Who Is Allah?

Aug 24, 2007 Full story: The Brussels Journal 207,283

“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

Full Story
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#155676 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
Actually all the Patriarchs and Prophets/Messengers of God were illiterate fellows.
Prove it.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#155677 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
May the good LORD shower more patience upon me, when dealing with you.
I wrote this:
"It is funny that you question and provide answers, which you fail to understand.
Wrong!
It wasn't said and it wasn't written : "Thou shall not take the name of the Lord."
It was said and it was written: "Thous shall not take the name of thy LORD in vain."
That means, one shall not take the name of the LORD in vain deeds, false oaths, false swearing, etc.
Moses was calling the LORD most of the time. If you read Jewish Scriptures, you will find instructions to remember the LORD and teach/preach/pray, etc., while sitting, standing and lying down.
When praying to the LORD was not forbidden, how could calling the name of the LORD fall in VAIN?
Do people pray to the LORD by spelling out a G, a hyphen and a D?
God is not the son of a man or a man to have a name. You can give beautiful names to God and there is no harm. Moses called God Almighty LORD, which is Adonai in Hebrew.
You are the one, who mentions it, so you should ask. If I were wrong, the members of Jewish faith would have certainly posted a note to correct me.
Where do you see G-d in here? "
Also, I had given you the links to Jewish sources, where God was spelled properly and you do not see any G-d there. Did you read at the two links which I gave you? Obviously not!
And now you write: " The question is the following, which name the god his lord does not want to be said/pronunced in vain?"
Is that what you understand by 'taking the name of the LORD in vain"?
Girls getting fucked, cry in ecstasy "Oh my God!" This is an example of calling the name of God in vain. Do you think God gave another name to be called in vain deeds?
One cannot tell his friend, "By God, I will take that girl to bed and fuck her!" This will be calling the name of God in vain.
A man deceives another by promising him in the name of God that he would help him in distress, swears upon God but does not keep that particular promise. That is an example of calling the name of God in vain.
Do you think God gave Moses another name for such activities? LMAO! You crack me up!
Why can't you understand?
Next time, please address my post para by para in separate short posts, as I do with Mahmood.
By the way it wasn't NEITHER written as you reported "Thou shall not take the name of the Lord in vain. but "Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain". You eliminated that part to make your point that I have demolished easily.

Moreover I haven't heard or seen any prayer using the name of god - YHVH. If yes tell us which Jewish prayer is.

The English word god is just a title used in ancient time by pagans and not a proper name. In today world the word Allah is translated as to god or the god. But is Allah (the god) the proper name of that divinity? No.

Ancient Jews thought the word god used in Europe was the proper name of that divinty, hence since they are prohibited to pronunce his name they wrote that word like this (g-d). And this thing passed on generation by generation. But as said above god is just a title and there is no reason for Jews to eliminate the vowel from that word. Am not surprised if some wrote tha wod properly, i.e. god.

To answer to my question what's the name of god is, you wrote: "Girls getting fucked, cry in ecstasy "Oh my God!" This is an example of calling the name of God in vain."

If until today, after that the Jews, here, have explained that their god goes by the name of YHVH, and after MAAT and Rabbee as explain to you that this god has a name, and it's not god the name, and after my many explications you still think that as in your example of girls in ecstasy screaming "Oh my God" that this is a calling the name of god in vain, then there is no point for anyone to discuss with a person so obtuse such as yourself.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155678 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for the news. How many more Senior Al-Qaidah leaders are left? Why can't the US finish 'em all? That should be fast, so that people can live in peace and harmony, after the trouble-makers have left.
Disaster in Iraq, Disaster in Afghanistan and Disaster in Pakistan.
Please inform all the old hags at Capitol Hill to stop this useless war of terror, which is not wroking at all and has turned into a Disaster for the US.
Thanks
Many of these made up chaps are inside White House, Pentagon and CIA!
A character from a Tom Sharpe book written nearly 40 years ago says something like:

"Tell them there is a terror threat and don't know from where but we are prepared to defend the nation and that will make sure the the voters will forget about economic and other problems and keep us in power!

This is exactly what the liars are doing:

They go over to Iraq and Afghanistan...blow up innocent women and children....get a few chaps p'd off....and bingo...we get more terrorists...

War on terror is Invasion promoting terror.

