Jesus's virgin birth between Talmud,New Testimony, and Quran

[Limo]

I'm discussing how logical these story not belief in a book or in Jesus or even in God.

The story of virgin birth in NT and Talmud are insulting to Mariam and Al-Masseh,
In NT:

• Mariam cousin married her to cover the scandal till he sew a dream
• Close relatives are not sure if she's innocent from adultery or not
• Issues :
  
  • Nobody witness the miracle of virgin birth
    
  • The child was deceived and grown up calling his mother's husband as father till 12 years
  • Imagine this deceived child is suppose to be God the Son who created universe or God himself
  • We don't know who documented Mariam's story as Jesus didn't say a word

Talmud story : If we believe that Yeshu ben Pandera is Jesus Christ:

• Mariam was a married woman
  
• She did adultery with a roman soldier Pandera
  
• If she's married and did adultery it's normal to be pregnant
• issues:
  • How people knew about adultery ? Why they didn't stone her according to law ?
    • The answer is because there were no 2 eyewitness
    • If there is no 2 eyewitness, then there might be one who repeated these allegations
    • . The guy should kept his mouth shut or people shouldn't believe but this is not the case
  • Rabbis repeated this allegations, taught , and wrote it in books without telling the evidence(s)
    
  • There might be be a strong evidence for these allegations such as she's not married (virgin)
    
  • There should be a strong reason for not stoning her although she's a virgin

The issues of these 2 stories are explained in Quran story :

• Mariam was virgin, not married, spent her life in Holy of Holies
• She get pregnant, she laid the child Al-Masseh
• Everybody knew and see the child, everybody believed that she did adultery, She should be stoned
• Miracle happened, the child spoke to all in a miraculous way that shuts everyone's mouth
• He told his mother's story and exposes who is he, and his mission
• Mother and son lived in pride and glory
• Everyone see the Virgin birth

This is a logical discussion, I hope nobody tells about disbelieve of a book or the story or the miracle or god. These are all known.
We're discussing how logical these stories.

 

[buddhist]

... or, different people thought up different angles to the "Jesus" story as a way to control and manipulate their respective followers. This argument seems the most logical to me.

 

[Jedster]

Common sense dictates that @buddhist opinion is correct.

{I note you say "NT and Talmud are insulting to Mariam and Al-Masseh," , even if it is, it is not as insulting as to Jews & Christians that they have altered/corrupted their texts.}

 

[Tumah]

issues:How people knew about adultery ?

Let's say because the whole town saw her husband leave for a long time and some male was continuously seen to enter her apartment during that time. And then she was found to be pregnant. Its not hard to figure out how it could be possible.

Why they didn't stone her according to law ?
The answer is because there were no 2 eyewitness
If there is no 2 eyewitness, then there might be one who repeated these allegations
The guy should kept his mouth shut or people shouldn't believe but this is not the case

Because you don't believe the story, you made up the least logical case.

It could be the whole town who knew it, not just one person. If everyone saw a man constantly entering her house at the time her husband wasn't home and during the time she would have gotten pregnant, then it would be common knowledge. We wouldn't need anyone to see the act in order to know what was going on. Her husband is in Rome taking care of business or whatever and won't be back for months. And there's this guy who keeps coming to visit her. Now she's pregnant. I wonder what happened...

It would also be very important to let the rabbis know. The child would be a *******. Its prohibited for a regular Jew to marry a *******, so the rabbis would need to get the child onto the list to make sure someone who isn't allowed to marry him, doesn't accidentally marry him. So if the town knew she committed adultery, its logical that they would go to the rabbis to let them know.

Rabbis repeated this allegations, taught , and wrote it in books without telling the evidence(s)

The rabbis don't need to write the evidence, because they're not talking to people who wouldn't believe them. Also, if it was common knowledge, there'd be no reason to write the evidence.

There might be be a strong evidence for these allegations such as she's not married (virgin)

It would be better if she hadn't been married at all, because then the child wouldn't have been a ******* and no one would know the story because it would have no impact on anyone's life. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case.

There should be a strong reason for not stoning her although she's a virgin

Since she was in fact married, she wasn't a virgin.

