-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
how did Virgin Mary get pregnant if she was a Virgin?
- Thread starter Houri
- Start date
do muslims believe that jesus was born by a virgin? @Loofydralb
Yes
The narrative in the bible is changed by human hands and corrupted.
For the truth read the Quran Chapter 19. Chapter of Maryam (Mary) from verse 15 onwards.
Last edited:
Huh?
Can help me understand by quoting the passage in Quran to confirm? Thanks in advance
Quran 19:15 onwardsHuh?
Can help me understand by quoting the passage in Quran to confirm? Thanks in advance
Thanks for the reference. Found the below on the net.
وَاذۡكُرۡ فِى الۡـكِتٰبِ مَرۡيَمَۘ اِذِ انْتَبَذَتۡ مِنۡ اَهۡلِهَا مَكَانًا شَرۡقِيًّا ۙ
(19:16) (O Muhammad), recite in the Book the account of Mary,13 when she withdrew from her people to a place towards the east;
13. For comparison, see( Surah Aal-Imran, Ayats 34-57), and (Surah An-Nisa, Ayat 156) and E.Ns thereof.
فَاتَّخَذَتۡ مِنۡ دُوۡنِهِمۡ حِجَابًا فَاَرۡسَلۡنَاۤ اِلَيۡهَا رُوۡحَنَا فَتَمَثَّلَ لَهَا بَشَرًا سَوِيًّا
(19:17) and drew a curtain, screening herself from people14 whereupon We sent to her Our spirit and he appeared to her as a well-shaped man.
14. The Sanctuary where she had retired for devotion was an eastern chamber in the Temple, and as was customary she had hung a curtain to conceal herself from the people. It cannot be Nazareth as some people have wrongly taken it to be, because Nazareth is to the north of Jerusalem.
قَالَتۡ اِنِّىۡۤ اَعُوۡذُ بِالرَّحۡمٰنِ مِنۡكَ اِنۡ كُنۡتَ تَقِيًّا
(19:18) Mary exclaimed: "I surely take refuge from you with the Most Compassionate Lord, if you are at all God-fearing."
قَالَ اِنَّمَاۤ اَنَا رَسُوۡلُ رَبِّكِ ۖ لِاَهَبَ لَـكِ غُلٰمًا زَكِيًّا
(19:19) He said: "I am just a message-bearer of your Lord, I have come to grant you a most pure boy."
قَالَتۡ اَنّٰى يَكُوۡنُ لِىۡ غُلٰمٌ وَّلَمۡ يَمۡسَسۡنِىۡ بَشَرٌ وَّلَمۡ اَكُ بَغِيًّا
(19:20) Mary said: "How can a boy be born to me when no man has even touched me, nor have I ever been unchaste?"
قَالَ كَذٰلِكِ ۚ قَالَ رَبُّكِ هُوَ عَلَىَّ هَيِّنٌ ۚ وَلِنَجۡعَلَهٗۤ اٰيَةً لِّلنَّاسِ وَرَحۡمَةً مِّنَّا ۚ وَكَانَ اَمۡرًا مَّقۡضِيًّا
(19:21) The angel said: "Thus shall it be. Your Lord says: 'It is easy for Me; and We shall do so in order to make him a Sign for mankind15 and a mercy from Us. This has been decreed.' "
15. The word “Thus shall it be” are very significant as has been stated in (E.N. 6). The plain meaning is this: A pure son shall be born to you just as your Lord has decreed, even though no man has touched you. The same was the response to prophet Zachariah as stated in( Ayat 9) above. And it is a sheer perversion to interpret it as: So shall it be that a man will touch you and a son will be born to you. For, if it were to mean: You will bear a son like all other women of the world, the subsequent two sentences, Your Lord says: This is an easy thing for Me to do, and We will make that boy a sign for the people, would have become meaningless. Had this birth been an ordinary birth like the birth of every other child, there would have been no occasion to boast: It is an easy thing, and that it will be made a sign (miracle). This will be so because the child will speak in the cradle.
