Christians are degrading Islam

BMZ wrote: TO GEORGE  George, That is okay. I did understand you. By the way, what do you think of my suggestion to Annie, in my post at 6:10 am of 4th June 2006, regarding some proposed new words to replace the term "Begoteen"?

You mean this one?

BMZ wrote: Annie, From you: "amah, I have run into the same thing with Muslims that George apparently has.  I don't know where it comes from." Annie, it comes from discussions. It comes when Muslims query on the use of the word "Begotten", which is the past participle of Beget, which in the English language means to procreate, which the Christians cannot explain well themselves. Couldn't there be any better word than that?

I don't think that works.  There are other interpretations of "begat" besides to procreate.  The misunderstanding clearly comes from the Qur'an or interpretations of the Qur'an.  Christians don't have a problem with the term.  If a more accurate interpretation of the Greek word "monogenes" is unique or only then why are most Muslim scholars translating monogenes as "begotten" and why is Allah so upset about it since an all-knowing God knows the meaning of all words in any language?

If Allah knew the correct translation of the word "begotten" shouldn't the following aya:

"They say (the Christians): "Allah hath begotten a son!" Glory be to Him! He is self-sufficient! His are all things in heaven and on earth! No warrant have ye for this!" (Surah 10:68)

Instead be:

 

"They say (the Christians): "Allah has a unique and only son in the figurative sense.  Glory be to Him! He is self-sufficient! His are all things in heaven and on earth! No warrant have ye for this!" (Surah 10:68)

That would have solved the whole "begotten" problem, wouldn't it?  Well, not quite.  We are still left with the words:  He is self-sufficient!  What does the fact that Allah is "self-sufficient" have to do with having a son in the figurative sense?  It sounds like Allah is saying that he doesn't need another God; that he is enough, which true.  Is this another sticky wicket?

BMZ wrote: There is another meaning of the word Beget and that is "give rise to" or "cause". Would you consider these better than using "begotten"?

What is your source for "give rise to" or "cause?"  Provide a link, please.

I think we should leave the translation to those who are experts in the Greek.  As I pointed out to you in another thread a few (most do not) Muslims scholars translate begotten as "taken."  But taken has the same connotation as "begotten."

BMZ wrote: Now, I am not suggesting that God procreated Jesus himself. That is the meaning of the word chosen by Christians. Muslims resent that word "Begotten" in English and write to object.

No, BMZ.  Monogenes does not mean that God procreated Jesus.  You must use a word in context with the rest of the sentence.

In The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia in Five Volumes, 1975, Vol A-C, p. 510, we find:

BEGOTTEN (BEGETTING) Various forms of the roots and "beget," are frequent in the OT both in the literal sense (Deut 23:8) and the metaphorical (Job 38:28; of the deposit of dew). Psalm 2:7 uses the word of God's relationship to the Messianic king.

In the Greek translation of the Old Testament the word "monogenes" is also used for Isaac.  It means "only" or "unique."  In the case of Isaac since Abraham already had a son, Ishmael, it cannot mean that Isaac was Abraham's only child.  It means that Isaac was "only and unique" because it was Isaac that God designated to be the bearer of His covenant.

Muslims have no reason to "resent" anything.  What Muslims should do is understand that monogenes means unique and only son and it has nothing to do with a biological son.

BMZ wrote: So, if I say that God gave rise to Jesus in his virgin mother's womb or God caused Jesus to be born, would you be willing to throw away and discard the word "Begotten"?

Would you be willing to admit that Jesus' "father" is YHVH in terms of relationship and that Jesus taught us to call YHVH "father" assuring that those who believe in Jesus have a father/son/daughter relationship, a personal relationship?

 

Peace

 

BTW:  Do you still go to the cricket matches?

Robertson & Falwell are classic demigogues.  The technique is:

1) Detail a long list of problems, threats and resentments.

2) Convince people that all of these stem from a single root cause.

3) Direct hostility at this target.

Robertson, Falwell, Bush, anti-American Arabs...all share this evil technique as a means to claw their way to power.

Er, hmmmm, I don't judge anyone, it's God's place to do that.  But I wonder if any of you have ever heard what these two gentlemen have to say regarding Catholics and the Catholic Church?  **hint** It ain't pretty.

God's Peace.

Christianity has always been a communal religion. 

Matthew 18:20
For wherever two or three are gathered (drawn together as My followers) in (into) My name, there I AM in the midst of them.

In early Christianity even individual prayer was not encouraged.  One had to pray in commune with other Christians.  Falwell, Robertson and others like them are noted for not submitting to any eccleiastical authority.  They have their own individualized version of Christianity, which is quite unlike the true denominations.

Falwell and Robertson are Christians, but IMHO their individuality is not scripturally sound.  A single person cannot represent the body of Christ.