Plus they use it to steal oil/natural resources, plus sell arms to dictators, charge an arm an a leg for re-constrution of infrastructure, that was fine until these maniacs deliberately and repeatedly bombed anything and everything!

Whenever they want the billions of dollars banked by the idiot dictators, they vilify them, arrest them, "cease" their assets and execute them!!

When will these moronic dictators learn?
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155679 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
May the good LORD shower more patience upon me, when dealing with you.
I wrote this:
"It is funny that you question and provide answers, which you fail to understand.
Wrong!
It wasn't said and it wasn't written : "Thou shall not take the name of the Lord."
It was said and it was written: "Thous shall not take the name of thy LORD in vain."
That means, one shall not take the name of the LORD in vain deeds, false oaths, false swearing, etc.
Moses was calling the LORD most of the time. If you read Jewish Scriptures, you will find instructions to remember the LORD and teach/preach/pray, etc., while sitting, standing and lying down.
When praying to the LORD was not forbidden, how could calling the name of the LORD fall in VAIN?
Do people pray to the LORD by spelling out a G, a hyphen and a D?
God is not the son of a man or a man to have a name. You can give beautiful names to God and there is no harm. Moses called God Almighty LORD, which is Adonai in Hebrew.
You are the one, who mentions it, so you should ask. If I were wrong, the members of Jewish faith would have certainly posted a note to correct me.
Where do you see G-d in here? "
Also, I had given you the links to Jewish sources, where God was spelled properly and you do not see any G-d there. Did you read at the two links which I gave you? Obviously not!
And now you write: " The question is the following, which name the god his lord does not want to be said/pronunced in vain?"
Is that what you understand by 'taking the name of the LORD in vain"?
Girls getting fucked, cry in ecstasy "Oh my God!" This is an example of calling the name of God in vain. Do you think God gave another name to be called in vain deeds?
One cannot tell his friend, "By God, I will take that girl to bed and fuck her!" This will be calling the name of God in vain.
A man deceives another by promising him in the name of God that he would help him in distress, swears upon God but does not keep that particular promise. That is an example of calling the name of God in vain.
Do you think God gave Moses another name for such activities? LMAO! You crack me up!
Why can't you understand?
Next time, please address my post para by para in separate short posts, as I do with Mahmood.
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
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155680 Dec 8, 2012
@ BMZ....Correction..
I have succumbed to the relentless onslaught on Queen's English by mr Stupido Colonic irrigator!
"Cease" assets?
"Seize" or "sequestrate"!! Duh!!
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155681 Dec 8, 2012
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>In case you missed it, according to Alex 123456789akaWhackyMuslim, "You will burn in hell."
Here's hoping that you have fire insurance.
lol...
Hello anti-gentile christ killer bu(ttturdlick)ford!
You will be in hot excrement and semen, instead of Jesus, according to the revised Talmudic pronouncements.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155682 Dec 8, 2012
Buford wrote:
"You know why...you are deliberately referring to the Holy Quran as koran.
You are referring to Muslims as mohamamdans." ~ Alex1234567890akaWhackiestOfAl lPossibleMuslims
He's wrong. I know for a FACT that you refer to the Qur'an as the Koran, and to mohammadans as Mohammadans, but the Medicated One likes to rewrite history. It's his schtick.
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.
Mahmood

Mississauga, Canada

#155683 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
That was precisely my point. So, it was wrong of you to say that people call Muslims, Mohammadans because they read or say Mohammadan in "'Mohammadan Rasool Allah".
It was the Midevil (Medieval) Christian world that started it and it was heavily used by the Christian polemicists of the last four centuries.
You already know my opinion about these so-called modern scholars, whom I consider half-baked. Hence, no comment on those junkies. Junkies can say whatever they like.
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.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155684 Dec 8, 2012
Eric wrote:
<quoted text>
Never work from memory. Should have been no. 3.
And don't give me that freudian slip bs.
yes dear "honest" person.
No 1 is your category!
You know No. 3 is the best.
Being one of your fellow non-gentile...will Freud get a ticket too?
Do you really think that readers are stupid?
We all know that the chaps in No. 1 will never allow others join it.
They slipped up by inventing Noahidism, a fourth class ticket to nowhere!!!!!!
Enjoy ring side seats with the other 143,999 members!!
But only 12000 from the tribe of Judah will be admitted I guess!
Why does the OT make Judah the biggest murderer in town?
Why does he wipe off all the 11 tribes out of 12?
Does he want all 144000 tickets?
When he realises that the tickets are for a different game with very hot oil and burning fire...it will be too late.
Yep..No. 3 is the BEST.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155685 Dec 8, 2012
Was Ruth a "convert of convenience "to give legitimacy to David?
Any takers?
Mahmood

