Who Is Allah?

Who Is Allah?

There are 253952 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.

Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#163721 Feb 15, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
If anyone wants to bese a law using the argumentum ad authority, you need some attributed hyperboles to establish the fact.
But none would take it literal.
Or let's hope not. Christians and muslims do have that tendency.
OK, you believe in "attributed hyperboles" that aren't to be taken literally, which tells me exactly nothing, except that this way of not knowing anything with certainty is your "tendency."
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#163722 Feb 15, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
But i guess you would agree that contradictions in the NT and even John's gospel are not helping.
Nor does the fad of borrowing from the Torah or tanakh.
I say we had one homest poster (though he did go on about the calendar a bit) that admitted that christianity has no leg to stand on without using the tanakh for a cruch.
Same would go for islam.
Just in general. If we would read Homer we would first check out whether the translations is done by experts. And a good edition would show in the footnotes what is still under discussion.
So basicly you would need to use a bible that does the same.
Well there is the 10,000 plus pages version that theologians would have access to. And on the net if you know where to look.
Post the link.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#163723 Feb 15, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>If the Torah "writes off" all non-Jews as "unworthy" of some divinely conferred privilege, and God knows that all humans are not now and may never become Jews, then why shouldn't the non-Jews of the world REJECT the Torah as unfairly discriminatory, seeing as how they can INTERBREED with actual Jews, which is to say, they aren't a different species?
wow...you have been reading some of my post grad work eh?
mine were not that harsh!

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#163724 Feb 15, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>If the Torah "writes off" all non-Jews as "unworthy" of some divinely conferred privilege, and God knows that all humans are not now and may never become Jews, then why shouldn't the non-Jews of the world REJECT the Torah as unfairly discriminatory, seeing as how they can INTERBREED with actual Jews, which is to say, they aren't a different species?
If you came to that conclusion it shows that misrepresentation has taken hold.
The origin is a tribal god with a mutual contract. But Moses stated people can accept it not by being forced but by showing us our ways. So hinting at adoption.
Only later we get the judahite state point of view. Well if you find fault with their idea of exclusivity i can't blame you.
But the idea would be selfpreservation and not allowing to let other people muddy the waters.
Not so different from what happens here on the forum.
But they called themselves goy too.
Gentile is a church definition they base it on the twisted interpretation and out of contxt quote-mining of torah and added to that by declaring that they on the other hand were universal (paul also doing away with Abraham). Borrowing authority from god needed creating a direct line of supercession.(therefore Uhuh's post is funny)
So reverse attribution happened. They were no longer the favorite, even though in hebrew you will not find a single verse stating that.

Not so different from the 19th century movement in Germany or europe in general.
The church is suppressive and with the gentry makes and keeps people poor.
Where did they get their ideas? Well it started with the jews, the O.T., therefore the jews are to blame at base.
The scapegoat found again. Even though as the philosopher René Girard would say, the bible did away with that.

I would say the best approach would be to list all ideas chronologically, about jesus.

