الرد على شبهة اقتباس قصة ولادة المسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام من الاناجيل الابوكريفية

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

قال تعالى في سورة مريم : ((15) وَاذْكُرْ فِي الْكِتَابِ مَرْيَمَ إِذِ انتَبَذَتْ مِنْ أَهْلِهَا مَكَانًا شَرْقِيًّا (16) فَاتَّخَذَتْ مِن دُونِهِمْ حِجَابًا فَأَرْسَلْنَا إِلَيْهَا رُوحَنَا فَتَمَثَّلَ لَهَا بَشَرًا سَوِيًّا (17) قَالَتْ إِنِّي أَعُوذُ بِالرَّحْمَٰنِ مِنكَ إِن كُنتَ تَقِيًّا (18) قَالَ إِنَّمَا أَنَا رَسُولُ رَبِّكِ لِأَهَبَ لَكِ غُلَامًا زَكِيًّا (19) قَالَتْ أَنَّىٰ يَكُونُ لِي غُلَامٌ وَلَمْ يَمْسَسْنِي بَشَرٌ وَلَمْ أَكُ بَغِيًّا (20) قَالَ كَذَٰلِكِ قَالَ رَبُّكِ هُوَ عَلَيَّ هَيِّنٌ ۖ وَلِنَجْعَلَهُ آيَةً لِّلنَّاسِ وَرَحْمَةً مِّنَّا ۚ وَكَانَ أَمْرًا مَّقْضِيًّا (21) ۞ فَحَمَلَتْهُ فَانتَبَذَتْ بِهِ مَكَانًا قَصِيًّا (22) فَأَجَاءَهَا الْمَخَاضُ إِلَىٰ جِذْعِ النَّخْلَةِ قَالَتْ يَا لَيْتَنِي مِتُّ قَبْلَ هَٰذَا وَكُنتُ نَسْيًا مَّنسِيًّا (23) فَنَادَاهَا مِن تَحْتِهَا أَلَّا تَحْزَنِي قَدْ جَعَلَ رَبُّكِ تَحْتَكِ سَرِيًّا (24) وَهُزِّي إِلَيْكِ بِجِذْعِ النَّخْلَةِ تُسَاقِطْ عَلَيْكِ رُطَبًا جَنِيًّا (25))

يدعي اعداء الاسلام اليوم من المنصرين و الملاحدة ان قصة ولادة مريم للمسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام تحت نخلة هي قصة مقتبسة من الاناجيل الابوكريفية

و الحقيقة عكس ذلك اذ ان المتتبع للمصادر التي يدعو الاقتباس منها يجد انها:
مصادر متاخرة عن الاسلام .

و المصادر او المصدر الوحيد الذي يدعي هؤلاء الاقتباس منه هو :
انجيل متى الابوكريفي .

و دعوى الاقتباس من انجيل متى الابوكريفي مردودة لعلتين :

1. ان الدراسات الحديثة تشير الى ان انجيل متى الابوكريفي تم تالفيه في القرن الثامن او التاسع اي بعد ظهور الاسلام بمائة او مائتي سنة .
نقرا من كتاب The Westminster Dictionary of New Testament and Early Christian Literature للكاتب David Edward Aune الصفحة 203 :(( Similarly the Gospel of PS. Matthew ( an 8th century combination of In JAm. and In Thomas with some independent material in chapters 18- 24 ) several miracles are attributed to the child Jesus in addition to those taken over from In Thomas))


https://scontent.fjed5-1.fna.fbcdn.n...51&oe=5EFEDF70

و نقرا من كتاب The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and the Nativity of Mary للكاتب Brandon W. Hawk الصفحة 3:
(( Transmission of PS. MT was widespread and long lasting. The manuscript evidence ranges from the turn of the ninth century to the sixteenth century, with origins or provenances as far flung as modern day France ))

https://scontent.fjed5-1.fna.fbcdn.n...72&oe=5EB73208

و نقرا من كتاب The Apocryphal Jesus: Legends of the Early Church للكاتب J. K. Elliott :
((A variation of the stories of the Protevangelium is to be seen in the later Gospel of Pseudo Matthew which in its present form may date from the eighth century, although it drew on much earlier material.))

