Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
no edit summary
Line 12: Line 12:  
The parallelism between the Arabic Infancy Gospel and verse 19:29-31 and 3:46 is plainly evident. There are three possible logical reasons behind this:  
 
The parallelism between the Arabic Infancy Gospel and verse 19:29-31 and 3:46 is plainly evident. There are three possible logical reasons behind this:  
   −
*1. The Qur'an has ‘corrected the omission’ of the talking baby Jesus tale from the New Testament.  
+
#The Qur'an has ‘corrected the omission’ of the talking baby Jesus tale from the New Testament.  
 
+
#The Qur'an has ‘corrected the consigning of the tale to the apocrypha,’ and that the Arabic Infancy Gospel should be included in the canonical New Testament.  
*2. The Qur'an has ‘corrected the consigning of the tale to the apocrypha,’ and that the Arabic Infancy Gospel should be included in the canonical New Testament.  
+
#Muhammad heard the story and mistakenly included it in the Qur'an, thinking it to be canonical and not apocryphal.  
 
  −
*3. Muhammad heard the story and mistakenly included it in the Qur'an, thinking it to be canonical and not apocryphal.  
      
The Arabic Infancy Gospel is widely regarded as apocryphal. It is believed to be a seventh century invention and was quite popular among the Syrian Nestorians. The talking baby Jesus miracle was recorded in the sira as one of the topics discussed by three Christians with Muhammad just before he revealed the relevant verses. Thus, it seems strange that the Qur'an should contain what is clearly an apocryphal story.
 
The Arabic Infancy Gospel is widely regarded as apocryphal. It is believed to be a seventh century invention and was quite popular among the Syrian Nestorians. The talking baby Jesus miracle was recorded in the sira as one of the topics discussed by three Christians with Muhammad just before he revealed the relevant verses. Thus, it seems strange that the Qur'an should contain what is clearly an apocryphal story.
48,466

edits

Navigation menu