Quran VS Bible , a thoroughly comparative study,arranged by items

[Al-manar]

Al-manar, you know that I have privately been one of your biggest supporters in terms of continuing this thread.

I have been and will always be a supporter of the wise non-muslims who would give the impression that they indeed taking the input of others who disagree with seriously , and when they post, they consider not the amount but the quality....

We are not going to get perfect agreement, or we wouldn't be of differing faiths.

If we are going to perfect agreement we not only wouldn't be of differing faiths but no longer human beings , The occurrence of the difference between human beings is something like the the sunrise from the East , and that is one of the fruits of the free will ......

It is true that the NT writers redefined the concept of the messaiah. However, I hardly consider it a problem, let alone a sin. The definition used by the NT writers parrallels the common usage in the first centuries BC and AD. The term had come to be identified with not just any anointed figure, but with a special figure who would be God's agent of change in the world inaugurating God's kingdom on earth.
.

If the definition used by the NT writers to the nature and role of the messiah parrallels the common usage in the first centuries BC and AD to the term ,then there has never been, not only a Jewish rejection to such definition but also the continuous rejection by other non-christians (including me)who disagree completely with the christian modification to the term...

Jesus himself then reinterpreted the understanding of that kingdom's arrival as something that was already present in and through his own ministry, and yet not to be fully culminated until his own future return bringing about an end of the age.

I disagree with that reinterpretation ,it is simply ,not supported textually...

I'm not a Jew ,but honest ,objective reading to the old testament led me to disagree with such argument and agree with the Jews who refuse the New testament argument that Jesus is the very king messiah,son of David that was promised ....

it wasn't the NT writers who invented this re-defined understanding of the Messiah, but Jesus himself.

I understand your attitude as a christian towards the writings of the New testament ,and I say I both agree and disagree...

1- If we take it with absolute certainity that the writers of the gospels reflect the true words uttered by Jesus,without adding their personal reflections ,then I agree that the redefinition of the Messiah began with him (Jesus)..

eg;in Luke 24:46 He(Jesus) said to them, "This is how it is written: the Messiah was to suffer and rise from the dead on the third day.

there the writer(s) of Luke said that Jesus said that he is the messiah and that IT IS WRITTEN that he was to suffer and RISE FROM THE DEAD on THE THIRD DAY.

trusting the new testament as wholly inspired puts not only its writers in trouble but Jesus as well.....
I don't believe that it was writtern in the old testament that the Messiah was to suffer and rise from the dead on the third day(I visited that point before ,and will be vistied soon again)...


what saved Jesus (pbuh) from the accusation of deception (a man who distorted the old testament claiming falsely to be the messiah)?

it is the Quran , unless I'm a muslim and believe in the Quran as the word of God..... I wouldn't ever exclude Jesus from those group of writers who used such exegesis to conclude that Jesus is the king messiah that was promised in the old testament......

with all courage and honesty ,if one day I find ultimate proof that it was Jesus who uttered such previous claims about the messiah , I would immediately leave Islam becoming an atheist !, as who would care for a religion praises a propagator of falsehoods ranking him ,as one of the greatest messengers , ever sent by God ?!
...

so I agree with you,if the gospels are the inerrant inspired word of God, or even a work that honestly and accurately reflecting the true words of Jesus ,without adding their personal exegesis ,then I agree that it was him who pioneered them with such exegetical work and then they added more to his theory ....

 

[Grace Seeker]

I don't believe that it was writtern in the old testament that the Messiah was to suffer and rise from the dead on the third day(I visited that point before ,and will be vistied soon again)...

Even Josephus and the members of the Qumran community give evidence that there did exist within Israel at the time of the millenium this understanding of some coming Messiah who as a representative of Israel would suffer for her. I don't mean to imply they had in mind something like a crucifixion as atonement theology, that is decidely Christian. But they and many others did see this idea of a suffering servant in Isaiah and of the messianic "Son of Man" in Daniel. That was Jewish thinking that would be incorporated by Christianity, not invented by it.

 

[Al-manar]

Even Josephus and the members of the Qumran community give evidence that there did exist within Israel at the time of the millenium this understanding of some coming Messiah who as a representative of Israel would suffer for her. .

before I provide my opinion ,would you plz elaborate that,would you quote both the scrolls and Josephus ?

where is in the scrolls ,some coming Messiah who as a representative of Israel would suffer for her?
the same question as to Josephus...

hope (if you have time) to share me with your thoughts ......
.............................................


Origin of Christianity

(from the Messiah to the Christ,the problem ?)

After misquoting Isaiah 7 ,the zealous writer of Matthew would visit another similar passage to Isaiah 7


Matthew 2 1 Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem, 2 saying, “Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him.”
3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him. 4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born.5 So they said to him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it is written by the prophet: 6 ‘ But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,
Are not the least among the rulers of Judah; For out of you shall come a Ruler
Who will shepherd My people Israel.’”

