To save time, in this post I have consolidated the following observations in the order they appeared under my previous post.
1. Verse 6:101
2. Is there a single ayat in the Quran saying Issa AS was born without a father? If it is the only example in human history of a fatherless birth, was is not easy to say so in the Quran which is a MUBEEN Kitab.
3. Answer: What you are saying is that normal conception/childbirth is impure when a man does his business with his wife! This is a christian falsehood to make Jesus a pure, unblemished sacrifice for our sins. ….
4. A very short review of the article, Br. Mubashir posted.
Before I begin highlighting my understanding of verse 6:101, some preliminaries for putting my thoughts in order.
1. verse 6:101
The word used in 6:101 for son/child is derived from wāw lām dāl. This word indicates a direct biological father/mother-son/daughter as well as biological ancestor relationship. In this process of procreation, a male and a female participate together to beget an offspring, a son or a daughter. This offspring is a biological inheritor of his/her parents and a person in his/her own right.
Fact 1: [112:1-4]: Say, "He is Allah, [who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He (God) neither begets nor is born. Nor is there to Him any equivalent."
Fact 2: [2:117]: “Originator of the heavens and the earth. When He decrees a matter, He only says to it, "Be," and it is.”
If the unique status of God is described by Fact 1, the absolute power and authority to initiate and originate the creation as well as the process through which His will and intentions are manifested is captured in Fact 2.
If someone (or a group) does not believe in the above facts, particularly, the fact 1, it could be because of deliberate falsehood and/or misunderstanding. Misunderstanding can be removed through logical arguments, thus, verses like 6:100-101, 72:3.
[6:100]: But they have attributed to Allah partners - the jinn, while He has created them - and they falsely attribute to Him sons and daughters. Exalted is He and high above what they attribute.
[6:101]: [He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a child/son when He does not have a female companion and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing.
Contrary to Fact 1, people are attributing partners to God in the form of His biological begotten sons/daughters in 6:100. God is simply reminding them, Nay, He has created them, the Fact 2.
In 6:101 a logic based on procreation as understood by us as well as Mary in 3:47 is presented, for to beget a biological child, both male and female are needed, since God is unique as per Fact 1, He does not have a female partner (a goddess) to beget a biological child. Yet, God reminds us in the same verse about His ability to Create Everything, including the origination, as well as subsequent creation. Thus, this part of the verse in no way contradict or constrained the remaining parts of the same verse or Fact 2, above.
Thus, in my humble opinion, verse 6:101 does not invalidate any of the conclusions I presented in my previous lead post.
2. Regarding: "Is there a single ayat in the Quran saying Issa AS was born without a father? If it is the only example in human history of a fatherless birth, was is not easy to say so in the Quran which is a MUBEEN Kitab."
The book is indeed Mubeen, provided we let it speak for itself. It is however a wrong question, rather one should ask, is there a single verse that indicates or just allude to Jesus having a father? Simple logic dictates, if Essa had a father, no one would be asking any questions. All verses related to prophet Jesus unambiguously lead to a miraculous, fatherless child.
Further, what was the charge on Mary? Was it to conceive a child while she was married? Or was it to conceive a child when not married? Is conceiving in marriage a unique and rare occurrence that God had to defend her through dozens of verses just to prove she was married and had a child? How do we think?
3. Regarding: “Answer: What you are saying is that normal conception/childbirth is impure when a man does his business with his wife! This is a christian falsehood to make Jesus a pure, unblemished sacrifice for our sins…..”
The confusion in above response is simply because of the limits of Arabic to English translation. The Arabic word used in 19:19 is from root letters zāy kāf wāw, which means to grow, to augment, to thrive, to be righteous, to be pure, away from sins and bad acts, virtuous, etc. Thus, Lane translates the word “ghulāman zakiyyan” in 19:19 as a boy pure from sins or growing and increasing in goodness and righteousness, etc. Unmistakably, Jesus is the only example in Quran who is termed as ghulāman zakiyyan = Pure, virtuous child, intellectually grown/augmented child, even before he was born. After his birth, his words to people in 19:30-33 are a clear evidence of this intellectual growth. Rest all of us are required to acquire this purity, goodness, growth, and virtue, see 91:9. 87:14, etc.
If Christians state Jesus to be Pure and Unblemished of Sins, etc., then this is fully endorsed and supported by Quran. “Sacrifice for our sins, etc.” is their error. For rest of the stuff like removing herself from monasticism and raising Jesus etc., please quote from Quran to support your assertions.
4. A short review of the article by Siraj Islam, as posted by Br. Mubashir.
Siraj Islam writes: “Traditional Muslims, while sharing this common belief with traditional Christians, derive it from Quranic texts misinterpreted by Islamic secondary sources that were impregnated with Christian influences during the earlier Islamic centuries.”
Author mentions misconceptions based on secondary sources. I would agree with some of his other observations as well as this observation since quite a few things are problematic in those sources. Having said that, the author claims that Quranic Texts were misinterpreted, yet he did not translate any verse completely, rather he picked up bits and pieces here and there, cherry-picking to infer his preconceived notions. To me, his main claim and conclusion are extrapolated and are not supported when verses are read in context.
For example, Siraj Islam writes: “ … thus she abandoned monasticism in response to the divine direction (3:42-47, 66:12) and entered a conjugal relationship (19:16-22), like others,…” He did not translate any of these verses, yet presented his untenable conclusions. Verses 19:16-22 DONOT establish Mary’s conjugal relationship. Ask the author to show/prove it through these verses, if he can.