Status of Jesus and Mary in Islam

Dear all,

I have seriously read the Quran (all 114 suras, that is) and I think I have understood most of it, especially its central point:

There is only one God, and there are no other gods, and He has no family members, such as uncles, aunts, wives, daughters or sons, and any such non-existing family members are certainly not humans, and you should never pray to such non-existing human family member of God, because that is just a scam.

Point taken and accepted.

There are two points, however, where I am still puzzled as to what to think, or what is meant in the Quran.

First point. Mary, mother of Jesus

The women. 4.156 And for their unbelief and for their having uttered against Mary a grievous calumny.

So, the Quran rejects the rather unflattering Jewish view on Mary and how the Jews question her respectability. But then again, Mary was not married when she became pregnant. The Christian bible insists on that point:

Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child [of the Holy Ghost].

The Koran insists that Jesus is not the son of God. But then, who is Jesus' father? The Koran does, however, say something similar to what the Bible says:

Mary 19.17-19.22. then We sent to her Our spirit, and there appeared to her a well-made man. She said: Surely I fly for refuge from you to the Beneficent God, if you are one guarding (against evil). He said: I am only a messenger of your Lord: That I will give you a pure boy. She said: When shall I have a boy and no mortal has yet touched me, nor have I been unchaste? He said: Even so; your Lord says: It is easy to Me: and that We may make him a sign to men and a mercy from Us, and it is a matter which has been decreed. So she conceived him;

Even the early Christian scriptures, reject the idea of Jesus conception by a Holy Spirit:

Nag Hammadi. Gospel according to Philip.
Some said, "Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit." They are in error. They do not know what they are saying. When did a woman ever conceive by a woman?

A good example of what the Jewish scriptures say about who is the father of Jesus, is the "Sepher Toldoth Jeshu":

2.32. And peradventure God in his mercy and great goodness will bless me, and bring into my hands this bastard and son of an adulteress.
2.35. Then going through the city he cried out, Where are they who report that this bastard is the Son of God?

Note that "Jeshu" in Hebrew means: the Heretic or the Blasphemer.

The confrontation of Jewish, Christian, and Islamic sources surrounding who is the father of Jesus, is absolutely confusing. The fact that there is confusion surrounding who exactly is the father of a child, in itself, seriously tarnishes the reputation of the mother. Any comments? Do you know how to exonerate Mary from these charges? Apparently, that is what the Quran wants to do.

Second point. Did Jesus, yes or no, endorse the use of the title "Son of God"?

The Women. 4.171 O followers of the Book! do not exceed the limits in your religion, and do not speak (lies) against Allah, but (speak) the truth; the Messiah, Isa son of Marium is only an apostle of Allah.
The Ranks. 61.6 And when Isa son of Marium said: O children of Israel! surely I am the apostle of Allah

The Quran exonerates Jesus from blasphemy: He did not say that he was the son of God. His followers did, but he did not.

However, both the Christian and the Jewish scriptures, insist that Jesus did say and endorse the idea that he was the son of God; all of which amounts to blasphemy.

The Jews insist that the Sanhedrin sentenced him to death for that very reason. (I'll quote the relevant scriptures another time, if you like).

Any comments?

Point one, the Quran defends Mary peace be upon her because if you read the Talmud it says some pretty bad things about her, so bad I cant even say them. Jesus Christ peace be upon him was created like Adam, except that Adam had no mother and no father and Jesus peace be upon him had a mother.

Second point, the term son of God literally meant at the time of Jesus servant of God. Never did son of God literally mean son of God as in God's literal son except many many years after the departure of Christ. The OT itself has tons of sons of God's, they are all metaphorical sons of God, servants of God. In Psalms it even says that God told David peace be upon him "this day I have begotten thee". Is it literal? Of course not, its metaphorical.

 

rami wrote: Yo have to understand the local language and usage of metaphors, in many places in the bible itself Jesus [hs] tells his followers they are the sons of God. This was a common metaphor at the time which was meant in the spiritual sence not the literal sence.

After reading and reading, and reading again, I have come to the conclusion that the scriptures are not metaphorical at all. They mean exactly what they say, including the Quran. The Word of God is not playing games, really.

The bible insists that Jesus endorsed the idea that he was the son of God:

Matthew 16:13-17.
When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Jesus would have endorsed it in the city of Caesarea Philippi. And the idea would have come from Simon ibn Jonah, also known by his Greek name, Petros.

There are 2 possibilities: Either this passage is a complete lie, and Jesus never said this; or else, the statement amounts to blasphemy, and the Sanhedrin, the supreme court of the Jews, was right to sentence him to death for blasphemy.

