Scholar8200:
Another challenge arises: Luke names Heli, descendant of David, as the father of Mary and father-in-law to Joseph. Joachim/Imran are not found in the Bible. The reference to Joachim/Imran is peculiar only to the Catholics who themselves got it from the non-canonical, literary works called the apocrypha; a website quoted them thus:

"We have no historical evidence, however, of any elements of their lives, including their names. Any stories about Mary’s father and mother come to us through legend and tradition.”(http://daily-bible-study-tips.com/Reader-Questions-Answered/Lineage-of-Mary.htm quoting from official catholic website)

If it be so, would we not be rather on safe ground staying with that written by Luke since it is backed up with a genealogy? Or do we have a genealogy that links Aaron to Imran/Joachin? You said there was a genealogy on this in the quran; can you publish it here?

RagnarLodbrok:


Foremost, it should be appreciated that the Quran contains numerous dialogues from many previous tribes, clans and individuals throughout human history. It even contains dialogues from different creations of God. None of these dialogues were spoken in Arabic. Instead, the Quran in the voice of God translates these dialogues in an expression and language which the specific audience of the Arabs could clearly understand and one which would best represent what was said at the time the dialogue took place.

Furthermore, it is imperative that one understands the context of the narrative with a view to appreciate why certain words may have been used. In 19:27-28, Mary was clearly being reminded of her association with great patriarchs such as Prophet Aaron (pbuh) who according to Jewish sources, was considered the first High Priest of the Israelites and through whom the priestly decendancy of his tribe, the Levites continued.

Mary had been under the guardianship of Prophet Zacharriya (pbuh) in a sanctuary (3:37) and had dedicated herself to her Lord. According to Biblical sources, Prophet Zacharriya (pbuh) was a priest from the decendancy of Prophet Aaron (pbuh) and hence of Levitical Priesthood if the Biblical position is to be accepted. However, according to these sources, it also appears that Mary was not herself a Levite but rather from the house of David, a Judah (Matthew 1:1; Hebrews 7:14) which would disqualify her from being referenced as 'descendant' of the tribe of Levi.

Mary's own people would clearly have known that she was not a descendant of the Levite tribe nor of the Levitical Priesthood and hence would not have referred to her as 'daughter of Aaron' which would have been expected if she was being referenced as a descendant of Prophet Aaron's (pbuh) tribe. In the Bible we note Mary's cousin, Elisabeth being clearly referenced as a 'daughter of Aaron' as she was indeed a Levite of Prophet Aaron's (pbuh) tribe.

Luke 1:5
"There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron (Greek: Thugater), and her name was Elisabeth"

Therefore, Mary's people would not have used the epithet 'daughter of Aaron', but rather, one which bound her spiritually to the priestly tribe of Prophet Aaron (pbuh) as she had remained under Prophet Zacharriya's (pbuh) auspices. Mary was clearly reminded of her 'noble associations' with Prophet Aaron's (pbuh) noble descendants when the charge of being unchaste was levied against her. In this manner, she would have been referred to Prophet Aaron (pbuh) as connected to him by faith (as a sister) and not in lineage.

The Quran is familiar with sibling epithets to denote spiritual and social relationships between members of tribes. For example:

Noah is referred to as a 'brother' of his tribe:

026:106
"Behold, their brother (Arabic: akhuhum) Noah said to them: "Will you not fear (God)?"

We find similar references for Hud (pbuh) (7:65; 11:50; 26:124), Saleh (pbuh) (7:73; 11:61; 26:142; 27:45), Lot (pbuh) (26:161) and Shoaib (pbuh) (7:85; 11:84; 29:36)

011:050
"And to Ad (We sent) their brother Hud. He said: O my people! serve God, you have no god other than He; you are nothing but forgers (of lies)"

Even the Bible is familiar with elective spiritual relationships.

Mark 3:35
"Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother."