Mississauga, Canada

#155686 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
That was precisely my point. So, it was wrong of you to say that people call Muslims, Mohammadans because they read or say Mohammadan in "'Mohammadan Rasool Allah".
It was the Midevil (Medieval) Christian world that started it and it was heavily used by the Christian polemicists of the last four centuries.
You already know my opinion about these so-called modern scholars, whom I consider half-baked. Hence, no comment on those junkies. Junkies can say whatever they like.
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.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155687 Dec 8, 2012
Mahmood wrote:
<quoted text>
What I am suggesting is that Allah is Mohammad's alter ego and that is why I call you guys Mohammadans. If you read the Koran, Allah is just pawn in this whole grand scheme of Mohammad's. You guys see god as having tailored the Koran's different verses to the varying circumstances Mohammad would encounter. My assumption in contrast is that Mohammad himself was doing the tailoring - even if often unconsciously and even if convinced god was doing it.
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.
Mahmood

Mississauga, Canada

#155688 Dec 8, 2012
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
I think Norman Stillman did not answer to your question. You said to him if Moses ever existed and he told you that from a theological point of view he DID all, and from a scientific viewpoint none of it is true, meaning anything it said he dd was false.
So he rejected what he (Moses) did but has not answered about his existence.
Well, he did shrug his shoulders and tell me that there was no Moses, the conversation just didn't end there. Its hard for me to explain over the internet.
HughBe

Kingston, Jamaica

#155689 Dec 8, 2012
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
Was Ruth a "convert of convenience "to give legitimacy to David?
Any takers?
Was Joseph's Egyptian wife a CONVERT?

Recall, she had TWO tribes of Israel, Manasseh and Ephraim. Yes these TWO TRIBES of Israel had an EGYTIAN mother.

This clearly exposes the LIES of man-made doctrine about mothers i.e. they determine if you are an Israelite. Wake-up, seed of Israel.

Oh Joseph's wife's father was a PAGAN priest. "daughter of Potipherah priest of On " So what would be his daughter?

Also, no converts here "And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife;

12 Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails;

13 And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from off her, and shall remain in thine house, and bewail her father and her mother a full month: and after that thou shalt go in unto her, and be her husband, and she shall be thy wife.

14 And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not make merchandise of her, because thou hast humbled her."

Tell me, who would CONVERT under these conditions and in 30 days or ONE month? NOBODY!!! ONLY a DECEIVER and a LIAR would suggest otherwise.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#155690 Dec 8, 2012
bmz wrote:
@ Buford
Please read again, as i have added a new term for Christians:
Actually all the Patriarchs and Prophets/Messengers of God were illiterate fellows.
Try to whack and screw Jesus in the Philippines or the Maluku Islands, also known as the Moluccas, or in Africa or among the Egyptian Copts and see how the JESUSARIANS would go berserk and fly into murderous frenzies.
As for the Western Christians, it is perfectly all right for others to bash and screw Jesus in the West. It is fine with them.
By the way, God is a potent He in Christianity too, because God is the Father, not the Mother. Right?
In Islam, God is not the Father.
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.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#155691 Dec 8, 2012
Mahmood wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, he did shrug his shoulders and tell me that there was no Moses, the conversation just didn't end there. Its hard for me to explain over the internet.
Personally I think it doesn't really matter who is to affirm something but rather the evidence(s) that a person brings to support its affermation.

Said this, there are no evidences to affirm Moses existed, as well as there are no evidences to affirm he never existed. So untill one person has no proof to affirm something, those who claim he didn'texist and those who claim he existed, can be putted at the same level.
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

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
Satanists Unveil Design for Statehouse Statue (Jan '14) Thu thefinestallmoved... 16
Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) Dec 10 God worships Sin ... 14,477
Student expelled for casting a spell (Jan '14) Nov 22 Stay6c 6
Is reincarnation real?? (Feb '11) Nov '14 holysupremacy 70
Looking to correspond with Pagan's Nov '14 GordonM 1
drawing with pen Nov '14 scribbles 1
Shadow Energy / Shadow Magic (Feb '08) Nov '14 scribbles 25
More from around the web