@seun
If this topic has been posted before, please send me the link so I can read it up.

Most Christians would have us believe that God chose their partner for them.

But I ask, can God choose for you? Are you not supposed to "toast" that sista of your choice? In any way, how does God choose? Will you not have a particular sista in mind before praying to God for ratification?

Lovely question.

Anyway, I will make my answer short for now.

The only way I see God choosing a spouse for us is strictly by following his Word which is how we know his will over any situation. He has laid down instructions for us in the bible and a whole lot of things that pertain to life and godliness.

E.g "do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers". With this we can deduce that a christian should not marry an unbeliever. I believe others will have one or two things to chip in.

My two cents: Many chiristians believe that there is one particular person that God created specially for them, who has all the qualities they desire. Apart from this being a fairy tale, it is quite selfish.

It is better to look for someone who is willing to evolve into the person you want them to be than someone who already has them, someone who only exists in fantasy land.

A_K_O:

It is better to look for someone who is willing to evolve into the person you want them to be than someone who already has them, someone who only exists in fantasy land.

This isn't fair. It will be selfish for you to want someone to evolve into who you want them to be and that is unchristainly. Why aren't you willing to evolve into what the other person wants

@Naomijt: Whether you believe that the Christian God chooses or not a spouse for human, so that they ultimately have progeny/Child, who is the spouse of this Christian God, since you believe that He has a son, child, progeny, begotten son?

Omo girl, Yaba will be too small for you, if you sincerely answer this very straight forward question!. I will be on the look out for your response. Anyone can try to answere it, too.

olabowale:

who is the spouse of this Christian God, since you believe that He has a son, child, progeny, begotten son?

Actually, "sonship" in Biblical terms does not project the idea of sex. That concept began with Islam, and nowhere does the Bible teach such an idea. The only fair thing you can do to yourself is to be honest.

When the Bible uses the term "begotten" (or any such akin words as "beget" in speaking of our relationship with God, it is clear that not once did the prophets project the idea of sex and wife. If there is, please find it. If there is none, heal your mindset with simple truths.

naomijt:

This isn't fair. It will be selfish for you to want someone to evolve into who you want them to be and that is unchristainly. Why aren't you willing to evolve into what the other person wants

Well the simple solution is for both people to make themselves adaptable.

A_K_O:

Well the simple solution is for both people to make themselves adaptable.

Precisely my thoughts. In marriage, there's bound to be compromises both ways - the man must 'adjust' as much as he expects the woman to be 'adaptable'.

pilgrim.1:

the man must 'adjust' as much as he expects the woman to be 'adaptable'.

I aint no sexist!!

I didn't mean to sound it so!

When a child is begottened, it means there is sexual intercourse, or at least there are transfers of genes from more than one entity to make this new entity, which is now begottened! I know. I have actual experience. Even Adam and Eve had the same experince.

And we can not even forget the test tube babies have the essence of the "more than one," gene donators. If therefore begotten as to Jesus is not sexual because it does not exist in the Bible like that, then the over shadowingness means nothing. Therefore, we will have to conclude that Jesus, is truly not a son and never can he be a begotten son, since the idea or concept of this does not occur, in the pages of the Bible!

Why then give an affirmative conclusion, as to say that he is a begotten son, when upon the process being tested, since there is no explanation that is reasonable that people are up in arm about a simple logical inquiries about it? Why use a term that you can't give a logical explanation on? Why say something that you do not mean? This is my human thought, and ability, naomijt. We are all humans. God will not give us any burden to bear more than we can definitely handle.

To say that Jesus is anything but human, and when pressed on it, to cry out as if it is not a legitimate concern, is being completely dishonest. Finally, I am not interested in engaging emotionally charged people who will rather not provide decent explanation, but retort to inuendos. Are you there, Queenisha?

Thanks for your concerns. Let me highlight the areas where you constantly miss it all:

olabowale:

When a child is begottened, it means there is sexual intercourse,

Unfortunately, this is where you make the mistake of projecting your own ideas into the teachings of the prophets. I asked for direct references (verses, scriptures, etc) where any of the prophets assumed "sexual intercourse" when speaking about our relationshop with God by the term "begotten". Have you found such a text yet?

