Evidence of prophecy

[sarah_]

Quote

It's good that you have brought this up.. Begotten and monogenes .. "only begotten" translates the Greek word monogenes. This word is usually translated into English as "only," "one and only," and "only begotten." It's the "only begotten" translation that gives the wrong impression that Jesus was begotten in the human sense of procreation.. When it is very clear that no one ever thought it meant this.. As that would not have been construed from the term "monogenes". You could ask yourself why the Quran admonishes Christians of the time for believing Jesus was " begotten" when they certainly would not have inferred that idea from the scriptures. They would have inferred from the term monogenes the uniqueness of Jesus in that their was no one like unto Him.
In early Christian Literature, monogenes has two primary definitions. The first definition is "pertaining to being the only one of its kind within a specific relationship." You are correct in your information about is its meaning in Hebrews 11:17 when the writer refers to Isaac as Abraham's "only begotten son". Abraham had more than one son, but Isaac was the only son he had by Sarah and the only son of the covenant. So it is the uniqueness of Isaac among the other sons that allows for the use of monogenes in that context.


The second definition is "pertaining to being the only one of its kind or class, unique in kind." This is the meaning that is implied in John, which was primarily concerned with demonstrating that Jesus is the Son of God (John 20:31), and he uses monogenes to highlight Jesus as uniquely God's Son—sharing the same divine nature as God—as opposed to believers who are God's sons and daughters by adoption. Jesus is God’s “one and only” Son.

You are correct when you say Jesus was unique in many ways.. Where you are maybe in error is that you don't ask the important question... Why? Why was only Jesus out of all the prophets unique? Could it be He was the promised Messiah? The one sent to redeem mankind and correct the fall of Adam.. So making us once more right before God.. I believe He was... Jesus was everything He said He was. Never a lie was found on His lips, do you think He would have accepted worship as God and let people believe He shared a unique relationship with God if it were not so?

Again the word “begotten” is wrong and blasphemous and it is not to be used.
The word “begotten” for ancient Greek is “GENNAO”, and the correct translation of the word “MONOGENES” is “unique”. The word “begotten” has been removed from Christian scholars of highest eminence, as it had been detected as a mistranslated word. Other more honest translations of the Bible have removed this word along with some other serious errors found in the King James Version!
And I’ve explained earlier why is Jesus referred to “unique” or “one kind” in this verse. It’s because he was created miraculously without a father.
Jesus did not accept worship as God. To this question and some other questions you have made will continue in another thread.

[pandora]

Quote

Again the word “begotten” is wrong and blasphemous and it is not to be used.
The word “begotten” for ancient Greek is “GENNAO”, and the correct translation of the word “MONOGENES” is “unique”. The word “begotten” has been removed from Christian scholars of highest eminence, as it had been detected as a mistranslated word. Other more honest translations of the Bible have removed this word along with some other serious errors found in the King James Version!
And I’ve explained earlier why is Jesus referred to “unique” or “one kind” in this verse. It’s because he was created miraculously without a father.
Jesus did not accept worship as God. To this question and some other questions you have made will continue in another thread.

Sarah, Did you even read what I said? It is only muslims when using the term begotten in relation to the birth of Jesus who are committing blasphemy. Because it is the Quran and not the Bible that interprets "begotten" to imply the act of procreation in human terms. Christians have always believed it refers to the uniqueness of Jesus. As in "monogenes". Gennao refers to production through birth when referred to the woman. As the mans role was not involved in the creation of Jesus then only this meaning is applicable.

Honestly, a tip for you. Do not use the King James Version..at least not the original version if you have to use it at all choose the revised version. King James no doubt meant well, but there are many textual errors.. Hence why it's been revised :) you should cross reference with other translations if you wish to compare. I doubt you would find any great degree of difference in the central message. Which is what Gods word is about.. The message.. And that is something that cannot be corrupted by the hands of men. I know that because God makes that claim.

You say the reason Jesus was unique was being created miraculously without a father. Really? Is that the only reason you can see? You totally miss the point, and I can understand why because the Quran does not explain it to you. The point is WHY? Mankind had been witness to Gods greatness through miracles for a millennium before the Birth of Jesus. There was no need for the Messiah to be born this way just to offer another miracle to mankind. The reason is deeper than that. God could have created Jesus in the way of Adam.. With no mother or father!! Would that have seemed a greater miracle if a miracle was needed? But the need for a human mother was required.

