the story of Our Lady "the Virgin Mary" in the muslims holly book (quran)

[domaster]

the story of Our Lady "the Virgin Mary" & the The birth of Christ in the muslims holly book (quran)
ther is all Chapter 19
The Holy Quran : Chapter 19

http://www.jannah.org/qurantrans/quran19.html

interesting story

[Thorne]

Interesting? Silly is more like it. It's even sillier than the biblical version, and that takes some doing.

019.008 He said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son, when my wife is barren and I have grown quite decrepit from old age?"

Sounds to me like an impotent old man trying to explain his pregnant wife. There are other, more realistic, explanations.

019.016 Relate in the Book (the story of) Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place in the East.

Yeah, they used to do that here in the states, too. Send the pregnant teenager to live with family somewhere, so the neighbors won't know she got pregnant. Of course, nobody would claim that the baby was conceived miraculously. But I'm quite sure at least one of the parents would be stomping around, muttering, "Jesus H. Christ, how could she do this to me!"

[domaster]

the Silly thing when you say that about the holly books Respect the feelings of the believers Please

& the "old man" its a Messenger of God "Zakariya - Peace be upon him"
& god is not responsible for man Mistakes . He's here to hear and see and judge the Day of Judgement --- not Jesus who make the teenage pregnant It is the responsibility of parents Thank you for participating
But this is not our subject
In the end I just wanted to share more knowledge with those who are looking for
thanks

[Thorne]

the Silly thing when you say that about the holly books Respect the feelings of the believers Please

Why? They never seem to show respect for my disbelief.

In the end I just wanted to share more knowledge with those who are looking for thanks

This is not knowledge, but superstition. It is certainly not truth.

[domaster]

This is your opinion I respect that but You can not impose on others
You do not have to tell the others what they believe or not

[denuseri]

Thorne: Alltough I didnt understand the reason for the initial post and still dont (which may be a simple matter of a language barrier at work), I have to say that its not very nice to jump all over it in such an unwelcoming belicose and demeaning manner just becuase one's beliefs differ from those expressed by the authors of the text presented in the link.

domaster: Is this post intended to initiate a dialoge between different faiths as to the story of the virgin mary and how it differs somewhat between the adhereants of Islam, Judism, Bahai, Christianity and many others?

[Thorne]

Thorne: Alltough I didnt understand the reason for the initial post and still dont (which may be a simple matter of a language barrier at work), I have to say that its not very nice to jump all over it in such an unwelcoming belicose and demeaning manner just becuase one's beliefs differ from those expressed by the authors of the text presented in the link.

The language barrier may be part of the problem, I agree. I read the story, and found it rather fractured and incomprehensible for the most part, and filled with just as much fantasy as the biblical story it's trying to deny. I'm sure that the story sounds much more appealing in the original Arabic, though I would not understand it that way. But it is still making claims that certain events actually happened without having any evidence for those claims. After all, we're talking about a book written more than 600 years after these events supposedly took place. Even the new testament is older than that! And it's all based on "revelations" from an angel? If someone today tried to make that claim they would be immediately placed into an institution! (Or maybe not! The claims made by Scientologists are even more fantastical, even more insane, and they've managed to stay out of the asylums.)

Of course, if domaster wishes to provide evidence that this particular story has any more basis in fact than the biblical story, I'd be happy to hear it.

[thir]

And it's all based on "revelations" from an angel? If someone today tried to make that claim they would be immediately placed into an institution! (Or maybe not! The claims made by Scientologists are even more fantastical, even more insane, and they've managed to stay out of the asylums.)

You have an interesting point here. In a religious society that believes in angels, you'll still get put away for thinking you saw some. Why is that?

However, all the evangelists who claim they speak for God, and therefore must have talked to him, are believed.

Ordinary people who think the same thing are put away. Why?

[Thorne]

However, all the evangelists who claim they speak for God, and therefore must have talked to him, are believed.

Ordinary people who think the same thing are put away. Why?

My guess would be that the evangelists don't like it! After all, if just ANYONE can speak for God, where's the incentive to give all your money to the REALLY slick operators?

[denuseri]

You have an interesting point here. In a religious society that believes in angels, you'll still get put away for thinking you saw some. Why is that?

Blinks, I just watched Roma Downey touch someone the other day and Im not in the looney bin.

Seriously? An admission of faith or a claim of seeing an angel in and of itself has to my knowledge never resulted in any one being put away in the modern era where one has to be diagnosed with an actual mental ilness first.