فَحَمَلَـتۡهُ فَانْتَبَذَتۡ بِهٖ مَكَانًا قَصِيًّا
(19:22) Then she conceived him and withdrew with him to a far-off place.16
16. When she conceived the child, she left the sanctuary and went to a distant place (Bethlehem) in order to escape the bitter criticism of the people. They would have said: Look at the virgin daughter of the pious house of Aaron! She has conceived a child and that, too, in the sanctuary where she had retired for devotion! Thus she temporarily succeeded in concealing the shame of the conception, but this event itself is a proof that prophet Jesus was born without a father. Had Mary been married and had a husband, she would not have left his or her parents house by herself and chosen a distant place for the purpose of delivery.
فَاَجَآءَهَا الۡمَخَاضُ اِلٰى جِذۡعِ النَّخۡلَةِۚ قَالَتۡ يٰلَيۡتَنِىۡ مِتُّ قَبۡلَ هٰذَا وَكُنۡتُ نَسۡيًا مَّنۡسِيًّا
(19:23) Then the birth pangs drove her to the trunk of a palm-tree and she said: "Oh, would that I had died before this and had been all forgotten."17
17. The words “Would that...” show the extreme state of anxiety in which Mary found herself at the time. She did not utter these words on account of the labor pains but due to the pangs of sorrow as to how she would conceal the child from her people. The angel’s words, grieve not at all explain why she had spoken these desperate words. When a married girl is delivering her first baby, she might be dying with pains, but she is never so sorrowful and grieved.
فَنَادٰٮهَا مِنۡ تَحۡتِهَاۤ اَلَّا تَحۡزَنِىۡ قَدۡ جَعَلَ رَبُّكِ تَحۡتَكِ سَرِيًّا
(19:24) Thereupon the angel below her cried out: "Grieve not, for your Lord has caused a stream of water to flow beneath you.
وَهُزِّىۡۤ اِلَيۡكِ بِجِذۡعِ النَّخۡلَةِ تُسٰقِطۡ عَلَيۡكِ رُطَبًا جَنِيًّا
(19:25) Shake the trunk of the palm-tree towards yourself and fresh and ripe dates shall fall upon you.
فَكُلِىۡ وَاشۡرَبِىۡ وَقَرِّىۡ عَيۡنًا ۚ فَاِمَّا تَرَيِنَّ مِنَ الۡبَشَرِ اَحَدًا ۙ فَقُوۡلِىۡۤ اِنِّىۡ نَذَرۡتُ لِلرَّحۡمٰنِ صَوۡمًا فَلَنۡ اُكَلِّمَ الۡيَوۡمَ اِنۡسِيًّا ۚ
(19:26) So eat and drink and cool your eyes; and if you see any person say to him: 'Verily I have vowed a fast to the Most Compassionate Lord, and so I shall not speak to anyone today.' "18
18. That is, you need not say anything with regard to the child. It is now Our responsibility to answer the critics. This also indicates why Mary was so sad and grieved. Had she been married and given birth to her first baby like any other mother, there was no occasion to tell her to observe a fast of silence, though it was a common custom among the Jews.
فَاَتَتۡ بِهٖ قَوۡمَهَا تَحۡمِلُهٗؕ قَالُوۡا يٰمَرۡيَمُ لَقَدۡ جِئۡتِ شَيۡـئًـا فَرِيًّا
(19:27) Then she came to her people, carrying her baby. They said: "O Mary! You have committed a monstrous thing.
يٰۤـاُخۡتَ هٰرُوۡنَ مَا كَانَ اَ بُوۡكِ امۡرَاَ سَوۡءٍ وَّمَا كَانَتۡ اُمُّكِ بَغِيًّا ۖ ۚ
(19:28) O sister of Aaron!19 Your father was not an evil man, nor was your mother an unchaste woman."