So
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#163725 Feb 15, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Millions, eh? Enumerate them.
Judah killed 500000 Israelites in one day...and if you survive to face the next day it will be a million!!
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#163726 Feb 15, 2013
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Judah killed 500000 Israelites in one day...and if you survive to face the next day it will be a million!!
Wow! Judah is the God of Abraham! Who knew?
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#163727 Feb 15, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
If you came to that conclusion it shows that misrepresentation has taken hold.
The origin is a tribal god with a mutual contract. But Moses stated people can accept it not by being forced but by showing us our ways. So hinting at adoption.
Only later we get the judahite state point of view. Well if you find fault with their idea of exclusivity i can't blame you.
But the idea would be selfpreservation and not allowing to let other people muddy the waters.
Not so different from what happens here on the forum.
But they called themselves goy too.
Gentile is a church definition they base it on the twisted interpretation and out of contxt quote-mining of torah and added to that by declaring that they on the other hand were universal (paul also doing away with Abraham). Borrowing authority from god needed creating a direct line of supercession.(therefore Uhuh's post is funny)
So reverse attribution happened. They were no longer the favorite, even though in hebrew you will not find a single verse stating that.
Not so different from the 19th century movement in Germany or europe in general.
The church is suppressive and with the gentry makes and keeps people poor.
Where did they get their ideas? Well it started with the jews, the O.T., therefore the jews are to blame at base.
The scapegoat found again. Even though as the philosopher René Girard would say, the bible did away with that.
I would say the best approach would be to list all ideas chronologically, about jesus.
So
I prefaced my remarks with an "If." You have clarified matters. Thank you.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#163728 Feb 15, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Al-EX the Phallocentric,
How many Heavens was it that the "TRUE GOD" created? Seven? Eight? Ten? One Zillion?
Makes no darn difference even if he was too tired after 6 days of creation and being short sighted unable to find Adam in a haystack!!
Listen you fool.
The can ONLY be ONE God.
No matter how you jump up and down, if a person believes in ONE TRUE God then that person has a chance of being recognised as a true believer.

But, if people start worshipping men, those men go down a slippery slope to end up in hell, head first, in hot excrement and semen.

so beware!
If you worship men, they end up in hell with you!

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#163729 Feb 15, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>OK, you believe in "attributed hyperboles" that aren't to be taken literally, which tells me exactly nothing, except that this way of not knowing anything with certainty is your "tendency."
Come of it.
If the rule state to only give burnt-offerings when all are present, at the proper time and with the proper quorum present to have the ritual go without a glitch. Then we get a parasha/parable about two boys that think differently and go out in the middle ofthe night and end up getting the heavy dish overturned and burned with the coals.
So if an earth-quake gets attributed to a god, we find nothing different from other cultures. Whatever the name is, they would give such events super-natural meaning.
If i describe this it would not mean (read back: this way of not knowing anything with certainty is your tendency.) that i have to state that i know exactly what happened allover the world.
That would obviously be daft. All i can do is describe what has been yotted down or what is told in folk-lore.
Overlooking discrepancies and contradictions is exactly what religions usually do.
Religion-to bind by ritual and fixed definitions.
Believe is not the same as knowledge.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#163730 Feb 15, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Wow! Judah is the God of Abraham! Who knew?
Idiot!!
God does not come down to kill israelites you dumbass...
God gets others to do it!
READ the Tanach you nutcase..

But you may have some redeeming qualities...you did challenge the Jewish view of the non Jewish "world"..good for you!
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#163731 Feb 15, 2013
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
No matter how you jump up and down, if a person believes in ONE TRUE God then that person has a chance of being recognised as a true believer.
But, if people start worshipping men, those men go down a slippery slope to end up in hell, head first, in hot excrement and semen.
so beware!
If you worship men, they end up in hell with you!
Golly gee, you mean that there is a slim chance that I might be recognized as a "true believer" if I somehow by miraculous chance find myself believing in the "ONE TRUE God" that you also believe in???

Umm.. I don't also have to believe in that Arabian warlord, do I?
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#163732 Feb 15, 2013
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Idiot!!
God does not come down to kill israelites you dumbass...
God gets others to do it!
READ the Tanach you nutcase..
But you may have some redeeming qualities...you did challenge the Jewish view of the non Jewish "world"..good for you!
Take your meds.
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#163733 Feb 15, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Come of it.
If the rule state to only give burnt-offerings when all are present, at the proper time and with the proper quorum present to have the ritual go without a glitch. Then we get a parasha/parable about two boys that think differently and go out in the middle ofthe night and end up getting the heavy dish overturned and burned with the coals.
So if an earth-quake gets attributed to a god, we find nothing different from other cultures. Whatever the name is, they would give such events super-natural meaning.
If i describe this it would not mean (read back: this way of not knowing anything with certainty is your tendency.) that i have to state that i know exactly what happened allover the world.
That would obviously be daft. All i can do is describe what has been yotted down or what is told in folk-lore.
Overlooking discrepancies and contradictions is exactly what religions usually do.
Religion-to bind by ritual and fixed definitions.
Believe is not the same as knowledge.
OK, what exactly do you KNOW about the God of Abraham?