Let me enunciate it further: we know that David was a prophet - and it would indeed be a queer Muslim that would deny this. Infact, we know that Muhammad in referring to the same David said that the latter was "the best worshipper". But even David himself used this same expression ("begotten" when speaking about the Messiah in Psalm 2:7:

[list]"I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee"[/list]

Again, in the Psalms we find another yet interesting statement:

[list]"He shall cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation. Also I will make him my firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth." - Psa. 89:26-27[/list]

It doesn't stop there. Go back to Moses - another man that no sincere Muslim would deny as a prophet - and let's see where he also used the term "begat" >>

[list]"Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee" - Deut. 32:18[/list]

The concept of divine sonship expressed with such words as "beget, begat, begotten" was not strange to the prophets. As could be understood from the above, neither the prophets Moses nor David used the term to mean that "there is sexual intercourse" according to your allegation. My question is simple: since both Moses, David and Ethan (Psalm 89) used the term without reference to sexual intercourse, where did you get your own idea that they were speaking about such?

olabowale:

Why then give an affirmative conclusion, as to say that he is a begotten son, when upon the process being tested, since there is no explanation that is reasonable that people are up in arm about a simple logical inquiries about it? Why use a term that you can't give a logical explanation on?

Indeed, I affirm the divine sonship of Jesus Christ - and as can be seen in my explanation and references above, it is quite logical to understand that it did NOT connote the idea of "sexual intercourse", unless you want us to conclude now that Islam has changed and no longer recognise Moses and David as prophets.

olabowale:

To say that Jesus is anything but human, and when pressed on it, to cry out as if it is not a legitimate concern, is being completely dishonest.

Your allegation is not new. Dishonesties aside, is it not queer that you haven't been able to defend your own disingenuous ideas about the concepts being argued - and which have been demonstrated here as used by the prophets without the idea of "sexual intercourse"? Can we ask you to show where the prophets ever used it the way you are unreasonably arguing?

olabowale:

Finally, I am not interested in engaging emotionally charged people who will rather not provide decent explanation, but retort to inuendos.

I doubt that you have been able to provide decent explanations.

Can anyone, in a reasonable manner, show me from the Bible where God says about Jesus, that to beget, as it should be known with the capability of man, involves sexual intercourse, but in the case of Jesus, I, even I your Lord God, beget Jesus, in a more profound and unfamiliar way? It is reasonable for me to accept that God was never seen by any man, because the prophets, the elects of god declared this very idea!


Please somebody should tell me where God says that He changed up the process of what is begotten, when it came to Him and son Jesus, since He, God, never expressed to anybody before that He needed a son! Are the Angels not even more nearer and more in line to being a son, if God were to desire one? Not having a son will diminish His Majesty?


Will having a son, as a progeny not cheapened His Awesomeness? Is there anything similar to God? The people say God has a son have given us an impression that God is limited and not unique in every sense of the word. That is totally wrong. Is God all of a sudden incapable of governance, able to for forgive without any residual effect, incapable of doing all things, without anything from anyone?

Was Jesus not formed, as we see the prophets of old declared about the creation of man, by God Almighty? How do anyone explain the word of Jesus himself, other than being a formed being of God, as we read in Mark 12 Verse 29? I am all ears.

Davidylan, esoo, omo Obanta? Ki de sheee! Omo weee! And there is no better worshipper than Muhammad (AS)! Not even Jesus, the lord of the Christians! Muhammad (AS), only eat when there is food. The rest of the times, he was fasting! He, the nobliest of prophets, (AS), warned the muslims not to copy his style of fasting, because it may be an unattainable condition for the Muslims.


Yet he recommended, or used as a means of explanation, or example, among others, the fast of Prophet David! Is the fasting style of David, the prophet of God not easier than the continued fasting of Prophet Muhammad, (AS), when the time and conditions put him in such situation?

olabowale:

Can anyone, in a reasonable manner, show me from the Bible where God says about Jesus, that to beget, as it should be known with the capability of man, involves sexual intercourse, but in the case of Jesus, I, even I your Lord God, beget Jesus, in a more profound and unfamiliar way? It is reasonable for me to accept that God was never seen by any man, because the prophets, the elects of god declared this very idea!

This makes utterly no sense at all!

You mooted an idea, thus:

When a child is begottened, it means there is sexual intercourse,

Now we are asking you to be reasonable in showing us from the Bible you found the idea as such: have you found it yet?

Turning back to ask anyone to show you your own assumptions where you have not been able to demonstrate it yourself is a wasted argument.

olabowale:

Please somebody should tell me where God says that He changed up the process of what is begotten, when it came to Him and son Jesus, since He, God, never expressed to anybody before that He needed a son!

The assignment was simple: where in the Bible did any one of the prophets speak of "sexual intercourse" when using the word "begotten/beget" in speaking about our relationship with Him?

I gave the examples of Moses, David and Ethan - can you show me where they used it to suggest "sexual intercourse"? I'm still waiting, thank you.

