Does Allah Almighty have a son?
From http://www.f24.parsimony.net/forum54389/messages/8038.htm
Brother Yishan Jufu's answers are in red.
Written by yishanjufu at 01 Sep 2001 20:57:27:
From: http://www.f24.parsimony.net/forum54389/messages/8035.htm
A reproduction of Quennel Gale's article by someone going by the nickanme ","!!
------
QUE- 3. GOD DOESN'T HAVE A SON BECAUSE HE HAS NO CONSORT.
RESPONSE: This is a strawman argument. The definition of this argument is someone that attacks an argument which is different from, and usually weaker than, the opposition's best argument.
The Bible doesn't mention that God has a consort either. Therefore Muslims who use this argument to try and convert people have invented a situation based on false assumptions and then proceeded to disprove this argument that was never mentioned. The question of God having a son is answered and shown in both the Old and New Testament:
Yi Shan- Not only is que ignorant, he also lies about what muslims use and his abuse of the term "to convert"! Muslims do not go after people to convert them, this is done by missionaries like the queBAAL and his churches!
We shall see the fallacy and the ignorant remarks made by que against the "figurative" term used in the quran! They do not know anything about the quran and its style, so they resort to such silly accusations and claims!
6:100-102 Yet they make the Jinns equals with Allah, though Allah did create the Jinns; and they falsely, having no knowledge, attribute to Him sons and daughters. Praise and glory be to Him! (For He is) above what they attribute to Him! To Him is due the primal origin of the heavens and the earth: how can He have a son when He hath no consort? He created all things, and He hath full knowledge of all things. That is Allah, your Lord! There is no god but He, the Creator of all things; then worship ye Him; and He hath power to dispose of all affairs.
72:1-5 Say: It has been revealed to me that a company of Jinns listened (to the Qur-an). They said, ' We have really heard a wonderful Recital! 'It gives guidance to the Right, and we have believed therein: we shall not join (in worship) any (gods) with our Lord. 'And exalted is the Majesty of our Lord: He has taken neither a wife nor a son. 'There were some foolish ones among us, who used to utter extravagant lies against Allah; 'But we do think that no man or spirit should say aught that is untrue against Allah.
Verse 6:101 does not reject the notion of God having a son "because He had not consort"; only a dumb person would take it so literally, and that person is queBAAL! The verse ridicules those who claim any person is "a son of God", because God only Has servants, not sons or daughters! We are all His creation and we are all His servants; therefore God answers the fallacies of those who call themselves "the sons of God" or call Jesus [pbuh] as the son of God. And it should also suffice to prove that the critic did not give the whole story about jesus and his 'sonship' to God; he did not quote the following NT verses, simply because they would embarrass him!
Luk 1:35 And2532 the angel32 answered611 and said2036 unto her846, The Holy40 Ghost4151 shall come1904 upon1909 thee4571, and2532 the power1411 of the Highest5310 shall overshadow1982 thee4671: therefore1352 also2532 that holy thing40 which shall be born1080 of1537 thee4675 shall be called2564 the Son5207 of God2316.
COME = 1904 - Greek: eperchomai ep-er'-khom-ahee
from 1909 and 2064; to supervene, i.e. arrive, occur, impend, attack, (figuratively)
influence:--come (in, upon).
UPON = 1909 - Greek: epi ep-ee'
a primary preposition; properly, meaning superimposition (of time, place, order, etc.), as
a relation of distribution (with the genitive case), i.e. 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).
POWER = 1411 - Greek: dunamis doo'-nam-is
from 1410; force (literally or figuratively); specially, miraculous power (usually by
implication, a miracle itself):--ability, abundance, meaning, might(-ily, -y, -y deed),
(worker of) miracle(-s), power, strength, violence, mighty (wonderful) work.
HIGHEST = 5310 - Greek: hupsistos hoop'-sis-tos
superlative from the base of 5311; highest, i.e. (masculine singular) the Supreme (God),
or (neuter plural) the heavens:--most high, highest.
OVERSHADOW = 1982 - Greek: episkiazo ep-ee-skee-ad'-zo
from 1909 and a derivative of 4639; to cast a shade upon, i.e. (by analogy) to envelop in
a haze of brilliancy; figuratively, to invest with preternatural influence:--overshadow.