You are asking the wrong questions.. As muslims you are so intent on tearing down the previous scriptures because they do not agree with the Quran.. For the only way the Quran can stand by its claims is if the previous scriptures were in error. As the Quran claims the words of God cannot be changed whilst at the same time acknowledging the previous scriptures as from God then claiming they were changed by men.. It seemingly contradicts itself. You cannot prove the previous scriptures were ever changed.. So I really don't know where that leaves you. You get tied up with the minutiae of textual Biblical errors and minor details whilst choosing to ignore the bigger picture. Don't forget the devil is in the detail.

If I were to ask you what is the main aim and objective of Satan? What would your answer be?

Peace.

[Burninglight]

Quote

Sarah, Did you even read what I said? It is only muslims when using the term begotten in relation to the birth of Jesus who are committing blasphemy. Because it is the Quran and not the Bible that interprets "begotten" to imply the act of procreation in human terms. Christians have always believed it refers to the uniqueness of Jesus. As in "monogenes". Gennao refers to production through birth when referred to the woman. As the mans role was not involved in the creation of Jesus then only this meaning is applicable.

Honestly, a tip for you. Do not use the King James Version..at least not the original version if you have to use it at all choose the revised version. King James no doubt meant well, but there are many textual errors.. Hence why it's been revised :) you should cross reference with other translations if you wish to compare. I doubt you would find any great degree of difference in the central message. Which is what Gods word is about.. The message.. And that is something that cannot be corrupted by the hands of men. I know that because God makes that claim.

You say the reason Jesus was unique was being created miraculously without a father. Really? Is that the only reason you can see? You totally miss the point, and I can understand why because the Quran does not explain it to you. The point is WHY? Mankind had been witness to Gods greatness through miracles for a millennium before the Birth of Jesus. There was no need for the Messiah to be born this way just to offer another miracle to mankind. The reason is deeper than that. God could have created Jesus in the way of Adam.. With no mother or father!! Would that have seemed a greater miracle if a miracle was needed? But the need for a human mother was required.

You are asking the wrong questions.. As muslims you are so intent on tearing down the previous scriptures because they do not agree with the Quran.. For the only way the Quran can stand by its claims is if the previous scriptures were in error. As the Quran claims the words of God cannot be changed whilst at the same time acknowledging the previous scriptures as from God then claiming they were changed by men.. It seemingly contradicts itself. You cannot prove the previous scriptures were ever changed.. So I really don't know where that leaves you. You get tied up with the minutiae of textual Biblical errors and minor details whilst choosing to ignore the bigger picture. Don't forget the devil is in the detail.

If I were to ask you what is the main aim and objective of Satan? What would your answer be?

Peace.

This is an excellent post. It is interesting to note that no Muslim on the forum have been able to gainsay that the virgin birth of Jesus was borrowed from our NT Bible by Muhammad. He probably learned of it through oral tradition. There is no other place that story was recorded ever before Muhammad's Quran came on the seen. The irony is he rejected the reason for Jesus virgin birth, but accepted Jesus was born of a virgin. That is why Muslim don't have a reason for why Jesus had to have been born of a virgin.

Muhammad could have done more damage to Christianity if he had denied the virgin birth instead of the death and resurrection of Jesus, because if Jesus wasn't virgin born, his death would've been useless. Muhammad didn't understand Christianity and neither did his god. These misconceptions are, IMHO, apparent discrepancies in Muhammad's Quran.

I will say, however, even though Muhammad was unread, he was very intelligent and creative. Had he dug or research a little further he would have own that Christians never considered Allah (God the father) the third of three nor did Christians ever believe Mary was God which would have to have made her one of the three Allah said say not three about.

Too many misconception for a supposedly all knowing god. My comments here prove to me that Muhammad's Quran is contrived and what further lends to it is how Allah abrogates verses to bring one better or like. That is ridiculous. God gets it right the first time, and He never has to change or modify it. That is what humans do. Man does that he has to edit his work, because he doesn't get it right a first. I see the work of a man in the Quran.

God bless you