And if they did not, why are you so bent on forcing your own unrealistic allegations upon what the prophets have taught?

olabowale:

Will having a son, as a progeny not cheapened His Awesomeness? Is there anything similar to God? The people say God has a son have given us an impression that God is limited and not unique in every sense of the word. That is totally wrong. Is God all of a sudden incapable of governance, able to for forgive without any residual effect, incapable of doing all things, without anything from anyone?

The question is not able God's governance, or being able to forgive. Rather, you alleged that the Biblical term 'begotten/beget' means there is sexual intercourse (underlined portion is quoting you directly). Have you shown where that idea came from any of the prophet?

Lol. . . don't woosh away from the main course of what you proposed: distractions or diversions are not credible tools of arguement here.

olabowale:

Was Jesus not formed, as we see the prophets of old declared about the creation of man, by God Almighty? How do anyone explain the word of Jesus himself, other than being a formed being of God, as we read in Mark 12 Verse 29? I am all ears.

How does this answer the allegation of your statement about "begotten/beget" as connoting "sexual intercourse" as used by the prophets?

olabowale:

Davidylan, esoo, omo Obanta? Ki de sheee! Omo weee! And there is no better worshipper than Muhammad (AS)!

I tire for you!   Even Muhammad never once made such a statement: yet we know that he clearly stated that David was "the best worshipper!" In your scale of reference, which comes higher: better or best?

olabowale:

Not even Jesus, the lord of the Christians! Muhammad (AS), only eat when there is food. The rest of the times, he was fasting! He, the nobliest of prophets, (AS), warned the muslims not to copy his style of fasting, because it may be an unattainable condition for the Muslims.

Please leave all these tales by moonlight and answer the simple question: where did Moses, David or Ethan describe "begotten/beget" to mean that there is "sexual intercourse"?

olabowale:

Yet he recommended, or used as a means of explanation, or example, among others, the fast of Prophet David! Is the fasting style of David, the prophet of God not easier than the continued fasting of Prophet Muhammad, (AS), when the time and conditions put him in such situation?

All I can say unequivocally is that Muhammad stated clearly that David was "the best worshipper".

Now can we wait to see your reasonable answers to your own assumptions on what the prophets meant by "beget/begotten"?

Anyway, as suggested by tpia, let's get back to the topic: "Does God Really "choose" A Spouse For You?"




@Olabowale, if you'D like to discuss your concerns further, it might be helpful to seek a suitable thread and do so. It is not appropriate to just seek to argue in any thread without minding the topic being discussed. If the initial questions I offered you cannot be answered, nothing else matters at the end of the day - because it only means that you're forcing interpretations into the teachings of the prophets that they never suggested: and as a Muslim, you should know that such an attitude is denounced in Islam!

@Tpia: Before you run to far with the topic, please tell me what is the meaning of beget, apart from sired? I remember as a child when the Christians will say that Mary said that she was overshadowed. Please as a man or woman, get into your private room and think about what it is meant by being overshadowed!

When you say beget and you are now running away from the sexuality intent, i wonder if any really know what beget really means! I beget my sons. InshaAllah, there are still more children to be begottened by me.

Finally, can there be anyone greater than the greatest Prophet, the Lover of the Most Merciful? Muhammad was both a prophet and a messenger. David was a prophet, only! I will like to have a referenced source where it is mentioned by Prophet Muhammad (AS), that Prophet David (AS) was the best of worshippers among mankind, including the generations of Jesus (AS) and that of Muhammad (AS)!

Making a statement to cloud the ignorants that one is making a valid argument, without expecting to be tested, is just not acceptable. Just the same way that I have asked if anyone being called son of God is truly His son, since his mother must therefore have to be at just before pregnancy be a legal wife, to the father of the child! I am the son of my late father, (ra) and no other father for me. I will not claim what is false, even if it looks very attractive.

olabowale:

@Tpia: Before you run to far with the topic, please tell me what is the meaning of beget, apart from sired? I remember as a child when the Christians will say that Mary said that she was overshadowed. Please as a man or woman, get into your private room and think about what it is meant by being overshadowed!

Can you please demonstrate from the Quran that to "overshadow" is the same as to have "sexual intercourse"?

I realize this tired old games people like you play - it is a sign of restlessness and discontent where the sort of allegations you make actually lack substance. This is why no matter how many times you turn and stir, you cannot answer your own allegation that the prophets ever used the terms "beget/begotten" to mean the same thing as "sexual intercourse" - as in the examples I gave of Moses, David and Ethan.

Are you still so restless? The simple thing to do is acknowledge the fact that you are making false accusations - something which your own religion claims to denounce.

Can you rest your heart now and plot your graph back to your Muslim motherboard and let this topic be? Thank you.

olabowale:

I will like to have a referenced source where it is mentioned by Prophet Muhammad (AS), that Prophet David (AS) was the best of worshippers among mankind, including the generations of Jesus (AS) and that of Muhammad (AS)!

