why people don't say Jesus Son of Mary?
537938
Real Muslims follow Isa/Jesus.\nThe Quran says Isa/Jesus was a Prophet.\nA Prophet is one that is the Voice of God to us.\nTo disobey Isa/Jesus is to disobey God.\nAccording to Isa/Jesus we are to follow and obey His diciples.\nHis diciples said that if anyone teach anything different than what they already taught, even if it come from an "angel from heaven", to let that one be accursed.\n\nGALATIANS 1:8,9\n8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. \n9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.\n\nMohammed wrote the Quran several hundreds of years after the last Apostle died.\nHe said an angel gave it to him.\nNearly every word of it contradicts what Isa/Jesus and His diciples taught.\nThere is nothing that says he had any authority to change what was already written, many hundreds of years before him (the Holy Bible), and proven by many different Prophets and Apostles.\nReal Muslims follow Isa/Jesus...not Mohammed.\n\nQuran 2:136\nSay (O Muslims): We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered.\n\nIf you do not follow Isa/Jesus, His Apostles and Prophets, then you will be judged by these verses.\nThe words of the Quran, the very book you call "holy", and that you claim to follow, will condemn you.
765030
Mary is Ever Virgin\nExodus 13:2,12 - Jesus is sometimes referred to as the "first-born" son of Mary. But "first-born" is a common Jewish expression meaning the first child to open the womb. It has nothing to do the mother having future children.\n\nExodus 34:20 - under the Mosaic law, the "first-born" son had to be sanctified. "First-born" status does not require a "second" born.\n\nEzek. 44:2 - Ezekiel prophesies that no man shall pass through the gate by which the Lord entered the world. This is a prophecy of Mary's perpetual virginity. Mary remained a virgin before, during and after the birth of Jesus.\n\nMark 6:3 - Jesus was always referred to as "the" son of Mary, not "a" son of Mary. Also "brothers" could have theoretically been Joseph's children from a former marriage that was dissolved by death. However, it is most likely, perhaps most certainly, that Joseph was a virgin, just as were Jesus and Mary. As such, they embodied the true Holy Family, fully consecrated to God.\n\nLuke 1:31,34 - the angel tells Mary that you "will" conceive (using the future tense). Mary responds by saying, "How shall this be?" Mary's response demonstrates that she had taken a vow of lifelong virginity by having no intention to have relations with a man. If Mary did not take such a vow of lifelong virginity, her question would make no sense at all (for we can assume she knew how a child is conceived). She was a consecrated Temple virgin as was an acceptable custom of the times. \n\nLuke 2:41-51 - in searching for Jesus and finding Him in the temple, there is never any mention of other siblings. \n\nJohn 7:3-4; Mark 3:21 - we see that younger "brothers" were advising Jesus. But this would have been extremely disrespectful for devout Jews if these were Jesus' biological brothers. \n\nJohn 19:26-27 - it would have been unthinkable for Jesus to commit the care of his mother to a friend if he had brothers.\n\nJohn 19:25 - the following verses prove that James and Joseph are Jesus' cousins and not his brothers: Mary the wife of Clopas is the sister of the Virgin Mary. \n\nMatt. 27:61, 28:1 - Matthew even refers to Mary the wife of Clopas as "the other Mary."\n\nMatt. 27:56; Mark 15:47 - Mary the wife of Clopas is the mother of James and Joseph.\n\nMark 6:3 - James and Joseph are called the "brothers" of Jesus. So James and Joseph are Jesus' cousins.\n\nMatt. 10:3 - James is also called the son of "Alpheus." This does not disprove that James is the son of Clopas. The name Alpheus may be Aramaic for Clopas, or James took a Greek name like Saul (Paul), or Mary remarried a man named Alpheus.\n\n Jesus' "Brothers" (adelphoi)) = Cousins or Kinsmen\nLuke 1:36 - Elizabeth is Mary's kinswoman. Some Bibles translate kinswoman as "cousin," but this is an improper translation because in Hebrew and Aramaic, there is no word for "cousin." \n\nLuke 22:32 - Jesus tells Peter to strengthen his "brethren." In this case, we clearly see Jesus using "brethren" to refer to the other apostles, not his biological brothers.\n\nActs 1:12-15 - the gathering of Jesus' "brothers" amounts to about 120. That is a lot of "brothers." Brother means kinsmen in Hebrew.\n\nActs 7:26; 11:1; 13:15,38; 15:3,23,32; 28:17,21 - these are some of many other examples where "brethren" does not mean blood relations.\n\nRom. 9:3 - Paul uses "brethren" and "kinsmen" interchangeably. "Brothers" of Jesus does not prove Mary had other children.\n\nGen. 11:26-28 - Lot is Abraham's nephew ("anepsios") / Gen. 13:8; 14:14,16 - Lot is still called Abraham's brother (adelphos") . This proves that, although a Greek word for cousin is "anepsios," Scripture also uses "adelphos" to desc
925496