19. “Sister of Aaron” may either mean that Mary had a brother of the name of Aaron, or it may mean that she belonged to the family of Prophet Aaron. The first meaning is supported by a tradition of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the second is plausible because that is supported by the Arabic idiom. But we are inclined to the second meaning, for the wording of the said tradition does not necessarily mean that she actually had a brother named Aaron. The tradition as related in Muslim, Nasai, Tirmizi, etc. says that when the Christians of Najran criticized the Quranic version of stating Mary as the sister of Aaron before Mughirah bin Shubah, he was not able to satisfy them, because Prophet Aaron had passed away centuries earlier. When he presented the problem before the Prophet (peace be upon him), he replied: Why didn’t you say that the Israelites named their children after their Prophets and other pious men? That is: You could have answered their objection like this as well." See also (E.N. 32 of Aal-Imran).
19a. How can the people who reject the miraculous birth of Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him), explain why Mary’s whole community had come out to curse and condemn her when she had appeared before them with the child?
فَاَشَارَتۡ اِلَيۡهِ ؕ قَالُوۡا كَيۡفَ نُـكَلِّمُ مَنۡ كَانَ فِى الۡمَهۡدِ صَبِيًّا
(19:29) Thereupon Mary pointed to the child. They exclaimed: "How can we speak to one who is in the cradle, a mere child?"20
20. People who misinterpret the Quran translate this verse as: How shall we talk with him, who is but a child of yesterday? They attribute these words to the elderly people of the Jews, who said years later, when Jesus was a grown up boy, that they could not have any useful dialogue with a mere kid. But the person who keeps the whole context in view, will realize that this interpretation is absurd and has been given merely to avoid the miracle. As a matter of fact, the dialogue took place when the people were condemning Mary who being unmarried, had brought forth a child, and not when the child had grown up into manhood. (Ayat 46 of Surah Aal-Imran) and (Ayat 110 of Surah Al-Maidah) also support the view that Prophet Jesus had uttered these words as a baby in the cradle and not when grown up. In the first verse, the angel while giving the good news of a son to Mary, says: He will speak to the people alike when in the cradle and when grown up. In the other verse, Allah Himself says to Prophet Jesus: You talked to the people even in the cradle as you talked when you were grown up.
20a. The words used are: “dutiful to my mother” instead of “dutiful to my parents”. This is another proof of the fact that Jesus (peace be upon him) had no father, and for the same reason he has been called Jesus son of Mary everywhere in the Quran.
قَالَ اِنِّىۡ عَبۡدُ اللّٰهِ ؕ اٰتٰٮنِىَ الۡكِتٰبَ وَجَعَلَنِىۡ نَبِيًّا ۙ
(19:30) The child cried out: "Verily I am Allah's servant. He has granted me the Book and has made me a Prophet
وَّجَعَلَنِىۡ مُبٰـرَكًا اَيۡنَ مَا كُنۡتُ وَاَوۡصٰنِىۡ بِالصَّلٰوةِ وَالزَّكٰوةِ مَا دُمۡتُ حَيًّا ۖ
(19:31) and has blessed me wherever I might be and has enjoined upon me Prayer and Zakah (purifying alms) as long as I live;
وَّبَرًّۢابِوَالِدَتِىۡ وَلَمۡ يَجۡعَلۡنِىۡ جَبَّارًا شَقِيًّا
(19:32) and has made me dutiful to my mother.20a He has not made me oppressive, nor bereft of God's blessings.
20. People who misinterpret the Quran translate this verse as: How shall we talk with him, who is but a child of yesterday? They attribute these words to the elderly people of the Jews, who said years later, when Jesus was a grown up boy, that they could not have any useful dialogue with a mere kid. But the person who keeps the whole context in view, will realize that this interpretation is absurd and has been given merely to avoid the miracle. As a matter of fact, the dialogue took place when the people were condemning Mary who being unmarried, had brought forth a child, and not when the child had grown up into manhood. (Ayat 46 of Surah Aal-Imran) and (Ayat 110 of Surah Al-Maidah) also support the view that Prophet Jesus had uttered these words as a baby in the cradle and not when grown up. In the first verse, the angel while giving the good news of a son to Mary, says: He will speak to the people alike when in the cradle and when grown up. In the other verse, Allah Himself says to Prophet Jesus: You talked to the people even in the cradle as you talked when you were grown up.