Matthew quotes an old testament passage Micah 5:2:

the context of the passage:

Micah 4:11 But now many nations are gathered against you.They say, “Let her be defiled, let our eyes gloat over Zion!”12 But they do not know the thoughts of the LORD;they do not understand his plan, that he has gathered them like sheaves to the threshing floor.13 “Rise and thresh, Daughter Zion, for I will give you horns of iron;I will give you hooves of bronze, and you will break to pieces many nations.”You will devote their ill-gotten gains to the LORD, their wealth to the Lord of all the earth. 1 Marshal your troops now, city of troops, for a siege is laid against us.They will strike Israel’s ruler on the cheek with a rod. 2 “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah,out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel,whose origins are from of old,from ancient times.” 3 Therefore Israel will be abandoned until the time when she who is in labor bears a son,and the rest of his brothers return to join the Israelites. 4 He will stand and shepherd his flock in the strength of the LORD, in the majesty of the name of the LORD his God.And they will live securely, for then his greatness will reach to the ends of the earth. 5 And he will be our peace when the Assyrians invade our land and march through our fortresses.We will raise against them seven shepherds, even eight commanders,6 who will rule the land of Assyria with the sword, the land of Nimrod with drawn sword.He will deliver us from the Assyrians when they invade our land and march across our borders.


First: In the context of the passage in which Micah made this statement, he was speaking of "many nations [that] have gathered against you [Israel]" (4:11). In particular, there seemed to be concern about "the Assyrian com[ing] into our land" (5:5), so it makes good sense to assume that Micah, rather than predicting the coming in the distant future, was talking about a "ruler" who would arise to help Israel during the present threat to its national security,someone arising to lead Israel through its present crisis.

Second: Even if we assume that Micah did intend this to be a prophecy of a distant future ,the fact that the predicted figure will not be one ordinary Bethlehemian but must be a "ruler in Israel" who would protect Israel from military threats,according to the text.... something Jesus never fulfilled....


till next post

 

[Al-manar]

3- The christian response to that is to argue for a second coming fulfillment:
eg;

This will occur at the Second Coming and in the Millennium.This same Ruler will destroy Israel's military armament and fortifications so they are not dependent on them and also cut off all false worship (5: I0-14). He will also rule the nations and pour out His vengeance on them as He rules with an iron scepter This will occur during the millennial

Dictionary of Premillennial Theology
By Mal Couch


before we show the trouble with such argument ,let's read the next point...

4- you remember the linguestic argument of Almah vs Bethula in the previous passage of Isaiah 7? here again another similar linguestic argument ?

some christians (not all) would use linguestic argument from the passage to support the concept of Messiah'e pre-existence ,deity .....

It is verse 5:2-3

most translations translated it correctly
eg:


(New International version)
out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel,whose origins are from of old,from ancient times.

Common English Bible
His origin is from remote times, from ancient days.


(Contemporary English Version)
But the LORD will choose one of your people to rule the nation--someone whose family
goes back to ancient times


(English Standard Version)
from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel,whose coming forth is from of old, from ancient days.


(GOD’S WORD Translation)
from you Israel’s future ruler will come for me. His origins go back to the distant past, to days long ago.


(Good News Translation)
out of you I will bring a ruler for Israel, whose family line goes back to ancient times.


(The Message)
From you will come the leader who will shepherd-rule Israel.He'll be no upstart, no pretender. His family tree is ancient and distinguished.



(New Century Version)
will come one who will rule Israel for me.He comes from very old times,from days long ago."


(Young's Literal Translation)
And thou, Beth-Lehem Ephratah, Little to be among the chiefs of Judah! From thee to Me he cometh forth -- to be ruler in Israel, And his comings forth [are] of old, From the days of antiquity.



some translations would translate (ancient times,days of old) as everlasting

eg;

whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. KJV

whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting. ASV


those biased translations try to suppose the origin of the messiah as from everlasting


The Hebrew phrase יְמֵי עוֹלָם (yeMEI oLAM), ancient days, is used at Micah 5:1 with the preposition מִ (mi-), from, as מִימֵי עוֹלָם . All six instances of the expression יְמֵי עוֹלָם in the Hebrew Bible, including its combinations with prepositions:
eg: the same phrase (yeMEI oLAM), is used in Isaiah 63:9,11 ...Amos 9:11;Micah 7:14;Malachi 3:4 Micah 5:1[2]

Professor Uri Yosef (Ph.D. and M.B.A.) notes:

The KJV correctly translates this expression in five out of the six cases as “days
of old”, which is synonymous with “ancient days”, but at Micah 5:2 the KJV
renders it as “from everlasting”.
What could have motivated the KJV translators to change the translation at
Micah 5:2, which speaks of the Messiah? A likely answer is that, by substituting
“from everlasting” for “from ancient days”, the KJV translators attempted to bring this
"Old Testament" prophecy into “harmony” with the accounts in the New
Testament and with Christian theology. Could this be another example of "pious
fraud" committed by some Christian authors?