Okay, I've offered the answers to that request earlier in the year before my long absence. However, just so there are no guesses still left in your mind, let me offer them as a reminder:

A few references from the "sahih hadiths" (i.e., "hadiths believed to be authentic" where Muhammad is said to have concretely stated these issues about David:

(a) . . . that David's fasting is the best:

[list]". . . The Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him), said: Fast one day and break on the other day. That is known as the fasting of David (peace be upon him) and that is the best fasting." -- Sahih Muslim, Bk. 006, Num. 2587. [/list]

[list]'Abdullah b. 'Amr (Allah be pleased with both of them) reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: With Allah the best fasting is that of David and the best prayer is that of David (peace be upon him) for he slept half of the night and stood for prayer for the third of it and (then) slept the sixth part of it and he observed fast one day and broke on the other. -- Sahih Muslim, Bk. 006, Num. 2595[/list]

[list]". . .Thereupon the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: There is no fasting (better than) the fasting of David which comprises half of the age, fasting a day and not fasting a day. . " -- Sahih Muslim, Bk. 006, Num. 2597[/list]


(b) . . . that David's prayer is the best:

[list]"'Abdullah b. 'Amr (Allah be pleased with both of them) reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: With Allah the best fasting is that of David and the best prayer is that of David. . ." -- Sahih Muslim, Bk. 006, Num. 2595[/list]

[list]". . .and the best prayer in the eye of Allah, the Exalted and Majestic, is that of David" -- Sahih Muslim, Bk. 006, Num. 2596[/list]

[list]"Narrated Abdullah bin 'Amr bin Al-'As: Allah's Apostle told me, "The most beloved prayer to Allah is that of David and the most beloved fasts to Allah are those of David. He used to sleep for half of the night and then pray for one third of the night and again sleep for its sixth part and used to fast on alternate days." -- Sahih Bukhari, Bk. 21, Num. 231[/list]


(c) . . . that David was the best worshipper:

[list]". . .I said: Apostle of Allah, I am capable of doing more than this. He said: Your wife has a right upon you, your visitor has a right upon you, your body has a right upon you; so observe the fast of David, the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him), for he was the best worshipper of Allah. . . ." -- Sahih Muslim, Bk. 006, Num. 2588[/list]


I hope the above help to clear your doubts.

Can we then get back to the topic? Or would you rather convince us you're still restless?

So who can tell me what beget means? Who can tell me that a father begets a son and he did not sleep with his mother? Queenisha, can you try, since there are many begottened children with you? Now tell me what beget means in plain english. Please use example that are familiar with humans. Is there anyway that a male overshadows a female and a baby comes out afterward, except, it is a soffisticated way of saying sex took place when being overshadowed?

Someday, I will overshadow my wife and when a baby comes out, I will argue that there was no sex, even though as the boy may be my spitting image! I wonder anybody will buy that? And all those people who call me their father, did i sire/beget them, in the only way it can truy happen?

Finally there is no overshadow, as a word in Qur'an. I remember the american military evangelitical christian who was foolish enough to demostrate how to overshadow a woman to late Shekh Ahmed Deedat (ra). People can see that all his procedure of overshadow is exactly what is expected in sex. Well, the christian may deny that they do not mean sex, but when they continue to insist that there is someone begets, then that someone must have mounted to be able to beget.

Inshort, if there is no sex, there is no begotten! Any clain therefore of begotten son is a farce. Its raining heavily in New York City, right now. Thats the reality. To then say that it is ocean that has just found its way into the street of Manhattan, will be false. I can see the rain water strands coming from a higher level from from the sky. Reality. You can not be a begotten, except sex s involved.

When the Bible refers to a clan of people as sons of God, we will see that they are just foolishly or zealotly label as such. The same applies to Jesus, in the begottened classification.

Davidylan, Queenisha, am restless. lol. Where are you guys? Warriors, come out to playyee.

olabowale:

So who can tell me what beget means? Who can tell me that a father begets a son and he did not sleep with his mother?

Did the Quran teach that the conception of Jesus involved sexual intercourse? Are you so much at pain to go such length at confusing even what your own Quran does not teach?

olabowale:
Inshort, if there is no sex, there is no begotten!

Did you pay attention at all to the previous examples clearly outlining what Moses, David and Ethan meant in using the terms "beget/begotten"? Where did they use it to mean "sexual intercourse"? Please be as 'honest' as you can be and provide the answer.

I guess admirer of noble person can attach him, as a means of honoring him, with a title of being the child/son of a greater entity. The Yorubas are called Omo Oduduwa. Yet Oduduwa could not have been the only male in the entourage of the people who were the ascentors of the present day Yorubas. We can see how a word could be use to honor, but later generations may actually take it not as honor any longer, but the reality of the matter.

