Who Is Allah?

Aug 24, 2007 Full story: The Brussels Journal 209,383

“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

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#190014 Sep 21, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>You are insane!
You have no idea what God is saying in the scriptures.
Muslims keep misrepresenting Gods Holy Trinity.
* There is only one God - so even as we talk about the three persons of the trinity we are talking about one God. All three persons of the trinity are God. If you want to look at some verses, you could look at Deuteronomy 6:4, Galatians 1:1, John 1:1-18, and Matthew 28:19.
* There is relationship in the trinity - the Son (Jesus) is obedient to the Father (Luke 22:42); the Holy Spirit is sent by the Father and the Son (John 16:15ff).
So the three persons of the trinity are the same God, but they are each distinct. They have different roles, but each action any member of the trinity might do is God’s action, regardless of who did it.
* We see this distinction / unity when Jesus identifies himself with the Father, saying that he and the Father ‘are one’(John 10:38, 17:11,21), and that he is in the Father and vice versa (John 14:11). Jesus does not say that he IS the Father, or that he and the Father are the SAME, but that they are ONE. So they are distinct, yet unified.
* Because Jesus and the Father are both one and distinct, we can say that God ‘sent his son into the world’-(John 3:16), and also that Jesus came into the world (1 Tim 1:15)- we are speaking about essentially the same action on the part of God, but on the one hand, God the Father sends, on the other, God the Son comes.
Lies upon lies and nothing but lies!

Deuteronomy 6:4 New Living Translation (NLT)

4 “Listen, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord alone.

Footnotes:

6:4 Or The Lord our God is one Lord; or The Lord our God, the Lord is one; or The Lord is our God, the Lord is one."

It does not say that the LORD is one Trinity or one Godhead.

Jesus makes a clear distinction that God sent him.He wants you to know that you should know the true God, who sent Jesus.

John 17:3 disintegrates Trinity:

"Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." This is what John is telling you, not Jesus.

Notice that he does not speak of the Holy Spirit at all.

The triune God or Trinity is a 5th Century forgery and fraud.

Trinity was a concept given by Greek pagan philosophers to the the Church fathers, who accepted it out of courtesy as they were unable to argue with the philosophers.

That is why even a cognizant Christian can neither understand it nor explain it.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#190015 Sep 21, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Lies upon lies and nothing but lies!
Deuteronomy 6:4 New Living Translation (NLT)
4 “Listen, O Israel! The Lord is our God, the Lord alone.
Footnotes:
6:4 Or The Lord our God is one Lord; or The Lord our God, the Lord is one; or The Lord is our God, the Lord is one."
It does not say that the LORD is one Trinity or one Godhead.
Jesus makes a clear distinction that God sent him.He wants you to know that you should know the true God, who sent Jesus.
John 17:3 disintegrates Trinity:
"Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." This is what John is telling you, not Jesus.
Notice that he does not speak of the Holy Spirit at all.
The triune God or Trinity is a 5th Century forgery and fraud.
Trinity was a concept given by Greek pagan philosophers to the the Church fathers, who accepted it out of courtesy as they were unable to argue with the philosophers.
That is why even a cognizant Christian can neither understand it nor explain it.
You are insane BMZ!
You are just babbling without knowledge of what you are talking about.
You should be concerned about the evil Muslims spread in our human society.

Every where Muslims go they cause the community to become morally corrupt with pushing drugs in the community.

Parents don't let your children get involved with Muslim drug gangs.
August 6, 2013,- 3:17 pm
6 Arab Muslim Detroiters Indicted for Running Violent Drug Gang, Used Black Kids to Push Drugs; May Be Illegal Aliens (Amnesty Candidates)
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#190016 Sep 21, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Talking about consistency, are you?
You who change your stance every now and then, PROVING Jesus, where there is none and then deny our prophet when the reference is much more clear?
That's merely your opinion that it is much more clear, and that is the purpose for discussion. But I have not changed the rules at all on the fly. Disagreeing with your claims is not changing the rules at all. Again, I can't talk with someone who doesn't understand basic logic, reasoning and debating.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
And you misquote, it was not Isaiah 9:6, but Isaiah 14:7, where the period itself was specified in the book itslef, not by me, but by Isaiah!!
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Fine, I misremembered. Does it matter? The point is still the same and there is NO time specified by 7:14 at all.
You didn't bring anything conclusive at all about what time period that was supposed to happen, because there is nothing specific at all in that prophecy that dictates a time period.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
And you ignored all that and said that it talks about a boy born 800 years after writing.
While in the case of "Comforter", you insist that he "must come" during the life time of Apostles of Jesus. And you say I am not consistent!!
First of all, I never even discussed that with you yet. So for the 8th time you have attributed something to me that I never said at all. That's yet another good reason to not continue with you. Secondly when he said I will send you a comforter, he was talking in private to his apostles, not to a crowd, and I can provide the verses that clearly say this. Thirdly, I hope that you realize that if you want to start quoting from John, then you have to acknowledge the verses that make Jesus out to be divine as well. And there are many of them. So are you going tom use John when you want, and throw it in the trashcan when you want? Yet even more inconsistency from you and changing of the rules as you see fit. And you don't even know enough to see the logical flaw in doing this.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
The point is that, you people change your rules with each and every prophesy and are never consistent.
Look at this Deut. 18:18, there is no way that it refers to Jesus, but see the twists and turns which you people do to paste it on Jesus.
Oh, it might possibly be about Jesus. It isn't conclusive. But if you reference Deuteronomy 34, it gives us a good idea of what being like Moses means.

