Who Is Allah?

Who Is Allah?

There are 254838 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

#154783 Nov 23, 2012
Cont.

2. Loyalty to the Imams
Recognition of the Imams is meaningless unless loyalty to them is added. In other words, if recognition of the Imams is bare of loyalty to them, it will be worthless. This is because the Imam, whose mission is to confirm the realities of Sharia, elucidate its rulings, guard it against trickeries and false interpolations of the atheists, and exert all efforts for protecting, supporting, and pleasing Muslims spiritually and materially in this world as well as the life to come, is the Prophet’s representative and the pioneer towards the Islamic idealities. Such being the case, any negligence of the loyalty to the Imam will lead to deviation. This fact was frequently confirmed by the Prophet (s) who, in more than one occasion, declared that the right guidance and triumph will completely accompany the loyalty to the Immaculate Imams, while deviation will be the share of him who leaves and dissents from them:

“The like of my the Ahl ul-Bayt is Noah’s ark—he that embarks on it will be saved, while he that falls behind will be sunk.”

“I will leave with you things that will save you from deviation so long as you adhere to: the Book of Allah, which is a cord extended from the heavens to the earth, and my family—the Ahl ul-Bayt. These two will never depart each other until they join me on the Divine Pool. Consider how you will regard me through them.”

On the authority of his fathers, Imam as-Sadiq narrated that Amir ul-Mu'minin (a), once, was asked about the meaning of ‘my family’ in the Prophet’s saying,‘I will leave with you the two weighty things: the Book of Allah and my family’?

He answered:“This refers to me, al-Hassan, al- Hussein, and the nine Imams from the descendants of al-Hussein. The ninth will be al-Mahdi al-Qa’im. They will not contradict the Book of Allah, and the Book of Allah will not contradict them until they will join the Prophet (s) on His Pool.”

This hadith substantiates the fact that the Ahl ul-Bayt and the holy Quran are full twins that never depart each other. Like the Quran’s being the constitution and the argument against Muslims, an imam from the Ahl ul-Bayt (a) must exist in every age to hold the position of Muslims’ leadership and guide them to prosperity. The Prophet (s) said:

“He who desires to live like me, die like me, and be taken to the paradise of eternity of which my Lord has promised me, must be loyal to Ali and his descendants, for they will never take you out of the door of right guidance and will never take you to a door of deviation.”
HughBe

Kingston, Jamaica

#154784 Nov 23, 2012
uhuh wrote:
<quoted text>
so Christians believe as FACT that Satan is God of this aeon like Paul taught
Satan is God of this world, the LORD is God of the next world? lol that is typical gnostic dualism
the holocaust, the pogroms, the spree killings, blame it all on Satan not evil men
uhuh---no man of God would accept as FACT that Satan is the "Archon tou kosmos" (Ruler of this kosmos) or "Theos tou aionos" (God of this aeon)
that is unless he is in fact a man of Satan

HughBe---Think about this, if God is the RULER of this world and there is so much MURDER, RAPE, INJUSTICE, WARS etc. then surely He is doing a very poor job.

If on the other hand Satan or the god of MURDER, DECEPTION etc. is in RULING then he is doing a good job.

uhuh--so Christians believe as FACT that Satan is God of this aeon like Paul taught
Satan is God of this world, the LORD is God of the next world? lol that is typical gnostic dualism

HughBe--- I cannot speak for ALL Christians as you have done as there are many diverse beliefs in Christianity. These differences are MAJOR e.g. day of worship meaning to worship on Saturday or Sunday, eating clean meat as opposed to eating all meat, observance of the appointed feasts in the bible as opposed to Christmas etc. and finally and MOST importantly the issue of the divinity of Jesus. So don't make generalize statements about Christians.

uhuh---the holocaust, the pogroms, the spree killings, blame it all on Satan not evil men

HughBe--- EVIL is EVIL in God's eyes as well as my eyes. The massacres of Palestinians is EVIL. Now the use of the word massacre is that of an Israeli whose father was a general in the army of Israel and who comes from a Zionist family. Video to be provide.

Now, YOUR own country has been involved in the MASSACRE of Christians. Tell me about the Spanish Inquisition and how many Christians were killed.