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#163734 Feb 15, 2013
Ali wrote:
bmz, If 'Jesus being God' is a lie from Satan, then the Qur'an is doubly a lie because it came from a demon called Jibreal. Any proof that he wasn't a jin? M said it was a jin but Khadija, a woman!!! persuaded him it was an angel!!! lol. Who do we believe? That was the only true thing M ever uttered!
Qadir, nothing is chronological in Islam, especially the mess of a book called the 'holy' Qur'an. We are able to study the origins of our Scriptures whereas to muslims it is SHIRK! We are all quaking!!!Woa boy!
Allah is the pagan moon god - why don't muslims call God Illah, the true word?
Silly Joy of Pune!!!!! get a life or take some prune juice!
bmz, you are ignorant of the Bible and you are obviously in denial to intelligent Western people! All you know is what you have been spoon-fed.
The version you keep quoting from about Jesus saying 'dont cling to me...' is a poor translation. The true translation says,'dont TOUCH me for I have not yet ascended..'
The correct interpretation is that, as per the purification requirements of priests and sacrifices had to be strictly obeyed. No ceremonially unclean or unqualified person was permitted by God to touch the sacrifice until presented before God on the Mercy Seat.
If she had touched Jesus, she would have defiled the sacrifice making it unacceptable to God! Do you grasp this amazing truth? Jesus blood WAS however accepted in heaven, then He came down for all here to touch. Now you are so much of a wiser muslim!(if there is such a thing!) lol
Alex 123, you know nothing, nothing, nothing! You only parrot Islamic ignorance. Illah allah illah, ha ha ha, etc, lol
Shamma, you bless me with you logical and true postings; Paul, you also do well. Sadly guys, the spiritual descendants of the illegitimate Ishmael have brain damage and are unable and unwilling to comprehend any truth.
"You shall know the Truth (Jesus) and the truth shall set you free." Inshallah muslim eyes will open....
Allah was not a moongod, at most he would have incorporated all such attributions.
There is simply no pre-islamic source stating as such.
Allah is however attested as a travel god, found on pre-islamic caravan routes at places for rest in stone inscirption and not so different form Allat. Though she lorded it all.

Mary was herself of immaculate reception, so her mother an immacualte reseptee also, so goddess in person if you wish. So his mother can, if your interpretation is correct, not have been the Mary not being allowed to touch even the hem of his robe.
Though i find the imagery funny. A mere womens touch would keep him grounded.
Later eating fish seems to have been no objection.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#163735 Feb 15, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>OK, what exactly do you KNOW about the God of Abraham?
The few remarks and tales in Exodus would be the extend of it, he gave praise to YHWH that would be Elohim.
And one of the lessons is, that human sacrifice is wrong.
Using ancient persian it was the old name for the silk-route.
Using archeology we find Terah and other names associated with Abrams life in the Lake Van area.

Just some ways of looking.
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#163736 Feb 15, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Allah was not a moongod, at most he would have incorporated all such attributions.
There is simply no pre-islamic source stating as such.
Allah is however attested as a travel god, found on pre-islamic caravan routes at places for rest in stone inscirption and not so different form Allat. Though she lorded it all.
Mary was herself of immaculate reception, so her mother an immacualte reseptee also, so goddess in person if you wish. So his mother can, if your interpretation is correct, not have been the Mary not being allowed to touch even the hem of his robe.
Though i find the imagery funny. A mere womens touch would keep him grounded.
Later eating fish seems to have been no objection.
Not necessary that Mary's mother be immaculate, as what she received was a gift.
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#163737 Feb 15, 2013
MAAT wrote:
And one of the lessons is, that human sacrifice is wrong.
Why is it wrong?
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#163738 Feb 15, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Wow! Judah is the God of Abraham! Who knew?
2 Chronicles 13:15-18.......