The issues of these 2 stories are explained in Quran story :
Mariam was virgin, not married, spent her life in Holy of Holies

If by "Holy of Holies" you meant the area of the Jewish Temple called the "Holy of Holies" then we can already write your story off as false. Its prohibited for anyone to enter the Holy of Holies, except the High Priest once a year. There is no way anyone would allow a woman to go in there.

This is a logical discussion, I hope nobody tells about disbelieve of a book or the story or the miracle or god. These are all known.
We're discussing how logical these stories.

Ok, so purely from a point of logic, who is more likely to have the actual story? The Talmud and the NT which were written by people in the country with traditions of what happened or the Quran which was written 600+ years after the fact by people with no connections to the subject?

Everybody knew and see the child, everybody believed that she did adultery, She should be stoned

Even in your story, unless two witnesses saw her commit adultery, she wouldn't be stoned by Jewish law.

Miracle happened, the child spoke to all in a miraculous way that shuts everyone's mouth

A child's testimony is not admissible in Jewish court.
The testimony of someone related to the defendant is not admissible in Jewish court.
I'm not sure making a miracle would help.

 

[Limo]

... or, different people thought up different angles to the "Jesus" story as a way to control and manipulate their respective followers. This argument seems the most logical to me.

Possibly from your perspective.
We're just discussing the 3 documented stories.

 

[Limo]

Let's say because the whole town saw her husband leave for a long time and some male was continuously seen to enter her apartment during that time. And then she was found to be pregnant. Its not hard to figure out how it could be possible.

Because you don't believe the story, you made up the least logical case.

It could be the whole town who knew it, not just one person. If everyone saw a man constantly entering her house at the time her husband wasn't home and during the time she would have gotten pregnant, then it would be common knowledge. We wouldn't need anyone to see the act in order to know what was going on. Her husband is in Rome taking care of business or whatever and won't be back for months. And there's this guy who keeps coming to visit her. Now she's pregnant. I wonder what happened...

It would also be very important to let the rabbis know. The child would be a *******. Its prohibited for a regular Jew to marry a *******, so the rabbis would need to get the child onto the list to make sure someone who isn't allowed to marry him, doesn't accidentally marry him. So if the town knew she committed adultery, its logical that they would go to the rabbis to let them know.

I don't think that pregnancy in absence of the husband is not an evidence for adultery.
On the other hand, if it became so famous in the city, There should be a single good/bad/relative to tell the idol husband about his wife. It doesn't make any sense that the whole city or village know except the idol husband.
If the husband knew the rumors,He should have undergo ordeal of bitter water or ordeal of jealousy as described and prescribed in the Priestly Code, in the Book of Numbers,

The rabbis don't need to write the evidence, because they're not talking to people who wouldn't believe them. Also, if it was common knowledge, there'd be no reason to write the evidence.

Do you really believe any Rabbi without an evidence ? Do you consider what he's saying is holy and a revelation from Yahweh ?

In Islamic law, a severe punishment to allegations on women without evidence. (I know it waits zero in your book).
I think there should be something like this in Mosa law as well otherwise innocent people name is not protected

It would be better if she hadn't been married at all, because then the child wouldn't have been a ******* and no one would know the story because it would have no impact on anyone's life. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case.

Do you mean ?
If a unmarried woman get pregnant and laid a child, she'll not be subject to the Law and her child will not be called a ******* ?

Since she was in fact married, she wasn't a virgin.

See above comment

If by "Holy of Holies" you meant the area of the Jewish Temple called the "Holy of Holies" then we can already write your story off as false. Its prohibited for anyone to enter the Holy of Holies, except the High Priest once a year. There is no way anyone would allow a woman to go in there.

If you mean by Holy of Holies the small room that is accessible by High Priest only then she wasn't there.
I think the wider area is the Mountain Temple or whatever it's called where everyone was allowed to be there. Also, some students/servants/priest were allowed to live there.

Ok, so purely from a point of logic, who is more likely to have the actual story? The Talmud and the NT which were written by people in the country with traditions of what happened or the Quran which was written 600+ years after the fact by people with no connections to the subject?

From pure logic and history, apparently what you're saying is true but deeper discussion proofs opposite.
Beside the 2 stories are completely contradicted, both have gaps and not comprehensive.

