Author Topic: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue  (Read 57479 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Eskimo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Location: North Pole
  • Posts: 249
    • View Profile
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #60 on: March 17, 2004, 02:06:35 PM »
Malam,
After my previous response I also found this on the net and I SHAMELESSLY copied it exactly without changing a word of it...JUST LIKE YOU DID!~ ;D

HERE IT IS. it is a muslim response to the article you copied and post here!!

This proposed internal contradiction (that Allah has a son) is so outside the scope of logical deduction, that I am compelled to refute this section-by-section (and line-by-line where necessary).

Additionally, I have made the text which I am responding to smaller than my response. The purspose of this is to distinguish the response from the original argument and highlight the response as opposed to the origianl text (which can be seen in the normal font elsewhere anyway).

Who is the Father of Jesus?

ANSWER: No one. (to be expounded upon by refuting any claims that God is)

Is Jesus the son of Allah? The Qur'an says no. Yet it is also entirely consistent with the Qur'an to consider Allah the Father of Jesus for the following reasons:

1) Allah caused Mary to become pregnant with Jesus
2) Allah determined some of the physical characteristics of Jesus
3) All of the genetic characteristics of Jesus were determined by just two parties: Allah and Mary.

Let me say that (1) is a justified claim, (2) and (3) are questionable because God shapes everyone according to His will as He pleases. I personally do not know "how" God made Mary pregnant - but I guess you know! Did God turn Mary's egg into an embryo directly, or did He create a sperm to fertilize it, or did He just put an embryo there without Mary's egg or a created sperm? Tell me if you really know!

A Muslim might argue "Being a father implies having sex", and therfore Allah cannot be the father. No. Modern science has brought us "test tube babies", which are conceived without any sex.

The key word there is "might". I, as a Muslim, think it would take sperm from a man to fertilize an egg from a women in order for there to be two biological parents. God is not a biological parent because God is NOT a biological being. God is uncreated. Anyway, where do the test tube sperms come from? Or did you think they created a sperm in the lab?! And why don't you worship these test-tube babies since they don't have a father or mother (according to your logic anyway)?

There is nothing to support the idea that if Allah wants a baby, he must resort to normal human means to have one.

Correct. So if you are saying God is not a biological parent, fine. What kind of parent is he? A metaphorical one? Well, we know that's how the Bible describes God often. Remeber God calls Israel His first born (according to the Bible)? Is God then the parent? And yet Israel came from biological parentage! Or do you claim that Israel's parentage is a metaphorical parantage and Jesus(pbuh)'s is literal?

Again, a Muslim may say that if we are going to call Jesus the son of Allah, then we should say that Adam is the son of Allah too. No, because Adam popped into existence without a mother. We cannot compare Adam to Jesus this way.

Then what is the difference between the creation of Adam and Jesus which makes Adam not a Son of God and Jesus a Son of God? Is your answer, "because Jesus's mother was a creation of God therefore Jesus is the Son of God, but since Adam had no earthly mother, Adam is not the Son of God."? Another point, it is not that Muslims say Adam is the Son of God. Read your Bible. Email me if you need the verse.

Let us first review some background material. What does the Qur'an say about how Mary became pregnant with Jesus? In Surah 3:45-49 we read:

The angels said to Mary: "Allah bids you rejoice in a word from him. His name is the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary. He shall be noble in this world and the hereafter, and shall be favored by Allah. He shall preach to men in his cradle and the prime of manhood, and shall lead a righteous life." "Lord", she said, "how can I bear a child when no man has touched me?" He replied: "Such is the will of Allah. He creates whom He will. When He decrees a thing He need only say: 'Be' and it is. He will instruct him in the Scriptures and in wisdom, in the Torah and in the Gospel, and send him forth as an apostle to the Israelites..."

>From this passage we can draw the conclusions presented above: 1) Allah caused Mary to become pregnant with Jesus. Muslims infer from this passage and others like it that Jesus was conceived while Mary was a virgin by the word spoken by Allah, and not by a man.

Muslims do not know "how" Mary was made to be pregnant with Jesus (pbuh). How she became pregnant is God's knowledge. We only know that God commanded it.

Not that this in itself implies that Allah is the father. When a doctor causes a woman to become pregnant by artificial insemination, he is not considered the father. Hence the following two points:

Good thinking! You are right. This does not imply Allah is a father.

2) Allah determined some of the physical characteristics of Jesus. When Allah said "Be", did he have something specific in mind? Certainly! Allah had a very detailed plan in mind for Jesus. In particular, Allah decided that Jesus would be male. Normally, it is the sperm that decides the gender of the baby. Here Allah made the choice instead.

3) All of the genetic characteristics of Jesus were determined by precisely two parties: Allah and Mary. This is clear because they were the only two parties involved. So we conclude that Allah and Mary are the only two possible candidates for the title "Father".

Ever hear of surrogate mothers? Perhaps mary was just that; a surrogate mother. I mean really, how do you know "how" Jesus was formed? It seems you are assuming that Mary supplied the egg and God suppled the sperm. May Allah protect us from such blasphemous thoughts!

I'm not hiding that I don't know "how" Mary became pregnant with Jesus(pbuh), and I am not pretending to know. God said "Be" and it happened. I'm just asking, "How do you know Mary's egg was part of the process? How do you know?" The truth is you don't know. Admit you don't know "how" Jesus(pbuh) was placed in the womb of Mary and be humble to your Lord, God.

Hence it appears legitimate to call Allah the father of Jesus,

No...

at least in a figurative sense.

Interesting... He is not the biological father. He does not beget children. So what kind of father is he? A metaphorical/figurative one at best! Just refer to what I said above about Israel being God's first born in the Bible. Or do you also worship Israel? Or if you think God is then a figurative father, did he then supply a figurative "sperm"? Again, may God protect us from such blasphemous thoughts!

Therefore we are at a loss to explain why the Qur'an spends so much space arguing against this.

How can you not understand this? May God make you see it. The Qur'an is an a message to straighted out the errors which the followers of previous prophets have fallen into. You may not believe it is an error, but if it was not, then there would be no reason to correct it, would there? I mean the message of the Qur'an id Guidance and part of that is pointing out the errors we should not fall victim to.

Certainly more and better justification is needed than what appears in these passages:

Surely they lie when they declare: "Allah has begotten children". - - Sura 37:151

Where is the "lie" in our reasoning above?

I have shown it. You assume two postulates ( numbers 2 and 3 above) which are assumed truths. They are nothing but conjecture and the Qur'an has mentioned that Christians follow nothing but conjecture. You can't make up your own religion. That is equivalent to worshipping Satan.

They say: "Allah has begotten a Son". Glory be to Him! His is what the heavens and the earth contain; all things are obedient to Him. Creator of the heavens and the earth! When he decrees a thing, He need only say "Be", and it is. -- Sura 2:116

Allah made Mary pregnant. What more would Allah have to do if he wanted a legitimate son?

Excuse me, but you assume God wants a son in the first place. That may be a whole other discussion, but certainly has nothing to do with a proposed inconsistency in the Qur'an. The Qur'an never says that God ever wanted a son (metaphorical or literal - whatever a "literal" son of God may mean - a'uuthu billah! I seek shelter in God from such blasphemous thoughts!).

