Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله


Advanced Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About swede

  • Rank
    Level 1 Member

Previous Fields

  • Gender
  1. I do not doubt that the Sunnah speaks about two different women named Miryam, but this doesnt prove that the Quran does. If I am not wrong, Miryam is the only woman mentioned by name in the Quran, so assuming that the same person is intended seem logical, if the Quran does not contain material to destinguish between them.
  2. So I will repeat my rebuttal: Had a sensation like a virgin birth, or a man that could make living birds from clay been known, it would inevitable have been reported to the Roman ocupators, and be found in the files in Rome, and in contemporary history writings and private letters. Also early christians lika Paul would not have missed a chanse to use the virgin birth as a proof that Jesus was the son of God. But there is nothing such.
  3. .....because the family of Jesus did not know their family line, or they did not internally agree how they were related to king David. How many poor and maybe illiterate carpenters would remember their family tree 1000 years back? Probably the family tree was created like a myth, and this is why there are more than one version
  4. A minority of christians believe that the Bible should be read litterally. As an example; only fundementalists believe God created the world in 7 days 6000 years ago.
  5. But if the sunnah has got its historical information from the Bible (where else?) and the Bible has been corrupted, how do we know that the sunnah does not contain some of this corrupted information?
  6. I am sorry, I am not able to find this in any of your posts. Could you please just once give me the chapters and numbers of the suras you have in mind.
  7. Pleas just give me the suras in the Quran that makes it possible to determine that the 2 Marys are not the same person. Mark and Luke did their best, but how make a correct genetic line from poor peasants in galilea? And why should we believe that Muhammad had knowledge of the correct genetic lines?
  8. If no other information is given, it is impossible to decide if she was the daughter of Aron or not. This was my point. From the Quran only we can not decide if Mary was the sister or not. I didnt say she was. From the Bible we can conclude that she was not, even if the Bible has got errors in the genetical line. the Quran has got no such errors because there is so little information that errors are impossible to determine. Maybe info is available in other islamic sources, but where do they come from and who wrote them? We have got all reasons to be sceptical to stories that are written 700 years after they happened. I didnt say that revelations in the Quran were lost, but I find it very likely for the reasons I wrote earlier. To know if I am wrong or right, we really must ask Muhammad or Allah. And a last comment. Could it really be so that the virgin birth was so famous that noone bothered to write about it until 80 years later, when two gospels give two entirely different stories about what happened? Of course not. History writers, journalists and ordinary people never miss a sensation that big.
  9. I agree it is difficult to read. This must be the reason why people do not always agree on how to interpret the Quran. I dont consider myself to be an expert. But since experts do not agree, I think people like me should be allowed to put forward ideas as well.
  10. Rubbish. We have got no indication whatsoever that the virgin birth of Jesus was famous. On the contrary; It was totally unknown until the gospel of Matthew and Luke tells us about it, almost a century after it was supposed to have happened. Two entirely different stories. They only agree that Jesus was born by a virgin.
  11. Wether Maryum (mother of Isa) and Maryum (sister of Moses) was the same person or not, is not possible to decide from the Quran only. Nor is it possible to decide when she/they lived, because the Quran has no line of genealogy. (Likely to be the reason why we in the Bible find family trees with errors buty not in the Quran.) Now I have read the Quran only once, so I am open to reconsider this opinion of mine if you can show beyond reasonable doubt, based on the Quran only, that they were two different persons. It was not proved on this page. I have not read the Sunnah, but I doubt it is considered as a reliable source concerning the time of Jesus and earlier by others than muslims. It was written long after Jesus. We have no guarantees that such info is genuine. There were many strange gospels written in the centuries after, but the earliest and most reliable sources we find in the Bible. If the Quran is the word of Allah, the information given must be true. He is the best witness, I can give you that. But the Quran has very little to say about Jesus. If the roman church, the most powerful religion during the lifetime of Muhammad, as well as today, really had corrupted the bible on purpose, I find it peculiar that the Quran tells us a long story about Joseph in Egypt, but the crucial points if Jesus was the son of god, if he died on the cross and the trinity problem are mentioned with few words. Could be that revelations concerning this were lost?
  12. Corrupted is not an adequate word. Many stories like the virgin birth story that was written almost a century after the birth, are myths. What is historically correct and what is not in the bible ought to be a problem for Muslims too. The quran is very limited on historical details, and from the Quran only we can not decide if virgin Mary was the sister of Mose and Aron, or if she lived millenniums later. Only one example. If we do not know which parts of the Bible that are "corrupted", and here the Quran gives hardly any help, this will affect our understanding of the Quran. Based on the Quran only, we are left with no dating at all on important religious events.
  13. The romans crucified many, and the crucifixion of Jesus is not found mentioned by contemporary historians or in official documents. But naturally it was a shocking experience to his desciples and family. John the baptist was known from secular records of the time thou, and Muhammad was very famous.
  14. Naturally it it impossible to say when the virgin birth was known. And therefore I am not accusing you for suggesting different periods. You suggest that Mary kept the secret until Jesus was born (for what reason?). We have earlier discussed that when Jesus started his mission (around year 30) his family thought he had gone mad. This made you suggest that Mary had (still) not told anone. 20 years later Paul writes his letters. He travells a lot, meets with the apostles, a brother of Jesus and many other christians are mentioned by name. Detailled letters about his journeys, plans an thoughts. But not a word about Mary or a virgin birth. By now Mary would be at least 70 years old and maybe no longer alive. The epistles by John and Peter do not mention her either. By the year 70 the oldest gospel Marc apparently knows nothing about the virgin birth, but at the end of the century Matthew and Luke are the first ones to tell the news. The jews will also hear about it, they will not believe it to be true, but when you say they speak bad about Mary you are probaby reffering to quotes from the Talmud centuries later. I am not suggesting that Matthew and Luke were deliberately lying. They just tried to do their best referring what they had heard. There were probably more than just two myths about the birth of Jesus by the end of the first century cerculating in the different mediterranian countries. The Bible is a witness by humans, God did not write it himself. Had he done so, he had not been able to foresee world development. Modern world would collapse if there were capital punishment for working on the sabbath, women had not equal rights with men, or a husband were obliged to stone an unfaithful wife to death. We must read the Bible (and the Quran) remembering the culture and time in which they were written.
  15. Before you said that Mary kept the virgin birth secret to the end, now you say it was common knowledge!!! But Jesus was not a famous person in the 1 century. Besides from Josefus, who have written a short, but disputed comment on Jesus, we have nothing on him from other than christian sources. A virgin birth ought to have been a world sensation, at least mentioned by Josefus or Tacitus. Jesus became famous as christian faith grew becoming a rival to other religions. If Mary was spoken bad about, this is more likelty to be the reason, than in which way she was made pregnant. I think you ought to read the beginning of Marc and the beginning of Luke to see for yourself just how different theese stories are before you decide whether this is reliable history or not. I know that the Quran say Mary was a virgin. A person that believes that this information comes from Allah himself (the best eyewitness you can imagine, and no problem it is 600 years late), will be immune to arguments that questiones this "fact". However I am not talking about the info from the Quran, but the info from two NT-gospels written 70-80 in contrast with the screaming silence from other 1.century sources. You are defending maybe the two most obvious contradictory stories in the NT. If you were a christian fundamentalist you would be immune and find a way to combine them. But I dont believe you are.
  • Create New...