Iran’s New ‘Virgin Mary’ Metro Station and What It Says About Faith in the Islamic Republic

This past week, social media was flooded with images showing a new metro station in Tehran called the “Virgin Mary” station. The photos went viral, sparking widespread debate among those who hail it as a rare gesture of openness, those who dismiss it as a staged act to polish the regime’s image, and others who simply wonder if it even exists.

According to the posts circulating online, the “Virgin Mary” station is located on Line 6 of the Tehran metro near the St. Sarkis Armenian Cathedral.

According to France 24, the station has been under construction for 10 years. Its arched concourse and dome feature religious frescoes and artwork honoring the Virgin Mary alongside what appears to be a church, presumably the cathedral.

For many, the idea of a metro station in Iran named after the mother of Jesus is a surprise. Others see it as consistent with Shiite culture, which also venerates the Virgin Mary. Still others interpret it as an attempt to highlight the country’s religious diversity.

Many argue that such a move does not align with the Islamic Republic’s record in dealing with religious minorities, and some dismiss it as propaganda designed to project a more tolerant image of the regime to international audiences.

The official X account of the Iranian Embassy in Yerevan weighed in, describing the station as “a beautiful sign of coexistence between Iranians and the Armenian community.”

In reality, however, this “coexistence” falls far short of international standards on religious freedom and human rights.

Message from Jim Robinson:

Dear FRiends,

We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.

If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:

Click here: to donate by Credit Card

Or here: to donate by PayPal

Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794

Thank you very much and God bless you,

Jim

Luke 1:26-38
New Life Version
Gabriel Speaks to Mary
26 Six months after Elizabeth knew she was to become a mother, Gabriel was sent from God to Nazareth. Nazareth was a town in the country of Galilee. 27 He went to a woman who had never had a man. Her name was Mary. She was promised in marriage to a man named Joseph. Joseph was of the family of David. 28 The angel came to her and said, “You are honored very much. You are a favored woman. The Lord is with you. *You are chosen from among many women.”

29 When she saw the angel, she was troubled at his words. She thought about what had been said. 30 The angel said to her, “Mary, do not be afraid. You have found favor with God. 31 See! You are to become a mother and have a Son. You are to give Him the name Jesus. 32 He will be great. He will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give Him the place where His early father David sat. 33 He will be King over the family of Jacob forever and His nation will have no end.”

34 Mary said to the angel, “How will this happen? I have never had a man.” 35 The angel said to her, “The Holy Spirit will come on you. The power of the Most High will cover you. The holy Child you give birth to will be called the Son of God.

36 “See, your cousin Elizabeth, as old as she is, is going to give birth to a child. She was not able to have children before, but now she is in her sixth month. 37 For God can do all things.” 38 Then Mary said, “I am willing to be used of the Lord. Let it happen to me as you have said.” Then the angel went away from her.

Read full chapter

Ironic that the only part of Christianity Muslims embrace, is one of the few I reject.

LMAO

Mary was just a human like the rest of us, praying to her is about as useful as praying to a tree.

I respect Mary and that she was chosen by God, along with the apostles to be a part of Jesus’s story. But it ends there.

I pray to God alone, he is more than able to hear everyone at once. It is insulting to imply God isn’t enough and needs some human to convince him that we pray to instead.

Not necessarily. Everything is not always as it seems on the surface, or as the neocon sound bites try to portray.

For example, Iran has an excellent relationship with Armenia (Christian), while Israel funds and provides weapons to Armenia's long-time enemy, Azerbaijan (Shiite Muslim!).

Persians have long had fond feelings (based on an inherent respect) towards Armenian Christians in particular. There is an old story from 1604 where, after a Persian military victory over Armenia, the Shah of Persia took some sacred stones from Etchmiadzin (effectively the Holy See of the Armenian church) and incorporated them into the Vank Cathedral in Isfahan (which he built specifically for the Armenians displaced into Persia), to make them feel more comfortable in their new situation.

You would be hard-pressed to find a modern Armenian who will speak poorly of Iran or Iranians.

clueless Old Yeller,

Your claim that Matthew 1 "makes two references to sexual relations" after Jesus' birth is a classic case of your nonsensical eisegesis, born from ignorance of biblical language, history, and logic. Linguistically you, old yeller are WRONG: "Before They Came Together" (Matthew 1:18) and "Did Not Know Her Until" (Matthew 1:25)

"Before they came together" (Greek: prin ē synelthein autous, v. 18) describes the betrothal period without consummation—synerchomai can mean marital union, but context shows no relations occurred, implying none ever did. Counter: Protestants say it expects future union. Refutation: Greek doesn't mandate this; it's descriptive, not prescriptive (e.g., Acts 2:45: "Sold their possessions and distributed… as any had need"—doesn't imply they stopped later).
"Did not know her until she had borne a son" (Greek: ouk eginōsken autēn heōs hou eteken huion, v. 25)—"until" (heōs hou) denotes a period up to an event without implying change after (e.g., 2 Samuel 6:23: "Michal had no child until the day of her death"—no children after; Matthew 28:20: "I am with you always, until the end of the age"—no abandonment after). Counter: "Until" always implies reversal. Refutation: Not in biblical Greek (Psalm 110:1: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool"—no end to reign; Acts 8:40: "Philip preached… until he came to Caesarea"—no stop after).