Thats even between humans. Is that a parallel with God? Does God need a child, when he is the Creator of all? When He actually created Adam in a way that He had not done before, even though He was always capable of it, before hand. He also created Eve,by a process that you may say it is human cloning, except that he changed the gender so that they can be sexual partners, in order to bring about the race of mankind.

Finally, the yoruba adage, ti a ba ka eru, inu eru abaje. Could Jesus be anything other than the slave of Allah, even though a great number of humans say he was a son? This is the crock of the matter! Queenisha, Davidylan, where are you guys?

I hope so. Because I am still waiting for Him to send a Perfect one my way because I am not looking

@Olabowale,

Lol, after playing with you, it is obvious you're having difficulty with your own misplaced assertions.

The case is a very simple one - and up until now you have not been able to show very simply that the prophets were speaking of "sexual intercourse" when they used the terms "beget/begotten".

Already, I have repeatedly highlighted the fact that they used the terms to demonstrate the concept of a divine relationship and divine 'sonship' of the Messiah without connoting the idea of sex. Here again (predictably) you kept crying that someone show "explain" what they mean! Person wey no dey hear word will continue to miss simple answers!

olabowale:

I guess admirer of noble person can attach him, as a means of honoring him, with a title of being the child/son of a greater entity.

In the above case, does the "title" connote "sexual intercourse"? And if it does not, does that not negate your assumption of forcing "sex" into everything? Na wah for you!


Anyhow, just a little concrete reminder about the divine relationship where it is clear that "sexual intercourse" was not intended:

[list]"And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn"  --  Exodus 4:22[/list]

That was Moses' declaration to Pharaoh. Did Moses assume your idea of "sexual intercourse" when he declared that Israel was the firstborn of the LORD? Of course not! Such an idea did not once cross the mind of even Pharaoh - because it simply was understood to mean that Israel was in a divine covenant relationship with God. That is why we read in other texts that: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" (Deut. 14:1).

This is why it is important to read contextually before nosing your ignorance.

Cayon:

I hope so. Because I am still waiting for Him to send a Perfect one my way because I am not looking

Honestly speaking, does anyone ever find the perfect one?

@Queenisha: Are you there, honey? How are the begottened children? Now read the below and learn from it:

The case is a very simple one - and up until now you have not been able to show very simply that the prophets were speaking of "sexual intercourse" when they used the terms "beget/begotten".

If there is no sexual intercourse, then the idea of beget/begotten is therefore a fantastic fantasy of lies. A made up concept without any shred of evidence, concrete or leading, except misleading to its probability. A bogus pronouncement should not be left to ride its waves for so long, without expecting a definite challenge.

Already, I have repeatedly highlighted the fact that they used the terms to demonstrate the concept of a divine relationship and divine 'sonship' of the Messiah without connoting the idea of sex. Here again (predictably) you kept crying that someone show "explain" what they mean! Person wey no dey hear word will continue to miss simple answers!

Whats devine in a relationship and sonship that is shrouded in blatant lie? A Phulani or Phular friend of mine, from Mauritania always joke with me that we, he and I, being black men are from Fir'awn of Egypt. I always deny it and argue with him that he, a Phular may be, but I am a Yoruba man, the remoteness that I am related to Fir'awn bloodline is not clear or does not exist.


His response, always is that we are from Adam and Fir'awn was also from Adam (AS). He is right, except that the reality is that Adam (AS) is the Root and Trunk of the tree of Mankind. I as a Yoruba man belong to a twig from that tree, but on a different subbranch, if not a major branch, but definitely different from what this Mauritania friend came from and definitely, different from what Fir'awn of Egypt, the good, the bad and the ugly of them came from.

My point is this, relationship and or sonship that is mislabeled or misdefined, begs reality and the honesty of the matter. The dishonesty among the Christians is so profound that they boldly move ahead to claim that Jesus is God Almighty Himself.


While at the same time they ignore Jesus declarations, which are contrary to this claim! Jesus in the pages of the Bible escoriated a woman, saying to this woman, right there on the spot, "Why call me (Jesus) good? The Only One who is good is God!" Jesus also declared in Mark 12 Verse 29 that God and Lord, he has is the same as what his audience has.


In essence, Jesus pointed to tha fact that he is not that good as the woman might have thought, but only God Almighty is that Good. And his saying to the listening crowd, that he and they have the same Lord God! What is it that confound you, Davidylan? I am sure these verses are written in plain and simple enough English for a person living among the english speakers of Europe and the North America and the Australian continent to understand, without any intepretation! Why intepreting what is so simple and plain as "John comes to school?"