5- Just as the( Almah,bethula controversy) , the( days of old ,everlasting) controversy is not useful as well !

As even if we accept the (everlasting) rendering, even if we understand Micah description of the messiah as divine,pre-existent remains the problem :
If we accept the idea of Micah's reference to a divinity of the messiah,we then have three elements:

A- the messiah will be born through the clan of Bethlehem Ephrathah..

B- the messiah will protect Israel from military threats and rules as a king.

C- he is of divine origin.

we have 2 physical aspect and 1 metaphysical ...

If the second one is not fulfilled yet ,then we are left with the first and the third ...
we have hundreds of thousands who were born through Bethlehem Ephrathah ,so nothing exclusive here for Jesus (assuming his birth was so,which is against what the quran says regarding his birth place,details later)......

what would be proper to be called exclusive, is the second element ,which is absent yet...

which will lead us to the conclusion:

believe in Jesus as the messiah king cause he was born in Bethlehem ...
believe in Jesus as God cause he was born in Bethlehem ......

and that leads us back to the Question :How could you buy a Metaphysical concept if not supported by the physical ...

how could you buy the God Jesus ,before you buy the Messiah Jesus ...


If the biblical record can be proved fallible in areas of fact that can be verified(whether Jesus was the promised king messiah or not), then it is hardly to be trusted in areas where it cannot be tested (the claim of divinity).

such passage (and all the messianic passages alike) needs unconditional faith to be accepted ...

 

[Grace Seeker]

such passage (and all the messianic passages alike) needs unconditional faith to be accepted ...

I totally agree that there is an element of faith first in apply these passages to Jesus and second in seeing them as substantiating any other claims with regard to Jesus.

On the other hand, if one sees that Jesus could be seen as the fulfillment of not just one, but multiple messianic prophecies, then the likelihood that he is THE Messiah become much more likely.

However, I don't know why you think that any of this speaks to Jesus' divinity one way or the other. Orthodox Christian belief would hold that Jesus is divine completely appart from and in addition to his identity as the Messiah.

 

[Al-manar]

On the other hand, if one sees that Jesus could be seen as the fulfillment of not just one, but multiple messianic prophecies, then the likelihood that he is THE Messiah become much more likely.

Allow me to disagree.....

fulfillment requires a prediction ,isn't it?

what if someone claims fulfillments of some passages that weren't intended by its writer to be predictions?

with the exception of the two passages of Isaiah 7 (which isn't messianic) and Micah 5 , the rest of the New testament quotes of the old testament are NOT messianic predictions in any sense ..

Farrell till said it rightly :

Usually, Bible "prophecies" turn out to be prophecies only because imaginative Bible writers arbitrarily declared them to be prophecies. The same can be said of their alleged fulfillments: the fulfillments are fulfillments only because obviously biased New Testament writers arbitrarily declared them to be fulfillments.

eg; Jeremiah (31:15) ,Hosea 11:1,Isaiah 40:3,Psalms 41:9,Zechariah 11:12-13,. Psalms 22:16 etc.....

all those passages weren't intended to be predictions at all .....
so before we talk about a fulfillment we need to ask where is the prophecy, to begin with?

However, I don't know why you think that any of this speaks to Jesus' divinity one way or the other. .

I don't think that any of this speaks to Jesus' divinity nor his humanity and message .....
let's at least agree that such passage speaks not to Jesus' (divinity ).....

do you think there are other Old testament passages speaks of the promised messiah as divine?

peace

 

[Grace Seeker]

do you think there are other Old testament passages speaks of the promised messiah as divine?

peace

Like you have ably said already, the NT reads things back into the OT that the OT writers themselves probably were not thinking of. Remember, I stipulated that at the very beginning of this discussion. Now we are going to have to agree to disagree as to whether that is appropriate.

(As an aside, it is interesting that I'm arguing for this process with regard to what Christians call Messianic prophecies and you against, while Christians and Muslims then reverse those same positions when it comes to whether or not Muhammad pbuh is to be found prophesied in the Bible.)

But with the advantage of hindsight, I do think that there are some passages that speak to a divine nature for the Messiah. An idea that would not be formed and take root until after Jesus' resurrection.

 

[Al-manar]

As an aside, it is interesting that I'm arguing for this process with regard to what Christians call Messianic prophecies and you against, while Christians and Muslims then reverse those same positions when it comes to whether or not Muhammad pbuh is to be found prophesied in the Bible..