During his preaching, Jesus had never called himself as God or Son-God. Now, look upon those people who consider Jesus as God or Son-God. They are, baselessly, blaming even those people who were present at the spot and knew that Jesus was not God or son-god. In other words, the people with the belief that Jesus is God or Son-god; are far more enemies of Jesus who tried to crucify him.\n\n•The people who say that Jesus is God or Son-God or in his guise, the Lord descended upon earth because of God’s love for humanity. They are, baselessly, blaming Jesus and the Lord of Jesus, the both.\nAccording to Jesus, God, the Holy One; is the Saviour of the Whole mankind. God is capable (be God glorified as God is) to relive off every infliction. None of the human beings is saviour beside God. Jesus, himself is also, not a saviour at all. The people who have chosen him as their saviour__ they have denied the Holy One___ who alone is the saviour of Jesus and whole mankind and the act of choosing Jesus as saviour__ is equal to hate the Holy One___ as it is clearly written in the old Testament:-\n\n“I am the Lord your God. Worship no God but Me. Do not make for yourself images of anything in heavens or on earth or in the water under the earth. Do not bow down to any idol or worship it. Because I am the Lord your God and I tolerate no rivals. I bring punishment on those who hate me, on their descendants, down to third and fourth generation.”\n(Exodus 20:1-5)\n\nNow, ponder over the point that whosoever says that Jesus is God___ Holy Spirit is God___ Mary is God; has he not made an idol beside the One God? While nothing is there in the earth and heavens which could be considered in terms of the One God.\n\nBeware please! A father is a father__ a mother is a mother___ and a son is a son__ and they all are the creatures of God. They cannot be considered as God___ as god is their Creator__ and nothing is like the Lord.\n\nCreatures of God are God’s Creatures they can never be considered as God or as the parts of God. Same is the case of Jesus who is a creature and, as such, can not be considered as God or a part of the Creator or the son of Creator.\n\n•Jesus is not a Saviour. He is not capable, even, to save himself from his enemies. How he can be considered “All-Able” to save everyone on the earth. It is the Lord alone__ Who is the All-Able to save every creature of the universe including the mankind__ as the Lord is already saving__ each of them__ without any desolation and defect.\n\nJesus was born after Adam, Noah, Abraham, Ismael, Isaac, Jacob, David, Solomon, Moses and the numerous other Prophets (peace & blessings of God be upon all of them). If he were the Son-God, then, all of the foregoing Prophets, must have been the believers of Trinity. But the case is not like that at all. None of them was the believer of Trinity, rather, none of them, had, even, heard about the name of Trinity, in their times. Hence, Trinity is nothing else but an invented and artificial concept which has no existence, even, during the time of Jesus. It is, therefore, a rootless concept from all accounts.\n\nPrior to Jesus, the Lord had created Eve, without mother__ and Adam, without mother and father, the both. Afterwards, the Lord created Jesus without father. So the creation of Jesus, without father, is the third instance of the Lord’s all-encompassing creativity___ which is free from all the channels or systems of the birth. Instead, all the channels or systems of the birth are subservient to the all-encompassing and unique creativity of the Lord.\nThe Lord is, therefore, Holy and the Lord must be believed in, as Holy. To ascribe a son unto the Lord__ is a direct assault on the Lord’s Holiness__ which is an unpardonable crime.\n\nsince Adam to Noah__ Noah to Abraham__ Abraham to David, David to Moses__ Moses to Jesus and Jesus to Muhammad (peace & blessings of God be upon all of them) all the Prophets were slaves or servants of the Lord. An
637942
I do not find this blasphemy at all.  Names have different meanings and functions in different cultures.  In some cultures, the name describes the essence of the person.  But in others, it serves as a reminder to those who call the name.  So by naming a kid "Jesus" in such a culture would NOT be to imply that the kid IS Jesus.  But that the kid is to remind people of Jesus every time they say his name.  It is common practice in India to name children after the various Gods and Goddesses.  It was common practice in the Bible to name kids names of God.  For example, Tovia means "Good God,"  "Hezekiah" means "Mighty God," and so on.  Isaiah gave his children names that were whole phrases.  They were actually prophecies.  He did this so that when people said the name of his children, they would remember the message that is being conveyed in the name, such as "God is with us" (Immanuel).  Naming a kid "Emmanuel" or Immanuel is not to say that the kid IS God, but that the name serves as a reminder that God is with us.\n\nSo, it all depends on the culture and the reason for the name.\n\nI also would like to point out to the person who said it doesn't matter because it is pronounced differently, that Hey-Soos IS the way you say the Lord Jesus's name if you speak Spanish.  Spanish people do not pronounce a J sound, but use an H sound for that letter.  So the name IS the same as Christ's.
