They say that Allah hath begotten a son

David,

"BMZSP : Is there anything in the Arabic that might be interpreted as God installing Jesus as his heir or successor in governing the earth?"

No, David. There is nothing. If there were, George, Ali Sina and Ibn Warraq would not be quiet.

BR

BMZ

Dear Amlhabibi,

From you: "Allah breathed of His spirit into us all at our creation hence His spirit resides in us also."

That is the best description of Allah's/God's Spirit which is within Allah/God, not a separate Spirit of a kind floating around.

Salaam Alaikum & BR

BMZ 

George,

My response, to your comments, is shown in "Blue". Please don't use "Blue" in your response.

"You are saying that Ali has mistranslated Surah 10:68.  If so, would his commentary be invalidated along with his translation?"

I did not say that Ali mistranslated. His commentaries are explanations. Commentaries are not the words of God. I can have my comments, he can have his comments and you can have yours. The most important point is that the message of God remains unchanged.

Ali doesn't have commentary for Surah 10:68, but he does for the following two Surahs:

It is not necessary to have commentary for every verse. You asked me to translate 10:68 which I did and added some commentary.

Ali's commentary is this:

"Begetting a son is a physical act depending on the needs of men's animal nature. God Most High is independent of all needs, and it is derogatory to Him to attribute such an act to Him. It is merely a relic of pagan and anthropomorphic materialist superstitions."

Ali is right. I don't see anything wrong with that. Could not the Greek translators pick some better and proper word instead of that improper word "begat or begotten"? The modern translators of the Bible, changed the Holy Ghost to the Holy Spirit in the recent times, didn't they? Do you have a copy of The Holy Scriptures according to the Masoretic text? If you do have, then please compare with the following series of begetting:

Shem begets Arpachshad, Arpachshad begets Shelah, Shelah begets Eber, Eber begets Peleg, Peleg begets Reu, Reu begets Serug, Serug begets Nahor, Nahor begets Terah, Terah begets Abram, Nahor, and Haran.

Were all, named above, acquired figuratively or metaphorically or through their women?

It seems to me that Ali's commentary would be the same whether he mistranslated the word incorrectly or not.  Further than that Ali should know how to translate the Arabic.  How could he do such a poor job on one word?  And not only him but other Muslim scholars as well?

Ali and other translators have already done a marvellous job of translating Qur'aan to help non-Arabs to know the message. They knew Arabic well. Fortunately the Greeks did not translate the Qur'aan and I thank God for it!

However, some other translators seem to agree with you:

Thanks for the compliment.

BTW:  I stopped at the public library today and read Surah 10:68 in two other translations.  One had "begotten" and one had "taken."  Neither one had any commentary.

The translators' use of the word "begotten" does not confirm that Jesus was begotten by God in any way or that God begat Jesus.

You said:  The Greek was translated into English and look! what did you get? You got "Beget, Begat and begotten".

Christians have no problem with the translation and Muslim scholars should have no problem either.

It is not that I have a problem or the translator has a problem. It is also not important that Christians have no problem with that, hence Muslim scholars should also have no problem with that.

The biggest problem is that God has a big problem with that. God Almighty in Qur'aan wishes to remain the Most High and tells us not to use any such word.

Just as you say that "begotten" is an incorrect translation in the Qur'an, Christian scholars say that the more accurate translation of monogenes is "one and only" or "unique."

Christian scholars are discussing and analysing Jesus, a non-Greek character in Greek. Even Jesus did not know that he would be discussed and explained by way of monogenes and logos. He did not talk of any such things, it's just people's own analysis and opinions. Those analyses and commentaries from countless people changed Jesus into something that he WAS NOT! 

You said:  So, God is asking that who says that God has taken a son or God has got a son? This got has nothing to do with begot.

Is this speaking of a biological son or a metaphorical son?  Because you know that YHVH claims to have sons in the figurative/relationalship sense.

I am told by God in Qur'aan that God has not taken or begotten any son, God does not have a son and that God does not like that such words be uttered. God just does not like that word "son" to be associated with or such a word to be ascribed to God, be it biological or metaphorical or figurative.

Jesus taught us to pray, "Our Father�."  Being a prophet of God he understood that we did not become biological sons of God; he meant it in terms of relationship.  If Jesus understood this, then why didn't Allah?

I don't really know who started this term "Father" in ancient times. So far, I have not met even one Jew who has called God his father or Father lovingly. Jesus definitely knew that he was NOT a son of God and God knew that Jesus never declared that God was Jesus's Father or his father. That's why, in Qur'aan, God is particularly concerned and determined to refute and declare that term, created by men, null and void. 

That is the way God wants it and that is the way the Muslims believe and say, "YES! Lord!, We hear and obey!"

Can't do anything about that, George!  I hear, I read, I understand and I obey the Lord God Almighty.

Peace and lots of that.