I find a difference between whether or not Muhammad pbuh is to be found prophesied in the Bible and what Christians call Messianic prophecies

1- what New testament writers call Messianic prophecies are mostly quoted directly and included in the new testament which considered by Christians to be fully the word of God ,while the exegesis of the passages that quoted by Muslims are neither considered divine nor above questioning....

2- unlike the new testament The Quran never claims of several prophecies of Mohamed pbuh, but it merely says he is mentioned there ,if we check the torah as defined by the Qur'an and the injeel as defined by the Qur'an we will find only 1 reference in each ..


3- The Quranic only one reference to a prophecy in the bible ,and its repeated word of challenge to humanity to produce one like it ,its repeated urge for reflection to find out the clues for its divine source shows that the question of validity comes through its internal content rather than the issue of prophecies...

4- when it comes to what Christians call Messianic prophecies ,our objection is not whether Jesus fulfilled them or not but if they were prophecies, to begin with?

for example we can have a mutual discussion about the prophecy in Deuteronomy 18:18 ,which refers to a future prophet like Moses ...I will argue that Mohamed pbuh fits ,and you may not agree ....
but what is sure that we would agree that it is A REAL PROPHECY ....

on the other hand if you gonna bring me references from old testament passages eg; Jeremiah (31:15) ,Hosea 11:1,Isaiah 40:3,Psalms 41:9,Zechariah 11:12-13,. Psalms 22:16 etc.....

that you think them to support the Messianic arguments in favor for Jesus...

I won't tell you Jesus doesn't fit ,but NO PROPHECY is there at all neither for Jesus nor anyone else...

and that is the most serious problem with what Christians call Messianic prophecies .....

 

[Al-manar]

Jesus ,his birth place ,according to the Qur'an ,and lessons from that?

Mary was brought up in Jerusalem ,was placed under the care of the prophet Zechariah, who used to live in Jerusalem ,She conceived and moved to a shelter on a lofty ground having meadows and springs, a place far away from Jerusalem to be away from her people in such embarrassing situation and gave birth to the child in the wilderness far away from Jerusalem ....

What does that mean?


1- Jesus wasn't born in Bethlehem but in the wildrness far away from Jerusalem..

2- Joseph is simply a fictional character been inserted in the gospels of Matthew and Luke.

Which necessarily requires the following to be inventions as well:

3- the story of Mary and Joseph travel from Nazareth to Joseph's ancestral home in Bethlehem to register in the census of Quirinius and then Mary gives birth to Jesus there .

4- Herod's intent to kill Jesus , An angel tells Joseph to flee with his family to Egypt. Meanwhile, Herod orders that all male children of Bethlehem under the age of two be killed, in the so-called "Massacre of the Innocents" and the return of Jesus from Egypt .

such Quranic attitude agress with the New testament critics who believe that the origin of most of those narratives based on all manner of creative activity by using Old Testament prophecy .


Joseph?

Some interesting work has been done on Matthew's use of Scripture as the background to his infancy narrative. First, we may ask: is the shadowy figure of Joseph in the birth stories so named because this accords with history or for the sake of an Old Testament model (Genesis 37-50)? The name of the New Testament Joseph has often been seen as chosen for the guardian of the holy family after the model of the patriarchal joseph, who also went down to Egypt and looked after the members of his family. It is also relevant that Joseph of the New Testament was, like the Joseph of the Old Testament, a man of dreams." Andries van Aarde applies the figure of Joseph tather differently. ln a preliminary article in 2000, followed by a book in 2001, he suggests that the Joseph of the infancy stories is no more than an ethical paradigm: “To me it seems joseph was a legend.New Perspectives on the Nativity By Jeremy Corley


The birth in Bethlehem ?

That Jesus was son of David is a principal message of Matthew's first chapter, with its great drum-roll of Israelite history and its story of the divinely inspired adoption of Jesus into the House of David. In this case theology will have shaped quasi-history, or (to put the matter more clearly) the theological truth that jesns was the fulfillment of the promises to David and his lineage was expressed by the placing of_]esus' birth at Bethlehem. Each of the two evangelists will have used this location and decorated it in his own way, expressing in a picturesque narrative form some aspects of the theological truth about jesus that seemed to him important. New Perspectives on the Nativity
By Jeremy Corley


- “Bethlehem was not Jesus’ birthplace but was imported from Hebrew prophecies about the future Messiah; the Star had similar origins (Numbers 24:17). Matthew’s story is a construction from well-known messianic prophecies (Bethlehem; the Star), and the Wise Men (Magi) have been added as another legend.” “Where the truth had been lost, stories filled the gap, and the desire to know fabricated its own tradition."