Allah forbid that He Himself should beget a son! When He decrees a thing He need only say "Be," and it is. -- Sura 19:35

So is Allah unable to beget a son by saying "Be"?

Your wrong assumption here is that saying "Be" is the same as begetting a son. It has been shown that that is not the case. Do you doubt that? How can you doubt it, if you do? Or should I say that because God commanded all of us to "Be", we then are the children of God? Do we then worship ourselves? (I am mentioning that because that is really the point of trying to proven God has a son, isn't it? You want Muslims to become deluded and worship a creature like you do. The Qur'an is right when it says that the Jews and Christians would never be satisfied unless we follow their form of religion. Well, may God protect us from that.) Why can't Christians just understand that "son of God" and "children of God" are not literal terms, but literary devices and expressions?

Say: "If the Lord of Mercy had a son, I would be the first to worship him". -- Sura 43:82

We would prefer something more convincing from the Qu'ran than this.

That is the key comment in your post. What is it that would convince you that God did not beget a son? I mean, if it is true that God did not have a son, then what is the convincing proof you would require? What's the proof that he had a son? You seem to agree with the Qur'an's description of God's capability to create Jesus(pbuh). I mean even the Qur'an says that if the Qur'an wasn't from God there would be dicrepencies. Does your religion offer you a proof of authenticity? Is it the supposed Resurrection of Jesus? Just compare the four gospels in detail to each other, along with the book of Acts, and see if the Resurrection really happened. Go on... Do it. I dare you. Are you afraid of what you will find? How will you rationalize the inconsistencies? Is it that you have no discrepencies in your Bible? If you think so, you are deluding yourself (or Satan is deluding you). Even the maintainer of these web pages admits to those contradictions, and yet none of the proposed contradiction of the Qur'an are proven to be contradictions. That's right. None have been proven to be contradictions. If so, which ones? Be honest. Are they conclusively contradictions? Have you considered the Arabic? All contexts? All meanings? God's word (the Qur'an) is protected. Don't kid yourself.

I hope you realize you've disappointed a lot of people here. First, you attempted to find a contradiction in the Qur'an where none existed. Second, you claimed knowledge of "how" Jesus(pbuh) was formed (and that is knowledge you just don't have). Third, you used that false knowledge in trying to concoct an argument as to how Jesus could be the son of God - unsuccessfully. Lastly, you take the Qur'an and interpret it to your own desires -something the Qur'an says we can not do. So you have used the Qur'an incorrectly to try to prove something the Qur'an doesn't support based on assumed knowledge you just don't have. Do you think your arguments have any crediblity now?

Look, it is not too late to say, "hey, I made a mistake," and move on. The doors of Mercy from God are still open. If I have been harsh in my response it is because I want the message to get through. You really don't know the joy of believing in God without concocted beliefs added in by Satan until you become a Muslim. Please think about the arguments I have put forth.
color=blue]NOBODY is PERFECT and I am NOBODY.[/color]

Anonymous

  • Guest
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #61 on: March 18, 2004, 03:39:31 AM »
Eskimo

Again you rush into throwing tantrums without reading!!! you wrote ".....personally do not know "how" God made Mary pregnant - but I guess you know! Did God turn Mary's egg into an embryo directly, or did He create a sperm to fertilize it, or did He just put an embryo there......" and I see you continue to go with this line of argument throughout your posting on the question of "how".  I do not see anywhere in the posting where "how" was a question or an issue, I see you do not know or understand that conception ( I used concieve) is not a discription of how but a description of a state and both the bible and quran do agree that Mary agree that Mary concieved (became pregnant) with Jesus at one time.  Stop the tantrums and read carefully where you do not understand the meaning of a word read it up from the dictionary.

1) Allah caused Mary to become pregnant with Jesus  
2) Allah determined some of the physical characteristics of Jesus  
3) All of the genetic characteristics of Jesus were determined by just two parties: Allah and Mary.  
 
Your response:  Let me say that (1) is a justified claim, (2) and (3) are questionable because God shapes everyone according to His will as He pleases. I personally do not know "how" God made Mary pregnant - but I guess you know! Did God turn Mary's egg into an embryo directly, or did He create a sperm to fertilize it, or did He just put an embryo there without Mary's egg or a created sperm? Tell me if you really know!  
 
A Muslim might argue "Being a father implies having sex", and therfore Allah cannot be the father. (this a very common response from muslims and I know because I have come across it several times, however no assumptions are made that all muslims respond as such thus the catch word "MIGHT").

I will not respond to (1) on (2) surely you would agree that atleast Allah did determine the physical characteristics of Jesus if you do not want to accept some because you said I qoute "...because God shapes everyone according to His will as He pleases." (this is not saying that Jesus's physical characteristics are those of Allah please). So (2) can be said not to be questionable. With (3) again since we did not have genetic science then and we do not have the blood of Mary and Jesus we may not be able to say for sure that Mary contributed in determining Jesus's genetic make up but we can say for sure that Allah did (please note this not saying that Jesus had Allah's genes, it is just to say that Allah determined which genes Jesus got), considering your statement as I have qouted above.

You wrote "I have shown it. You assume two postulates ( numbers 2 and 3 above) which are assumed truths. They are nothing but conjecture and the Qur'an has mentioned that Christians follow nothing but conjecture." You will agree with me that there is no conjecture or assumed truth as your statement above acknowledges that God (Allah) shapes everyone as He pleases according to His will.

Surely they lie when they declare: "Allah has begotten children". - - Sura 37:151

Where is the "lie" in our reasoning above?  

your response: "I have shown it. You assume two postulates...."

Let us go back to the begining of this post remember we have establish 3 things as facts (1) Allah caused Mary to be pregnant (2) Allah determined the physical characteristic of Jesus (3) Allah determined the genetic make up of Jesus.  We know for a fact that all men from Adam that have walked the face of the earth with the exception of Jesus were created.  Based on the 3 facts stated we can then say that Allah was directly instrumental in the bringing into being of Jesus and Mary was the channel used.  We can therefore also say that Jesus was begotten (please look up the meaning of this word first).  Christains believe (1) God caused Mary to be pregnant, (2) God determined the physical characteristic of Jesus, (3) God determined the genetic make up of Jesus, and Jesus is the begotten Son of God.  So the question still remains where is the lie?


Allah made Mary pregnant. What more would Allah have to do if he wanted a legitimate son?  
 
You wrote "Excuse me, but you assume God wants a son in the first place. That may be a whole other discussion, but certainly has nothing to do with a proposed inconsistency in the Qur'an. The Qur'an never says that God ever wanted a son (metaphorical or literal - whatever a "literal" son of God may mean - a'uuthu billah! I seek shelter in God from such blasphemous thoughts!)."

I qoute from you "...because God shapes everyone according to His will as He pleases." It is a historical fact that Jesus was male so I do not know what you are trying to say.  And as you said the quran never said that God wanted a Son niether does the bible.

Allah forbid that He Himself should beget a son! When He decrees a thing He need only say "Be," and it is. -- Sura 19:35  
 
So is Allah unable to beget a son by saying "Be"?  
 