[Quote]
In the above case, does the "title" connote "sexual intercourse"? And if it does not, does that not negate your assumption of forcing "sex" into everything? Na wah for you!
[/quote]

Since there is no sex, where do you get your sonship? The absence of sex negates sonship. Sonship means progeny. Someone to carry the dynasty. But God does not die! The same God existed longtime before He decided, all by Himself to create man! The same God will exist, all by Himself, without ever diminishing after all things, man and Angels and genie, etc included are perished by His command! How do we bring a son to God Almighty Who has no need of it? God declares in Surah Azumar, commanding Muhammad (AS); Say, if God has a son I would have been the first to worship him (that son)!

Read that verse in the Qur'an, it gives a tone of negation, that is, it is impossible for Him to have a son, because He does not need any. But if He had had a son, I (Muhammad) would have been informed of it, because I am His last Prophet and messenger and I am informed of all things, all the things that happened before me, now during my prophetship and messengership and the things that will happen, even after I am dead and up to the end of time.


I would have been therefore commanded to worship that son, so that other people, the believers would have been made aware to worship him! This is the very essence of that verse, which clearly states God does not have any children or a son! The Jews will deny that they are children of God, even though the Bible stitches that label on them. This is another proof that what the Bible says in many cases are different from the realities.

In surah Nisaa, Allah declares, further, in verses171 and 172, thet the Christians, as a people of the Book should speak the truth and not lie about God. They should know that Jesus is no more than an apostle, messenger prophet of Allah. And if God had wanted a son, could He not have chosen from the Angels who are near or dear to Him, obedience to Him, without any "will" of their own, like what the humans have? In surah Al Maidah, Allah spoke about Jesus, using his mother as the very base of understanding the nature of Jesus, human being.

Anyhow, just a little concrete reminder about the divine relationship where it is clear that "sexual intercourse" was not intended:

In conclusion, there is no proof that there is any sonship, even though the stubbornness to insist that there are continue to cloud peoples judgement. I have asked for evidence from the bible that will stand strong against negating arguments from the same Bible, no christian have been able to produce it! Is this not an endictment against your very conscience, saying sometime thats unbelievable, which you can produce any evidence except Fairytale? Mazaje, this is for you my man. lol.

"And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn" -- Exodus 4:22

Bingo! First this verse proves that Israel who is a son of his father,Isaac, is even claimed as first son of the Biblical God! You then have to conclude that sonship, "begotten?" or not, does not truly mean that there is a father/son relationship with God! The Christians have argued blindly that because Jesus did not have a human father, he must be son of God. Well, those sperm donor clinic babies don't have known fathers, too, and none is requested by the women or mothers.


But more importantly is the fact that the Christians diminish the capability of God to create a man without a father, but just with a mother that must be made plain. But He created Eve through a father, Adam, without a mother and no pregnancy! And Queenisha, I guess the above statement about Israel being first son destroys your idea that just because the Bible is first before the Qur'an, the Qur'an must have copied from the Bible!

You will see therefore that if Israel is declared as first son, he must exist before every other son or sons.Then Jesus must not have existed before his Big Brother, Israel, the first son! lol. If he did, and am sure that you will argue it so, then know that AlQur'an was alway in Laumafuth, a book or tablet already preserved as mother of all Books, in Heaven, long time, before human was created. And very very long time before verses f it began to be revealed to Muhammad to answer and address the issues of mankind! How is my brother, the Big Oga? The man who truly beget your children!

That was Moses' declaration to Pharaoh. Did Moses assume your idea of "sexual intercourse" when he declared that Israel was the firstborn of the LORD? Of course not! Such an idea did not once cross the mind of even Pharaoh - because it simply was understood to mean that Israel was in a divine covenant relationship with God. That is why we read in other texts that: "Ye are the children of the LORD your God" (Deut. 14:1).

And we did not read devine sonship, in the above explanation. But dubiously, it was inserted to illustrate that special something, higher than just devine relationship with God! This is deceit and even though as it is introduced in a subtle manner, it is completely wrong! And we read that many are children of God in the Torah! Are these children don't know that there is no true father/children realation? Of course they know! But the Christians turn it around when it comes to Jesus and God. They insist that God is the very and actual father of Jesus! Now thats a lie!

This is why it is important to read contextually before nosing your ignorance.

In all the contextual reading, no one in good conscience must conclude that Jesus is the very and actual son of God! I guess only dubious opinions may lean or lead in that direction, to conclude that Jesus is anything but a human prophet and messenger!