How about OT that is MORE ACCEPTABLE to a BUNCH OF LOSERS like you YOU?

15 and the men of Judah raised the battle cry. When the men of Judah raised the battle cry, ALLAH routed Jeroboam and all Israel before Abijah and Judah.&#8239;

16 So the Israelites fled before Judah, and ALLAH handed them over to them.&#8239;

17 Then Abijah and his people struck them with a mighty blow, and 500,000 choice men of Israel were killed.

18 The Israelites were subdued at that time. The Judahites succeeded because they depended on ALLAH, the God of their ancestors.

NOW YOU CAN BLAME ALLAH FOR BEATING THE CRAP OUT OF ISRAELITES!!!

WHAT ARE YOU? AN IDOT!!!

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#163739 Feb 15, 2013
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Allah was not a moongod, at most he would have incorporated all such attributions.
There is simply no pre-islamic source stating as such.
Allah is however attested as a travel god, found on pre-islamic caravan routes at places for rest in stone inscirption and not so different form Allat. Though she lorded it all.
Mary was herself of immaculate reception, so her mother an immacualte reseptee also, so goddess in person if you wish. So his mother can, if your interpretation is correct, not have been the Mary not being allowed to touch even the hem of his robe.
Though i find the imagery funny. A mere womens touch would keep him grounded.
Later eating fish seems to have been no objection.
Your analyses is wring.
What is her problem? That isn’t clear but the phrase “an issue of blood” suggests a menstrual issue. This would have been very serious because among the Jews a menstrating woman was “unclean,” and being perpetually unclean for twelve years couldn’t have been pleasant, even if the condition itself wasn’t physically troublesome. Thus, we have is a person who is not only experiencing a physical malady but a religious one as well.

She doesn’t actually approach to ask for Jesus’ help, which makes sense if she considers herself unclean. Instead, she joins those pressing close to him and touches his garment. This, for some reason, works. Just touching Jesus’ clothing heals her immediately, as if Jesus has imbued his clothing with his power or is leaking healthy energy.

This is strange to our eyes because we look for a “natural” explanation. In first century Judea, however, everyone believed in spirits whose power and abilities were beyond comprehension. The idea of being able to touch a holy person or just their clothing to be healed would not have been odd and no one would have wondered about “leaks.”



The answer comes from Jesus: she was healed not because Jesus wanted to heal her or because she was the only one who needed healing, but rather because she had faith. As with previous instances of Jesus healing someone, it ultimately comes back to the quality of their faith which determines whether it is possible.

““You must not lose faith ”

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#163740 Feb 15, 2013
For all the obvious reasons. Do not kill.
And jewish ritual still has a day where they recall being silly in thinking g-d even wanted that. We have free-will and are asked to reason for ourselves what is just. The Law -torah points to using reason...not just blind faith. Also in deciding what laws are having priority.
Comparable the fiqh as used in Islam.
Church law is a bit harder to find.

Numbers 16 however also makes the point of who rules with permission of the g-d.
I'll grant you that. But the hyperbole and attribution is obvious.

It's not a lamb,(which was a replacement of no concern, as in not having the same meaning as taking a human life.) that needs slaughtering in the form of Mithra/jesus imagery to laud the new world order.

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 Remembering a Christian and a Jew who traced an... Aug 25 JesusWasNOTaJew G... 12
News Athiest tells high schoolers God is evil (May '11) Aug 25 Eagle 12 798
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Aug 25 Eagle 12 4,819
Anyone still at this forum Aug 23 Sarah Good 1
When do you know if you are truly Wiccan? (Nov '07) Aug 11 Tekmoses 137
Convert me from Agnostic to Atheist Jul '16 ATHEOI 2
Astrology and Paganism Jun '16 Wolf 1
More from around the web