Even in your story, unless two witnesses saw her commit adultery, she wouldn't be stoned by Jewish law.

I don't think so.
If she isn't married then for sure she'll be punched. If she's married, Husband should have known the rumors and would go for ordeal of bitter water or ordeal of jealousy

A child's testimony is not admissible in Jewish court.
The testimony of someone related to the defendant is not admissible in Jewish court.
I'm not sure making a miracle would help.

He's one day or so old.
If even one month old infantry speak from Yehwa telling his story defending his mother, Don't you consider this as miracle ?
Don't you think Priests and people would believe in the miracle and convinced that the mother is innocent from adultery ?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Why is it not "most logical" to presume that the Virgin Birth narrative is a late 1st century embellishment by the author of gMt and plagiarized by Luke (particularly given that its wholly absent from the other gospels and the letters attributed to Paul)?

 

[Limo]

Why is it not "most logical" to presume that the Virgin Birth narrative is a late 1st century embellishment by the author of gMt and plagiarized by Luke (particularly given that its wholly absent from the other gospels and the letters attributed to Paul)?

I agree with you If we consider the history of Gospel only, the story should be rejected.

Although we're not discussing the authentication of the the text of Talmud, Gospel, and Quran (as we Muslims, Jews, and Christians not believe in each others' books or at least the accuracy)
but I can say the existence of the story with different version in the 3 books is a good base to discuss.

 

[Muffled]

I'm discussing how logical these story not belief in a book or in Jesus or even in God.

The story of virgin birth in NT and Talmud are insulting to Mariam and Al-Masseh,
In NT:

• Mariam cousin married her to cover the scandal till he sew a dream
• Close relatives are not sure if she's innocent from adultery or not
• Issues :
  • Nobody witness the miracle of virgin birth
    
  • The child was deceived and grown up calling his mother's husband as father till 12 years
  • Imagine this deceived child is suppose to be God the Son who created universe or God himself
  • We don't know who documented Mariam's story as Jesus didn't say a word

Talmud story : If we believe that Yeshu ben Pandera is Jesus Christ:

• Mariam was a married woman
  
• She did adultery with a roman soldier Pandera
  
• If she's married and did adultery it's normal to be pregnant
• issues:
  • How people knew about adultery ? Why they didn't stone her according to law ?
    • The answer is because there were no 2 eyewitness
    • If there is no 2 eyewitness, then there might be one who repeated these allegations
    • . The guy should kept his mouth shut or people shouldn't believe but this is not the case
  • Rabbis repeated this allegations, taught , and wrote it in books without telling the evidence(s)
    
  • There might be be a strong evidence for these allegations such as she's not married (virgin)
    
  • There should be a strong reason for not stoning her although she's a virgin

The issues of these 2 stories are explained in Quran story :

• Mariam was virgin, not married, spent her life in Holy of Holies
• She get pregnant, she laid the child Al-Masseh
• Everybody knew and see the child, everybody believed that she did adultery, She should be stoned
• Miracle happened, the child spoke to all in a miraculous way that shuts everyone's mouth
• He told his mother's story and exposes who is he, and his mission
• Mother and son lived in pride and glory
• Everyone see the Virgin birth

This is a logical discussion, I hope nobody tells about disbelieve of a book or the story or the miracle or god. These are all known.
We're discussing how logical these stories.

I don't believe I have seen much logic yet, just supposed issues.

 

[YmirGF]

The issues of these 2 stories are explained in Quran story :

• Mariam was virgin, not married, spent her life in Holy of Holies
• She get pregnant, she laid the child Al-Masseh
• Everybody knew and see the child, everybody believed that she did adultery, She should be stoned
• Miracle happened, the child spoke to all in a miraculous way that shuts everyone's mouth
• He told his mother's story and exposes who is he, and his mission
• Mother and son lived in pride and glory
• Everyone see the Virgin birth

.

I can only 2nd @Tumah here and ask how it is logical that stories that began with a people far removed from the events AND 600 years after the fact could possibly shed any meaningful information on the matter. How is that supposed to be logical?