Your response:  Your wrong assumption here is that saying "Be" is the same as begetting a son. It has been shown that that is not the case. Do you doubt that? How can you doubt it, if you do? Or should I say that because God commanded all of us to "Be", we then are the children of God? Do we then worship ourselves? (I am mentioning that because that is really the point of trying to proven God has a son, isn't it? You want Muslims to become deluded and worship a creature like you do. The Qur'an is right when it says that the Jews and Christians would never be satisfied unless we follow their form of religion. Well, may God protect us from that.) Why can't Christians just understand that "son of God" and "children of God" are not literal terms, but literary devices and expressions?  

I like your argument on this point because it only goes to precisely say what christains have always said.  I qoute you "Your wrong assumption here is that saying "Be" is the same as begetting a son."  You are absolutely right the two are not the same "be" will be creating into being (Adam and creation of the world) and that is the point!!  So Allah goes through a process which we have established the 3 facts as stated earlier right?  You went on and I qoute "It has been shown that that is not the case. Do you doubt that? How can you doubt it, if you do? Or should I say that because God commanded all of us to "Be", we then are the children of God? Do we then worship ourselves?"  Firstly let me correct a misconception you have.  Christians DO NOT WORSHIP JESUS we worship God!!! We worship God through Jesus that is to say Jesus is our intercessor!  For us as christrians yes we are children of God if you are a saved believer of God, you get salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ who intercedes for us with the Father.  So it is not the command that will make us children of God as you erronously tried to potray. Let us look at this in veiw of all that has been said so far.  So you see I am glad you agree with me that "be" and begotten Son are not the same.  Allah would have still acheived His will if He said "be" instead of the process with Mary, but the process with Mary was used which shows a significant and special relationship between Jesus and Allah.  And it is that process that clearly makes Jesus a begotten one.

You wrote "You seem to agree with the Qur'an's description of God's capability to create Jesus(pbuh)."  I believe can can create anything on earth an in the heavens and universe.  God is not limited as you are making Him to be He has decided to send Jesus and you deny Jesus because you believe can not do it or because you say He can not have a Son.  As you asked what proof do I have that God had a Son, I tell you it is my bible (we will go to it in a minute).  I also ask you what proof do you have the God did not have a Son.  Your wrote "I mean even the Qur'an says that if the Qur'an wasn't from God there would be dicrepencies."  This is a different topic and you would be surprised with the amount of discrepences.

You wrote "I mean, if it is true that God did not have a son, then what is the convincing proof you would require?"  You phrase your question as a fact the Jesus is not the Son of at God in any sense.  Now except you have had a direct communication with God and He personally told you that I do not know how you came to this conclusion. You do not have any evidence that Jesus is not the Son of God, if you did or any other person did believe me there would not be christianity today!!

You wrote "What is it that would convince you that God did not beget a son? What's the proof that he had a son?"

These two questions are very impotant and I will show you from the bible your answers (note I am not using any other book or some logic only the word of God)

PROPHESY
It is a biblical fact that  the coming of the messiah (Jesus) was prophesied. Isaiah 42:3-7, Isaiah 53:13 Then Isaiah said, “Listen well, you royal family of David! You aren’t satisfied to exhaust my patience. You exhaust the patience of God as well! 14 All right then, the Lord himself will choose the sign. Look! The virgin will conceive a child! She will give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel—‘God is with us.’ 15 By the time this child is old enough to eat curds and honey, he will know enough to choose what is right and reject what is wrong.

Isaiah 53:4 Yet it was our weaknesses he carried; it was our sorrows that weighed him down. And we thought his troubles were a punishment from God for his own sins! 5 But he was wounded and crushed for our sins. He was beaten that we might have peace. He was whipped, and we were healed! 6 All of us have strayed away like sheep. We have left God’s paths to follow our own. Yet the Lord laid on him the guilt and sins of us all.

John 1:1 In the beginning the Word already existed. He was with God, and he was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 He created everything there is. Nothing exists that he didn’t make. 4 Life itself was in him, and this life gives light to everyone. 5 The light shines through the darkness, and the darkness can never extinguish it.
6 God sent John the Baptist 7 to tell everyone about the light so that everyone might believe because of his testimony. 8 John himself was not the light; he was only a witness to the light. 9 The one who is the true light, who gives light to everyone, was going to come into the world.
10 But although the world was made through him, the world didn’t recognize him when he came. 11 Even in his own land and among his own people, he was not accepted. 12 But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. 13 They are reborn! This is not a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan—this rebirth comes from God.
14 So the Word became human and lived here on earth among us. He was full of unfailing love and faithfulness. And we have seen his glory, the glory of the only Son of the Father.
15 John pointed him out to the people. He shouted to the crowds, “This is the one I was talking about when I said, ‘Someone is coming who is far greater than I am, for he existed long before I did.’ ”
16 We have all benefited from the rich blessings he brought to us—one gracious blessing after another. 17 For the law was given through Moses; God’s unfailing love and faithfulness came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. But his only Son, who is himself God, is near to the Father’s heart; he has told us about him.


Will continue.......

Offline Eskimo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Location: North Pole
  • Posts: 249
    • View Profile
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #62 on: March 19, 2004, 01:28:54 PM »
Mallam..sorry ba
you see we are just wasting our time on a fruitless discussion. we are not getting anywhere so may be we should just forget everything.

Wish you a nice navigation in K_online. ;)
color=blue]NOBODY is PERFECT and I am NOBODY.[/color]

Anonymous

  • Guest
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #63 on: March 20, 2004, 01:28:26 AM »
Amen

Anonymous

  • Guest
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #64 on: March 20, 2004, 02:02:41 AM »
Quote
Mallam..sorry ba
you see we are just wasting our time on a fruitless discussion. we are not getting anywhere so may be we should just forget everything.

Wish you a nice navigation in K_online. ;)

Don't stop what you are doing, this is really educating alot
of people here. This is the type of thread that should go on
and on and on and on untill all your points are satisfied.

Pls dont stop, this is getting more interesting

Offline Barde

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Location: Niger Delta
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #65 on: March 21, 2004, 11:39:38 AM »
Quote

Assalamualaikum

I am really sorry for exhausting you guys, as you know Mallam is always saying that am dogding his questions, that was why i took his points one after the other. I will not repeat that inshaAllah. You guys should accept my apologies.
im

Offline Barde

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Location: Niger Delta
  • Posts: 148
    • View Profile
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #66 on: March 21, 2004, 08:03:04 PM »
Quote
Barde

I must emphasise that chriatians believe in only one God and I have been saying that all along so I am not sure if you understand that. ?I see you also questioned how Jesus could have human attributes (hunger etc), remember in one of my postings I made it clear that one of the things about christianity is that we can not say a situation is too much for us therefore we sin. ?Jesus has been through everything we as humans go through so we can not make such escuses. ?You ask me for my definition of justice. ?Again you are just runing away from the issue, the point is not that of definitions but an attribute. ?Anyway to answer that question this way, what is the difference between a shape and (say) a triangle? ?Can you see why it is important that an attribute (such as Justice) is mentioned clearly? A shape can be anything and is not definite a triangle is a definite shape. ?So maybe you would like to answer my question on the matter now. ?In another part you asked if my God was a jew God or praying God to this maybe you should educate yourself on the origin of the term christian. ?I am indeed sorry for misqouing you on the issue of prophets it was not delibrate, but still for followers (disciples) of Mohammed (SAW) does it not worry you and raise questions of their holiness considering this act and the fact that it is accepted by a Holy Allah? please let me know your answer and if it does not worry you please also tell why (you have so far not commented on this act).