10 Since then, no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face, 11 who did all those signs and wonders the Lord sent him to do in Egypt—to Pharaoh and to all his officials and to his whole land. 12 For no one has ever shown the mighty power or performed the awesome deeds that Moses did in the sight of all Israel.

The only dilemma with saying it is Jesus is because it says Prophet, when Jesus was supposed to be much more than a prophet. So for that reason alone, he could be disqualified unless someone claims that someone can be called a Prophet, and yet be so much more than a Prophet. That's debatable. But either way, it is NOT Muhammad. Muhammad did not come from the Jews, and 17:15 clearly tells us who brethren refers to. It refers to fellow Jews. And Muhammad did NOT perform miracles, and 34 is the only thing in the scriptures that explain what one should be if they are to be like Moses. There are no the other descriptions to tell us what like unto you means. So regardless of any similarities in other aspects of the prophecy you might want to read into it, it CANNOT be Muhammad because he was not a Jew, so he is immediately disqualified right there. And it is "possible" for him to be further disqualified because he did no miracles like Moses did.
Guitar player

Austria

#190017 Sep 21, 2013
SHOCKING, no kidding.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#190018 Sep 21, 2013
BMZ is not fluent in Arabic. He once translated the word kitab as revelation when the meaning is a book.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#190019 Sep 21, 2013
Jesus is as per the NT the consciousness-force of a typal being materializing via the DNA of human parents - if this is what is meant by virgin birth. So, this G-d of who Jesus is an incarnation has no DNA. LOL.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#190020 Sep 21, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
No point, because even the Church and the Christians do not know the exact period. The Council of Nicaea held in 325 was only about God and Jesus confusion and had nothing to do with the Holy Spirit and Trinity.

Anyway, I can easily knock off the first 400-500 years straight away. Will appreciate if you could let me have the exact year, when Trinity was formally established and substantiate it with a solid evidence.
http://www.comparativebiblestudylessons.com/L...
"The Confession of the Council of Nicaea said little about the Holy Spirit.[62] The doctrine of the divinity and personality of the Holy Spirit was developed by Athanasius (c 293–373) in the last decades of his life.[67] He both DEFENDED and REFINED the Nicene formula.[62] By the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine had reached substantially its current form"
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#190021 Sep 21, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
SHAMMA,
Slip into BMZ's wife's soiled underwear and begin reading the stinking Quran revealed to that mad man, Muhammad. Then, switch to the NT attributed to another lunatic, Jesus. LOL.
Yes, everybody is a lunatic but you. LOL!!!
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#190022 Sep 21, 2013
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to speak you have an arabic dictionary right on your desk that you use almost everyday. Shame on you.
And he probably even rewrites even that to suit what he wants, just like he does with the Quran.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#190023 Sep 21, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
When was that, pompous fool?
Careful now. We both know that some of the time, you don't even remember saying things, let alone remembering what others say.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#190025 Sep 21, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, that is a hilarious lot. Most of them are also ignorant fools.
You should go on there as they are surprising very very well studied on Islam. I would even say more studied than you are. Sometimes you have made claims, and then I quote verses from the Quran that clearly contradict your claims, and you say nothing in response and pretend as though the verses were never even pointed out. That has happened more than once, and you were smart to not even reply so that you could pretend those verses were never pointed out to you or that you didn't see them pointed out to you, and as time goes by, everybody forgets it even happened. You seem to take this tact a lot.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#190026 Sep 21, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
<quoted text>
Not very true.
We don't know the given context and why the Buddha made such a comment about living in the present that clearly is a half-baked solution to dealing with life.
More on this, later.
Well, first of all, we all know how many solutions you have about dealing with life....eerm. Second of all, you usually have a hard time with philosophical depth. You seem to grasp science, but not deep philosophical thinking, and deep thinking and scientific thinking are two entirely different disciplines. So don't even bother with someone as deep as Buddha as he will merely confuse you, just like people like Krishnamurti do as well. I could explain to you exactly what he meant, but it wouldn't do any good, and it would take a little while for me to explain. So I'm not going to waste that kind of time with you on a pointless exercise.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#190027 Sep 21, 2013
bmz wrote:
Christianity has made a mockery of God and the obedient servant Jesus.
Islam has made a mockery of concepts like peace, justice, equality, tolerance, and consent, and that's because its only "prophet" was IN FACT a thief, a liar, a sadistic murderer, a rape enabler (if not a rapist himself, See: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Safiyah ) and a Jew hating bigot.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#190028 Sep 21, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
BMZ is not fluent in Arabic. He once translated the word kitab as revelation when the meaning is a book.
In this particular case, I would have to defend him because in the context that he was probably speaking in, the two words can be said to be interchangeable. So I don't see a huge foul on that "particular" instance, but there are other instance that could be called fouls.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#190029 Sep 21, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
Jesus is as per the NT the consciousness-force of a typal being materializing via the DNA of human parents
In your story, how does a typal being materialize from connection with the larger typal force or whatever you called it? Do they lose their DNA when they do this?

