my explanation using the Christian concept of "original sin". I'm sure Christians know that we Muslims do not believe in this idea, but for this example I am going to suppose it is true in order to illustrate a point.
Adam (as) was created by Allah SWT Himself; He molded Adam (as) from dirt and clay. Adam (as) is therefore technically the purest creation of all. He had neither a human mother, nor a human father.
Jesus (as) was conceived miraculously without the help of a man, but he was still Mary's child. He was still nurtured in her womb and she gave birth to him. Since he still came from a human mother, he would still inherit this "original sin".
In order for Jesus (as) to completely take away the sins of humanity (as Christians say), he would need to be born as Adam (as) was. He would have to be created from dirt and clay without a mother or father.
Christians, I welcome your response and am curious to hear what you have to say.
1. Moses pbuh turned his staff into a snake and split the red sea because at that time, magicians were big in Egypt. These miracles were to show them whos the boss.
2. In Jesus' pbuh time, Romans were at a zenith of science and medicine, but they still couldnt cure stuff like Blindness and leprosy. Jesus came along and showed them that God is the master of these things and cured the blind, the lepers, and raised the dead. He even was born of a virgin birth, something none of the embryologists there could explain.
3. In Muhammad's pbuh time, the Arabs were at the pinnacle of their literarity and poetical accomplishments. When the Quran came down, none of the people could match it's eloquence and power. All the great poets failed to match it and God's power.
I'm not sure if Jesus' (as) miraculous birth means anything special in Islam. I'm sure there is a reason for his birth being special, but I'm not sure what it is, nor have I ever heard this mentioned by Muslim scholars. Allah SWT knows best.
I was actually thinking about this the other day in terms of how Christians see the Virgin birth of Jesus (as). My understanding is that because Jesus (as) was immaculately conceived he is free of the so-called "original sin" of Adam (as). Well, that's not entirely true if you're going based on this logic. What follows is my explanation using the Christian concept of "original sin". I'm sure Christians know that we Muslims do not believe in this idea, but for this example I am going to suppose it is true in order to illustrate a point.
Adam (as) was created by Allah SWT Himself; He molded Adam (as) from dirt and clay. Adam (as) is therefore technically the purest creation of all. He had neither a human mother, nor a human father.
Jesus (as) was conceived miraculously without the help of a man, but he was still Mary's child. He was still nurtured in her womb and she gave birth to him. Since he still came from a human mother, he would still inherit this "original sin".
In order for Jesus (as) to completely take away the sins of humanity (as Christians say), he would need to be born as Adam (as) was. He would have to be created from dirt and clay without a mother or father.
Christians, I welcome your response and am curious to hear what you have to say.
Your conclusion here is correct, even if we go by Biblical standards. It's in the book of Job [chapter 25 if I'm not mistaken] where it is written that none born of a woman is pure. -Well, obviously, Jesus [saas] was born of a woman, so...
I'm not sure if Jesus' (as) miraculous birth means anything special in Islam. I'm sure there is a reason for his birth being special, but I'm not sure what it is, nor have I ever heard this mentioned by Muslim scholars. Allah SWT knows best.
I was actually thinking about this the other day in terms of how Christians see the Virgin birth of Jesus (as). My understanding is that because Jesus (as) was immaculately conceived he is free of the so-called "original sin" of Adam (as). Well, that's not entirely true if you're going based on this logic. What follows is my explanation using the Christian concept of "original sin". I'm sure Christians know that we Muslims do not believe in this idea, but for this example I am going to suppose it is true in order to illustrate a point.
Adam (as) was created by Allah SWT Himself; He molded Adam (as) from dirt and clay. Adam (as) is therefore technically the purest creation of all. He had neither a human mother, nor a human father.
Jesus (as) was conceived miraculously without the help of a man, but he was still Mary's child. He was still nurtured in her womb and she gave birth to him. Since he still came from a human mother, he would still inherit this "original sin".
In order for Jesus (as) to completely take away the sins of humanity (as Christians say), he would need to be born as Adam (as) was. He would have to be created from dirt and clay without a mother or father.
Christians, I welcome your response and am curious to hear what you have to say.
Do you want me to talk about it from a theological or biological point of view?
I'm not sure if Jesus' (as) miraculous birth means anything special in Islam. I'm sure there is a reason for his birth being special, but I'm not sure what it is, nor have I ever heard this mentioned by Muslim scholars. Allah SWT knows best.
I was actually thinking about this the other day in terms of how Christians see the Virgin birth of Jesus (as). My understanding is that because Jesus (as) was immaculately conceived he is free of the so-called "original sin" of Adam (as). Well, that's not entirely true if you're going based on this logic. What follows is my explanation using the Christian concept of "original sin". I'm sure Christians know that we Muslims do not believe in this idea, but for this example I am going to suppose it is true in order to illustrate a point.
Adam (as) was created by Allah SWT Himself; He molded Adam (as) from dirt and clay. Adam (as) is therefore technically the purest creation of all. He had neither a human mother, nor a human father.
Jesus (as) was conceived miraculously without the help of a man, but he was still Mary's child. He was still nurtured in her womb and she gave birth to him. Since he still came from a human mother, he would still inherit this "original sin".
In order for Jesus (as) to completely take away the sins of humanity (as Christians say), he would need to be born as Adam (as) was. He would have to be created from dirt and clay without a mother or father.