However, all the evangelists who claim they speak for God, and therefore must have talked to him, are believed.

Imho the televangelists are in it for the money, Ive never trusted their lot.

Ordinary people who think the same thing are put away. Why?

I know lots and lots of people who express a belief in angels, ghosts and what have you, and not a one of them is in any danger of being dragged off to the mental ward.

[denuseri]

All the same is it absolutely nesseasary to be so belicose and demeaning in your critique?

Isnt it enough for you to say, I persoanlly dont agree with the work your citings validity and leave it at that? Instead of trying to jump on everyone's whose faith differs from your own...yet again and derail yet another thread with a bunch of unessesary name calling and the like?

[Thorne]

All the same is it absolutely nesseasary to be so belicose and demeaning in your critique?

Sorry. It's a profound religious experience for me.

[domaster]

Dear friends
Book Quran came down 610 after Jesus Christ
As Muslims see , that Islam, & Christianity and Judaism, its religion of God (allah) and God particularize every Nation with the Prophet
& The faith of Muslims will not be full and complete only after that they believe in all prophets as they believe in Prophet Muhammad
And to love them as they love their Prophet (in the sense that love the Prophets more than themselves)
And therefore they love the Virgin Mary and have all the love and respect and is a an example for Muslim women

It is true that the Quranic text loses the beauty and the miracle of language after translation
Of the spectrum insist all Muslims of all races to learn the Arabic language to reflect and enjoy the words of god (Allah)

And of course has come Koran story of the Virgin Mary and Christ
As did the Bible Including the predecessors of the prophets and righteous people

ps :
Please forgive me for my language
I have learned English from watching the movies & the chat rooms

[Thorne]

Please forgive me for my language

There is nothing to forgive, my friend. Your command of English is far superior to my command of Arabic, or any other language, even those I actually studied.

It is true that the Quranic text loses the beauty and the miracle of language after translation

This is nice to hear for a change. Too many Christians only accept the (rather bad) King James translation of the bible. The one which was translated from the (not quite so bad) Latin version, which was translated from the (not nearly so bad) Greek version, which was translated from the (almost good) Hebrew version, and so on, and so on.

And of course has come Koran story of the Virgin Mary and Christ
As did the Bible Including the predecessors of the prophets and righteous people

But the Muslims don't accept Jesus as the Son of God, as Christians do. So which holy book are we to believe?

Not that it really matters, of course. Neither of them, in any translation, was actually written by eye-witnesses to the events described. Both claim to be the inerrant word of God. And both are notably lacking in their tolerance for people of other faiths.

I don't believe either of them.

[denuseri]

The language thing is just a small hurdle for us to all overcome and nothing to be ashamed of domaster.


We who are Bahai have a similar beliefs in that:

Throughout history, God has revealed Himself to humanity through a series of divine Messengers, whose teachings guide and educate us and provide the basis for the advancement of human society.

These Messengers have included Abraham, Krishna, Zoroaster, Moses, Buddha, Jesus, and Muhammad.

Their religions come from the same Source and are in essence successive chapters of one religion from God.

Bahá’u’lláh, the latest of these Messengers, brought new spiritual and social teachings for our time.

His essential message is of unity.

He taught the oneness of God, the oneness of the human family, and the oneness of religion.

Bahá'u'lláh said, “The earth is but one country and mankind its citizens,” and that, as foretold in all the sacred scriptures of the past, now is the time for humanity to live in unity.

[domaster]

ferst : Please allow me about the love that holds Muslims to Jesus Christ
thank you denuseri for Statement & And To be honest that it is the first time I hear "béhaïsme" Thank you will see in this religion

& thorne
2) for what u said about the book and translated the Bible and different belief between Muslims and Christians

But the Muslims don't accept Jesus as the Son of God, as Christians do. So which holy book are we to believe?

Not that it really matters, of course. Neither of them, in any translation, was actually written by eye-witnesses to the events described. Both claim to be the inerrant word of God. And both are notably lacking in their tolerance for people of other faiths.

I don't believe either of them.

I wish that to see the video I have found a lot of answers in
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYMKQ...&feature=share

thank you Dear friends

[Thorne]

I wish that to see the video I have found a lot of answers in

I'm not impressed. You have a young man trading in one collection of superstitions for another. You can also find videos of Muslims switching to Christianity. You can find videos of Muslims and Christians turning away from their faith to become atheists. And videos of atheists going back to religion. None of it means anything. 99% of the population of the world could believe that the world was flat. That doesn't make the Earth flat, it just makes 99% of the people wrong. 99% of the people can believe in gods. That doesn't make gods real.