No god whatseoever choses a spouse for you. It all boils down to person traits and characteristics of the people involved. The term the "hunter and the hunted applies to this rule". Men generally chase women that appeal to certain factors that are inherent in them. It could be a sexual thing, bodily thing, material thing or anyother factor that appeals to the other sex. No god tells a woman to choose a man that has money more than a man that is kind and poor, no god tells a man to choose a woman that is sexually seductive over a born again woman. It all boils down to their person choices and if god really chose these spouses for them, how come the rate of divorce is zooming to an all time high world wide? If he chose them and they later divorced then god must be the most incompetent match maker to invest your money in. If god choses a spouse that continously cheats on the other partner, then invariably god is a supporter of cheats. If god choses a partner that lies, steals, maltreats his spouse and is extremely violent for another spouse then god must definately be screwed up seriously because since he knows the beginning and the end of the world, he ought to know how messed up that partner would be and wouldnt sanction it.

But we all know whenever people like me state the obvious about your kind all loving god in a negative way, you all run out of excuses to defend such a person and resort to your usual prayers and fire branding insults.

Bottom line, we are all humans and our greatest religion and attribute is freewill. The right to choose good and bad, right or wrongand you enjoy the rewards personally or suffer the consequences personally.

No god chooses your mr or mrs right. You do! 100%

why do significant percentage of christains have bad marriages? if the hebrew god who is perfect and knows all things really chooses their partners for them.

Olabowale,

olabowale:

If there is no sexual intercourse, then the idea of beget/begotten is therefore a fantastic fantasy of lies.

The prophets do not have to bend to your sex-driven mindset before they could speak about covenant relationships. I made clear that they used terms such as "beget/begotten" without referring to "sexual intercourse" - the simple thing to do was to find where they actually did so, since you have alleged it so. Have you found that reference yet? NO.

This is the funny thing with your arguments: your penchant to force your deliberately misdriven mindset (often lewd) into everything. That's not a virtue - it's a vice. I feel very concerned that you ask others to "speak the truth". . . but I keep my fingers forever crossed to see you do the same.

olabowale:

Whats devine in a relationship and sonship that is shrouded in blatant lie?

Should I interpret that as the usual Islamic and Muslim thing of accusing the prophets to be "lying" when you can't find "sex" in their teachings? Sad. I pointed out that the terms were used by the prophets (even giving several examples - Moses, David and Ethan). To allege that what they taught are "blatant lies" only confirms that you do not believe in the prophets, no matter how loud you may shout "sexual intercourse" till the end of age.

I'm quite satisfied to say that I believe what the prophets taught - and no, I am not going to accuse them of "blatant lies", for they did not teach what you have alleged. May God deliver you from this sad state of affairs.

olabowale:

My point is this, relationship and or sonship that is mislabeled or misdefined, begs reality and the honesty of the matter.

But it is clear that you are the one doing the "mislabelling" and "misdefining" - afterall, was it not you who forced "sexual intercourse" into the prophets' teachings where they never defined their teachings as such?

olabowale:

Jesus also declared in Mark 12 Verse 29 that God and Lord, he has is the same as what his audience has.

Deviation. Please don't divert your attention into spinning unrelated arguements.

olabowale:

In surah Nisaa, Allah declares, further, in verses171 and 172, thet the Christians, as a people of the Book should speak the truth and not lie about God.

Well-well. But WHO has been lying all along apart from you, dear sir? I asked you to find where the prophets spoke about "sexual intercourse" in all the examples I offered - and up until now I am still waiting for your answer!

You see how you keep quoting what you do not believe in - and yet turn round to accuse others of your own allegations.

Take it easy, Olabowale. Let's learn to speak the truth as we find it.   

Jesus was a being on earth. Just like any being that walked on earth. If one is now labelling him as a son or begotten son of God, one will have to bear in mind, that the writers of the Bible Books were ordinary men. These ordinary men, the Christians argue, were inspired on the ideas in the Bible. But the words are of their own! In view of the above, we have seen the Bible going to changes, whereby in some editions, of say Circa 1951 of the KJV, there were essential verses which were relegated to mere footnotes or completely absent, when compared to edition that preceeded it! Then in later editions, say from 1970 onward, we see that the same verses were reinserted as fully part of the Bible!

This alone, for a keen observer and seeker of truth, should be enough to seiously question the ever changing word of Christian God! I am not even talking about the missing Books that are present in the Catholic Bible, but not in the Protestant's Bible. The same Protestants are now accusing the Catholics of Idolatory, even though, their own Bible is copied from them. The Protestants have the burden of proof with the catholics. The Christians have the burden of proof with the muslims!



