Enough is enough!

[Hidden In Him]

Muslims believe Jesus was the Messiah. They also believe in the Virgin Birth. They do not, however, concur with the idea of "a begotten" son. I don't know myself if "begotten" is the right word. It is a somewhat strange term that almost implies God could have sex with a woman.

And the phrase "only begotten son" is not a very good translation of the original Greek "monogenes". It probably should read "only" -- the way Isaac was described as the "only son."

Gen 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.

The KJV mangles a verse in Hebrews where "monogenes" is used about Isaac.

Heb 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

Why it got translated that way is a mystery since Abraham had two sons who were "begotten" sexually. Then we find that "monogenes" most certainly didn't get translated as "only begotten" when talking about an only son of a woman.

Luk 7:12 Now when he came nigh to the gate of the city, behold, there was a dead man carried out, the only son of his mother, and she was a widow: and much people of the city was with her.

Sorry about the late reply. Took a few days off.

About this, monogenes is a composite of mono and genos, from the root ginomai "to be born." Thus "only-born" is the essential meaning, with no direct reference to how conception took place (either sexually or otherwise). Muslims just read into the expression in order to debunk it as a carnal and sinful doctrine.

About Isaac, Hebrews 11:18 adds, "By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said that "In Isaac shall thy seed be called." In other words, in terms of his godly lineage, Abraham only had one true son.

The Quran states that religion should not be a matter of compulsion, that Jews and Christians should be tolerated and allowed to worship as they want.

Yes, but they have a way of subjugating people of other faiths in regions where Islam has achieved complete dominance. They force them to pay Jizya in order to observe their faith while under Muslim rule, a concession that I believe will be withdrawn when the time of the Antichrist draws near and the prophecy is fulfilled which says, "neither will they be allowed to buy or sell unless they have the mark."

 

[Giuliano]

Sorry about the late reply. Took a few days off.

About this, monogenes is a composite of mono and genos, from the root ginomai "to be born." Thus "only-born" is the essential meaning, with no direct reference to how conception took place (either sexually or otherwise). Muslims just read into the expression in order to debunk it as a carnal and sinful doctrine.

They object to the idea of God begetting people as inferred by the expression.

About Isaac, Hebrews 11:18 adds, "By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said that "In Isaac shall thy seed be called." In other words, in terms of his godly lineage, Abraham only had one true son.

Notice how Hebrews 11:8 doesn't read the way Genesis does. Someone has "added" to it.

Yes, but they have a way of subjugating people of other faiths in regions where Islam has achieved complete dominance. They force them to pay Jizya in order to observe their faith while under Muslim rule, a concession that I believe will be withdrawn when the time of the Antichrist draws near and the prophecy is fulfilled which says, "neither will they be allowed to buy or sell unless they have the mark."

Did you know Christians and Jews didn't need to pay Jizya if they join the military and help defend the country they're in? You may be interested in the article on it at jizyah | Definition & Facts

Some Christians were exempt, people like widows. Some non-tax paying Christians even got benefits from the Muslim government. I ask you if you were a wealthy Christian, should you expect to pay no taxes while your Muslim neighbors contributed money to charity and ran the police and military forces that protected you?

Remember too that this practice has died out. As the article pointed out, it was unevenly practiced and often led to abuses in some places.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Notice how Hebrews 11:8 doesn't read the way Genesis does. Someone has "added" to it.

Well yes. It doesn't appear as if the LXX even has the word "only" in it, let alone "begotten." But the writer of Hebrews was likely depicting Abraham offering up his son as a reflection and prophetic foreshadowing of God offering up His, and since Christ is referred to as God's only begotten son, hence you have the terminology being used here of Isaac.

Did you know Christians and Jews didn't need to pay Jizya if they join the military and help defend the country they're in? You may be interested in the article on it at jizyah | Definition & Facts

No I didn't, and that's very interesting...

Some Christians were exempt, people like widows. Some non-tax paying Christians even got benefits from the Muslim government. I ask you if you were a wealthy Christian, should you expect to pay no taxes while your Muslim neighbors contributed money to charity and ran the police and military forces that protected you?

Put this way, I see your point. I don't know that I would have a problem with the practice if they are not supporting the Islamic state by any other means. But are you sure Jizya is not a tax added on in addition to normal taxation in order to further bring infidels into a state of submission and subjection?

Remember too that this practice has died out.

Found an article about how ISIS was using it on Christians back in 2015. Not sure how widespread the practice still is, however.
ISIS Video: Christians Forced to Pay Jizya Poll Tax in Syrian Town of Qaryatayn

 

[Giuliano]

Well yes. It doesn't appear as if the LXX even has the word "only" in it, let alone "begotten." But the writer of Hebrews was likely depicting Abraham offering up his son as a reflection and prophetic foreshadowing of God offering up His, and since Christ is referred to as God's only begotten son, hence you have the terminology being used here of Isaac.