If you wish to convince me that Islam, or any religion, is true you must provide evidence! Real, testable evidence. Not testimonials, not anecdotes, not lists of believers. Show me how anything you believe can be true. If your god is all powerful as you claim, that should be simple for him.

[denuseri]

I dont believe that the topic of the thread is about weather or not any given religion or belief system is better than another Thorne so much as domaster is trying to point out that muslims and christians have some common ground that is shared between them, even though I know that you so desperatly wish to deride all faiths and beliefs that are not your own, a point you have made abundantly clear.

Such hypocrisy used to astound me when coming from you too once upon a time...the man in the video is doing the very thing you yourself recomend all people to do, he has went out and studied things and decided for himself which path "he" wishes to follow to God if any.

Just as the vast majority of us who are at liberty too ourselves, even in the areas of the world in which you claim we cant, my own faith arose quite letterally from such a place.

Instead of deriding him maby you would be better served by praising him.

But keep your blindfold on, keep twisting what anyone else says to feed the fire of your bully pulpit and insulting others. It must be how you wish aethism to be portrayed I guess.



There was a point in time when not all Christans believed that Jesus was divine in and of his own right eaither btw.


Addittonally, all of the faiths mentioned (other than aethism apparently) seem to in fact to preach tolerance of others.


Love thy nieghbor as thyself is a very common theme in all the majior religious ethos.


That doesnt mean kill your nieghbor if he disagrees with you.


Nor does it mean insult him if his beliefs differ from your own.


It means seek a peacful means to come to an understanding.


Fundamentalism and secularism are not part of Allah's will and they are derisive and repugnant in His eyes.


Such things derive from the evil in mens hearts that lead to misinterpetation of what other good men have written about God and His wishes where as we His creation are conserned.

[Thorne]

Such hypocrisy astounds me from you Thorne...the man in the video is doing the very thing you yourself recomend all people to do, he has went out and studied things and decided for himself which path "he" wishes to follow to God.

True, but he's basing his search on the premise that there IS a god. Without evidence. But that's beside the point, it's still a belief in something unprovable.

There was a point in time when not all Christans believed that Jesus was divine in and of his own right eaither btw.

Yes, I'm aware of that. Which only lends weight to my arguments that religions adapt to suit the people who need them, not the other way around. Which is even more evidence that these holy books are NOT the inerrant word of god.

Addittonally, all of the faiths mentioned (other than aethism) seem to in fact to preach tolerance of others.

You might want to check into the Blood Libel to see just how "tolerant" of Jews Christians have been. And look up the punishment for apostasy in Islam. Not quite so tolerant as you presume.

Love thy nieghbor as thyself is a very common theme in all the majior religious ethos.

As long as that neighbor believes as you do. It's not so clear cut otherwise.

That doesnt mean kill your nieghbor if he disagrees with you.

Again, look into the Muslim hatred of Jews, or Christian hatred of Jews. Hell, just look at some of the Christian hatred towards Muslims! And vice versa.

Nor does it mean insult him if his beliefs differ from your own.

How about when those beliefs defy logic?

It means seek a peacful means to come to an understanding.

Yes, just look how peacefully the Sunni's and Sufi's are resolving their differences.

Fundamentalism and secularism are not part of Allah's will and they are derisive and repugnant in His eyes.

Doesn't sound too tolerant to me. Don't fundamentalists count towards loving thy neighbor?

Such things derive from the evil in mens hearts and misinterpetation of what men have written about God.

Perhaps the basic problem is that there has been so much contradictory testimony written about gods.

As I have said many times, I have no problem with people believing whatever they want to believe. But if they want to post those beliefs in an open forum like this I have no problem in telling them what I think. As abrasive and annoying as you believe my posts are, I find such proselytizing to be equally abrasive and annoying.

Few people would be upset if I were to ridicule someone who posted a screed about alien bases on the far side of the moon, or unicorns raining from clear skies, or any of dozens of equally inane ideas. Why must I keep quiet about religious ideas, which I find to be just as inane as any of those others?

[Incidentally, some of the comments I've quoted above don't appear in your post, but showed up when I clicked the "Reply With Quote" button. I assume you intended to delete them, and I'm not sure why they showed up, but I decided to respond to them anyway. Perhaps a moderator could look into this issue? It can create some confusion, I'm sure.]

[leo9]

[QUOTE=denuseri;922381]Addittonally, all of the faiths mentioned (other than aethism apparently) seem to in fact to preach tolerance of others.