What is the truth? Only one of both can be true.

Bi ismillahir rahmanir raheem


What is the truth? Only one of both can be true.

that is a condition you lone have placed on this after not being able to see any further posabilities,

the following is taken from the work "what did jesus really say.

"The most significant development since 1986 in this regard has been the discovery of the title "Son of God" in one of the Qumran papyri (Dead Sea Scrolls) used in relation to a person other than Jesus.....this simply reinforces the argument made there that to be called the Son of God in a Jewish setting in the first century is not by any means the same as being identical with God Himself."

For Christ's Sake, pp. xii.

How many sons does the Bible tell us that God Almighty has?

   - Jacob is God's son and firstborn: "Israel is my son, even my firstborn" Exodus 4:22.

   - Solomon is God's son "He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son": 2 Samuel 7:13-14.

   - Ephraim is God's firstborn: "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn." Jeremiah 31:9 (who is God's firstborn? Israel or Ephraim?).

   - Adam is the son of God "Adam, which was the son of God." Luke 3:38.

   - Common people (you and me) are the sons of God: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" Deuteronomy 14:1. "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" Romans 8:14. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:" John 1:12. "That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;" Philippians 2:15. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: ... now are we the sons of God" 1 John 3:1-2. "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" Job 38:7. "Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 2:1. "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD," Job 1:6. "when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men," Genesis 6:4. "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair" Genesis 6:2

As we can see, the use of the term "son of God" when describing normal human beings was not at all an uncommon practice among Jesus' people.

Well then, was Jesus the only begotten son of God? Read Psalms 2:7

"I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me (King David, King), Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.".

Indeed, the Jews are even referred to as much more than this in the Bible, and this is indeed the very trait which Jesus (pbuh) held against them. When the Jews picked up stones to stone Jesus (pbuh) he defended himself with the following words

"Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, 'I said, Ye are gods?' If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken..."

John 10:34:

(he was referring to Psalms 82:6 "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High..") As we can see from these and many other verses like them, "son of God" in the language of the Jews was a very innocent term used to describe a loyal servant of God. Whether the translators and editors chose to write it as "Son of God" (with a capital S) in reference to Jesus and "son of God" (with a small S) in reference to everyone else does not diminish the fact that in the original language, both cases are exactly the same. Are we beginning to see what drove the most learned men of the Anglican Church to recognize the truth? But let us move on.

Grolier's encyclopedia, under the heading "Jesus Christ," says:

"During his earthly life Jesus was addressed as rabbi and was regarded as a prophet. Some of his words, too, place him in the category of sage. A title of respect for a rabbi would be "my Lord." Already before Easter his followers, impressed by his authority, would mean something more than usual when they addressed him as "my Lord.".... it is unlikely that the title "Son of David" was ascribed to him or accepted by him during his earthly ministry. "Son of God," in former times a title of the Hebrew kings (Psalms 2:7), was first adopted in the post-Easter church as an equivalent of Messiah and had no metaphysical connotations (Romans 1:4). Jesus was conscious of a unique filial relationship with God, but it is uncertain whether the Father/Son language (Mark 18:32; Matt. 11:25-27 par.; John passim) goes back to Jesus himself" .

There seems to be only two places in the Bible where Jesus (pbuh) refers to himself as "son of God." They are in John chapters 5 and 11. Hastings in "The dictionary of the Bible" says: "Whether Jesus used it of himself is doubtful." Regardless, we have already seen what is meant by this innocent title. However, Jesus is referred to as the "son of Man" (literally: "Human being") 81 times in the books of the Bible. In the Gospel of Barnabas, we are told that Jesus (pbuh) knew that mankind would make him a god after his departure and severely cautioned his followers from having anything to do with such people.

Jesus was not the son of a human man (according to both the Bible and the Qur'an). However, we find him constantly saying "I am the son of man." Why?. It was because in the language of the Jews, that is how you say "I am a human being."

What was he trying to tell us by constantly repeating and emphasizing to us throughout the New Testament "I am a human being," "I am a human being," "I am a human being"?. What had he foreseen? Think about it!.

Do Christians emphasize this aspect of Jesus? The New Testament Greek word translated as "son" are "pias" and "paida" which mean "servant," or "son in the sense of servant." These are translated to "son" in reference to Jesus and "servant" in reference to all others in some translations of the Bible (see below). As we are beginning to see, one of the most fundamental reasons why Jesus (pbuh) is considered God is due to extensive mistranslation.