Who Is Allah?

Who Is Allah?

There are 250908 comments on the The Brussels Journal story from Aug 24, 2007, titled Who Is Allah?. In it, The Brussels Journal reports that:

“Allah is a very beautiful word for God. Shouldn't we all say that from now on we will name God Allah? [...] What does God care what we call him?”

From the desk of Soeren Kern on Fri, 2007-08-24 11:56 Europeans love to mock the salience of religion in American society. via The Brussels Journal

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Brussels Journal.

rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#155692 Dec 8, 2012
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
hello anti-gentile christkiller bu(ttturdlick)ford!
Why don't you circumcise yourself again and read the Talmudic writings on Jesus?
Holy Quran is doing fine without you.
rabbee: well unfortunatly it seems to be doing fine, without G-D too.

as you claim your scriptres written by men, better than any other scriptures written by men. thus fitting, the description of: hypocrite. calling, your book of lies holy. does not make, it holy.
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#155693 Dec 8, 2012
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Here's the thing, No Nails,
It's very bad manners to ever say to someone, "You will burn in hell" for the alleged sin of calling the MOHAMMADAN holy book the KORAN.
BUFORD TALKING ABOUT MANNERS?

Since when did you hear about the word "Manners", which even Jesus and the Jesusarians never had?
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#155694 Dec 8, 2012
Mahmood wrote:
<quoted text>
I call my own relatives Mohammadans and they dont give a rats ass so why does it bother you so much? I told you, the Koran is Mohammad's manifesto to control the credulous minds of those camel dung cleaning Arabs and in the process people like you and I got engulfed due to no fault of our own. The only difference is that you'v stayed and I left.
You can call your relatives even bloody fools. I would not mind.

My point was that you were foolish enough to give an absurd reason for calling Muslims, Mohammadans.

You have accepted that you were wrong, so I have no problem. The word does not bother me.

However, I do pity the ignorant fools, who call Muslims, Mohammadans.

PEOPLE LIKE YOU, were never real Muslims.

I have already proved that by pointing out the blunder you made, when you wrote "Mohammadan Rasool Allah" and gave us the silly reason why Muslims were called Mohammadans.
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#155695 Dec 8, 2012
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Para by para?
He doesn't address what we give...he addresses his own assumtpions.
He is a robot without stop, rethink, admit mistake, apologise buttons!
Good luck with mr. Stupido Colonic irrigator!!!
Salaams
lol!

Even if SC can address line by line, I would be glad to respond. The problem is that I can neither make a head nor a tail of his posts. He quarrels with his own self and confuses it.

Salaams
BMZ
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#155696 Dec 8, 2012
rabbee yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
rabbee: well then i guess that makes, all these religions wrong including your's. more proof to me, that if the world teaches it. then it, is must be a lie. just more proof to me, that your're all the enemy of G-D.
Rabbee,

Please tell me what keeps on forcing to write G-d? Would God be angry and furious, if you wrote God?

You know jolly well that even God is no name. Right?
uhuh

Valencia, Spain

#155697 Dec 8, 2012
the Rambam codified in his Mishneh Torah that gentiles who follow the "Noahide laws" deserve a portion in the world-to-come
however in the same book he laid down another halacha,

"These do not have a portion at all, they are forever cut-off,
minim - those who accept that there is one God, but maintain that He has a body or form; those who maintain that He was not the sole First Being and Creator of universe; and those who worship other entity to serve as an intermediary between him and God (Christians are clearly referred to here)
koferim ba-Torah (kafir of Torah)- those who deny the oral Law, that is the interpretation of the written Torah, or question the authority of the sages who were its spokesmen; those who insist that the mitzvot in Torah have been replaced or nullified, such as the Muslims and Christians" (hilchot Teshuvah)

if Muslims and Christians do not have a portion in the world-to-come, then who are the Noahides, the "righteous gentiles"?
Mahmood

Schomberg, Canada

#155698 Dec 8, 2012
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Hello bu(ttturdlick)ford's alter ego!
If you read the OT, the god of judah is a pawn.
If you call us muhammadan we shall call you a monkey.
I dont have time to read fiction, the Koran is enough.
Mahmood

Schomberg, Canada

#155699 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
You can call your relatives even bloody fools. I would not mind.
My point was that you were foolish enough to give an absurd reason for calling Muslims, Mohammadans.
You have accepted that you were wrong, so I have no problem. The word does not bother me.
However, I do pity the ignorant fools, who call Muslims, Mohammadans.
PEOPLE LIKE YOU, were never real Muslims.
I have already proved that by pointing out the blunder you made, when you wrote "Mohammadan Rasool Allah" and gave us the silly reason why Muslims were called Mohammadans.
You are right, I was a once a Mohammadan but not a good one. By this I mean I would fast and pray occassionaly not frequently.
Mahmood