Yi Shan- What the queBAAL forgot to quote is his own downfall!! If one was to construct a literal translation of the verse (Luke 1:35), one would wonder if the literal meanings alongside those of John 3:16 (His only BEGOTTEN son) would not give some a feeling of some physical encounter?!! Take Strong's Greek numbers for "come upon" and "the power of the highest shall overshadow thee" and BINGO, you got a 'masculine singular' casting a shade upon/envelopin in a haze of brillinacy; or comin "IN"; or coming "ABOVE" or "BESIDE" or "THROUGH"!!! And the result BINGO an "only begotten son"!!! Do you need more absurdity that this to indicate some sort of maternal relationship?! Especially that we know the critic has lied about the use of the term 'son of God' and has tried to play a strawman by claiming that "sons of God" are not the same as "son of God"!! But isn't "sons" a plural of "son"?! What more can we expect from a musguided and misguiding trinitarian?!!
Que-
For thus says the LORD,
Who created the heavens,
Who is God,
Who formed the earth and made it,
WHO HAS ESTABLISHED IT,
Who did not create it in vain,
Who formed it to be inhabited:
"I am the LORD, and there is no other. Isaiah 45:18
"Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Who has gathered up the wind in the hollow of his hands? Who has wrapped up the waters in his cloak? WHO HAS ESTABLISHED ALL THE ENDS OF THE EARTH? What is his name, AND THE NAME OF HIS SON? Tell me if you know!" Proverbs 30:4
From Isaiah we see that God established the earth and from Proverbs we see that God has a son. Notice he didn't say SONS which can't be used as a defense by Muslims to claim that Jesus was one of the many sons. Jesus himself further authenticates this:
For God so loved
the world that He gave HIS ONLY begotten Son, that WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM should not
perish but have everlasting life. For
God did not send HIS SON into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through
Him might be saved. John 3:16-17
yi shan- We now see that the critic has lied in a very blatant,
unshameful manner by claiming that "sons of God" cannot be used!! More
importantly, do john 3:16-17 represent the words of jesus himself?! If the answer is
"yes", then why did he use "He gave His only BEGOTTEN son" and not
"He sent me", and why did he not say "whoever believes in ME" instead
of "whoever believes in him"?! Questions needing answers!!!
But we shall counter the fallacy of the quebaal with biblical quotes from the OT with both
"son" and "sons"!!
Psalm 2:7 I will declare5608 the decree2706: the LORD3068 hath said559 unto me, Thou art my Son1121; this day3117 have I begotten3205 thee. (the decree: or, for a decree)
1121 - Hebrew
SON = ben bane
from 1129; a son (as a builder of the family name), in the widest sense (of literal and
figurative relationship, including grandson, subject, nation, quality or condition, etc.,
(like 1, 251, etc.)):--+ afflicted, age, (Ahoh-) (Ammon-) (Hachmon-) (Lev-)ite,
(anoint-)ed one, appointed to, (+) arrow, (Assyr-) (Babylon-) (Egypt-) (Grec-)ian, one
born, bough, branch, breed, + (young) bullock, + (young) calf, X came up in, child, colt,
X common, X corn, daughter, X of first, + firstborn, foal, + very fruitful, + postage, X
in, + kid, + lamb, (+) man, meet, + mighty, + nephew, old, (+) people, + rebel, + robber,
X servant born, X soldier, son, + spark, + steward, + stranger, X surely, them of, +
tumultuous one, + valiant(-est), whelp, worthy, young (one), youth.
from :WEN
"Psa 2:7 - The decree - The will and appointment of God concerning this. My sin -
Which tho' it may in some sort be said to, or of David, yet much more properly belongs to
Christ, who is commonly known by this title both in the Old and New Testament, ..."
yi shan- We see that DAVID is called "THE SON OF GOD" and "TODAY HE IS BEGOTTEN BY GOD"!! The trinitarians try to interpolate the bible by claiming that the psalm is referring to jesus!!! How else can they hide their dilemmas?!! I have even quoted part of the commentary from WEN, in which interpolation is evident!!!! They try to play down the real meanings and over-blow the interpolated ones!!