I doubt "begotten" belongs in either place if we take it to imply a sexual thing.

Put this way, I see your point. I don't know that I would have a problem with the practice if they are not supporting the Islamic state by any other means. But are you sure Jizya is not a tax added on in addition to normal taxation in order to further bring infidels into a state of submission and subjection?

No, it was not an additional tax. Originally Muslims were to contribute a certain percentage of their income to the mosques who then distributed it doing acts of charity and so on. Over time however governments tended to take over. Thus in Iraq under Saddam he collected as taxes to the state what Muslims had donated to religion. He secularized things more, taking more power for himself in a way.

The course I had in college about the early history said that Islam did get converts because of the Jizya. Non-Muslims figured why pay the tax if they could get away with not paying it by converting. They'd still have to pay as Muslims, but I think the rates varied from place to place. If it was significantly cheaper to be a Muslim, why not convert? No doubt in some places, the financial incentive helped convert people to Islam.

Found an article about how ISIS was using it on Christians back in 2015. Not sure how widespread the practice still is, however.
ISIS Video: Christians Forced to Pay Jizya Poll Tax in Syrian Town of Qaryatayn

ISIS people were not really Muslims if you ask me. They felt free to make up new rules as they went, altering teachings from the Quran, etc. My guess is ISIS did that when they were running out of money so they invented a new rule (contrary to Islam) to raise it. Also interesting was how the Taliban originally despised the opium trade. Later however when their funds were running low and they saw how much money could be made at it, their original objections to raising opium poppies vanished into thin air.

 

[Hidden In Him]

The course I had in college about the early history said that Islam did get converts because of the Jizya. Non-Muslims figured why pay the tax if they could get away with not paying it by converting. They'd still have to pay as Muslims, but I think the rates varied from place to place. If it was significantly cheaper to be a Muslim, why not convert? No doubt in some places, the financial incentive helped convert people to Islam.

This part confuses me. Muslims don't practice taxation amongst themselves?
Maybe I should have put what I was saying another way: Does Jizya place the non-Muslim at a financial disadvantage to Muslims? Your answer here sounds like it does if conversion could mean not having to pay it.

ISIS people were not really Muslims if you ask me. They felt free to make up new rules as they went, altering teachings from the Quran, etc. My guess is ISIS did that when they were running out of money so they invented a new rule (contrary to Islam) to raise it.

I suppose this is possible. I wonder what the policies of other more militant factions with Islam would be, i.e. Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, Boco Haram, etc.

 

[Giuliano]

This part confuses me. Muslims don't practice taxation amongst themselves?
Maybe I should have put what I was saying another way: Does Jizya place the non-Muslim at a financial disadvantage to Muslims? Your answer here sounds like it does if conversion could mean not having to pay it.

I believe today most Muslim countries tax everyone at the same rate. In theory, the Jizya was supposed to equalize things with the non-Muslims paying the same amount Muslims contributed to their mosques. It varied however in some places giving Muslims an advantage, so the Christian often either joined the military or converted.

I suppose this is possible. I wonder what the policies of other more militant factions with Islam would be, i.e. Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, Boco Haram, etc.

Hezbollah, I believe, is big on conducting charity work. They do that to do good but also to curry favor among the people, of course. Where they are now however doesn't give them much authority to tax anyone; but they were getting money from Iran. They also used to get donations from abroad -- Muslims in the USA would pay their taxes here but then feel obliged to make the donation to Islam to support the needy; and I believe Hezbollah used to get money channeled via various "charity" groups until those groups got sanctioned. I don't think you can even send money to them from the USA anymore. I imagine their finances are getting tight since Iran is also hurting financially with riots and protests over the state of affairs. Those started over the government raising the price of gasoline. So far, 1500 people have been killed. That tells me Iran is hurting bad financially, and that probably puts Hezbollah's funding at risk too. I hadn't thought about it; but that makes me wonder if Hezbollah will change its tactics if their money from outside gets cut off. It would make them less popular in the areas of Syria and Lebanon they occupy. Now they're often viewed with favor because of the charity work.

Is Al Qaeda still operating? I don't know. If it is, it's struggling. I also don't know much about Boco Haram or their finances; but they are a lawless group, to be sure. My guess is their major source of income is kidnapping people for ransom and extorting money in what we could call a protection racket. I found an article on it. I see they are even involved in fake charities and drug cartels.

Article here: Fake Charities, Drug Cartels, Ransom and Extortion: Where Islamist Group Boko Haram Gets Its Cash

So how popular can Boko Haram be if they have to kidnap people to get money? If Muslims in Nigeria liked them, they'd be supporting them, wouldn't they?

The conclusion is inescapable that Muslim countries suffer the most from these radical groups. They conduct acts of terrorism in Europe and the USA from time to time; but in some Muslim countries, the violence is never ending.