Maybe in aswering your questions on the relationship between God and Jesus, we should also look at what the quran says a bit more closely and try and follow your logic because it is obvious your questions are based on the quran(?) position which in all truth is unclear

The Qur'an says Jesus is not the son of Allah. Yet it is also entirely consistent with the Qur'an to consider Allah the Father of Jesus for the following reasons:

1) Allah caused Mary to become pregnant with Jesus
2) Allah determined some of the physical characteristics of Jesus
3) All of the genetic characteristics of Jesus were determined by just two parties: Allah and Mary.


Muslims might argue "Being a father implies having sex", and therfore Allah cannot be the father. Not necessarily so. Modern science has brought us "test tube babies", which are conceived without any sex. There is nothing to support the idea that if Allah wants a baby, he must resort to normal human means to have one.

Again, a Muslim may say that if we are going to call Jesus the son of Allah, then we should say that Adam is the son of Allah too. No, we cannot compare Adam to Jesus this way because Adam came into existence without a mother.

Let us first review some background material. What does the Qur'an say about how Mary became pregnant with Jesus? In Surah 3:45-49 we read:


The angels said to Mary: "Allah bids you rejoice in a word from him. His name is the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary. He shall be noble in this world and the hereafter, and shall be favored by Allah. He shall preach to men in his cradle and the prime of manhood, and shall lead a righteous life."
"Lord", she said, "how can I bear a child when no man has touched me?"
He replied: "Such is the will of Allah. He creates whom He will. When He decrees a thing He need only say: 'Be' and it is. He will instruct him in the Scriptures and in wisdom, in the Torah and in the Gospel, and send him forth as an apostle to the Israelites..."
From this passage we can draw the conclusions presented above:
1) Allah caused Mary to become pregnant with Jesus. Muslims infer from this passage and others like it that Jesus was conceived while Mary was a virgin by the word spoken by Allah, and not by a man.

Not that this in itself implies that Allah is the father. When a doctor causes a woman to become pregnant by artificial insemination, he is not considered the father. Hence the following two points:

2) Allah determined some of the physical characteristics of Jesus.
When Allah said "Be", did he have something specific in mind? Certainly! Allah had a very detailed plan in mind for Jesus. In particular, Allah decided that Jesus would be male. Normally, it is the sperm that decides the gender of the baby. Here Allah made the choice instead.

3) All of the genetic characteristics of Jesus were determined by precisely two parties: Allah and Mary.
This is clear because they were the only two parties involved. So we conclude that Allah and Mary are the only two possible candidates for the title "Father".

Hence it appears legitimate to call Allah the father of Jesus, at least in a figurative sense. Therefore we are at a loss to explain why the Qur'an spends so much space arguing against this. Certainly more and better justification is needed than what appears in these passages:


Surely they lie when they declare: "Allah has begotten children".
-- Sura 37:151
Where is the "lie" in our reasoning above?


They say: "Allah has begotten a Son". Glory be to Him! His is what the heavens and the earth contain; all things are obedient to Him. Creator of the heavens and the earth! When he decrees a thing, He need only say "Be", and it is.
-- Sura 2:116
Allah made Mary pregnant. What more would Allah have to do if he wanted a legitimate son?



Allah forbid that He Himself should beget a son! When He decrees a thing He need only say "Be," and it is. -- Sura 19:35
So is Allah unable to beget a son by saying "Be"?


Say: "If the Lord of Mercy had a son, I would be the first to worship him". -- Sura 43:82
 

I can assure you that even by logic it is easier to understand the bible's position of Jesus than it is to understand the quran's. ?May be you would like to take a shot at answering the questions I have raised vis-a-viz the christian position

Mallam

Allah (SWT) created Jesus through mary as a  prove to mankind that he is capable of doing everything according to his will, see qur'an 19:21. If i may ask you, for how long did Jesus stay in Marys womb? is it for nine months? No! It is said that Jibril had merely breathed in the sleeve of Marys shirt, and thus she conceived. Allah says " Verily, the likeness of Isa ( Jesus) before Allah is the likeness of Adam. He created him from dust, then said to him "Be" and he was". (qur'an 3:59)
Allah (SWT) created Adam without a father and a mother, he created Jesus without father but with a mother, and then he created us through both perents, did you follow the sequence? it is stated in the holy qur'an " There is none in the heavens and the earth but comes unto the most Gracious (Allah) as a slave" (Qur'an 19:93) also in qur'an 19:30 it is stated that " He Isa (jesus) said "verily i am a slave from Allah, He has given me the scripture and made me a prophet".(19:30). Jesus Prayed and worship God Like the muslims do, see the  book of mathew 26:39. In the book of Mark Jesus says "A prophet is honored every where except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family" ( Mark 6:4). I want you to understand that muslims are not like the christians whereby they go contrary to what their Holy book is telling them.

It should be noted that nowhere in the gospels does Jesus actually call himself "son of God", instead, he is recorded to have repeatedly called himself "Son of Man" (example Luke 9:22) innumerable times. And in Luke 4:41, he actually rejected being called "Son of God": And demons also came out of many, crying, You are the Son of God! But he rebuked them, and would not allow them to speak, because they knew that he was the christ".

Infact there are numerous places in the old testament where the title of Son of God has been given to others.God called Israel(prohet Jacob) His "Son" when He instructed Prophet Moses to go to Pheraoh in Exodus 4:22-23, "And you shall say to Pharaoh,thus says the Lord, "Israel is my first-born son, and i say you, 'Let my son go that he may serve me' ". See also Genesis 6:2, Hosea 1:10, Psalms 89:27.

It is obvious that the expression "Son of God" merely meant Servant of God, one who, because of his faithful service, was close and dear to God. Unfortunately christians are misusing the term, the use of the term "Son of God" should only be understood from the semitic symbolic sence of a servant of God. In the four Gospels, Jesus is recorded as saying: " Blessed are the peace-makers; they will be called sons of God" (Mathew 5:9). I want mallam to please tell me what this verse implies, maybe am misunderstanding the meaning.

You said "Allah caused Mary to become pregnant with jesus" do you think it was the effort of your father that resulted in your giving birth? if you think so, you are only deceiving yourself, Allah not only caused the creation of Jesus but everything.

"Allah determined the physical characteristics of Jesus", I want Mallam to tell us who determined his Physical characteristics. Does that means we are all sons of God? since he is the one that determines everything.

"All of the genetic characteristics of Jesus were detemined by just two parties: Allah and Mary". Again Mallam should tell us whether a Father has every right to determine his sons genes. According to the bible, Mary was known to be the wife of Joseph (Luke 2:4-5), what then is the relationship between Jesus and Joseph? if Joseph did not impregnate Mary, then definately he (Joseph) is the step Father of jesus (wa'iyyazhubillah).