I can't believe you are serious. As for Xianity, if you think that has always been tolerant of other religions you slept through History 101. As for Islam, the Hadith says "He that changes his religion, he must be slain," and that is still the law in many Middle Eastern states. In India the Hindus are persecuting Muslims as enthusiastically as the other way around. They used to say Buddhists were always tolerant, until the Sri Lankan Buddhists started slaughtering their Hindu neighbours.

With the arguable exception of Stalinist Russia, I can't think of an example of atheist persecutions.

[Thorne]

With the arguable exception of Stalinist Russia, I can't think of an example of atheist persecutions.

And even there, you cannot say those persecutions were in the cause of atheism. They were performed to satisfy the cause of Communism. And a flawed communism at that.

[thir]

With the arguable exception of Stalinist Russia, I can't think of an example of atheist persecutions.

China? South Africa? Slavery? Racism?

[Thorne]

China? South Africa? Slavery? Racism?

Were any of these done to promote the cause of atheism?

Yes, bad things can be done by anyone, atheists included. But I don't know of any atrocities which were committed in the name of atheism. History is littered with examples of atrocities committed in the name of religions, on the other hand. And many of those atrocities were condoned, if not instigated, by the leaders of those religions.

[denuseri]

Were any of these done to promote the cause of atheism?

Yes, bad things can be done by anyone, atheists included. But I don't know of any atrocities which were committed in the name of atheism. History is littered with examples of atrocities committed in the name of religions, on the other hand. And many of those atrocities were condoned, if not instigated, by the leaders of those religions.

Here we go again huh?

Read up on the Communists and get back to us on that one, it was their idea to have state funded, state promoted, religious persecution. Which all the more just proves my point made way back before, about how its not the religions doing the bad stuff...its bad people doing bad stuff and misussing the "ideas" presented in any given philosophy, religion, creedo, etc.

<< goes to check the thread's topic, comes back, rme.

So whats all that got to do with Islam and Chiristianity having a chance to get along?

Or are you back to your same ole agenda of creating division so common ground cant be talked about between "theists".

[denuseri]

Inquiry: I understand that Christianity and Islam can never co-exist in peace with each other because of their extreme dogmas.

Is this true?

Response: From the perspective of both Islam and Christianity, this statement is not true.

In fact, from the very beginning Christianity has co-existed peacefully with other religions, including religions that opposed it.

For example, the leaders of the Jewish religion considered the truth claims of Christianity blasphemous; and, as a result, the leaders attempted to kill those who followed it whenever they could. Saul of Tarsus (see Acts 9) persecuted Christians. But the Christians did not therefore view it as their duty to revenge their persecutors. Rather, Christians are instructed by Holy Scripture to "live at peace with all men" (Romans 12:18, see also Hebrews 12:14), including those with whom we disagree.

Its part of that whole "tiruning the other cheek" thing.

Attempts to execute wrath upon others are totally contrary to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles.

(Sadly, it must be acknowledged that not all Christians have truly followed the teachings of the Bible in this respect.)

And when they do commit acts of agression and violence against one another, they are in fact breaking the tennents of their respected faiths.

Technically that makes them automatically excomunicated from said religion by defualt in the eyes of some.


According to Dr. James. A McBean D.Th., MCC :

"Men lacking the will to understand other men, in time will became like the beasts, and the beasts ways of life, will be ours. When we consider how religion comes about, it is rather stupid, for people to hate each other over religious dogmas. Especially over something that base on other people dreams. The founder of our leading religions, said that they got a vision of God. Some said they had a vision or a dream of an angel giving them the revelation for the book that they have written. Moses said an angel has spoken to him. Joseph Smith, the founder of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" said it was the angel name.Moronic Spoken to him. Mary said: it was an angel name. Gabriel spoken to her. Joseph the husband of Mary said: it was an angel told him in a dream about Jesus. Mohammed the founder of Islam said it was an angel name. Gabriel gives him the revelation to wrote the Koran. ...

All the foundation religions are base on a vision of an angels or a dream. It is up to each man to believe it or reject it.

If it makes you feel good to believe it, then go ahead and believe it. If it makes you feel better not to believe it, by all means go ahead and do not believe it."

Ok who is right?

Does it really matter? No. It only matters to each and every individual.

No one has the right to say their way is best any more than anyone else (yes that includes you agnostics and aethists out there too).

Science hasnt proven anything one way or the other. It may never be able to do so for all we know in the forceable future.

So why make such a fuss.