-“After (the crucifixion )and the belief in the resurrection, people wondered all the more deeply about Jesus’ birthplace. Bethlehem, home of King David, was a natural choice for the new messiah. There was even a prophecy in support of the claim which the ‘little town’ has maintained so profitably to this day.” So, “a higher truth was served by an impossible fiction.” [The Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible(Knopf, 1992), p. 31-32].

“Luke’s real source for the view that Jesus was born in Bethlehem was almost certainly the conviction that Jesus fulfilled a hope that someday a descendant of David would arise to save Israel,” because the Messiah was supposed to come from there (Micah 5:2). [E. P. Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus (p. 87.)].
...

To note, the Quranic attitude is not that radical supposing that ALL the birth narratives to be fabricated ..... eg; according to the Quran, Zachariah is a real person ,besides John the baptist ,besides the issue of the virgin birth ....

that agrees with some new testament critics who suggest that some of the narratives perhaps go back to a historical core while supposing also that the rest of the narratives were invented by either Matt or Luke, or both.

To conclude :

If we ask Did the writers of the New testament make up fictional details about the birth of Jesus (and the rest of his mission) to make it appear that he had fulfilled passages that they thought to be prophecies or they tried all the way to find references in the old testament to the traditions they received regarding the life of Jesus ?


The answer from a Quranic point of view ,and lots of new testament critics ,is that they did BOTH ......

 

[Hiroshi]

Jesus ,his birth place ,according to the Qur'an ,and lessons from that?

Mary was brought up in Jerusalem ,was placed under the care of the prophet Zechariah, who used to live in Jerusalem ,She conceived and moved to a shelter on a lofty ground having meadows and springs, a place far away from Jerusalem to be away from her people in such embarrassing situation and gave birth to the child in the wilderness far away from Jerusalem ....

What does that mean?


1- Jesus wasn't born in Bethlehem but in the wildrness far away from Jerusalem..

2- Joseph is simply a fictional character been inserted in the gospels of Matthew and Luke.

Which necessarily requires the following to be inventions as well:

3- the story of Mary and Joseph travel from Nazareth to Joseph's ancestral home in Bethlehem to register in the census of Quirinius and then Mary gives birth to Jesus there .

4- Herod's intent to kill Jesus , An angel tells Joseph to flee with his family to Egypt. Meanwhile, Herod orders that all male children of Bethlehem under the age of two be killed, in the so-called "Massacre of the Innocents" and the return of Jesus from Egypt .

Joseph fathered at least six children by Mary (Matthew 13:55-56), two of whom (James and Judas) wrote books in the Bible. But I am sure that Muslims would be happy to think that Joseph, his many chldren and indeed the Bible itself are all figments of the imagination.

 

[Al-manar]

welcome back to the thread Hiroshi ,

Joseph fathered at least six children by Mary (Matthew 13:55-56).

you have just gone to one of the most controversial issues within the Christendom ...
Christians of the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox traditions, as well as most Anglicans and some followers of Lutheranism, reject the idea that Jesus had blood siblings, as their churches hold the doctrine of the Virgin Mary's Perpetual Virginity.

whether Mary married after the birth of Jesus or had other children ,wasn't my point....

the point is that the stories of that Joseph accompanied her to Bethlehem etc,,, are against what the Quran teaches...

two of whom (James and Judas) wrote books in the Bible

blood brothers to Jesus wrote books in the bible ?
I don't think so neither the huge number of Christians I already mentioned .
eg;Epistle of James
The Protestant reformer Martin Luther denied it was the work of an apostle and termed it an "epistle of straw"
Many scholars consider the epistle to be written in the late 1st or early 2nd centuries, after the death of James the Just

the authorship not only of James but the gospels as well, had been and still a matter of big controversies ...

I am sure that Muslims would be happy to think that Joseph, his many chldren and indeed the Bible itself are all figments of the imagination.

A muslim thinking that ALL the Bible , figments of the imagination ,will no longer be a Muslim .

peace

 

[Hiroshi]

welcome back to the thread Hiroshi ,

Thank you Al-manar.

A muslim thinking that ALL the Bible , figments of the imagination ,will no longer be a Muslim .

Perhaps I should have said "New Testament" rather than "Bible" then. If you question the authorship of the gospels and the authenticity of their contents such as the accounts that mention Joseph, and if you reject all the writings of Paul, James and Jude then there isn't much left of it.

 

[Hiroshi]

the point is that the stories of that Joseph accompanied her to Bethlehem etc,,, are against what the Quran teaches...

You stated that this means that Joseph was merely a fictional character. It is ironic then that Joseph is one of the few people ever to walk this earth whose ancestry we can trace all the way back to David, Abraham and even to Adam. If the genealogies of Matthew and Luke were invented and not in agreement with public records then enemies of Christianity would have immediately seized the opportunity to discredit Jesus' claim to be the Messiah once and for all.