....................................................................................

Mallam, if i have gotten you right, christians believe and worship only one God. God the Father, God the son (jesus), and God the holy spirit, these three constitute the one and only God.  please correct me, if am not correct. Now,come to think of it, when Jesus was being baptised, the holy spirit descended on him and a voice from heaven said you are my beloved son (Luke 3:21-22) if you read and understand these verses, you will definately know that they are not one, Jesus was there physically, Holy spirit descended on him, and a voice was heard from heaven not from jesus mouth. i want you tell us considering these verses how did they become one and coequal?

As stated in the bible (luke 2:5-7), Mary gave birth to Jesus(God in flesh) her first child and the bible also says in the book of Genesis that God created Everything, If Mallam and the rest of the christians are thinking logically, they wouldn't have considered Jesus as thier God or part of God, come to think of it, God created Mary and entered her womb, he also created the angel that announced his name. Mallam is always talking about logic,does that sound logic to you?

In the book of Acts 2:22, Paul was preaching he says and i quote" People of israel, Listen! God publically endorsed Jesus of Nazareth by doing wonderful miracles, wonders and signs through him, as you well know". My question here is, how can God endorsed another God?

It is stated in Mathew 26:39 and i quote " And he went a little farther, and fell on his face and prayed, saying ' o my father, if it be possible, let this cup of suffering be taken away from me. Yet i want your will not mine' " see also 14:23.
We note here that the person speaking is unaware of Allah's will and realises the fact that he is a servant of Allah,He alone can cause the change. If Jesus is God or part of God, why did he pray? infact, prayer is always from a submitting, needy and dependent one for the mercy of almighty Allah as mentioned in surah 35:15 and i quote " o mankind! it is you who stand in need of Allah but Allah is rich (free from all wants and needs), worthy of all praise" (qur'an 35:15). if i can remain you, you said the God you are worshipping is independent of his creation, i can only agree with you if you tell me that your God also depend on another God.

I asked you the meaning of justice and you refused to answer well, this is the defination of justice according to the concise oxford Dictionary, Just behaviour or treatment.> the quality of being just. and Allah says and i quote " That day mankind will proceed in scattered groups that they may shown their deeds. So whosoever does good equal to the weight of an atom shall see it. And whosoever does evil equal to the weight of an atom shall see it. (Qur'an 100:6-8) and He (Allah)
says earlier that he will inspire that day (100:5). So i don't know what you were there trying to imply by saying Allah is not just.

You also asked if am not worried by the holiness of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) disciples. How many times will i repeat myself that Islam was not revealed in a day, let me give you an example, if a non muslim is willing to convert to islam, all the five pillars of islam will not be enforced upon him at once, it has to be gradually depending upon his faith. So that was what happened to the desciples of Prophet Muhammad (SAW).

I don't know the origin of christianity, Mallam should please educate me but i want you to realise something, this is what you said "Note that it was on the seventh day, this is the day that is considered the sabbath day by the Jews, on this day they do not work but is a day set aside to rest and worship and praise God" . And the verse says "It is a permanent sign of my covenant with them. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but rested on the seventh day and was refreshed" (Exodus 31:17). Considering the fact that am still learning, i have no alternative than to ask such a question (is your God a jew?), you said the sabbath is set aside by the Jews, and the verse is saying God rested on the seventh day, i have to ask, since what the verse is saying and the answer you gave me did not correspond. I need some more explanations so that i will not misunderstand the verse anymore.

You also said why did i brought the issue of the Top 100 men, well, am just wondering why God in flesh could be rated against somebody who is 100 percent human and still the human being came first. Mind you does who did the comparison worship that same God.

You did not answer my question on the fig tree, let me repeat myself, how could God created the whole world and yet he went to a fruitless tree looking for something to eat? not knowing that there won't be any fruit on the tree and he angrily cursed the tree, was he pretending?

Today, there are modern scholars in christianity who hold that Jesus christ was not God. In 1997, a group of seven biblical scholars, including leading anglican theologians and other New testament scholars, published a book called The Myth of God incarnate, which caused a great uproar in the General Synod of the church of England. In the preface, the editor, John Hick, Wrote the following:" The writers of this book are convinced that another major theological development is called for in this last part of the twentieth centuary. The need arises from growing knowledge of christian origins, and involves a recognition that Jesus was (as he is represented in Acts 2:21) ' a man approved by God' for a special role within the divine purpose, and that the later conception of him as God incarnate, the second of the Holy trinity living a human life, is a mythological or poetic way of expressing his significance for us" There is brought agreement among New Testament scholars that the historical Jesus did not make claim to deity (as proved earlier) that the later christians thought was to make for him; he did not understand himself to be God, or God son, incarnate (in flesh). The late Archbishop Micheal Ramsey, who was himself a New testament scholar, wrote that "Jesus did not claim deity for himself." His contemporary, the New Testament scholar C.F.D.Moule, said "Any case for a 'high' Christology that dependent on the authenticity of the alleged claims of Jesus about himself, especially in the fourth Gospel, would indeed be precarious".

In a major study of the origins of the doctrine of the incarnation, James Dunn, who affirms orthodox christology, concludes that "there was no real evidence in the earlist Jesus tradition of what could fairly be called a consciousness of divinity." Again, Brian Hebblethwaite, a staunch upholder of the traditional Nicene-Calceldonian Christology, acknowledges that "it is no longer possible to defend the divity of Jesus by reference to the claims of Jesus."

Most famous among the church of England bishops, who doubt Jesus divinity, is the outspoken Reverend Professor David Jenkins, the Bishop of Durham in England, who openly states that Jesus was not God.

References:

1. Christology in the making, page 60.
2. Jesusvand the living past, page 39.
3. The Economist, April 1, 1989, vol.311,no.7596, page 19.
4. The Incarnation, page 74.
5. The Metaphor of God Incarnate, pages 27-8
6. The Myth of God incarnate.

 I think it will be good if i can reproduce an article which appeared in The Daily News some years ago, it clearly indicates the extent to which there are doubts among the clergy regarding Jesus divinity.

"London: More than half of England's Anglican bishops say Christians are not obliged to believe that Jesus Christ was God, according to a survey published today.
The poll of 31 of England's 39 bishops shows that many of them think that Christ's miracles, the virgin birth and the resurrection might not have happened exactly as described in the bible. Only 11 of the bishops insisted that Christians must regard Christ as both God and man, while 19 said it was sufficient to regard Jesus as "God's supreme agent". One declined to give a definate opinion."
The poll was conducted by London weekend Television's weekly religion show, Credo. Daily News 25/06/84

I know Mallam will say that Muslim's scholars also differs, you tell me if at all there is any muslim who does not believe in the five pillars of islam.
im

Anonymous

  • Guest
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #67 on: March 22, 2004, 10:25:55 PM »
Barde

welcome back.  i still maintain that you are avoiding answering any of my questions for reasons I do not know but can only speculate that you do not have any answers!!  I will repeat the questions if you want better still may be you should go through my postings, there are lots of questions I have asked and you have not answered any!!  Lets go to your issues arising from my last post.  I have noted that you did not look at my response to Eskimo's posting which also had to do with some of the questions you have raised again, so I may refer you to it time to time if you do not mind.