Lastly, the family of Imran is referenced separately by the Quran. There is a whole Surah that usually bears the name (Surah Imran - Chapter 3). It is clear that this family bears no direct connection with the Amram from the Bible, who is the father of both Prophets Moses and Aaron. (pbut)


Isn't this the whole purpose of the thread? How many times have we been over this?

malvisguy212:
I wanted to reply you but my battery died.

Let's examine the Quran. It contains
many stories from Judaism, both
theological and folklore. One would
expect that since Muhammad related so
many stories from Jewish legend, that he
would have consistently used their
metaphors, if he really knew what he was
talking about. Or, if he were really getting
"revelation" from God, then he would
have communicated with the people in
the way they understood. Perhaps there
is another reference in the Quran to
someone being called, "sister of Aaron",
or "sister of another great pious person".
But as we search, we find none.
In fact, I find that there are about 14
times the actual Arabic word
"sister" (ukhtun) is used in the Quran.

One time it refers to "Mary, sister of
Aaron". Eleven times it refers to a blood
relative, one time it is used as "sister-
nation" (7:38), and one time it refers to
"sister-sign", (43:48). Each of the
metaphorical uses of "sister" refers to a
case of concurrent relationship. And, in
each use of relational "sister", the
reference is to an actual relative.
I expanded the search to include,
"brother of Aaron", "sister of Moses", and
"brother of Moses".
Again, at no time is the idiom used to
represent someone being called
"brother" or "sister" with respect to
someone who has preceded him by
hundreds of years.

Further, I find that "brother" (akhun) is
used about 82 times in the Quran. Much
of the time it is used literally. Many times
it is used metaphorically, as in living
Muslims being "brothers" in the faith, or
one man being a "brother" to his living
tribe. In no case is it ever used to
metaphorically between a living man,
and one who has preceded him by
hundreds of years. In other words, there
is no other textual support for this
idiom's model in the Quran.
Only Mary is called sister of Aaron, Moses was mention more than Aaron but no place was this idiom use for Moses. So you failed woefully!!

RagnarLodbrok:


This copy and paste was brought to you courtesy of answering islam . Com, the proud pioneers of christian stupidity.


Fyi, I didn't even read it.

RagnarLodbrok:


This copy and paste was brought to you courtesy of answering islam . Com, the proud pioneers of christian stupidity.


Fyi, I didn't even read it.

malvisguy212:
here is one again:

Moses confronted "Aaron" and a "Samaritan" for having made the golden calf for the Israelites while he (Moses) was on Mount Sinai:

Quran 20:92-95
"[Moses] said, "O Aaron, what
prevented you, when you saw them
going astray, from following me? Then
have you disobeyed my order?" [Aaron] said, "O son of my mother, do not seize [me] by my beard or by my head. Indeed, I feared that you would say, 'You caused division among the Children of Israel, and you did not observe [or await] my word.'" [Moses] said, "And what is your case, O Samaritan?"



Assyria conquered the Jewish northern
kingdom in 722 BC, exiled its upper class and brought in conquered people from other lands, who intermarried with the lower class Jews who had been allowed to stay. Their offspring were called "Samaritans" because they occupied the region of "Samaria", which was named after its original owner, "Shemer" (see 1 Kings 16:24 in the Bible).The Jews despised the Samaritans both for being a mixed race and for setting up their own temple to compete against the temple in Jerusalem.

But the problem with this is , the golden calf incident near Mount Sinai mentioned in Quran 20:92-95 above took place in 1446 BC, which was 725 years before the first Samaritan was
born in 721 BC.

malvisguy212:
I ask you to explained why the quran used the idiom "sister of Aaron" instead you want and copy and paste from
quransmessage.com hence my reply from answeringislam.

RagnarLodbrok:


The Qur'an, while thoroughly referring to the events of the Golden Calf, does not expound on the person of al-Samiri. A description of who he was is irrelevant to the overall message. As such, we cannot definitively say where he was from or why he was among the Israelites or if he was the only one of his kind. The indication that he did not have a covenant is that he was singled out separately from the Israelites and the covenant was established with the Children of Israel. The Old Testament mentions that there were some who escaped with the Israelites and stayed with them until the events under discussion occurred (see Exodus 12:38). So, because he was not one of them he did not suffer the divine punishment.