Schomberg, Canada

#155700 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
You can call your relatives even bloody fools. I would not mind.
My point was that you were foolish enough to give an absurd reason for calling Muslims, Mohammadans.
You have accepted that you were wrong, so I have no problem. The word does not bother me.
However, I do pity the ignorant fools, who call Muslims, Mohammadans.
PEOPLE LIKE YOU, were never real Muslims.
I have already proved that by pointing out the blunder you made, when you wrote "Mohammadan Rasool Allah" and gave us the silly reason why Muslims were called Mohammadans.
Do you know that in 18th CE Europe, the scientific and philosophical revolution led to the cultural revolution of the Enlightenment, which finally also resulted in a political revolution. It was when traditional values of the church and theological institutions were largely rejected and mocked by the intellectual elite.

The leading figure of the French Enlightenment was Voltaire, philosopher and critic of the church. A large scale process of secularization and emancipation began which later spilled over to other places in Europe. Witch trials and the burning of witches was no longer the norm and the Bible became by far the most throughly invetigated book in world literature. Can a thing like this happen in an Islamic country? Absolutely not. Will there ever be a thorough investigation on the sources of the Koran? Absolutely not. Can anyone publicly challenge the authenticity of the Koran based on evidence? Absolutely not.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#155701 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
BUFORD TALKING ABOUT MANNERS?
Since when did you hear about the word "Manners", which even Jesus and the Jesusarians never had?
rabbee: manners according, to whose standard?

the bad manners of this, whole world against G-D. are not in any position, to determine what is good or bad manners. your all just bad manners, in opposition or agreement to each other.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#155702 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
You can call your relatives even bloody fools. I would not mind.
My point was that you were foolish enough to give an absurd reason for calling Muslims, Mohammadans.
You have accepted that you were wrong, so I have no problem. The word does not bother me.
However, I do pity the ignorant fools, who call Muslims, Mohammadans.
PEOPLE LIKE YOU, were never real Muslims.
I have already proved that by pointing out the blunder you made, when you wrote "Mohammadan Rasool Allah" and gave us the silly reason why Muslims were called Mohammadans.
rabbee: calling unreal muslems, real muslems does not make you realistic to G-D. saying your in the quran, while G-D is still giving TheWhole Torah again. is not being realistic, it is fantacizing.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#155703 Dec 8, 2012
Mahmood wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because you dont have a good word to say about any scholar, does not mean what they'v written is not true. Forget about old Christians writers, Chritian scholars are now coming out and challenging Christianity, can a Mohammadan scholar do the same about his own religion in Iran or Pakistan?
Critcal Christians regard writings of the Hebrew Bible and the NT as products of human authors who wrote them under the inspiration of the Spirit of God while you guys regard the Koran as the literal word of God and that is a problem. Critical research into the sources of the Koran & Hadith was discouraged and even banned in Islamic countries as result belief in the un-createdness and infallibility of the Koran triumphed over belief in its historicity.
rabbee: truth is not determined by, any of you or your scholars. truth is determined, by G-D only. and the fact that you disbelieve this, means your a liar. and G-D did not write, the quran and give it to Moshe, muhammed or anyone else. what G-D gave to Moshe is called TheTorah: The Her-Story. in search, of the true mate.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155704 Dec 8, 2012
Mahmood wrote:
<quoted text>
I call my own relatives Mohammadans and they dont give a rats ass so why does it bother you so much? I told you, the Koran is Mohammad's manifesto to control the credulous minds of those camel dung cleaning Arabs and in the process people like you and I got engulfed due to no fault of our own. The only difference is that you'v stayed and I left.
They do generally end up showing traits of mangod worshippers.
They are more bothered about karbala and hero worship than actually looking at Allah and Islam.
Hassan Hussein although are precious, are not in the script!
There is no need to go around beating yourself in the chest and head drawing blood screaming and shouting.
You should leave the naked pagan on a pole to deal with torture, blood drinking and flesh eating.
Islam is about living.
So you guys can be hussainians or hassanians?
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155705 Dec 8, 2012
Mahmood wrote:
<quoted text>
I dont have time to read fiction, the Koran is enough.
As an ex-hassan/hussainian, your "koran" may just as well be a work of fiction.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155706 Dec 8, 2012
Mahmood wrote:
<quoted text>
You are right, I was a once a Mohammadan but not a good one. By this I mean I would fast and pray occassionaly not frequently.
I think I know what your problem is.
You were never a Muslim.
You were perhaps an unwilling hassan/husseinian who was into self molestation, you poor boy.
Seems you were not even a mohammadan, and certainly not fortunate enough to have been a pious loving caring Muslim.
That accounts for your twisted way of thinking.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155707 Dec 8, 2012
rabbee yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
rabbee: calling unreal muslems, real muslems does not make you realistic to G-D. saying your in the quran, while G-D is still giving TheWhole Torah again. is not being realistic, it is fantacizing.
Is Jesus God?
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#155708 Dec 8, 2012
http://www.answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/Vol2...