You wrote "Allah (SWT) created Jesus through mary as a  prove to mankind that he is capable of doing everything according to his will, see qur'an 19:21. If i may ask you, for how long did Jesus stay in Marys womb? is it for nine months? No! It is said that Jibril had merely breathed in the sleeve of Marys shirt, and thus she conceived. Allah says " Verily, the likeness of Isa ( Jesus) before Allah is the likeness of Adam. He created him from dust, then said to him "Be" and he was". (qur'an 3:59)"  The bible did not indicate how long Mary was pregnant I do not know why you are trying to give an impression that I or the bible said anything to that effect.  You describe how Mary conceived Jesus, but the question still remains why not "Be" as in the case of Adam, but go through Mary?  You see it is significant, because everything God does is with a purpose.  God has the might and power to bring Jesus into being by saying "be" yet He chose to bring Jesus into being through Mary.  I put it to you that it so happened so that God could show man the existence of a special relationship with Jesus (please also see my reply to Eskimo).  My question to you is if you believe that God can create anything as He wills, why do you say He can not decide to have a Son? (and please not in human terms)

You wrote "Allah (SWT) created Adam without a father and a mother, he created Jesus without father but with a mother, and then he created us through both perents, did you follow the sequence? it is stated in the holy qur'an " There is none in the heavens and the earth but comes unto the most Gracious (Allah) as a slave" (Qur'an 19:93) also in qur'an 19:30 it is stated that " He Isa (jesus) said "verily i am a slave from Allah, He has given me the scripture and made me a prophet".(19:30). Jesus Prayed and worship God Like the muslims do, see the  book of mathew 26:39. In the book of Mark Jesus says "A prophet is honored every where except in his own hometown and among his relatives and his own family" ( Mark 6:4). I want you to understand that muslims are not like the christians whereby they go contrary to what their Holy book is telling them."  You make me laugh at your childishness Mat. 26:39 states Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.”  And you conclude Jesus was praying like muslims without even refering to the tens of hundrends of times Jesus prayed without His face to the ground.  You may be able to tell us that He washed first then faced a particular direction and squatted to the ground!!!  He fell to the ground my friend NOT SQUATTED!!!! there is a big difference! Mark 6:4 reads Jesus said to them, “Only in his hometown, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor.”  Jesus was only responding to their rejection with the proverb that a prophet is not appreciated at home. He was like an Old Testament prophet (compare v. 15; 8:28) whose words were often rejected and who was dishonored most by those who knew Him best (compare. 6:17-29). So no my friend Jesus was not refering to Himself as a prophet!!  He was only likening his rejection with the rejection of prophets before Him!

You wrote: It should be noted that nowhere in the gospels does Jesus actually call himself "son of God", instead, he is recorded to have repeatedly called himself "Son of Man" (example Luke 9:22) innumerable times. And in Luke 4:41, he actually rejected being called "Son of God": And demons also came out of many, crying, You are the Son of God! But he rebuked them, and would not allow them to speak, because they knew that he was the christ". You may be right that Jesus did not use the words as you put them (I suppose the way you put them posses a grammatical).  But the bible is full of statements by Jesus where He refered to God as His Father, so except if you tell me that that does not mean He was saying He is the Son of God then I suppose He has indeed called Himself Son of God.  Here are a few verses of statements by Jesus Mat 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of MY FATHER (emphasis mine) who is in heaven.  Mat 10:32-33 “Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before MY FATHER (my emphasis) in heaven.  33 But whoever disowns me before men, I will disown him before MY FATHER (my emphasis) in heaven. Mat 11:27 “All things have been committed to me by MY FATHER (emphasis mine). No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

It is against a background of pain, hurt, sorrow, fear, confusion, torment etc that God’s provision comes, the encouragement of a name for the incarnate Lord Jesus Christ—Son of Man. Above all it stresses that God knows just what it is like to be human. The title Son of God describes Christ’s deity, glory, and infinity, then Son of Man highlights His humanity, humility, and finiteness. As Son of God Jesus is omnipotent and self-sufficient, as Son of Man He is pushed around and dependent. The Son of Man got wet when it rained. To bring it closer to home, if the Son of Man were here today, there would be times when His car wouldn’t start! And we should be struck by the fact that this is the term that Jesus used for Himself more than any other—more than eighty times. He wanted us to know that this characterization would be especially helpful for us.
It is this title of Son of Man, then, that should be especially dear to us in our humanity. Its content is taught both by specific uses of the phrase and by passages where Jesus’ humanity is highlighted. When we are tired, we are to look to the Son of Man who got tired, too (see Mt. 8:20). When rejected, we are to remember that it was the Son of Man who was rejected (Mk. 8:31). At those times when we feel as if heaven is far away, we are to recall that the Son of Man has opened the way into it (Jn 1:51), since to take humans to the presence of God He has to be human, too. If we long to know God better, we are to look to the Son of Man, who reveals Him, remembering that God is just like the Son of Man. Should death touch our lives, our consolation is the Son of Man who suffered, hurt, cried over Lazarus, and died (Heb. 2:14ff). We are commanded to go to God at the time of temptation through the one who was also tempted, yet never conceded (Heb. 2:18; 4:15). Should we ever feel that life has no point, we must recall that with the Son of Man we have a glorious future (Dan. 7:13; Heb. 2:9–10).
Therefore for your information, Son of Man  was used in the New Testament  forty-three times as a distinctive title of the Saviour. In the Old Testament it is used only in Ps. 80:17 and Dan. 7:13 with this application. It denotes the true humanity of our Lord. He had a true body (Heb. 2:14; Luke 24:39) and a rational soul. He was perfect man.

With respect to Luke 4:41 what was happening was that the news about Jesus’ authority over sickness spread quickly so that same night people began coming to Him for healing. They came when the sun was setting, when the Sabbath Day was ending. It would have been unlawful to carry the sick before then. As the demons came out of many people, they were shouting, You are the Son of God! The reason for Jesus’ rebuke was that He did not come to earth so that demons could acknowledge Him as the Christ, that is, the Messiah. Instead, He came to be acknowledged by people.

You wrote:  You said "Allah caused Mary to become pregnant with jesus" do you think it was the effort of your father that resulted in your giving birth? if you think so, you are only deceiving yourself, Allah not only caused the creation of Jesus but everything.  
 
"Allah determined the physical characteristics of Jesus", I want Mallam to tell us who determined his Physical characteristics. Does that means we are all sons of God? since he is the one that determines everything.
 
"All of the genetic characteristics of Jesus were detemined by just two parties: Allah and Mary". Again Mallam should tell us whether a Father has every right to determine his sons genes. According to the bible, Mary was known to be the wife of Joseph (Luke 2:4-5), what then is the relationship between Jesus and Joseph? if Joseph did not impregnate Mary, then definately he (Joseph) is the step Father of jesus (wa'iyyazhubillah).