https://scontent.fjed5-1.fna.fbcdn.n...a7&oe=5EFDC834

و نقرا من كتاب The Biblical Drama of Medieval Europe للكاتب Lynette R. Muir الصفحة 89 :(( The material is drawn from the Protevangelium from which two successive texts developed: The Gospel of Pseudo Matthew (attributed to St Jerome but probably not composed before the eighth century; versions are extant in many languages)


https://scontent.fjed5-1.fna.fbcdn.n...b0&oe=5EF53383

و نقرا THE INFANCY OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST AS SEEN IN THE GOSPELS OF MATTHEW AND LUKE COMPARED WITH THE INFANCY GOSPELS OF THE APOCRYPHAL CHRISTIAN LITERATURE. للكاتب John Gayford الصفحة 11:
((This work was better known in the West replacing the Protevangelium of James and the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. In fact it is made up from the beginning of the former and an edited version of the latter, Jesus as a child is projected in a less malevolent way. It has some material of its own and differences from the above works. In one edition we are told that Joseph had grandchildren who were older than Mary and that Mary stayed in the temple until she was 14. The work became popular in the Middle Ages and greatly influenced art. At the birth of Jesus the ox and the ass are said to be present and this has passed into modern nativity scenes and old carols. Elliott (1993, p. 84-85) tells us that it was most likely written in Latin possible in the eight or ninth centuries but the oldest manuscripts are not before the 14th century. It was also known as Liber de Infantia or Nativitate Mariae et de Infantia Salvatoris. ))
http://www.stmaryeastgrinstead.co.uk...7NueVM4KC6t7f8

https://scontent.fjed5-1.fna.fbcdn.n...00&oe=5EF1C135

2. انجيل متى الابوكريفي لم يكتب الا باللاتينية و لم يعرف الا للكنائس الغربية فلم تعرفه الكنائس الشرقية و من ضمنها كنائس الحبشة و مصر و الشام و العراق فلا عبرة اذا للبعض الذين قالوا بان الانجيل كتب في القرن السادس لانه لم يعرف ابدا في الشرق .
نقرا من The Apocryphal New Testament: A Collection of Apocryphal Christian للكاتب J. K. Elliott الصفحة 84
(( Conversely Pseudo Matthew as such seems not to have been known in the east or in the Eastern versions))


https://scontent.fjed5-1.fna.fbcdn.n...ee&oe=5EB6B280

اقتباس:

---

نقرا من الموسوعة الكاثوليكية :
((This is a Latin composition of the fourth or fifth century. It pretends to have been written by St. Matthew and translated by St. Jerome.

Pseudo-Matthew is in large part parallel to the "Protoevangelium Jacobi", being based on the latter or its sources

. It differs in some particulars always in the direction of the more marvellous. Some of its data have replaced in popular belief parallel ones of the older pseudograph. Such is the age of fourteen in which Mary was betrothed to Joseph. A narrative of the flight into Egypt is adorned with poetic wonders.))

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01601a.htm#III1

و نقرا من international standard bible encyclopedia
A forged correspondence between Jerome and two Italian bishops supplied a substitute in the Gospel of the Pseudo-Matthew, which Jerome was falsely represented to have rendered in Latin from the original Hebrew of Mt.

The gospel is known only in Latin

and, as already indicated, is not earlier than the 5th century.

The Protevangelium is freely used and supplemented from some unknown (probably Gnostic) source

, and further miracles especially connected with the sojourn in Egypt have been wrought into it with others added from the Childhood Gospel of Thomas

https://www.internationalstandardbib...0uLQqOwrTiYxPU

و نقرا من THE INFANCY OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST AS SEEN IN THE GOSPELS OF MATTHEW AND LUKE COMPARED WITH THE INFANCY GOSPELS OF THE APOCRYPHAL CHRISTIAN LITERATURE. للكاتب John Gayford الصفحة 11
((

This work was better known in the West replacing the Protevangelium of James and

the Infancy Gospel of Thomas

. In fact it is made up from the beginning of the former and an edited version of the latter, Jesus as a child is projected in a less malevolent way. It has some material of its own and differences from the above works. In one edition we are told that Joseph had grandchildren who were older than Mary and that Mary stayed in the temple until she was 14.))

http://www.stmaryeastgrinstead.co.uk...7NueVM4KC6t7f8

---

هذا وصلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على اله وصحبه وسلم

اضافة :