In our lifetime, the US FALSELY accused Saddam of having WMD and invaded Iraq. I have heard that the operation first called OIL cost the lives of ONE MILLION Iraqis. Was it worth the while? Whose interest was served by the MASSACRE of so many Iraqis?
HughBe

Kingston, Jamaica

#154785 Nov 23, 2012
uhuh wrote:
<quoted text>
so Christians believe as FACT that Satan is God of this aeon like Paul taught
Satan is God of this world, the LORD is God of the next world? lol that is typical gnostic dualism
the holocaust, the pogroms, the spree killings, blame it all on Satan not evil men
&fe ature=related

listen to his words from about the 4th minute for the MASSACRE and terrorism comment.
HughBe

Kingston, Jamaica

#154786 Nov 23, 2012
LATER
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#154787 Nov 23, 2012
HughBe wrote:
<quoted text>
uhuh---no man of God would accept as FACT that Satan is the "Archon tou kosmos" (Ruler of this kosmos) or "Theos tou aionos" (God of this aeon)
that is unless he is in fact a man of Satan
HughBe---Think about this, if God is the RULER of this world and there is so much MURDER, RAPE, INJUSTICE, WARS etc. then surely He is doing a very poor job.
If on the other hand Satan or the god of MURDER, DECEPTION etc. is in RULING then he is doing a good job.
uhuh--so Christians believe as FACT that Satan is God of this aeon like Paul taught
Satan is God of this world, the LORD is God of the next world? lol that is typical gnostic dualism
HughBe--- I cannot speak for ALL Christians as you have done as there are many diverse beliefs in Christianity. These differences are MAJOR e.g. day of worship meaning to worship on Saturday or Sunday, eating clean meat as opposed to eating all meat, observance of the appointed feasts in the bible as opposed to Christmas etc. and finally and MOST importantly the issue of the divinity of Jesus. So don't make generalize statements about Christians.
uhuh---the holocaust, the pogroms, the spree killings, blame it all on Satan not evil men
HughBe--- EVIL is EVIL in God's eyes as well as my eyes. The massacres of Palestinians is EVIL. Now the use of the word massacre is that of an Israeli whose father was a general in the army of Israel and who comes from a Zionist family. Video to be provide.
Now, YOUR own country has been involved in the MASSACRE of Christians. Tell me about the Spanish Inquisition and how many Christians were killed.
In our lifetime, the US FALSELY accused Saddam of having WMD and invaded Iraq. I have heard that the operation first called OIL cost the lives of ONE MILLION Iraqis. Was it worth the while? Whose interest was served by the MASSACRE of so many Iraqis?
rabbee: no it means that all of you, are doing a lousy job. and this is why G-D, has unleashed the three angels hasatan, baal hamolech, and halooseefer upon the world. for G-D, is in charge of both the light and the dark. in this world, that prefers the dark side.

gilded calves are the result of worshiping the religion, and not worshiping G-D. being true to your religions, shall result in you not being true to G-D.

too proudly proclaiming, you are a jew, muslem, christian, buddist, or etc... comes with extreem dangers of idolitry. even claiming to be french, russian, brittish, american, or etc... comes with extreem dangers of national idolitry. when even following Moshe, Who is following G-D can present dangers. rather than following G-D with Moshe.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#154788 Nov 23, 2012
any presence of pestilence, plague or famine. means you, are not doing a good job. because G-D, is doing exactly as promised to idolitors.

so from cockroaches, to cancer, crime, to homosexuality, drought, famine are signs that your territory/nation/world is against G-D.

as global warming is a sign of G-D'S greater anger toward the whole world. the more widespread and diverse is the disbelief, the more widespread and diverse is the anger of G-D. and the more widespread is the pestilence, plague, and faming.

as your disbelief in G-D, shall murder your neighbors too.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#154789 Nov 23, 2012
idolitry shall result, in diverse religions. as i have yet to meet, any jew, christian, or muslem. that is not involved in some idolitry. too many religions, mean you are all screwed up. so please do not tell me, that yours is the only true religion. because i know better, than that.

even telling me, you are this or that religion. tells me you are following the religion, instead of G-D. and anyone who is against, G-D re-establishing Ysrael, i consider to be a muslem idolitor.
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#154790 Nov 23, 2012
Buford wrote:
CORRECTION:
IRANIAN rap artist, Shahin Najafi, has been condemned to death for insulting a Shia Imam.
Your dearest and most beloved Iranian friend is safe. He is living in Germany now. So, please tell him not to worry.