He wasn't a samiratan, his name was samiri.

malvisguy212:
so the evidence is in the bible and NOT the quran?

plainbibletruth:
These guys know that the book they claim came down from heaven has a lot of flaws. In order to explain away the flaws they resort to looking for ways to confuse issues raised. 

If ALL the intelligent Muslim scholars cannot translate the archaic language that gives room for speculations of Muslim commentators into something more understandable then that speaks volume of their competence. 

A book which on one hand claims it makes things so clear and simple that anybody can understand and then on the other hand says no one knows its [true] interpretation except Allah has set up itself as a deception. 

How do we know those portions that are 'clear and simple' and those that 'no one knows its [true] interpretation'? This then is confusion at it's heights for those who choose to go by it. 

As a result those trying to 'explain' it resort to all sorts of gimmicks in their attempts to 'interpret' it. 

This is what is happening here!

First it's the Quran that is quoted. Then they run to the Bible. Thereafter it's resort to the Hadith. Where the Hadith is proven to go against the Quran they resort to explaining away which is superior and which is inferior. 

Quran quotes from Bible and we find the same words in the Bible today. So for some Muslim 'scholars' to doubt its authenticity is the height of arrogance. 

Isn't it strange that no Muslim ever fought to retain any copy of the Bible (in whatever form they were) that the Quran mentioned severally whereas copies of Islamic tradition materials were guarded with every fiber of their being? 

Any Muslim has the fundamental human right to continue with a lie with eagerness and face the ultimate result - hell,  or choose the truth with the corresponding result of eternity with God.  

Rilwayne001:
Plainbibletruth, why have you not been replying your mentions?

malvisguy212:
ezeauditore . What do you have to say here ?

DJ2HOT:
. Hnmmmmm I prefer to read nd learn

It does not mean that here Qur’an calls Mary, the real sister of Aaron, the Prophet who was hundreds of years before her. Here she is only being called a female person of the family, from the Noble lineage of Prophet Aaron.

Is it logical that Mary who was born hundreds after Aaron will be called 'sister' rather than 'daughter'?
Here 'she is only being called a female person of the family'
Even Jesus was referred to as 'son of David' not 'brother' of David. 
In the same Quran she is called 'daughter' ??

In 19:27-28, Mary was clearly being reminded of her association with great patriarchs such as Prophet Aaron (pbuh) who according to Jewish sources, was considered the first High Priest of the Israelites and through whom the priestly decendancy of his tribe, the Levites continued.

Mary was clearly reminded of her 'noble associations' with Prophet Aaron's (pbuh) noble descendants when the charge of being unchaste was levied against her. In this manner, she would have been referred to Prophet Aaron (pbuh) as connected to him by faith (as a sister) and not in lineage.

No! Imran is the father of Mary mother of Jesus (pbuh). Not Mary sister of Moses.

That's none of our problem that's yours.

The debate here is about the name of Mary's father according to christians, has nothing to do with us.

plainbibletruth:

plainbibletruth:

Look at what you wrote:

Is it logical that Mary who was born hundreds after Aaron will be called 'sister' rather than 'daughter'?
Here 'she is only being called a female person of the family'
Even Jesus was referred to as 'son of David' not 'brother' of David. 
In the same Quran she is called 'daughter' ??

Then this;
 
Is the Quran written hundreds of years after Mary 'reminding' Mary?
Mary's lineage was clearly Judah so the Quran could have made this clear. 

And then:

So it's now the case of 'noble associations' with Aaron. Interesting, isn't it?

And:

You now craftily try to insert a name into the father of Mary to make up your razzmatazz. 

And:

Where you can find no 'trick' to use you shove it aside. Again, interesting!