You must be living on another planet or you are full of ignorance!!  We know that it is a fact that one way to concieve requires effort from the parents!! What are you saying!!  It is also a fact that a child inherits characteristics from his/her parents! Do you know anything about genetics?!! if not I suggest you do some reading!! Science has reached a point that even when a sperm fertilizies an egg can be controlled by man.  The colour of the eye, colour of hair etc can be determined by man and even manipulated.  Deformity in feotoeses can be detected at about 12 weeks, these are all advances in science. Body parts are begining to be grown in labs.  there is every likelyhood that humans will be created in labs one day. So yes parents determine genetic makeup of their offsprings!!!  However, it is acknowledged in the bible that only God gives life!! The bible has been aware of mans ability from the begining of the world.  That is why the bible warns us of knowlegde that can kill us!! (If you want references please let me know I will give you!!).  The bible has been aware of mans capability that is why present day scientific efforts do not worry true christains, because God is in control and only He can give life!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

You wrote: Infact there are numerous places in the old testament where the title of Son of God has been given to others.God called Israel(prohet Jacob) His "Son" when He instructed Prophet Moses to go to Pheraoh in Exodus 4:22-23, "And you shall say to Pharaoh,thus says the Lord, "Israel is my first-born son, and i say you, 'Let my son go that he may serve me' ". See also Genesis 6:2, Hosea 1:10, Psalms 89:27.
 
It is obvious that the expression "Son of God" merely meant Servant of God, one who, because of his faithful service, was close and dear to God. Unfortunately christians are misusing the term, the use of the term "Son of God" should only be understood from the semitic symbolic sence of a servant of God. In the four Gospels, Jesus is recorded as saying: " Blessed are the peace-makers; they will be called sons of God" (Mathew 5:9). I want mallam to please tell me what this verse implies, maybe am misunderstanding the meaning.

You are right there has been several usage of the term son(s) of God in the bible, however the usage has been different in order to convey meaning


I. In the Old Testament

a. Individuals of the class ‘god’

‘Son’ (Heb. be?n, Aram. bar) is commonly used in Semitic languages to denote membership of a class, as ‘son of Israel’ for ‘Israelite’, ‘son of might’ for ‘valorous’. ‘Son of God’ in Heb. means ‘god’ or ‘god-like’ rather than ‘son of (the) God (Yahweh)‘. In Jb. 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Ps. 29:1; 89:6, the ‘sons of God’ form Yahweh’s heavenly train or subordinates, though lxx Job calls them angeloi of God (cf. Dt. 32:8 lxx, whence rsv ‘according to the number of the sons of God’ supported by a Heb. Dead Sea Scroll text, 4Q Dtq, against MT ‘sons of Israel’). Similarly the ‘son of the gods’ in Dn. 3:25 is called the ‘angel of the Jews’ God’ in 3:28.
In Gn. 6:1-2 the ‘sons of God’ are contrasted with human women in a way which seems to preclude their identification with the line of Cain. Many commentators treat these verses as pagan myth, hardly altered from a polytheistic background. Others argue that the phrase denotes demon-possessed men or fallen angels (cf. 1 Pet. 3:19-20; Jude 6). A more attractive interpretation falls into the next category.

b. Men who by divine appointment exercise God’s prerogative of judgment

In Ex. 21:6; 22:8-9, 28, ‘God’ (Heb. ?elo?h??m) may stand for ‘judges’ (so av, rvmg.), his deputies, exercising power of life and death (cf. 2 Ch. 19:6), as may be the case in Ps. 82:6.
Kings were titled ‘son of god X’ in the OT world, and in Israel in sense c. below. M. G. Kline has proposed that this usage be seen in Gn. 6:1-2, referring to rulers of the remote antediluvian era (WTJ 24, 1962, pp. 187-204).

c. Those who are related to Yahweh by covenant

Sonship of God chiefly denotes relationship by *covenant and is used (i) of Israel as a whole (‘Israel is my first-born son’, Ex. 4:22; cf. Ho. 11:1); (ii) of the Israelites generally (‘You are the sons of the Lord your God’, Dt. 14:1; cf. Ho. 1:10—of an individual Israelite in later Judaism, e.g. Wisdom 2:18); (iii) of the Davidic king, Yahweh’s anointed, who will rule his people for ever (‘You are my Son; today I have begotten you’, Ps. 2:7). This relationship is not biological, though metaphors of birth, infancy and growth are sometimes used (Ho. 11:1; Dt. 32:6; Is. 1:2; 63:8) and conformity to the Father’s character expected. But basically sonship is established by God through his covenant. Dt. 14:1-2 well illustrates the covenantal context of Israel’s sonship. The Messiah-King, though called (like Israel with whom he is so closely identified) ‘my first-born’ (Ps. 89:27) and ‘begotten’ of Yahweh (Ps. 2:7), no less owes his status to God’s covenant with him (Ps. 89:28; 2 Sa. 23:5). The terms of this covenant (‘I will be his father, and he shall be my son’, 2 Sa. 7:14) are parallel to the terms of the covenant with Israel (‘I . . . will be their God, and they shall be my people’, Je. 31:33).  d.w.b.r. a.r.m.

II. In the New Testament

Both expressions, ‘sons (Gk. hyioi) of God’ and ‘children (Gk. tekna) of God’, occur in the NT, but without obvious distinction in meaning. The NT usage is based on one or other of the OT uses of ‘sons of God’.
a. Lk. 20:36
This reference, ‘they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection’, reflects the use of ‘sons of God’ as in Pss. 29:1; 89:6; Dt. 32:8 (lxx), where it means non-terrestrial beings in the presence of God, in contrast to ‘the sons of this age’. That the elect should have this destiny before them was already the belief of many Jews, but it was to acquire a more distinctive meaning in the light of Christ’s resurrection.

b. Those who act like God

Lk. 6:35, ‘you will be sons of the Most High’, means little more than ‘you will be like God’. ‘Son of. . .‘ is an idiom for ‘having the characteristics of’ or ‘doing the work of’ (cf. the parabolic description of the apprentice son in Jn. 5:19), and the ‘sons of God’ in Mt. 5:9 and 5:45 belong to this category. Ps. 82:6, discussed by Jesus in Jn. 10:34-36, may be an OT example of this sense, judges being men who exercise God’s power of life and death. Paul’s simple metaphor in Eph. 5:1, ‘be imitators of God, as beloved children’, reflects this idiom, though it also presupposes a deeper relation between the ‘children’ and their Father.

