Peace Ismael,
What proof do you have it was borrowed?
Man! Because it was written 200 years before the Quran, and the Quran contains the narrative.
That's funny, none of the christian historians(orientalists) of the last 200 years have ever made this accusation, and i am SURE you are more qualified. Sadly, the gospels though aren't even this identical, they would be slightly more beleiveable.
No, this was floating around, nobody took it like me and presented it in this fashion. What do the Gospels have to do with this?
The Quran doesn't get the story right? That's all because you believe that the story is borrowed. Hardly a proof. And since the Quran has a different story, doesn't that logically mean that it didnt borrow the story. Why would have the "fabricators" who wrote the Quran not copied the whole story. And you can't say its because they were trying to get Christians to become Muslim because Islam and the Quran explicitly denies the Cruci-FICTION of which Christianity is based. That would have driven off plenty of the early christians alone don't you think. So what utility would a "fabricator" have had in adding a little tiny story like that?
First of all, it's the exact same story except for ONE little thing, according to the pseudo-matthew gospel, Christ was born in a cave but in the Quran he was born under the date palm.
Just keep trying to change the subject, can't accept the reality that the Quran was fabricated as it contains very late apocryphal material.
This is what is puzzling about the Bible...the authors of the first 4 books, give remarkably detailed accounts of what happened when Jesus was born (some of the discrepancies between them follow and what causes not only muslims, but many christian scholars, more eminent than any armchair academic on this forum to doubt the authenticity of the gospels.) the flight to egypt, coming back etc, and then the next time we hear about Jesus he is 30 years old. The truth is that the Gospels were not inspired words of God. Just read the first 5 verses of Luke.
Okay, here's a small test to see if what Islam teaches is logical or not.
It makes sense that Jews were called in a Roman census to return to their hometowns and Bethelehem was loaded and nothing was left but a barn for some poor Jews like Joseph and Mary who was pregnant. Joseph was a descendant if David and he was from Bethelehem. Now Mary gave birth to Jesus in a humble setting, a little barn comfortable enough to sleep in for the night.
Does it make more logical sense that Jesus was born under a datepalm and he spoke right after he was born and commanded the date palm to bring forth a stream of water and fresh dates???
Doesn't that spund somewhat mythical to you???
What the Gospels say is much more realistic and logical.
The entire gospels, having been written after the heretical blasphemous writings of Paul, are very curious indeed. And its funny that modern day Christians would dare call anyone heretical without having original copies of anything Jesus said. But oooooooooo, the Council of Nicea kind of made sure we would neve be able to know. (destroying all non-Greek copies of the religious/historical writings.
Certainly the 4 Gospels are more reliable than some story book gospel written 400 years after Christ's childhood!
LIke i said, how do you get to define what is heretical and isnt? But this sortof mentality does make one sleep easier at night.
These "christians" in Arabia had false corrupted unsupported beliefs.
Most of what we know about Jesus, pbuh, was written long after His Childhood and Ascension, by people with political axes to grind. And what a choice you have left us, this is called a false argument and no sentient being will ever believe it.
Actually a pre-Markan passion narrative was found to be written within a decade after Christ's life. The Gospels weren't written long after Christ lived! It takes cenrturies for fantastic myths to form about someone, like the pseudo-Mathew and Arabic Infancy gospels.
But you can't believe every word written from the gospels when they don't all agree. Neither are the authors truly known. Now i realize that KJV Bibles like to offer the OPINION of who wrote it, but modern bibiblical scholars of most Stuby bibles (RSV, ISRV) admit that the authorship is purely speculative.
Everything said about Christ is in agreement.
2 Peter 1:16
We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.