Historically you are wrong

Claim	Refutation
Relations implied by Jewish custom.	Betrothal was binding marriage (Deuteronomy 22:23–24: Betrothed woman considered wife), but consummation delayed. Mary's vow (Luke 1:34: "How can this be, since I know not man?"—present tense ginōskō, ongoing) fits 1st-century Jewish Nazarite vows (Numbers 6:2).
"Brothers of Jesus" (Matthew 13:55) prove siblings.	"Brothers" (adelphoi) means kin/cousins in Greek/Aramaic (no cousin term; Genesis 14:14: Lot Abraham's "brother," nephew). "Mary mother of James and Joses" is Clopas' wife (John 19:25; Matthew 27:56)—not Jesus' mother.

Biblical you are wrong: Typology and Consistency show you wrong

Isaiah 7:14: "A virgin shall conceive and bear a son"—perpetual virginity implied (Matthew 1:23 fulfillment).
Ezekiel 44:2: "This gate shall remain shut; it shall not be opened, and no one shall enter by it, for the Lord… has entered by it"—Mary as the gate through which God passes, remaining virgin (Luke 1:35: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you").
John 19:26–27: Jesus entrusts Mary to John ("Behold, your mother")—why, if she had other children (cultural duty, Deuteronomy 27:16)? Symbolizes her motherhood of believers.

Logical Refutation

If post-birth relations, why no mention at the cross (John 19:25: Brothers absent)? Counter: Brothers unbelieving (John 7:5). Refutation: They believed post-Resurrection (Acts 1:14: "With his brothers"); cultural law required care (Exodus 20:12).
Virginity honors Christ's uniqueness (Hebrews 7:26: "Holy, innocent, unstained")—logical extension of Incarnation (Galatians 4:4: "Born of woman").

Your "two references" are false—Matthew 1 affirms virginity during pregnancy, not after. Now, offensive: You believe dispensationalism, a 19th-century Darby invention with no biblical basis (no verse for rapture, seven dispensations, or Israel-Church split; contradicts Galatians 3:28: "Neither Jew nor Greek… all one in Christ"). Name a pre-1800 Christian for it—you can't. Your non-biblical nonsense crumbles; repent of eisegesis (2 Peter 3:16).

Oh, and Old Yeller, bless your heart—you’re barking up the wrong tree with dispensationalism, that 19th-century fairy tale John Nelson Darby concocted in the 1830s, pretending it’s straight from the Bible.

Imagine thinking God runs history like a failed experiment with seven “dispensations,” each with different rules for salvation—where’s that in Scripture? Not a whisper! Jesus teaches one unified kingdom (Matthew 6:10: “Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven”), not your chopped-up eras where Israel and the Church are eternally segregated like awkward exes at a wedding (Galatians 3:28: “There is neither Jew nor Greek… for you are all one in Christ Jesus”).

Your pretribulation rapture? Pulled from thin air—1 Thessalonians 4:16–17 describes Christ’s visible return with a trumpet blast, not a secret snatch-and-grab before tribulation (Matthew 24:29–31: “Immediately after the tribulation… they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds… and he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call”).

And against what Jesus taught? Please—your system turns the Gospel into a cosmic game show with “dispensational” resets, but Jesus proclaims an eternal covenant (Luke 22:20: “This cup… is the new covenant in my blood”), fulfilling the old without your arbitrary divisions (Matthew 5:17: “I have not come to abolish [the Law and Prophets] but to fulfill them”). He warns of perseverance (Matthew 24:13: “The one who endures to the end will be saved”), not your “once saved, always saved no matter what” nonsense that lets folks coast into heaven.

Pre-1800 Christians? They laughed at such ideas—Augustine shredded premillennialism in *City of God* (Book 20: Amillennial kingdom as Christ’s current reign, Revelation 20 symbolic), and no Father or Reformer (Luther, Calvin) taught dispensations or rapture—they saw one people of God (Ephesians 2:14–16: Christ “has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility… creating in himself one new man in place of the two”). Your “biblical” system is a modern myth—stick to the real Gospel, pup.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.