 

[Hiroshi]

blood brothers to Jesus wrote books in the bible ?
I don't think so neither the huge number of Christians I already mentioned .
eg;Epistle of James
The Protestant reformer Martin Luther denied it was the work of an apostle and termed it an "epistle of straw"
Many scholars consider the epistle to be written in the late 1st or early 2nd centuries, after the death of James the Just

the authorship not only of James but the gospels as well, had been and still a matter of strong controversies ...

The letter of James is contained in the Vatican Manuscript No. 1209, as well as the Sinaitic and the Alexandrine Manuscripts of the fourth and fifth centuries C.E. The Syriac Pe****ta includes it, and it is found in at least ten ancient catalogs before the Council of Carthage in 397 C.E. Early religious writers quoted from it, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Jerome, and others recognizing the letter as authentic scripture.

 

[Hiroshi]

you have just gone to one of the most controversial issues within the Christendom ...
Christians of the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox traditions, as well as most Anglicans and some followers of Lutheranism, reject the idea that Jesus had blood siblings, as their churches hold the doctrine of the Virgin Mary's Perpetual Virginity.

The Bible just says that Joseph had no sexual relations with Mary "until she gave birth to a son; and he came to be called Jesus" (Matthew 1:25). We do not read anywhere that Mary remained a virgin perpetually. Do Muslims believe that she was (Surah 66:12)?

The Awake magazine (published by Jehovah's Witnesses) of 8 November 1985 pages 7-9 had this to say about the origin of this doctrine:

Origins of the Belief

“In several ancient religions,” observes Jesuit priest Ignace de la Potterie, “virginity had a sacral value. Certain goddesses (Anath, Artemis, Athena) were called virgins.” Yet, what does that have to do with Mary? Catholic priest Andrew Greeley explains: “The Mary symbol links Christianity directly to the ancient religions of mother goddesses.”

Professor of church history Ernst W. Benz comments on this link with ancient pagan religions. “Veneration of the mother of God,” he wrote in The New Encyclopædia Britannica, “received its impetus when the Christian Church became the imperial church under Constantine and the pagan masses streamed into the church. . . . [The peoples’] piety and religious consciousness had been formed for millennia through the cult of the ‘great mother’ goddess and the ‘divine virgin,’ a development that led all the way from the old popular religions of Babylonia and Assyria . . . Despite the unfavourable presuppositions in the tradition of the Gospels, cultic veneration of the divine virgin and mother found within the Christian Church a new possibility of expression in the worship of Mary.”

But what moved the Roman Church to adapt and adopt the “great mother” goddess and “divine virgin” cult? For one thing, the “pagan masses” coming into the church wanted it; they felt at home in a church that venerated a ‘great virgin mother.’ “In Egypt,” Professor Benz notes, “Mary was, at an early point, already worshipped under the title of the bearer of God (Theotokos).” So the “divine virgin” cult was adopted to accommodate the “pagan masses” that were streaming into the church.

Impetus to the veneration of Mary was provided at the first ecumenical Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E. How so? Well, the Trinity doctrine was there made an official Catholic teaching, the Nicene Creed declaring Jesus to be God. This supposedly made Mary the “bearer of God,” or “mother of God.” And as Professor Benz said: “The Council of Ephesus (431) raised this designation to a dogmatic standard.” The next step was to make Mary a “perpetual virgin.” This occurred when the title “eternal Virgin” was given to Mary at the second Council of Constantinople in 553 C.E.

 

[Al-manar]

If you question the authorship of the gospels and the authenticity of their contents

There is a difference between the authorship of a work and how far the authenticity of its content ....
Paul could be the writer of the epistles , but were his writings influenced by inspiration and true tradition ? the is the Question ....
that could be answered if we examine the entire content of such epistles (future posts).....

The Bible just says that Joseph had no sexual relations with Mary "until she gave birth to a son; and he came to be called Jesus" (Matthew 1:25). We do not read anywhere that Mary remained a virgin perpetually. Do Muslims believe that she was (Surah 66:12)? .

The verse you mentiond doesn't say that she remained virgin after giving birth to Jesus ,she of course lost virginity during birth .... and no mention that she married after that (might be possible) ,though the description of her suggests her as a saint woman that devoted her life to worship and isolated herself from mixing with the society in order to worship God without any distractions ....
her going to a remote place in the wildrness to hide her pregnancy from her people ,negates that she knew Joseph ,that she travelled to Bethelehem ,that she escaped to Egypt etc...... and that puts the issue of Joseph into trouble ....

It is ironic then that Joseph is one of the few people ever to walk this earth whose ancestry we can trace all the way back to David, Abraham and even to Adam. If the genealogies of Matthew and Luke were invented and not in agreement with public records then enemies of Christianity would have immediately seized the opportunity to discredit Jesus' claim to be the Messiah once and for all.