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#190030 Sep 21, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>

So don't even bother with someone as deep as Buddha as he will merely confuse you
Buddha is not deep.

From a yogic perspective, Buddha is an average spiritualist.

His typal consciousness is the the 4th plane of cosmic consciousness - quite low in the cosmic hierarchy.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#190031 Sep 21, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>

In your story, how does a typal being materialize from connection with the larger typal force or whatever you called it? Do they lose their DNA when they do this?
LOL.

You've understood nothing about the subject.

Doesn't matter.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#190032 Sep 21, 2013
WHO CAN BE CALLED DEEP?

Sri Aurobindo, his spiritual collaborator the Mother, Sage Agastya or someone of this order of Yoga can be considered DEEP....

These abovenamed personalities ascended to the 12th to 15th planes of cosmic consciousness in the Yoga which are the planes of the supramental consciousness-force.

Yes, in Yoga, to rise to the 12th to 15th cosmic planes is a great achievement.

Before these great yogis, Buddha appears a spiritual pygmy.

Buddha could rise only as high as the 4th plane of cosmic consciousness which is pretty low when compared to the 12th to 15th planes.

However, there exist numerous planes that far exceed the supramental planes.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#190033 Sep 21, 2013
Buddha's nirvana is a mere stepping back via trance from the vicissitudes of the frontal personality comprising the human equivalents of the mental, vital-emotional and physical consciousness-force fields. This is an ordinary achievement in the Yoga.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#190034 Sep 21, 2013
ABSOLUTE REST BEHIND THE FLUXES:

1) Most importantly, Buddha saw everything as a mass of ever changing forces without an underlying absolute substratum/source which is the fountainhead of stability from which upon manifestation a series of force fields originate that keep vibrating at typal or at fixed frequencies in decreasing order beginning from the end of the absolute. Being stuck in trying to step back from the fluctuations of the surface or frontal force force fields, Buddha lost sight of the absolute underlying all the various degrees of fluxes of all the numerous cosmic and supracosmic planes.

2) Change can be conceived only with respect to a body that is in a state of greater or lesser change and so it's logical to assume that there exists a state of absolute stability that forms the basis of all the various fluxes manifested from it in descending order. Buddha knew nothing beyond the 4th cosmic plane of consciousness-force and as said earlier the 4th cosmic plane is an inferior plane.

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
'Monotheism inevitable but wasn't a break with ... 9 hr MAAT 3
Pastors agree: Being gay not a sin, Bible says ... (Jun '08) 20 hr true fact 81
"Juggalos" Speak Out After Arson Arrests (Sep '07) Jan 20 Hillbilly 49
My friendly neighbourhood witches (Jul '08) Jan 18 Kaitlin the Wolf ... 454
Satanists Unveil Design for Statehouse Statue (Jan '14) Jan 12 You big dummy 20
Kwanzaa 2014, Day 7, Imani means faith; find th... Jan 4 Ceocailleach 1
The Storm Clan (Jun '07) Dec 27 Terry Hiltibidal 3
More from around the web