الناقد William S Abruzzi يعترف بصعوبة اقتباس القران قصة ولادة مريم عليها السلام للمسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام في القران من انجيل متى الابوكريفي اذ ان هذا الانجيل قد الف متاخرا و علاوة على ذلك فانه قد الف باللاتينية و لم تعرف القصة و لا هذا الانجيل الا للكنائس الغربية الكاثوليكية بعيدا عن الكنائس البيزنطية و السريانية في الشرق . و من اجل هذا فقد اضطر ابروزي ان يذهب بعيدا ليثبت وجود اقتباس من اي نوع كان حيث تبنى فيكرة الناقد شوميكر Shoemaker ان الاقتباس مصدره طقوس الاحتفال بميلاد المسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام التي كانت تقام في كنيسة كاثيسما Kathisma و التي تقع بين القدس و بيت لحم و من اجل اثبات هذا الاقتباس ( حيث انه من شبه المستحيل القول بان النبي عليه الصلاة و السلام الساكن في مكة في الحجاز تاثر او علم بطقوس تقام مرة في السنة في فلسطين ) ذهب شوميكر - و من بعده ابروزي - الى القول بان الاسلام لم يبدا من الحجاز و لكنه بدا من الشام !!!!

نقرا ما قاله ابروزي في The birth of Jesus : The Evolution of Jesus in the infancy narratives الصفحة 16- 17:
(( According to Shoemaker (2001: 29-36), however, the story of the palm tree was widely dispersed throughout the Byzantine Near East and is contained in several Syriac fragments copied as early as the late 5th century. He attributes the dispersal of this story to the Qur'an to the significance of the Kathisma Church in early Palestinian Christianity. According to Shoemaker (2003: 16), only two sources in Christianity contain reference to the holy family's pausing in the desert north of Bethlehem: the Protevangelium of James and the Gospel of Ps-Matthew.

However, the

Gospel of Ps-Matthew was likely composed too late to have an impact on the nativity story in the Qur'an. Furthermore, it was first composed in Latin in the Christian West and was completely unknown in the Christian East (ibid.: 19). The other principal source, according to Shoemaker, is the Kathisma Church where early celebrations of Jesus' nativity took place. The significance of the Kathisma Church in the development of the Qur'anic version of Jesus' birth is supported by current research that places the origin of Islam in the Levant rather than in the Hijaz, as is generally believed

(see Nevo and Nevo 1994; Berg 1997; Sivers 2003; Shoemaker 2003: 13-14, including notes 3 & 4).

"the Qur'an's dependence on . . . local Jerusalemite traditions adds additional weight to revisionist arguments against the origin of Islam in the Hijaz. As many scholars have demonstrated, . . . the traditional Islamic narrative of Hijazi origins is both late and problematic from a historical point of view.

Moreover, various peculiarities of formative Islam that have somehow escaped the censorship of the later tradition's 'Hijazi nostalgia' point to the beginnings of Islam somewhere in the Levant, and more specifically in the southern deserts of Palestine and Roman Arabia. In addition, the archaeological record of southern Palestine fits more with the traditions of early Islam than does the Hijaz." (Shoemaker 2003: 13))

https://scontent.fjed5-1.fna.fbcdn.n...kg&oe=6244E527

اضافة :
الدكتورة حسن عبود في كتابها السيدة مريم في القران الكريم تنفي احتمالية ان يكون القران تاثر بانجيل متى المنحول و ذلك لتاخره عن القران و كونه ايضا الف باللاتينية الامر الذي يجعل معرفته عند الكنائس الشرقية صعب . ترد بعد ذلك الدكتورة على دعوى شوميكر ان الاسلام ربما يكون نشا في الشام و اخذ القصة من الطقوس التي كانت تقام في كنيسة كاثيسما Kathisma

نقرا من كتاب السيدة مريم في القران الكريم للدكتورة حسن عبود الفصل الرابع الصفحة 122 :
(( ففي انجيل متى المنحول (الف في اواخر القرن اسلادس الميلادي او اوائل القرن السابع الميلادي) نرى صورة لمريم و ابنها عيسى مع النخلة في " رحلة الهرب التي تخوضها مريم مع يوسف و الطفل الى مصر" اي رحلة العائلة المقدسة. و من الطبيعي الافتراض ان انجيل متى المنحول، و هو المتاخر عن القران، لا يمكن ان يترك اثرا في النص القراني و قد الف اصلا باللاتينية. لكن هذا الانجيل بالتاكيد قد اعتمد في مراجعه على كثير من قصص الطفولة و تقاليدها، و منها قصة مريم و النخلة. و في هذا الانجيل نسمع عيسى يطلب من النخلة " الانحناء لاطعام امه من ثمرها، و هو ما يؤيد ما رجحته من كون الذي " نادى مريم من تحتها " هو الطفل في بطنها، على اساس ترجمتنا ل"تحت مريم " ب"بطنها" : و تنبع المياه من الارض ويفرح كل من يوسف و مريم و عيسى فيشربون منها"))