I won't now get into the well-known problems of the genealogies of Matthew and Luke ,neither will ask you what you mean by public record, but unlike what you said,I think opponents of the christianity that presented in the new testament, have seized the opportunity to discredit Jesus' claim to be the Messiah, as Jesus' (genealogy), as we have it in the Christian Scriptures, does not allow him to be the Messiah( details later).

but you know even if Joseph or Jesus could be traced back to David ,remains the biggest obstacle supporting Jesus’ messianic claim , it is that he didn't fulfill the prophecies that could obviously distinguish him from any other person on Earth ....
we have some Jews on Earth traced back to David ,inspite of that none of them could be automatically the messiah as none fulfilled the messianic prophecies, the same case was Jesus ....
and that is why the Jews still waiting someone will be qualified to get into their messianic office ...

 

[Hiroshi]

The verse you mentiond doesn't say that she remained virgin after giving birth to Jesus ,she of course lost virginity during birth .... and no mention that she married after that (might be possible) ,though the description of her suggests her as a saint woman that devoted her life to worship and isolated herself from mixing with the society in order to worship God without any distractions ....

I am glad that Muslims do not believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary. But there is still a suggestion of the Catholic doctrine of the immaculate conception in Surah 3:35-36.

her going to a remote place in the wildrness to hide her pregnancy from her people ,negates that she knew Joseph ,that she travelled to Bethelehem ,that she escaped to Egypt etc...... and that puts the issue of Joseph into trouble ....

The Qur'an has almost no details of the background and ministry of Jesus. And most of the details that it does contain disagree greatly with the gospels.

but you know even if Joseph or Jesus could be traced back to David ,remains the biggest obstacle supporting Jesus’ messianic claim , it is that he didn't fulfill the prophecies that could obviously distinguish him from any other person on Earth ....
we have some Jews on Earth traced back to David ,inspite of that none of them could be automatically the messiah as none fulfilled the messianic prophecies, the same case was Jesus ....
and that is why the Jews still waiting someone will be qualified to get into their messianic office ...

The genealogies were destroyed by the Romans so no Jew today can really trace his ancestry back to David.

What Messianic prophecies did Jesus not fulfill then?

 

[Al-manar]

I am glad that Muslims do not believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary.

I didn't say that....

But there is still a suggestion of the Catholic doctrine of the immaculate conception in Surah 3:35-36.

As I said, the description of her suggests her as a saint woman that devoted her life to worship and isolated herself from mixing with the society, and that verse is one of the clues for that...

Surah 3:35 When a woman of Imran said: My Lord! surely I vow to Thee what is in my womb, to be devoted (to Thy service); accept therefore from me, surely Thou art the Hearing, the Knowing.all things."

she remained all her life so devoted to the temple ?,or might had another life later ? unless we find another verse suggests the second ,then it is safe to assume she remained with totall devotion to worship all her life.....

your correct following note:

And most of the(Quranic) details that it does contain disagree greatly with the gospels..

would get us to one of the Quranic lessons reagarding the issue of the infancy of Jesus....

If we assume that the Quran is the word of Muhammad (peace be upon him) then ,he,while getting the infancy story, neccesarily had access to at least the gospel of luke ,if so that raises just one of the problems with the idea that the Quran validates the bible as fully inspired......

If Muhammad thought the gospels to be 100% inspired why he negates some of the details of the narratives and provides other details?!!
If he read about Zachariah he must have read about the issue of Bethelehm..Egypt etc as well,isn't it ?....

that is just one of the problems of the faulty theory of a Quran validates the bible fully ...

The Qur'an has almost no details of the background and ministry of Jesus.

I posted before explanation of the Quranic verses regarding the background ,the nature of him and his mission,the reaction to his mission and more will be posted regarding the end of his mission ...

The genealogies were destroyed by the Romans .

That is simply a myth

A Missionary Myth: Jewish Genealogy Records Were Destroyed in 70 C.E.
As part of justifying the two genealogies found in the New Testament, Christian apologists and missionaries often claim that the source of the information therein were the meticulously kept Jewish genealogical records, which were stored in the Temple in Jerusalem. They go on and claim that these records were destroyed when the Temple was ransacked and burned to the ground by the Romans in the year 70 C.E.. Therefore, Christians claim to have at least a semblance of the true genealogical link between Jesus and David, while the Jews, even when they eventually recognize someone as Messiah, will have no genealogical records to furnish as proof that he, indeed, is the Messiah.

The problem with this claim is that it is based on a fallacy. The assertion that all genealogical records of the Jewish people were destroyed with the destruction of the Second Temple around 70 C.E. is untrue and unfounded. No such event ever occurred in Jewish history, and there exists neither a credible historian nor any other reliable ancient source to support this claim. The genealogies of the twelve tribes of Israel were not stored in the Temple and, therefore, they could not have been destroyed with it. The majority of the Jewish people did not live in the Land of Israel during the first century C.E., and their genealogical records, if they were maintained and kept, would not have been affected by the destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple. Of the estimated six million Jews in the world in 50 C.E., approximately one third lived in the Land of Israel, another one third lived in Egypt (mostly in the populous area around Alexandria), and the rest lived throughout the Roman Empire (primarily in Europe).