All these base faiths say basically the same message. :live in peace with one another, love thy nieghbor as yourself, and it harm not others do as thou wilt, etc etc

Why not let every one Tend to their own garden as Voltaire suggests in Candide?

All each and everyone of us that wishes to abide by what appears to be our collective idealized vision of God's message (or personalized philosophy of "reason"...no matter what our chosen path, would need to do is let go of all that angst and hate we hold inside ourselves for the other guy.

Just say, ok thats fine, you can believe or not in what you wish to, no skin off my nose, lets still be good brothers and sisters to each other and press on with life and leave the bad parts of ourselves behind.

How about it?

Anyone here want to give that a try?

I'm certiantly game.

[denuseri]

Look Thorne Im not going to go over the whole thing all over again, in yet another thread you come off as crass and hypocritical whenever anyone in any thread so much as mentions the word religion and then after going on for days you will still refuse to recognize that your own beliefs, are just as unprovable to be right and therfor just as invalidly based on anthing but blind faith..as anyone elses in this matter.

And you seem bound and determined to ruin this thread alltogether as well.

What could be a good chance to have a thread examining commonalities between muslims and chirsitans so they could maby find some common ground..you are trying to divert into yet another aethisms hates anything thats not aethism rant...so once again..Im out, have fun with your intolerance of others and belittleing of their beliefs, I know you know full well how insulting your being too with your sophistry.

You can enjoy debating it with yourself from now on, I am done.

[Thorne]

What could be a good chance to have a thread examining commonalities between muslims and chirsitans so they could maby find some common ground..

So you're saying that atheist should have no say in these matters? Isn't that rather ... dogmatic?

you are trying to divert into yet another aethisms hates anything thats not aethism rant.

I'm sorry that this is all you can see of my arguments. I'm not preaching hate. I'm preaching understanding. And the first thing I am trying to get people to understand is that your belief system, or domaster's, or anyone else's, is always based on the presumption that gods exist, without ever requiring evidence for that existence.

I'm sorry if you find that hateful.

[denuseri]

So you're saying that atheist should have no say in these matters? Isn't that rather ... dogmatic?

No, Im saying that they should perhaps be respectful when discusing these matters instead of hateful.

I'm sorry that this is all you can see of my arguments. I'm not preaching hate. I'm preaching understanding.

You dont preach understanding by constantly drawing analogies between someone elses faith and make believe childrens stories or fantastical flying pigs and the like.

And the first thing I am trying to get people to understand is that your belief system, or domaster's, or anyone else's, is always based on the presumption that gods exist, without ever requiring evidence for that existence.

Thats no different than aethism being based on the "presumption" of a god or gods not existing and you know it, so why try to spin it otherwise, you stated that enumerable times, you state it every single time you post a responce, you will even I predict re-state it againg and try to wiggle your way around the fact of it yet again and ignore the fact that your beliefs have no more validity than any others.

So whats the point in my continued participation if you refuse to debate without clinging to such hypocricy hummm?

I'm sorry if you find that hateful.

You cant prove god doesnt exist any more so than anyone can prove he does...ergo, all arguments eaither way are moot.

All of which you continously ignore and then try and twist with the upmost of sophistry against all logic, becuase it doesnt agree with your dogmatic agenda.

Which is why I am done.

[Thorne]

[B][COLOR=pink]Thats no different than aethism being based on the "presumption" of a god or gods not existing

But that's just the point, a point which you cannot seem to accept. I DON'T presume that gods do not exist; I don't see evidence FOR their existence and so I don't see any reason to presume that they do.

[denuseri]

But that's just the point, a point which you cannot seem to accept. I DON'T presume that gods do not exist; I don't see evidence FOR their existence and so I don't see any reason to presume that they do.

Which is in and of itself a "presumption" of something's non-existance.

Yet again, you prove my own point for me with blatant hypocrisy.

You are still making a presumtion/ assumption/ corolation/ guestimation etc etc etc eaither way regardless of what word you wish to use, becuase you cannot "KNOW" for sure with any real certitude any more than anyone else can one way or the other.

And Ive come to realize that no amount of logic will work with you on this topic becuase you choose to not let logic apply to your own arguments, you just keep on trying to mince words just so you can maintain your dogmatic agenda you are being an outright sophist and insist anyway that only your way is the right one, which my dear Thorne makes you no different than those very secular fundamentalists that you blame for all wrongs on the earth.

Which is really sad, since you appear to be smart enough to actually be able to understand and realize when your doing it, yet consiously choosing to ignore it for your own convience.