20a. The words used are: “dutiful to my mother” instead of “dutiful to my parents”. This is another proof of the fact that Jesus (peace be upon him) had no father, and for the same reason he has been called Jesus son of Mary everywhere in the Quran.
وَالسَّلٰمُ عَلَىَّ يَوۡمَ وُلِدْتُّ وَيَوۡمَ اَمُوۡتُ وَيَوۡمَ اُبۡعَثُ حَيًّا
(19:33) Peace be upon me the day I was born and the day I will die, and the day I will be raised up alive."21
21. This speech in the cradle by Jesus was the sign to which the angel referred in( Ayat 21). As Allah intended to punish the children of Israel for their continuous wicked ways and evil deeds, He made a pious virgin girl of the family of Prophet Aaron, who had devoted herself to worship in the Temple under the patronage of Zachariah, bear a child and bring it before her people in order to concentrate the whole attention of the thousands of people assembled there on this extraordinary event. Then He made this new born child speak out even in the cradle that he had been appointed a Prophet. Though they had seen this wonderful sign of Allah, they rejected the Prophethood of Jesus and brought him to the court for crucifixion, and thus incurred the wrath of Allah. (For further details, please see (Surah Aal- Imran E.Ns 44 and 53), and (Surah An-Nisa E.Ns 212, 213).
ذٰ لِكَ عِيۡسَى ابۡنُ مَرۡيَمَ ۚ قَوۡلَ الۡحَـقِّ الَّذِىۡ فِيۡهِ يَمۡتَرُوۡنَ
(19:34) This is Jesus, the son of Mary; and this is the truth about him concerning which they are in doubt.
The New Testament was translated from Hebrew to Greek. The Hebrew word 'Almah' (young lady) was used five times in the Gospel of Luke, but was erroneously translated to 'παρθενου' (virgin) in Greek. The Roman church then based their Immaculate Conception doctrine on the Latin translation of the Greek version.
BTW, the Hebrew word for virgin is 'betulah'.
Mary was not a virgin; she was engaged to Joseph and she got pregnant the normal way - by having sex.
BTW, the Hebrew word for virgin is 'betulah'.
Mary was not a virgin; she was engaged to Joseph and she got pregnant the normal way - by having sex.
Without evidence your assertion is conjecture.
Show us the Hebrew bible it was copied from.
Bible scholars generally agree that most (if not all) of the NT was written in greek.
I did a search :
Why was the New Testament written in Greek and not Hebrew?
The New Testament was written in Greek by Greek-speaking writers for a Greek-speaking, largely Gentile audience. Paul was a Jew of the diaspora, and diaspora Jews used Greek in their everyday lives, with many of them unfamiliar with the Aramaic (or Hebrew) of Palestinian Jews.29 Mar 2013
No, but fairytale can explain. God has a super long dick.
most like to believe in fairy tales rather than proven science lol
Some scholars believe that the NT (like the OT) was first written in Hebrew, though are no extant Hebrew versions discovered today - yet.
That said, assuming it was written in Greek, it was written in Judeo-Greek (as opposed to classical Greek), the kind of Greek that was used in Palestine those days (Aramaic and Hebrew were the other languages in use at the time) which is full of Hebrew expressions awkwardly translated into Greek.
Even the Greek word 'παρθενου' in the NT can be translated as 'virgin' or 'unmarried maiden' - it was the translation into Latin (which was the version used by the Roman church) 'Virginem' that sealed the virgin concept.
?
Just like Newtonian physics
For those of Faith in mainstream religions of our Creator - who is known by many names across time, space & culture, would not deny HE is the Almighty, who created us Humans & the Universe.