c. The sonship of Israel

The collective sonship of Israel (‘Israel is my firstborn son’, Ex. 4:22) is prominent in the thought of Paul (e.g. Rom. 9:4, ‘they are Israelites, and to them belong the sonship. . .‘) and elsewhere in the NT. Sometimes this sonship is seen as represented and fulfilled in Jesus Christ, as in Mt. 2:15 and in the narratives of his baptism and temptation. However, even without a direct connection with Christ’s sonship, ‘sons (or children) of God’ recalls the OT application of the term to God’s covenant people who are to reflect his holiness. If Eph. 5:1 is little more than metaphorical, Phil. 2:15, ‘children of God without blemish in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation’, is based on the Song of Moses (Dt. 32:5-6, 18-20), and 2 Cor. 6:18 combines a number of covenantal passages (e.g. Is. 43:6; 2 Sa. 7:14). ‘The children of God who are scattered abroad’ in Jn. 11:52 are the lost sheep of the house of Israel (cf. 10:16). The idea is derived from Ezk. 34 and 37, though whether the reference in John is to Jewish believers only or all believers is a matter of debate.
The sonship of God’s people is, however, linked with the special sonship of Jesus in Heb. 2:10-17. (A different word, paidia, is used for ‘children’ in the quotation in vv. 13-14.) Here, Jesus’ sonship is that conferred on the Messiah-King, David’s son (Ps. 2:7; 2 Sa. 7:14, quoted in Heb. 1:5, which itself is parallel to, and perhaps epitomizes, Israel’s covenantal sonship. The ‘many sons’ are the ‘descendants of Abraham’ and ‘children’ by election even before Christ’s incarnation. But they are brought ‘to glory’ through the Son sharing in their ‘flesh and blood’ in which he secured their salvation by his death.

d. Paul in Romans and Galatians

Though Paul acknowledges that ‘the sonship’ belongs to Israelites (Rom. 9:4), he insists that not all the offspring of Israel are ‘Israel’ in the true sense, and that therefore it is not ‘the children of the flesh’ but ‘the children of the promise’ who are ‘children of God’ and true partakers of the privilege (Rom. 9:6ff.).
By this test, Gentiles as well as Jews are included, ‘for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith’ (Gal. 3:26). This doctrine of sonship is expounded in Rom. 8, where Paul invokes the idea of hyiothesia, usually rendered *’adoption’. But, though the term was used in contemporary Gk. to denote legal adoption of children (see MM), it is not clear how far this enters Paul’s thought. Despite the contrast with a former status of slavery, both in Rom. 8:15 (where rsv renders hyiothesia as ‘sonship’) and Gal. 4:5, at least in the latter passage hyiothesia seems to correspond to the entering of a child on his inheritance at ‘the date set by the father’. The primary model is the sovereign act of God’s grace when he declared Israel, and then the Davidic king, to be his son. Neither Israel’s sonship (Ex. 4:22) nor that of Messiah (Pss. 2:7; 89:27) was inconsistent with the recipient’s being called God’s ‘first-born’, and the hyiothesia of the believer is practically identical with the notion of spiritual generation. In Rom. 8:23 the hyiothesia is yet to come. Though again associated with the notion of ‘redemption’ (from slavery?), the positive act is really ‘the revealing of the sons of God’, showing them to be what they already are. This sonship is indissolubly linked with the sonship of Christ (Rom. 8:17), is attested and controlled by the Spirit (8:14, 16), and its ultimate nature disclosed when Christ’s sonship is disclosed and when God’s elect are seen as ‘conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the first-born among many brethren’ (8:19, 29).

e. John

John’s concept of ‘children of God’ differs only in emphasis from that of Paul, although he employs simply tekna, and reserves hyios exclusively for Christ. Westcott held that John deliberately avoided hyios, ‘the name of definite dignity and privilege’, to describe the relation of Christians to God, since ‘he regards their position not as the result of an ‘adoption’ (hyiothesia), but as the result of a new life which advances from the vital germ to full maturity’. However, Westcott overstated the case. While John undoubtedly exploits the imagery of natural birth and consequent relationship (e.g. 1 Jn. 3:9), he is also aware of the OT background where Israel became God’s son by election and calling. We have already referred to Jn. 11:52. In Jn. 1:12 the ‘children of God’ may be interpreted as believing Israelites before the Word became flesh. In any case, they are described not only as being ‘born of God’ but also as becoming ‘children of God’ by having that status conferred on them: ‘to them gave he the right to become children of God’ (rv). Again in 1 Jn. 3 and 4 believers are described as ‘born of God’, with special reference to their reproducing God’s character of love and righteousness; nevertheless the title ‘children of God’ is also a privilege bestowed through God’s ‘calling’ (3:1). Though it ‘may be seen’ now who are children of God by their behaviour (3:10), their final form ‘does not yet appear’, but will be manifested in the day when the Son of God is manifested and they fully reflect the image of their Father (3:2); which image is in the Son.
Bibliography. B. F. Westcott, The Epistles of St. John, 1883, pp. 94, 119ff.; Arndt, s.v. hyios, teknon; A. Richardson, An Introduction to the Theology of the New Testament, 1958, pp. 147ff., 263ff.; J. D. G. Dunn, Jesusand the Spirit, 1975, pp. 21-40.  d.w.b.r.
The New Bible Dictionary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.) 1962.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will be responding to the second part of your posting in my next posting

Anonymous

  • Guest
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #68 on: March 23, 2004, 02:16:03 AM »
As there is no chance that anyone contributing these huge tracts to this topic is going to convince anyone else of anything what is the point of this discussion. I thought we were going to have a debate about the moral instruction to be found in Chritianity and Islam not this stuff.

Offline Maqari

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Join Date: Jan 2004
  • Location: Brooklyn NY/Belleville Paris
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #69 on: March 23, 2004, 07:14:24 PM »
discussion of religious origins and justification of relgious methods are the life's most nutritious-less food, so guys please let the past rest in its shallow grave, and quit causing traffic on the highways of information, at first i thought the thread was amusing then it became a bit annoying and now its just downright dumb,sort of like waiting for messiah to be risen ...................!!!!!  

Anonymous

  • Guest
Re: Chriatian Muslim Dialogue
« Reply #70 on: March 28, 2004, 10:30:08 PM »
I do agree with some of you who think that this string is getting very cumbersome and maybe we should either start a new one or end it.

But for those of you who think such discussion is of no use I do not agree with you.  There is disrespect of both christainity and islam by followers of both religions.  It is difficult if not impossible to have objective discussions!! There are misconceptions and misinterpretations of one over the other, this has created a belittling of one over the other, and thus the violence we see (that is not to say this thread was out to solve all that problem).  The rise in tempers etc is not a problem it is part of human nature prevalent in any debate.  But it is important that misconceptions are cleared or discussed for  through these discussions mutual respect is borne.  I must appologise if I have offended some people (muslims) here.  I have presented my point/position on in as respecful way as I know what was presented was basically questions and issues which arise and probably are on the mind of some muslims.  In the same way some of the questions raised on christainity may also be on the minds of some christains.  So it is hoped that the thread or discussion did proof informative even if not conclusive, and if that has been acheieved it is something.  This discussion was not aimed at wining converts or demeaning islam, but to put us in a situation where we study and question what we are told.  This is particularly instructed of us christains for we are warned of false prophets infact we are warned that even the devil can recite the bible, it is not how well a person recites verses in a bible that makes them a christain.  TSalvation (ie aceptance of christ) we know as christains is not the responsibility of man but of God through His grace, however every believer is expected to spread the gospel and God convicts the heart.  I shall be sinning to condem/judge any muslim, for only God is the judge and a man can be saved even with his last breath, just as we were shown in the bible during the cruxificion of christ when He was cruxicified with two criminals one of whom believed in christ at the last moment and gained salvation.  So may the Lord grant us His grace that we may seek Him with all our heart in all truth!

 


Powered by EzPortal