My 2nd reason to doubt the Muslim narrative here is in point #4 and #5. There is no recorded event of an infant speaking a day or two after their birth. The Christian texts and Jewish texts are virtually silent on this matter. What I find amusing is that IF this had indeed happened, it would surely have become one of the most widely reported events in history. It did not... ...until 600 years later when some guy hundreds of miles away and far removed from the events and people involved came up with this nifty new story. Even after Muhammad made these claims Christians and Jews alike are almost silent on the matter. Have no doubt. If true, this would have been a momentous event that would have become part of the Christian narrative about Jesus. Since it has not become a large part of the Christian narrative, about the life of their central personality, we can conclude that this Muslim invention is likely a fabrication.

My 3rd point is that we have no evidence, whatsoever, that Mary and Jesus lived in pride and glory. From what I recall they continued to live in relative obscurity until Jesus made a name for himself when he was far past childhood.

I guess the thrust of my point is that there is no logical reason to give the Muslim version events any credibility whatsoever.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

... I can say the existence of the story with different version in the 3 books is a good base to discuss.

Why?

By the way, I would suggest that, given three variants of a narrative authored by different authors in different centuries, the more recent should have a better chance for logical consistency simply because its author can learn from debates surrounding the previous two efforts.

 

[Aberamentho]

I'm discussing how logical these story not belief in a book or in Jesus or even in God.

The story of virgin birth in NT and Talmud are insulting to Mariam and Al-Masseh,
In NT:

• Mariam cousin married her to cover the scandal till he sew a dream
• Close relatives are not sure if she's innocent from adultery or not
• Issues :
  • Nobody witness the miracle of virgin birth
    
  • The child was deceived and grown up calling his mother's husband as father till 12 years
  • Imagine this deceived child is suppose to be God the Son who created universe or God himself
  • We don't know who documented Mariam's story as Jesus didn't say a word

Talmud story : If we believe that Yeshu ben Pandera is Jesus Christ:

• Mariam was a married woman
  
• She did adultery with a roman soldier Pandera
  
• If she's married and did adultery it's normal to be pregnant
• issues:
  • How people knew about adultery ? Why they didn't stone her according to law ?
    • The answer is because there were no 2 eyewitness
    • If there is no 2 eyewitness, then there might be one who repeated these allegations
    • . The guy should kept his mouth shut or people shouldn't believe but this is not the case
  • Rabbis repeated this allegations, taught , and wrote it in books without telling the evidence(s)
    
  • There might be be a strong evidence for these allegations such as she's not married (virgin)
    
  • There should be a strong reason for not stoning her although she's a virgin

The issues of these 2 stories are explained in Quran story :

• Mariam was virgin, not married, spent her life in Holy of Holies
• She get pregnant, she laid the child Al-Masseh
• Everybody knew and see the child, everybody believed that she did adultery, She should be stoned
• Miracle happened, the child spoke to all in a miraculous way that shuts everyone's mouth
• He told his mother's story and exposes who is he, and his mission
• Mother and son lived in pride and glory
• Everyone see the Virgin birth

This is a logical discussion, I hope nobody tells about disbelieve of a book or the story or the miracle or god. These are all known.
We're discussing how logical these stories.

Logic has nothing to do with it. It's tradition. Issa(PBUH) was 'born of a virgin' and it is a popular tale. It certainly defies scientific reason to believe it but to dwell is fallacious.

You will never know and nobody else either, one way or the other. These stories are pagan in origin so I interpret it as allegory for being born again, as I do the Gospels period.

I don't doubt God could do such a thing but the concept is a metaphor for being born again in the NT.

In the Qur'an it is a display of the Power of God and I don't doubt God did allow Jesus (PBUH) a 'virgin birth.'

Just not in the same meaning as you are looking at it.

 

[Aberamentho]

I can only 2nd @Tumah here and ask how it is logical that stories that began with a people far removed from the events AND 600 years after the fact could possibly shed any meaningful information on the matter. How is that supposed to be logical?

My 2nd reason to doubt the Muslim narrative here is in point #4 and #5. There is no recorded event of an infant speaking a day or two after their birth. The Christian texts and Jewish texts are virtually silent on this matter. What I find amusing is that IF this had indeed happened, it would surely have become one of the most widely reported events in history. It did not... ...until 600 years later when some guy hundreds of miles away and far removed from the events and people involved came up with this nifty new story. Even after Muhammad made these claims Christians and Jews alike are almost silent on the matter. Have no doubt. If true, this would have been a momentous event that would have become part of the Christian narrative about Jesus. Since it has not become a large part of the Christian narrative, about the life of their central personality, we can conclude that this Muslim invention is likely a fabrication.