Most Jews of modern times do not know their tribal affiliation. The likely reason for this is that today’s Jewish people are either descendants of the tribes which comprised the Kingdom of Judah (Judah, Levi, and part of Benjamin), or descendants of a major wave of proselytes during the period from around 100 B.C.E. to around 100 C.E. There were, of course, converts to Judaism throughout all of the history in the Common Era (and before), but those were relatively small in numbers. This matter may be turning into a non-issue with today's advances in genetics research, where genetic markers related to tribal affiliation have been discovered, and are in the process of being identified with specific tribes. A genetic marker for Aaron's descendants, the (kohanim), priests, has also been identified. An amazing fact about these scientific discoveries is that all the tribal genetic markers reside on the Y-chromosome, which is carried only by males. This could serve as scientific confirmation of the part of Jewish Law which states that blood-rights, such as tribal affiliation, priestly descent, and any other lineage-related attributes, are transmitted exclusively from (biological) father to his son(s).

Concerning the matter of known tribal affiliations among the Jewish people, it is worthwhile to comment about the descendants of the Tribe of Levi. There is no segment of the Jewish people whose members are more aware of their tribal affiliation and more mindful to properly transmit this distinctive ancestry than those from the Tribe of Levi. From Biblical times onward, it has always been of utmost importance for members of the Tribe of Levi to be aware of their unique place and status among the people of Israel. There are numerous distinct laws in the Torah which pertain only to this Tribe, such as a (kohen), a priest, may only marry certain women, a (kohen), a priest, is prohibited from coming into contact with a dead body, thus barred from attending any part of a funeral service (with some exceptions for immediate family). Also, only descendants from the Tribe of Levi may take part in the ritual Aaronic Priestly Benediction ceremony, where the (kohanim), priests, bless the congregation while chanting the passage Numbers 6:24-26, performed on every festival in many traditional synagogues throughout the world. The clans from the Tribe of Levi have been known among the Jewish people throughout history.

According to Jewish Law, lineage is passed along exclusively by the (biological) father (e.g., Num 1:18), while the identity as a Jew is either passed by the mother (Deut 7:3-4; Ezra 10:2-3) or acquired through proper ritual conversion to Judaism. In this fashion, the priestly lineage is identified (and has, thus, been preserved over history) on the eighth day following the birth of a son of a father who is a (kohen), a Priest, when, as part of the circumcision ritual, the child is also given a name to which is appended the Hebrew title (ha’kohen), The Priest. Similarly, when a son is born of a father who is a (levi), a Levite, the Hebrew name is appended with the Hebrew title (ha'levi), The Levite. A male descendant of the Tribe of Levi is identified in this manner on all legal Jewish documents, such as records of birth and death, marriage contracts, and divorce decrees. This custom has been carried on as part of the Jewish tradition since the days in the desert, in accordance with Exodus 40:15. It was well known and well documented among the Jewish people who these individuals were, and this information was carefully passed down from father to son, and often recorded in a family's record book of family genealogy. Nehemiah refers to such a record as (sefer ha'yahas; Neh 7:5), and in Modern Hebrew, this is known as (sefer yuhasin)..

What Messianic prophecies did Jesus not fulfill then? .

check my posts there

http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...ghly-comparative-study-arranged-items-52.html

 

[Hiroshi]

I won't now get into the well-known problems of the genealogies of Matthew and Luke ,neither will ask you what you mean by public record, but unlike what you said,I think opponents of the christianity that presented in the new testament, have seized the opportunity to discredit Jesus' claim to be the Messiah, as Jesus' (genealogy), as we have it in the Christian Scriptures, does not allow him to be the Messiah( details later).

If you don't wish to discuss genealogies then let's leave that subject alone for now. But allow me to say this. The purpose of this thread is to compare the Bible with the Qur'an. You would be in a strong position to draw attention to problems in the genealogies of Matthew and Luke if the Qur'an had something better to show. But all it gives of Jesus' family tree is the following: (1) Adam (2) Noah (3) Abraham (4) Imran (father of Moses and Aaron) (5) Imran (father of Mary) (6) Mary (7) Jesus (according to Surah 3:33-36, 45). By comparison, Matthew and Luke provide a wealth of important information.

 

[Hiroshi]

check my posts there

http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...ghly-comparative-study-arranged-items-52.html

Thanks for the link Al-manar but I still can't see which posts you refer to. Could you tell me what number posts these are?