و نقرا ما قالته في الهامش رقم 1 من نفس الصفحة :
(( حاول شومايكر بلا جدوى ان يجد دليلا تاريخيا حول " موتيف ادبي" و لعله اراد من ذلك حرمان القران اي قيمة ابداعية. و هذا بالتاكيد لكي يدعم اطروحة وانسبرو حول التكوين المتاخر للقران خلافا للرواية المعتمدة للجمع العثماني ))

هذا وصلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على اله وصحبه وسلم

اضافة :

الرد على دعوى ان جيروم كتب مقدمة في هذا الانجيل .

نقول ان هذه المقدمة المنسوبة لجيروم هي مقدمة مزورة من قبل كاتب النص نفسه كما ذكر النقاد فطريقة الكتابة تشبه تلك الطريقة الموجودة في الرسالة و كذلك لا نجد صدى هذه المقدمة في اي من رسائل جيروم .
نقرا من هامش الصفحة 40 من كتاب The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and the Nativity of Mary John Hawk
. in Hebrew . . . Savior: the Latin phrasing used here to indicate the apoc- ryphon’s contents is parallel to titles of the apocryphon found in manuscripts (see the introduction). However, in this instance, the grammar does not seem to fit the context, since uirginis matris (“the Virgin Mother”) is in the genitive case. It is possible (and would explain the problematic Latin) that the author of this spurious letter relied on a titular ascription for this phrasing but did not alter the grammar to fit the sentence.

الرد على من قال بوجود نصر سرياني قديم للانجيل يرجع الى القرن الخامس كما قالت موسوعة International Online Bible Encyclopedia.

النقد النصي يكذب مسالة الاصل السرياني القديم فاقدم العوائل الخاصة بمخطوطات انجيل متى الابوكريفي A ترجع الى بداية القرن التاسع و نهاية الثامن و هي منسوخة من اصل لا يسبقها الا ببضعة عقود فقط
نقرا من كتاب John hawk السابق الصفحة 4
The A-text represents a version of Ps.-Mt. closest to the original, though revised around the year 800 with some slight grammatical changes. The earliest manuscript of the A family was created just a few decades later: London, British Library, Add. 11880, copied around 820 in Regensburg, Germany. Other early manuscripts of the A family include:

ونقرا من The Apocryphal Gospels: Texts and Translations للكاتبين Bart D. Ehrman and Zlatko Pleše الصفحة 75
The earliest surviving manuscripts of the Gospel date from the early ninth century (Gijsel’s A2a1 was written ca. 820; A3a1 and A1a2, ca. 850). Gijsel there- fore dates the archetype of his family A to around 800 CE and sees the prolifera- tion of manuscripts as deriving from the general reflection on and devotion to Mary during the Carolingian Age. This was also a period that saw a revival of interest in the writings of the “great” church fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries, which accounts for the correspondence of Jerome forged, then, at this time, and appended to the Gospel There continue to be debates concerning when the Gospel itself was com- posed. E. Amman produced one of the most influential studies nearly a cen- tury ago. Amman’s most significant argument was that one of the distinctive changes that Pseudo-Matthew made to the Protevangelium was the descrip- tion of Mary’s ascetic existence in the Temple as a child, in which she is said to have devoted herself to prayer and work. This description, Amman argues, is dependent on the Rule of Benedict from the mid-sixth century. Amman, then, dates the Gospel to the end of that century. The problem is that the changes Amman notes could have been made at just about any date after the mid-sixth century. More recently, M. Berthold has argued that Pseudo-Matthew shows evidence of literary dependence on the Vita Agnetis of Pseudo-Ambrose, which itself was used in the De Virginitate of Aldhelm of Malmesbury in 690 CE. On these grounds, Pseudo-Matthew must obviously date to some time in the mid- seventh century, at the earliest.
In the most thorough analysis to date, Gijsel has maintained that even though direct literary dependence on the Rule of Benedict cannot be demonstrated, there are enough general similarities to suggest that the book was written when monastic orders were beginning to expand in the West, by someone invested in them. Largely on these grounds he makes a convincing argument that the text was produced in the first quarter of the seventh century, by a monk in the Latin- speaking West who was enchanted by the account of the Protevangelium and its potential for conveying homage to Mary as a model virgin embracing the monastic ideal.