I have only brough this to the attention of our notable pundits, that if are to be generous and accept their concept of Inspired writers, we will find that there is almost a zero percent chance to accept any version of the Bible as 100% authentic! The Christians among themselves have problems of uniform definition of Jesus. Some say he is human prophet and no more. Yet some say that he is son, alone, begotten or otherwise. Yet others say that he is combinations of both and the God! Well if the christians can't even agree among themselves, how do they think that they can convince the non-christians to hold a firm definition, except the weakest of all!


But the christians, as they say that he is son or begooten and or God, we see that they do not have any concrete proof to affirm any of these. What we can see clearly, is that they are making empty statements. There is no pudding to eat so that we may know whether the taste fit the flavor! What is known, going by many previous example, is that Jesus was a human prophet, with special situations, and miracles.



On the other hand, to take the opinion that Jesus was not a son and therefore was not begotten, but created like every human creation, is very easy. There are profound evidence abound in the reminant of Truth that the Bible still contain! Adam was created from admixture of water and different hues of soil from the earth! If there is any person that could be considered begotten because of the absence of father, since our minds only understand that human zygote can be formed by the coming together of male and female germents, Adam would have qualified, perfectly. But we also see that Eve who was cloned from already human Adam, could have qualified as begotten, for the same reason at least that Adam could! But then Eve's creation is so profound that she came out of the body of a male! I guess the process of the creation of Eve should put a stop to the adage of "The Chicken or the Egg!"


If I say a man is a woman because he does not have a beard, does it truly makes him a woman? The answer is no! This is the same with calling Jesus son or begotten. The only way a son or begotten comes about, is to sire, to mount to have a sexual intercourse! The process that does not include this essential ingredient is completely off the mark, regardless of how loud the beat of its drum!


In the time of the Kalifa of Umar Kattab, a muslim responded with great wisdom by saying to Umar that he is grateful to Allah, who has made him possessed 3 things, which Allah Him does not possess. Umar was shocked, but ashamed to ask this muslim what he meant. In time he met with Ali bin Talib, the cousin and the son-inlaw of the prophet (AS). He related the statement of this muslim and asked if Ali had any knowledge of what the muslim was saying. Allah gave knowledge from the Qur'an and Ahadith to Ali, who told Kalifah Umar Kattab that the 3 things that the man have, which are not part of what Allah would have because they are meant for the creations, humans, etc are Offsprings, begotten or adopted, wife or wives and I think parent is the third.


We therefore should realise that Allah God Almighty Creator Lord, does not possess any of these. You can not say that God does not have a parent and all of a sudden you spring son or begotten son on Him! You can't say that God does not have a wife, yet the child born by a husbandless believing young virgin woman, is therefore the son of God! Since she did not lose her virginity in the pregnancy, we must have to accept that there was no intercourse, but a miraculous conception had occurred! But in this case, it is in no way insinuating that God must be the father of the Baby, the same way He is not the father of Adam and or Eve, whose individual process of coming to life must not able to be replicated by any scientist or group of scientists!


God says in the Qur'an, that the creation of Jesus is in the same light/line as the creation of Adam. When God decrees a thing, He but says to it, in command, Be! So it must becomes. The thing will come into being, following the charted path that God has ordained for it! In the case of Jesus, he incubated in the womb of his mother and when matured enough was delivered. Adam came from outside, without the luxury of any womb, as matured male and hit the complete garmut and ranges of human activities! Adam's immediately began to talk, eat grown people foods. He eat the apple, if we go by the christian story! The fact that he skipped all the period of preadulthood should tell us that God is capable of doing all things and creating a boy through a young virgin should not surprise us!


By the way sex is the last thing on my mind, right now. But whoever is not married amongst those who are matured, and there is no glearing reason not to, should do so! Academics should not be used as the open excuse, while the heart yearns for companionship and intimacy! To have a first degree or a Ph. D., mrriage is not a cog in the wheel of any possible progress of a determined individual. Where is Queenisha? I miss you woman. lol.

Zino Ben:


Bottom line, we are all humans and our greatest religion and attribute is freewill. The right to choose good and bad, right or wrongand you enjoy the rewards personally or suffer the consequences personally.

No god chooses your mr or mrs right. You do! 100%  

So I thought Zino Ben.

There's this Sister I quite fancied at my Church. So one Sunday, I went over to say howdy and "submit" my "application". Big mistake.
After dressing me down with the Scriptures, she referred the issue to the Pastor who asked me wether I heard from God before approaching the Sister.
According to him, God knows the woman thats perfect for me and would reveal her either in a vision or a dream. Anything short of these, I'm being controlled by my "sinful nature" and may be a wolf in sheep clothing.
At the same time, I can't even ask God to approve the Sister again, because that would mean Im the one "choosing" for God.


@olabowale

Why waste precious oxygen belabouring this issue? What's the point? You want us all to renounce our beliefs and convert to Islam?