The Uniqueness and Titles of Jesus in Islam
C. THE TITLES WORD AND SPIRIT OF GOD.

1. Jesus as the Word of God in the Qur'an.

The Qur'an has much to say about the Christian faith, speaking at times favourably and at others unfavourably, but perhaps the most interesting verse of all on the whole subject of Christians and their beliefs is this one:

O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of God aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of God, and His Word, which he bestowed on Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from him: so believe in God and His apostles. Say not "Trinity": desist: it will be better for you: for God is One God: Glory be to Him:(Far exalted is He) above having a son. To him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs. Surah 4.171

The passage contains typical Qur'anic dogmas in opposition to Christianity and we find here the divinity of Jesus as emphatically rejected as anywhere else in the book. The dogmas are these: Jesus was only a messenger, God is not Triune, he is only one God and has no son. A Muslim seeking proof texts in the Qur'an to confront Christians with a denial of their belief in Jesus as the Son of God will not have to venture beyond this verse. The fascinating feature of this verse, however, is its attribution of three titles to Jesus, each one of which strongly implies that he was far more than a prophet and seems to be more consistent with Christian belief in him as Lord and Saviour of all men than the Muslim belief that he was no different to the other messengers God had sent. The key words containing all three titles are Innamaal-Masiihu Iisaabnu Maryama rasuulullaahi wa kalimatuhuu al-qaahaa ilaa Maryama wa ruuhum-minhu.

We have already considered the first at some length, namely Al-Masih, "the Messiah", and saw that no attempt is made in the Qur'an to explain the title. The other two that : appear in the text we shall consider in this section, namely Kalimah, meaning "Word", and Ruh, meaning "Spirit". Let us begin with the first as it is written in the verse, namely kalimatuhuu - "His Word". The construction makes it plain that Jesus is, in some unique way, God's own Word. The title; appears in two other places in the Qur'an in much the same context. In Surah 3.39 an angel announces to Zachariah that his son John (Yahya) will witness to a kalimatim-minallaah, "a Word from God", and in Surah 3.45 the angels, in announcing the conception of Jesus to Mary, speak of him as a kalimatim-minhu, "a Word from Him". The title, thus applied on no less than three occasions to Jesus, is not applied to anyone else in the Qur'an yet, as with the title Messiah, no attempt is made to explain it.

As usual Muslim writers are at pains to explain away yet another unique title applied to Jesus in the Qur'an without seriously attempting to consider its implications.
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#155709 Dec 8, 2012
Notice: "a Word from God", not "the Word of God", the epithet that mystical Christianity uses for Jesus. As stated in iii.59 below, Jesus was created by a miracle, by God's word "Be", and he was.(Yusuf Ali, The Holy Qur'an, p. 132).
Many Muslim writers follow the same pattern, arguing that Jesus is called a Word from God solely because he was created by the Word of God, kun - "be", just as Adam was created (Surah 3.59). "Thus Imam Razi, followed by some modern writers, would have us believe that the term 'Word of God' means no more than that,'Jesus was created by the command or word of God"'(Goldsack, Christ in Islam, p. 14). Another argument occasionally used to explain away the title, is that the words of God were revealed to Jesus and that in this sense alone he can be called a Word from God. An Ahmadlyya writer uses this line:

Speaking of Mary the Book says that "she accepted the truth of the words of her Lord". Thus Mary is here the verifier and not Jesus. The only meaning that can be given to the word Kalimah in the verse is the prophetic words of her Lord, i.e., the divine inspiration which she received from God relating to the birth of Jesus. It is noteworthy that the inspiration is breathed into him, i.e., Jesus.(Ahmad, Jesus in Heaven on Earth, p. 164).
The common argument, however, is the first one, namely that Jesus was created in an unusual way simply by divine command just as Adam was created. This argument, with all the others, falls to the ground on closer analysis. A Christian writer assesses it in the following quote and in doing so gives a clear hint as to why it can only be regarded as an inadequate explanation of the unique title given to Jesus we are here considering, namely a Word from God.