Thus, it would be foolish to presume that HIS intellectual level is at the same as that of our ancient ancestors.
There are many instances in religious manuscripts that tells of many wonders they witnessed, but could only describe in words that they know, which sadly is limited, unlike our generation with our tech & science advancements, that unfortunately many modern day Humans term such events as fairytales, folklores, myths, legends, etc.
Our ancient ancestors do not even have the word - vaporize. Thus they called it as 'pillar of salt' when they witness Humans being affected by nukes. They have no term for helicopter which is manoeuvring in flight, & thus called it 'a wheel within a wheel' because that's what it looks like - the rotating blades & the cyclic controls of the helicopter turning left of right in its flight. The know not 'sound waves' & just simply wrote walls came tumbling down when trumpets were sounded, & much, much more that they do not know. It is equally foolish of us to claim we know it all today, as there is much much more that we do not know or comprehend.
Today, we Humanity know how of Assistive Reproductive Treatments - Invitro fertilization, intrauterine fertilization, etc, etc, to help couples have babies even without the sexual act of penetration. Dare we presume such tech advancements were created by us Humans alone, & that our Creator does not know of such techniques?
Some may say, why not our ancestors were taught more back then? Unfortunately, the answer is that it would need a learning culture & environment to develop what we know today. Example, if we teach Primary 1 students - who can understand Newtonian physics today - about Cold Fusion, they would not understand, as even other teachers would not, & so too their peers & parents.
Education takes time & no Human would be able to comprehend or absorb the VAST amount of knowledge that exists & beyond. It has to be built up over time & the social environment to sustain learning. Education was NOT compulsory even just a few years back in some countries, & some leaders even burnt & destroy precious manuscripts left by ancestors. Thus how more limited in knowledge were our ancient ancestors?
At least the Jews had a headstart centuries ago, which accounted for their intelligence proven by intricate & detail tasks they performed & contributed to their societies that they lived in.
Thus, it would be foolish to presume that HIS intellectual level is at the same as that of our ancient ancestors.
There are many instances in religious manuscripts that tells of many wonders they witnessed, but could only describe in words that they know, which sadly is limited, unlike our generation with our tech & science advancements, that unfortunately many modern day Humans term such events as fairytales, folklores, myths, legends, etc.
Our ancient ancestors do not even have the word - vaporize. Thus they called it as 'pillar of salt' when they witness Humans being affected by nukes. They have no term for helicopter which is manoeuvring in flight, & thus called it 'a wheel within a wheel' because that's what it looks like - the rotating blades & the cyclic controls of the helicopter turning left of right in its flight. The know not 'sound waves' & just simply wrote walls came tumbling down when trumpets were sounded, & much, much more that they do not know. It is equally foolish of us to claim we know it all today, as there is much much more that we do not know or comprehend.
Today, we Humanity know how of Assistive Reproductive Treatments - Invitro fertilization, intrauterine fertilization, etc, etc, to help couples have babies even without the sexual act of penetration. Dare we presume such tech advancements were created by us Humans alone, & that our Creator does not know of such techniques?
Some may say, why not our ancestors were taught more back then? Unfortunately, the answer is that it would need a learning culture & environment to develop what we know today. Example, if we teach Primary 1 students - who can understand Newtonian physics today - about Cold Fusion, they would not understand, as even other teachers would not, & so too their peers & parents.
Education takes time & no Human would be able to comprehend or absorb the VAST amount of knowledge that exists & beyond. It has to be built up over time & the social environment to sustain learning. Education was NOT compulsory even just a few years back in some countries, & some leaders even burnt & destroy precious manuscripts left by ancestors. Thus how more limited in knowledge were our ancient ancestors?
At least the Jews had a headstart centuries ago, which accounted for their intelligence proven by intricate & detail tasks they performed & contributed to their societies that they lived in.
Solemnly I say, all these varied translations and their subsequent interpretation have caused too much division and destruction. And will continue to do so. It would've been better if the original text did not exist at all.