217933
well sweetie, u said don't say jesus, but i can't help it because that is where ur answers will come from. no matter what they are.\nand by u saying "and don't say jesus" leads me to believe u r lacking in faith.  if u ask he will tell u the answer "u just have to know when that answer comes". a lot of us ask jesus for answers or material things and just keep hoping wishing and praying.....and the answer is right in front of them and they don't see it........... SOMEONE answered and said ur MOM. mom can answer a few, but u need someone to answer u that listens also to ur heart...........
176471
We believe in Jesus the son of Mary the virgin that he was one of the greatest prophets of God as Muhammad (peace be on them all) and he had a miraclous birth and revealed many wonders (by the help of God)to people to believe him and that he was sent from God(as every prophet do)...\nand you can find his story in the Qur'an in several places:\nhere in a chapter of the Holy Quran called(Mariam=Mary)in this link http://www.wam.umd.edu/~stwright/rel/islam/Quran/19.html\nin verses( 16-36 ).\nand also in another chapter called (Aal Imran)-it means the family of Imran,and Imran is the father of Mary(peace be on them all)..\nhttp://www.wam.umd.edu/~stwright/rel/islam/Quran/3.html\nverses ( 33-60 )\nread them and you will know our belief..\nGod blessing and guidance to you my friend..
1003735
God isn't - it's Jesus that is considered politically incorrect. Franklin Graham once said he can use the name God in conversation with no adverse affect no matter where he goes, but that the minute he uses the name Jesus he immediately received resistance. My opinion is because when people hear "God" they can substitute their own morally relative god in its place and it is socially acceptable, but when confronted with Jesus they have to face the truth and not their own idea.
279388
Yes, because I believe Jesus is the Son of God and I want to honor Him by setting apart a day for worship and praise.  I think it's a shame what our culture has done to take Christ out of Christmas when without Him, we wouldn't be celebrating anything at all.
624859
Mary was a normal human like everyone else.  She never preformed miracles, and she didn't stay a virgin much longer after Jesus was born.  She gave birth to Jesus' brother.    And right now (sorry Catholics) Mary is a dead woman who is nothing special.  What if a woman named "Suzan" gave birth to Jesus?  Would people start praying to "the virgin Suzan"?  Dead people don't hear prayers, only God does.
999548
Yes, lots of people do. I was brought up to believe that Jesus was the son of God and that God himself was a different person, not a trinity. I'm not religious now, but when you've had the same thing told to you since you were a small child it's difficult to unbelieve.
783066
OK..\nIt does not matter if James had a son or whatever because Mary was a virgin so she didn't use Joseph to have Jesus...\ntherefore no one is related to Jesus\nBut in the bible says that we humans were made by his image..\nwould you like to visit my church?\nI would glady explain everything to you....
1072358
A fourth-century Church council, the Council of Ephesus, declared it heretical.\n\nIt's heretical because it denies the hypostatic union -- the belief that Jesus, though He has two natures (the divine and the human) is one divine person.  \n\nTo say that Mary is the mother only of His human nature is to "split Him up" in a way that contradicts the hypostatic union.  \n\nCuriously, Protestants believe in the hypostatic union but do not believe that Mary was the Mother of God.  They try to have it both ways, but they really can't.  They're trying to wed their belief in the hypostatic union with their belief that Mary was the mother of Jesus' "human side" only.  \n\nCatholic teaching -- that Mary is the mother of the whole person of Jesus, of His divine and human natures -- is much more consistent with the Christian doctrine of the hypostatic union.
587478
The minute one accepts Jesus as their savior that are saved. As you pointed out, the thief on the cross did not get baptized, yet Jesus himself said he would be with him in Paradise. \n\nI think one of the reasons so many people think you have to be baptized is due to the misunderstanding of one the versus of the Bible. In John 3:5, Jesus says, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."  The water portion has nothing to do with baptism. Instead it is a reference to the womb of our mothers. When women give birth, one of the signs of labor is water breaking.
676137
There is not a single unequivocal statement in the entire Bible where Jesus (peace be upon him) himself says, "I am God" or where he says, "worship me".\n\nAnd why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" Luke 6:46 \n\n"Indeed they reject the truth, those that say "God is Christ, the son of Mary." For indeed, Christ said, worship God, who is my God and your God (Quran 5:75)."
12307
Catholics think Mary was born without sin, which is different than most other Christians.  That's the only real difference.  \n\nAlso mary is hugely popular in many countries especially spanish-speaking countries.
513882
You don't have pictures of Jesus the Son of God, because when He returns, the Christians will ascend into Heaven. That is what the Bible says, not that he is going to have pictures made with people here first.
295645
jesus never had a father. how can he be called son of a man. i dont know from where ever you got this info, it is wrong