نقرا من نفس المصدر السابق الصفحة 116
Since the Gospel heavily utilizes Pseudo-Matthew, it must have been com- posed some time after the mid-seventh century and, obviously, before the end of the eighth century (the date of ms M). Its place of origin is not known.
https://gnosis.study/library/Гнозис/...anslations.pdf

هذا وصلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على اله وصحبه وسلم

اضافة :

دليل اخر على تاخر تاليف انجيل متى الابوكريفي عن القران و عدم تاثر القران بانجيل متى الابوكريفي .
نقرا من بحث الدكتور سليمان مراد From Hellenism to Christianity and Islam: The Origin of the Palm tree Story concerning Mary and Jesus in the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and the Qur'an" الصفحة 207, 208- 209
((. The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, on the other hand, was composed sometime between the middle of the sixth century - the date of Pope Gelasius' decree to ban the Protevangelium of James - and the end of the eighth century - the earliest manuscript evidence? Jan Gisel suggests the first quarter of the seventh century as the most probable date. It is generally believed that Pseudo-Matthew was composed in order to recirculate, with some modification. the text of the Protevangelium of James,' which was composed in Greek in the Christian Near East in about the second half of the second century." The latter was perceived to include material offensive to Mary, which explains why it was banned by Pope Gelasius." …..Obviously the story as it appears in the Qur'an is shorter than the one of Pseudo-Matthew, reflecting a stylistic system common in the Quran. In the Qur'an, the story takes place while Mary is in labor with Jesus, and the setting is identified only as a remote place. In Pseudo-Matchew, Jesus is already born, and the incident occurs during the flight to Egypt. It is very likely, then, that one is dealing here with two stories stemming from the same origin: one story places the palm tree incident in the context of Mary's labor, and the other puts it in the context of the flight to Egypt. Common to both is the miracle which causes the palm tree to provide fruit and the appearance of water from its roots.
One might expect the tale told in Qur'an 19.22-26 to pre-date the version in Pseudo-Matthew 20.1-2. The need to circulate the birth story of Jesus reflects a time when the gospels' assertion that Jesus was born in Bethlehem (Matthew 1.18-25 and Luke 2.1-7) was not yet accepted, or simply not widely known, as authoritative. Once it indisputably became the canonical birth story, it seems that the alternative birth story had either to be dropped or simply reworked to fit another aspect of the life of Mary and Jesus: namely Jesus' childhood. After all, the canonical Gospels provide very little information about his early years))

و يشير الدكتور سليمان مراد ايضا الى ان صياغة القصة يشير الى زمان او مكان لم تكن فيه قصة ولادة المسيح عليه الصلاة و السلام المذكورة في انجيل لوقا معروفة او على الاقل معتمدة و مشهورة ثم يضع لهذا عدة احتمالات ، ما يهمنا منها احتمالين : الاول الجماعات المسيحية المبكرة و الثاني الطوائف الغنوصية و هذا يعني احتمالية وجود تراث شفهي لهذه القصة عائد الي القرون المسيحية الاولى المبكرة .
نقرا من نفس المصدر السابق الصفحة 214- 215
((The canonical gospels are almost silent about the circumstances of the birth of Jesus. All that is known comes from Luke 2.1-20, which mentions nothing about Mary's labor other than the following:
While they were there in Bethlehem1. the time came for her to deliver her child. And she rave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in bands of cloth, and laid him in a manger, because shore was no place for them in the inn t?
It is not unlikely, then, that some early Christians, ignorant of the Gospel of Luke or unconvinced by it, circulated a story that was meant to describe the circumstances of Mary's labor and delivery. Indeed, early Christian communities may well have done this. The Gnostics are perceived to have developed an interest in infancy stories about Jesus." A possible group might be the Christian community of Najran, in West Arabia, who used to worship a palm tree before converting to Christianity.
* Changing the Leto/Apollo palm tree story to fit Mary/Jesus would have permitted them to keep part of their belief, yet give it a Christian tone But the circulation of an account of Mary's labor and Jesus' birth could only have posed a challenge to the Christian))
https://academia.edu/resource/work/6728525

هذا وصلى الله على سيدنا محمد و على اله وصحبه وسلم