Christians, I welcome your response and am curious to hear what you have to say.
Graceseeker can probably explain it better than I can, but from my understanding sin nature is passed through the male.
Graceseeker can probably explain it better than I can, but from my understanding sin nature is passed through the male.
While we wait for Grace Seeker to expound upon this matter, do you have any scriptural references that state this claim of the sin nature being passed through the man? It just seems odd because didn't Adam and Eve BOTH sin?
While we wait for Grace Seeker to expound upon this matter, do you have any scriptural references that state this claim of the sin nature being passed through the man? It just seems odd because didn't Adam and Eve BOTH sin?
I don't know of any scriptures actually, I just know that it has been explained to me that way. And yes, both Adam and Eve sinned, but if you notice, their eyes weren't opened until after Adam ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Job 25 is talking about every man's distance from GOD, his impurity.
We know that Adam sinned Muslims and Christians agree on that. There is a verse in the Quran where Mohammad was advized to seek forgiveness for his sins. We all sin.
Jesus is the only pure human ever to have been born even by the Quran.
019.019
YUSUFALI: He said: "Nay, I am only a messenger from thy Lord, (to announce) to thee the gift of a holy son.
PICKTHAL: He said: I am only a messenger of thy Lord, that I may bestow on thee a faultless son.
SHAKIR: He said: I am only a messenger of your Lord: That I will give you a pure boy
19. He (Archangel Gabriel) said: "Nay, I am only a messenger from thy Lord, (to announce) to thee the gift of a holy son.
20. She (Mary) said: "How shall I have a son, seeing that no man has touched me, and I am not unchaste?"
21. He (Archangel Gabriel) said: "So (it will be): Thy Lord saith, 'that is easy for Me: and (We wish) to appoint him as a Sign unto men and a Mercy from Us':It is a matter (so) decreed."
Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall translation
19. He (Archangel Gabriel) said: I am only a messenger of thy Lord, that I may bestow on thee a faultless son.
20. She (Mary) said: How can I have a son when no mortal hath touched me, neither have I been unchaste ?
21. He said: So (it will be). Thy Lord saith: It is easy for Me. And (it will be) that We may make of him a revelation for mankind and a mercy from Us, and it is a thing ordained.
God Knows best what is the wisdom behind the virgin birth of prophet Jesus (pbuh).
Surely it is actually a question, not a statement?
It's also a question asked by someone called Bildad the Shuhite, and doesn't appear to be presented as a command from God or anything like that.
I don't know what led you to your conclusion here.
Peace
Greetings czgibson,
Yes, I realize that the quote Follower gave from Job is indeed a question and not a direct statement. Had this been any other book than the Bible, I probably could not draw the same conclusions as I did here. I will explain my reasoning as follows:
The verse that Follower quoted could fall into either of two categories in the Bible:
1) Purely Historical.
2) Foundation for Christian belief
It seems like an oversimplification to divide the Bible into only 2 types of verses, but if you think about it, a verse either supports the Christian belief, or it exists merely to retell past events and should not be taken as part of the creed. An example of a purely historical verse:
"Thus saith the LORD of hosts ... go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." 1 Samuel 15:2-3
Even though this was written as a command from God (according to Christians), Christians today do not believe that God is commanding them to commit genocide as is described in the verse, and often they attribute it to something that did happen in the past, but not something they are commanded to do now. Thus, it is purely historical and has no basis in the modern Christian belief system.
Remember that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God according to Christians, which means that everything contained within it comes from God.
Bildad's question poses a bit of a problem; it contains no direct answer. Thus, there are two possibilities as I described above:
1) This poem by Bildad is just that; a poem that Bildad wrote which does not contribute to the belief system at all. If that's the case, then it belongs in the purely historical category. I don't have a problem with this, but rather it's Follower's evidence so if he wants to throw it out as evidence for the Christian belief in Jesus' (as) purity then that's fine with me. However, given that all scripture in the Bible is the inspired Word of God according to Christians, this poem would have been inspired by God. I'm therefore less inclined to believe it is purely historical, as those types of verses are mainly the ones dealing with violence and battles. Historical verses are still inspired by God (according to Christians), but they are not binding commandments on today's Christians, and they merely exist to retell past events. Thus, if the verse falls into this category, then God still inspired it, but it does not apply to Christianity in any way.
2) According to Christians, God is speaking through Bildad and He is posing the question because it is part of the Christian faith. Since there is no answer to the question, and this statement is coming from God (according to Christians), we can only assume that it's a rhetorical question. Sort of like if I asked "How can greed be good?" Well, if I provided no answer, then the reader immediately concludes that greed is not good. This is the same here. God is All-Knowing and All-Wise; He wouldn't leave such an important answer out of His book if it were not an obvious answer.
In conclusion, if the verse is of the category that supports the Christian creed and is the Word of God, then God must be asking a rhetorical question, because we have to assume that God will not purposely mislead His followers in the scripture. Thus, Bildad's question becomes more of a statement and we can draw a clear conclusion from it and say that indeed nobody born from a woman is pure.
Remember that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God according to Christians, which means that everything contained within it comes from God.
According to some Christians.
Hopefully this explanation makes sense.
It made very little sense to me at all, I'm afraid. However, that could just be due to the fact that I've always found the Bible to be a bafflingly incoherent book anyway.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks