Question for Muslims on JESUS being Son of YHWH

LittleLambofJesus · #31 4th November 2009, 06:30 PM

Originally Posted by anatolian

? I do believe God did create Jesus by His power. So this question cannot be for me. It is you christians who say that God did not create Jesus but He is God's Himself..

There is a lot of division within Christianity on that.....so don't use such a broad brush there bro

RMDY · #32 5th November 2009, 01:37 AM

Originally Posted by anatolian

? I do believe God did create Jesus by His power. So this question cannot be for me. It is you christians who say that God did not create Jesus but He is God's Himself..

Don't avoid my question. If Jesus did not have an earthly father, then who was his father?

Wicked Willow · #33 5th November 2009, 04:20 AM

Originally Posted by RMDY

Don't avoid my question. If Jesus did not have an earthly father, then who was his father?

To use your analogy:
If the robot did not have an earthly father, then who was his father?
Answer: robots don't have fathers, they have makers. These may take on a paternal role, or even call themselves the robot's "father", but that still doesn't make it more than a gesture.

Back to the original case: if Jesus was indeed virgin-born, then he did not have a father - just as Adam and Eve didn't have any parents, but just a Creator. (Unless, of course, God did indeed impregnate Mary - a possibility that you have discounted yourself.)

benmaarof · #34 5th November 2009, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus

Salam/Shalom/Peace.
I keep hearing Muslims saying that Allah cannot have "partners".
In the NT/NC, YHWH refers to JESUS as His "Beloved Son". How do the Muslims or even the Baha'is interpret this.
Btw, the Jewish/Hebrew/Greek book of Revelation also show JESUS actually proclaiming Himself as the "Son of YHWH".
How do Muslims explain this? Thanks.

Why should we listen to anything by John of Patmos? Who's he for us to base our faith on? Did the past prophets & Jesus prophesied about somebody that fits John of Patmos's description and we should be listening to what he says?
Why should we believe him?

RMDY · #35 5th November 2009, 04:20 PM

Originally Posted by Wicked Willow

To use your analogy:
If the robot did not have an earthly father, then who was his father?
Answer: robots don't have fathers, they have makers. These may take on a paternal role, or even call themselves the robot's "father", but that still doesn't make it more than a gesture.

I disagree. We use the term 'father' for many things. 'Father' of the internet.(Vinton Gray "Vint" Cerf). 'Father' of nucleae bomb (J. Robert Oppenheime)

So what is wrong with saying God is the 'Father' of Jesus?

The scripture said Mary was overshadowed.

"The power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." (Luke 1:35)

I see no suggestion that God had sexual relations with Mary in this passage, especially in the greek lexicon:

"OVERSHADOW"
G1982
ἐπισκιάζω
episkiazō
ep-ee-skee-ad'-zo
From G1909 and a derivative of G4639; to cast a shade upon, that is, (by analogy) to envelop in a haze of brilliancy; figuratively to invest with preternatural influence: - overshadow.

"UPON"
G1909
ἐπί
epi
ep-ee'
A primary preposition properly meaning superimposition (of time, place, order, etc.), as a relation of distribution [with the genitive case], that is, over, upon, etc.; of rest (with the dative case) at, on, etc.; of direction (with the accusative case) towards, upon, etc.: - about (the times), above, after, against, among, as long as (touching), at, beside, X have charge of, (be-, [where-]) fore, in (a place, as much as, the time of, -to), (because) of, (up-) on (behalf of) over, (by, for) the space of, through (-out), (un-) to (-ward), with. In compounds it retains essentially the same import, at, upon, etc. (literally or figuratively).

Wicked Willow · #36 5th November 2009, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by RMDY

I disagree. We use the term 'father' for many things. 'Father' of the internet.(Vinton Gray "Vint" Cerf). 'Father' of nucleae bomb (J. Robert Oppenheime)

You are familiar with the concept of figurative language, aren't you?

So what is wrong with saying God is the 'Father' of Jesus?

There's nothing "wrong" with it. But can't you see that you and the muslims are in fact in complete agreement here? Both of you say that God isn't the biological father of Jesus, but that Jesus was created miraculously - with the "father"-title being figurative rather than literal.
The difference being, of course, that the muslims take this line of thought to its logical conclusion: namely that Jesus is no closer to being the physical, actual son of God than the rest of us, miraculous birth or no.

formy · #37 5th November 2009, 07:19 PM

Originally Posted by RMDY

Don't avoid my question. If Jesus did not have an earthly father, then who was his father?

Just like Adam, he doesn't have a father. Actually Adam's creation is more miraculously then Jesus. Jesus was created inside a woman, Adam was created from water and dust.

RMDY · #38 6th November 2009, 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by Wicked Willow

You are familiar with the concept of figurative language, aren't you?

There's nothing "wrong" with it. But can't you see that you and the muslims are in fact in complete agreement here? Both of you say that God isn't the biological father of Jesus, but that Jesus was created miraculously - with the "father"-title being figurative rather than literal.
The difference being, of course, that the muslims take this line of thought to its logical conclusion: namely that Jesus is no closer to being the physical, actual son of God than the rest of us, miraculous birth or no.

Nope. I believe Jesus father was literally God. It is not figurative, it is literal, and it literally had to happen in order for mankind to be redeemed and reconciled back to God.

Muslims were taught the false belief concerning us: That we believe God had sex with Mary. That is blasphamous. Not only is Muhammad a liar for teaching this about christians, but he slanders us in his 'holy' book by misleading people to believe we teach blasphamies. Not only that, but I showed by the greek context that Jesus was begotten, but not be sexual intercourse, but by the power of God. You and everyone else can argue and complain all you want with as much rhetoric as you can about this, but I am not budging my belief regarding this doctrine.

Jesus is the Son of God, begotten, not by sexual intercourse, but by the Power of God. There is no one like him, not Adam, not Mohammud, or anyone. He is special and is Lord, and one day you and every single person will bow down to Him whether you like it or not.

So hate me all you want for the good news of Jesus Christ. He is righteous, spotless, sinless, King of kings and Lord of lords. He is God, not some milky-toast wimpy weak greasy-nosed roman servant, He is Judge who is sovereign and in control of this world regardless of what people say, and you all will given an account to him one day as your Judge who will pronounce you to Hell because of your unrepentant, stubborn heart, because you refused to listen and believe.

Get this people, even though you don't deserve mercy, he DIED for you to free you from the bondage of sin and be reconciled back to God, taking on all your sins unconditionally even though Jesus didn't deserve it. And by His resurrection he was proclaimed the SOn of God by the power of it, and now that he has accended to heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father, there will be one day he will return to judge the living and the dead.

I am not going to appologize for this message and if I get warned for it, so be it. If I get warned for preaching what the gospel says then so be it.

Jesus is Lord, and loves you, and I pray that He grants many of you repentance and that the Father allows you to come to the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation.

Wicked Willow · #39 7th November 2009, 05:18 AM

Originally Posted by RMDY

Nope. I believe Jesus father was literally God. It is not figurative, it is literal, and it literally had to happen in order for mankind to be redeemed and reconciled back to God.

So, you claim that God is the literal father of Jesus, but you vehemently object to the notion that God actually, literally fathered Jesus.
How do these two fit together?
There's a pretty narrow definition of literal fatherhood, you know? And it involves sexual reproduction. Anything else is just figurative language.

Jesus is the Son of God, begotten, not by sexual intercourse, but by the Power of God.

See, under these circumstances, God is not Jesus's literal father, but just his maker.

So hate me all you want for the good news of Jesus Christ.

Getting melodramatic, are we? *sigh* The good old Christian persecution complex.
Listen, bro: I don't hate you. I'm discussing things with you, and it's got nothing to do with any personal feelings. I don't even know you. So, get it out of your system already, will ya? IF I have any feelings for you at all, it is a sense of amusement.

He is righteous, spotless, sinless, King of kings and Lord of lords. He is God, not some milky-toast wimpy weak greasy-nosed roman servant, <twip>

What did I just say about melodrama? Not that your antics aren't great entertainment, mind you. It's just that they don't add to the discussion of the issue on hand.

<more ranting>

What does any of this have got to do with the issue on hand, namely the question in what way Jesus can be considered the son of God?

I am not going to appologize for this message and if I get warned for it, so be it. If I get warned for preaching what the gospel says then so be it.

What did I just tell you about your absurd persecution complex? Face it: no one's even ASKING you to apologize.

anatolian · #40 7th November 2009, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by RMDY

Don't avoid my question. If Jesus did not have an earthly father, then who was his father?

Jesus has no Father. This is so simple. You, but , give the example of the robot and it's maker as the maker is a kind of it's father metaphorically. In this sense, God is "the father" of all universe not only Adam or Jesus, wrong?