Al Baidhawi says that the expression "Word from God" refers to Jesus Christ who is so called because He was conceived by the word of the command of God, without a father (Sale, Koran, p. 48, n.4). Using this interesting logic, Adam too should be called "the Word from God" because he also was created out of dust by a word of the command of God (see Sura 3.59). But nowhere does the Qur'an mention him by that designation. It is an expression uniquely used of Jesus Christ.(Abdul-Haqq, Sharing Your Faith with a Muslim, p. 84).
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#155710 Dec 8, 2012
There are two key factors that the Muslims are only too inclined to overlook - the application of the title to Jesus alone and the fact that he is clearly described in Surah 4.171 as "His Word", meaning not a Word from God alone but the Word of God. Abdul-Haqq states the first factor quite plainly - the title is "an expression uniquely used of Jesus Christ". The Qur'an, in Surah 3.59, states that "the likeness of Jesus with God is as the likeness of Adam" and promptly defines that likeness. God simply said "Be", and he came to be (kun fayakuun), implying that both were made by the single word of God in the same way. If Jesus is called the Word of God purely as a result of the manner of his conception, then Adam too must be the Word of God for according to the Qur'an they were both created in the same manner. Now a real difficulty arises because Adam is not called the Word of God in the Qur'an. Nor are the angels, nor is any other creature so called in the Qur'an. Jesus alone is called the Word of God.

The very uniqueness of the title in the Qur'an as applied to Jesus begs the suggestion that there must be something about the person of Jesus himself that makes him the Word of God in a way that no other man has ever been or ever will be. We must surely seek for some other meaning and significance behind the title, especially when we consider that the Bible also applies the title uniquely to Jesus - "the name by which he is called is The Word of God" (Revelation 19.13). It is perhaps in consideration of the second factor that we will find the real implications of the title.

In Surah 4.171 Jesus is called God's Word, not just a Word from God as in the two passages we quoted from the third Surah. This clearly implies, not that the Word was revealed to Jesus or that he was created by the Word, but rather that he himself is the Word of God. The title relates to his person and not to any feature or circumstance of his life. A Christian writer, speaking of Surah 3.45, makes the same point about the form of the words in the text:

Further, in the verse from the Qur'an which we have quoted, Christ is called 'His Word', that is,'God's Word'. The Arabic shows that it means 'The Word of God', not merely 'a Word of God'.(Kalimatullaah, not kalimatimmin kalimaatullaah). Thus we see that Jesus is the word or expression of God, so that by Him alone can we understand the mind and will of God. No other prophet has been given this title, because none other is, in this sense, the special revelation of God's mind and will.(Goldsack, Christ in Islam, p. 15).

The clear implication is that Jesus is, himself, in a unique way the revelation of God himself to men, the communication of God to his creation. The Word did not come to Jesus from above, rather he himself is that very Word which came from heaven to earth.
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#155711 Dec 8, 2012
Jesus is the word of God, not (as Muslims generally teach) in the sense that he was created by divine fiat, by the word of God, but in the sense that he is the one who expresses the mind and will of God most fully to men. Through Jesus, God has spoken and acted in a unique way.(Chapman, You Go and Do the Same, p. 81).
If Christ were a Word of God, it would be clear that He was only one expression of God's will; but since God Himself calls Him "the Word of God", it is clear that He must be the one and only perfect expression of God's will, and the only perfect manifestation of God.(Zwemer, The Muslim Christ, p. 37).

The Qur'an says no more of Adam than that "he learnt from his Lord words of inspiration" (Surah 2.37), that is, the kalimaat were sent down mir-rabbihi, "from his Lord", but in the case of Jesus it is said that he himself is the kalimatullah, the "Word of God". As there is, nonetheless, no explanation of the title in the Qur'an, we shall have to turn, as we did with the title Al-Masih, to the Christian Bible to find its real meaning and see how it can be used as a typical point of agreement between Christians and Muslims upon which a Gospel witness can be based.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pagan/Wiccan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) 14 hr thetruth 4,348
News This Halloween, Think of Islam as a Religion of... May 24 Im a poet and I k... 2
News Who Is Allah? (Jul '08) May 22 Joel 13,168
News Atheist billboard near Lincoln Tunnel scheduled... (Nov '10) May 19 Patrick 219
Convert me from Agnostic to Atheist May 19 New Beginning 1
News Witches for Sanders? Democratic Candidate Finds... May 16 Truth 2
News Athiest tells high schoolers God is evil (May '11) May 16 Eagle 12 770
More from around the web