Exo 4:22 And thou shalt say559 unto Pharaoh6547, Thus saith559 the LORD3068,
Israel3478 is my son1121, even my firstborn1060:
Exo 4:23 And I say559 unto thee, Let my son1121 go7971, that he may serve5647 me: and if
thou refuse3985 to let him go7971, behold, I will slay2026 thy son1121, even thy
firstborn1060.
Psa 82:6 I have said559, Ye are gods430; and all of you are children1121 of the most
High5945.
Psa 82:7 But403 ye shall die4191 like men120, and fall5307 like one259 of the princes8269.
yi shan- The above verses are also indicative of the use of the term "son of God" by others in the bible! Jesus used (according to the NT) the Psalm 82:6 to counter the jews' accusations against him for calling himself "son of God" (according to your own NT!!), so this shows us that jesus did not think that he was something special or God, did he o' deceptive ones?!!!
que- We see that Jesus says to believe on him and you will have everlasting life.
“But Jesus answered them, My father has been working until now, and I have
been working. Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill him because he not only broke
the Sabbath but also said that God was HIS FATHER, making himself EQUAL WITH GOD.”
John 5:17-18
yi shan- Falsehood!! See above for a refutation of your claims!! The jews wanted him not because he equated himself with God, he refuted them by using the psalm 82:6! Stop lying by using your contradicting NT verses!!
que- Literally, “His own Father”-Greek- patera idion. It is clear that the Jews understood that Jesus was claiming to be God.’” (NKJV, footnote, pg 843, Scoffield, 1989).
yi shan- False again! You better tell page 843 of your Scoffield to check what jesus told the jews from Psalm 82:6!!!!
que- Since Jesus by his own admission, is claming that God is his OWN (note: not metaphorically, the words pateria idion differentiates from metaphorically) Father then based on Judaism at this time, he is claiming to be equal with God. For more information and detail analysis on Jesus claim to deity Please see this Link
yi shan- What link?!! We know that you can play greek and hebrew word games and puzzles, but it just wouldn't work against the tons of evidence against you!! Jesus told you that "he has not ascended to your God and his God", so jesus is not God, unless you want to admit the truth about your false, pagan doctrine of the triplet gods that you worship, mr. 1x1x1=1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
que- CHALLENGE TO MUSLIMS PROMOTING THIS ARGUMENT:In order for Muslims to prove "THE SON OF GOD" fact wrong, they must first show explictedly in the Bible where this criteria takes place. Any Quranic or foreign injunction of this argument misses the point and falls under the logical fallacy of "Begging the Question"
yi shan- Muslims do not need to heed or listen to your ignorant challenges!! Because neither the quran nor muslims build any argument against your "son of God" doctrine based on your misunderstanding of the quranic verses dealing with "consort"!! It is not our fault that you are not intelligent enough to differentiate between a "Statement" and a ridiculing of your doctrines!!!
que- Definition:
The truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises.
Often, the conclusion is simply restated in the premises in a
slightly different form. In more difficult cases, the premise is
a consequence of the conclusion.
Examples:
(i) Since I'm not lying, it follows that I'm telling the truth.
We will use this same example of argument against the Quran.
God doesn't have a son, since the Quran says that he needs of Consort. What the Quran says must be true, since to have a son needs a consort and Allah never lies (Here, we must agree that Allah says you need a consort to have a son to believe that to have a son needs a cosort.
This is a silly assumption which makes no sense due to the fact that Muslims have invented the "consort" argument.
yi shan- You can use all the examples you want, but the fact remains that you are un-educated enough to deal with even your own books, much less the quran!! You tend to continue on lying through your teeth, o' deceptive one!! The quran does not say what you claimed it to say; it says as follows:
6:101 To Him is due the primal origin of the heavens and the earth: how can He have a son when He hath no consort? He created all things, and He hath full knowledge of all things.
72:3 'And exalted is the Majesty of our Lord: He has taken neither a wife nor a son.
The two verses above are very clear in their meaning, only a dumb person can twist their meaning to score an imagined VICTORY against the quran!!! Got it, o' deceptive one?!!
Conclusions: QueBAAL builds his post on strawman assumptions from start to
finish!!!!!!!!
Back to The Muslim-Christian Debates section.