My 3rd point is that we have no evidence, whatsoever, that Mary and Jesus lived in pride and glory. From what I recall they continued to live in relative obscurity until Jesus made a name for himself when he was far past childhood.

I guess the thrust of my point is that there is no logical reason to give the Muslim version events any credibility whatsoever.

Other than the fact that the Qur'an version of events is more logical, no.

But who needs another reason?

Not me or my logically minded brethren. It is certainly more credible than you or the New Testament.

 

[YmirGF]

Other than the fact that the Qur'an version of events is more logical, no.

But who needs another reason?

Not me or my logically minded brethren. It is certainly more credible than you or the New Testament.

Just because something is logically consistent does not mean that it is accurate. It just means that it is logically consistent, LOL. *sigh*

 

[Aberamentho]

I can only 2nd @Tumah here and ask how it is logical that stories that began with a people far removed from the events AND 600 years after the fact could possibly shed any meaningful information on the matter. How is that supposed to be logical?

My 2nd reason to doubt the Muslim narrative here is in point #4 and #5. There is no recorded event of an infant speaking a day or two after their birth. The Christian texts and Jewish texts are virtually silent on this matter. What I find amusing is that IF this had indeed happened, it would surely have become one of the most widely reported events in history. It did not... ...until 600 years later when some guy hundreds of miles away and far removed from the events and people involved came up with this nifty new story. Even after Muhammad made these claims Christians and Jews alike are almost silent on the matter. Have no doubt. If true, this would have been a momentous event that would have become part of the Christian narrative about Jesus. Since it has not become a large part of the Christian narrative, about the life of their central personality, we can conclude that this Muslim invention is likely a fabrication.

My 3rd point is that we have no evidence, whatsoever, that Mary and Jesus lived in pride and glory. From what I recall they continued to live in relative obscurity until Jesus made a name for himself when he was far past childhood.

I guess the thrust of my point is that there is no logical reason to give the Muslim version events any credibility whatsoever.

The thrust of your point is a waste of time. Your interpretation of what is logical doesn't mean anything to us, religion is not scientific so it's no big surprise or deal to have the story of Jesus (PBUH) in more logical and mysterious terms in the Qur'an.

It pays them great respect and doesn't dwell, like you are.

 

[Muffled]

I agree with you If we consider the history of Gospel only, the story should be rejected.

Although we're not discussing the authentication of the the text of Talmud, Gospel, and Quran (as we Muslims, Jews, and Christians not believe in each others' books or at least the accuracy)
but I can say the existence of the story with different version in the 3 books is a good base to discuss.

I believe the Jews have historically acted as antichrist and have lied to promote their own views so anything in the Talmud should be viewed skeptically.

 

[Aberamentho]

Just because something is logically consistent does not mean that it is accurate. It just means that it is logically consistent, LOL. *sigh*

And I am not worrying about your opinion on things, I already said it was not scientific and I don't concern myself with futile concerns like whether or not the Prophet Issa(PBUH) was really born of a virgin'.

If you had read my interpretation you never would have sent this message.

 

[YmirGF]

And I am not worrying about your opinion on things, I already said it was not scientific and I don't concern myself with futile concerns like whether or not the Prophet Issa(PBUH) was really born of a virgin'.

If you had read my interpretation you never would have sent this message.

I do understand that faith is so great that one need not let little things like facts get in the way of ones thinking. That much is really a given, LOL.

 

[Muffled]

... or, different people thought up different angles to the "Jesus" story as a way to control and manipulate their respective followers. This argument seems the most logical to me.

I believe logical is not the same thing as evidence. It is logical that an alien flew into Mary's womb and caused her to conceive but it is not evident.

 

[buddhist]

I believe logical is not the same thing as evidence. It is logical that an alien flew into Mary's womb and caused her to conceive but it is not evident.

Logic is not the same as evidence, and evidence is not the same as proof either.