You can see how you've been doing your twists and turns!

RagnarLodbrok:


No. It's inconclusive, the area you claim there's contradiction, the Quran did not mention because it was irrelevant to the story. It spoke of a man named samiri and that was it, it did not say he was a Samaritan. The Quran did not mention whether he was a Jew or not or his background.

malvisguy212:
what A man name samiri? You are a liar ,may God open your eyes.

Surah 20:85
Sahih International
[ Allah ] said, "But indeed, We have tried your people after you [departed], and THE Samiri has led them astray."

Surah 20:87
Sahih International
They said, "We did not break our promise to you by our will, but we were made to carry burdens from the ornaments of the people [of Pharaoh], so we threw them [into the fire], and
thus did THE Samiri throw."

Quran did not mention the man name , he adress the man by his tribe" THE samiri" on two occasion. You don't mention someone name and add the word "the"

In my humble academic view, it is important I feel to better appreciate where the common belief that the Samaritans originated from Samaria at the time of the Assyrian conquest 722 BCE (centuries after the account in Exodus) actually originate from.

This has also been a point of contention for Christian polemics that criticise the Quranic mention of ‘al-Samiri’ as a ‘Samaritan’ when the city of Samaria wasn't founded until hundreds of years after the death of Prophet Moses.

The origins of the ‘Samaritans’ as commonly understood are usually a result of interpretations from 2 Kings 17 and Josephus. The Bible uses the name 'Shomeroniy' {sho-mer-o-nee} once in 2 Kings 17 which simply means ‘of Samaria’ or 'inhabitants of Samaria'. This does not really tell us much of the Samaritans or even tell us anything of their origins.

Samaritan sources also ascribe their origins to the descendants of the Joseph tribes Ephraim and Manasseh. Therefore, it is quite possible that the al-Samiri of the Quran was a Samaritan, just not from Samaria.

However, whatever the true identity of ‘al-Samiri’ in the Quran or the historical origins of the ‘Samaritans’, the name ‘al-Samiri’ was clearly known to the primary audience of the Quran. There is no conclusive evidence that this was a reference to a ‘Samaritan’ either.

With regards your proposition as to the cause of the animosity, this would, with respect, remain inconclusive on the basis of insufficient evidence.

RagnarLodbrok:
Malvisguy212 here's what a brother had to say about the issue,



You have no case here. Some even say it's actually the bibles equivalent of zimri and has no relations to the Samaritans at all. Allah knows best, but there are 5 billion ways atleast to refute your foolish claims.

malvisguy212:
deception.

[quote author=RagnarLodbrok post=35762600]
Ahhh! Jesus Moses and every other prophet excluding the Abraham during the isra and miraj called Muhammad brother, not son, were they not born hundreds of years before, why do all muslims call each other brother?

I don't know how much clearer this needs to be.

Uhhhm yes! If it wasn't a noble association why would it be used as a way to infer that an unholy act is not expected from her?



Me? Craftily? Loool! Again it's in the Quran dumbas*, what did I insert?

Scholar was asking me questions about Joachim and Catholics and what not, why the hell should that be my problem? That is an issue of christian confusion. None of my beeswax.
Even direct questions about the thread and what you post are ignored by you when you realize they are going to expose you. 

twist and turns?


See the problem with you is you just like arguing, and you make a fool out of yourself in the process, some of your claims I just look at and burst into laughter, sometimes I wonder if you're actually serious, that's why I call you a clown!

Angelou:
malvisguy212... I had even witnessed muslims on this platform who claims that mary was 9 years old when joseph defiled her... I see this as a foul play in a bid to defend the paedophilc instincts of muhammad pbuh

RagnarLodbrok:


Are you tired of me already? Lol! Alright mate, new priorities for me now. Live long and prosper.

RagnarLodbrok:


Are you tired of me already? Lol! Alright mate, new priorities for me now. Live long and prosper.

plainbibletruth:

Choosing an escape route then?
Throwing in the towel?