And you stop worrying too.
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#154791 Nov 23, 2012
Buford wrote:
BTW, insulting Immaculate Mary is not a capital offense in any branch or sect of Christianity.
Please go to Benghazi, insult Mary loudly in public and see what happens. And before you do that, please make sure no one is inside the US embassy.
Buford

Scott Depot, WV

#154792 Nov 23, 2012
Surprise! Surprise! Part 2

Opponents of Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi are protesting violently in several Egyptian cities, after Morsi gave himself unprecedented powers.
http://news.msn.com/world/morsi-called-pharao...

CAIRO - Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi's decree exempting all his decisions from legal challenge until a new parliament was elected caused fury amongst his opponents on Friday who accused him of being the new Hosni Mubarak and hijacking the revolution.

Thousands of chanting protesters packed Tahrir Square, the heart of the 2011 anti-Mubarak uprising, demanding Morsi quit and accusing him of launching a "coup". There were violent protests in Alexandria, Port Said and Suez.

Morsi's aides said the presidential decree was to speed up a protracted transition that has been hindered by legal obstacles but Morsi's rivals were quick to condemn him as a new autocratic pharaoh who wanted to impose his Islamist vision on Egypt.

Buoyed by accolades from around the world for mediating a truce between Hamas and Israel, Morsi on Thursday ordered that an Islamist-dominated assembly writing the new constitution could not be dissolved by legal challenges.

"Morsi a 'temporary' dictator," was the headline in the independent daily Al-Masry Al-Youm.

Morsi, an Islamist whose roots are in the Muslim Brotherhood, also gave himself sweeping powers that allowed him to sack the unpopular general prosecutor and opened the door for a retrial for Mubarak and his aides.

The president's decree aimed to end the logjam and push Egypt, the Arab world's most populous nation, more quickly on its democratic path, the presidential spokesman said.

"President Morsi said we must go out of the bottleneck without breaking the bottle," Yasser Ali told Reuters.

Speaking at a Cairo mosque, Morsi told worshippers Egypt was moving forward. "I fulfill my duties to please God and the nation," he said, the official news agency reported.

The president's decree said any decrees he issued while no parliament sat could not be challenged, moves that consolidated his powers but look set to polarize Egypt further, threatening more turbulence in a nation at the heart of the Arab Spring.
__________
I get it. Morsi will only be a temporary dictator for life.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#154793 Nov 23, 2012
Buford wrote:
Positive Spin:
Fallujah Today
http://northshorejournal.org/fallujah-today
Negative Spin:
Seven years after sieges, Fallujah struggles
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/201...
Yes for sure.
This is one big non-gentile asslicker.
Its funny how butt-licker pops up to defend the non gentiles who deny their god while he claims he was born a gentile!
funny little creep.
lying butt-turd licker
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#154794 Nov 23, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Please go to Benghazi, insult Mary loudly in public and see what happens. And before you do that, please make sure no one is inside the US embassy.
Salaams brother!
butt-turd licker has nothing to do with christianity.
he is a non gentile barnacle on the backs of Christian gentiles.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#154795 Nov 23, 2012
Buford wrote:
Surprise! Surprise! Part 2
Opponents of Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi are protesting violently in several Egyptian cities, after Morsi gave himself unprecedented powers.
http://news.msn.com/world/morsi-called-pharao...
CAIRO - Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi's decree exempting all his decisions from legal challenge until a new parliament was elected caused fury amongst his opponents on Friday who accused him of being the new Hosni Mubarak and hijacking the revolution.
Thousands of chanting protesters packed Tahrir Square, the heart of the 2011 anti-Mubarak uprising, demanding Morsi quit and accusing him of launching a "coup". There were violent protests in Alexandria, Port Said and Suez.
Morsi's aides said the presidential decree was to speed up a protracted transition that has been hindered by legal obstacles but Morsi's rivals were quick to condemn him as a new autocratic pharaoh who wanted to impose his Islamist vision on Egypt.
Buoyed by accolades from around the world for mediating a truce between Hamas and Israel, Morsi on Thursday ordered that an Islamist-dominated assembly writing the new constitution could not be dissolved by legal challenges.
"Morsi a 'temporary' dictator," was the headline in the independent daily Al-Masry Al-Youm.
Morsi, an Islamist whose roots are in the Muslim Brotherhood, also gave himself sweeping powers that allowed him to sack the unpopular general prosecutor and opened the door for a retrial for Mubarak and his aides.
The president's decree aimed to end the logjam and push Egypt, the Arab world's most populous nation, more quickly on its democratic path, the presidential spokesman said.
"President Morsi said we must go out of the bottleneck without breaking the bottle," Yasser Ali told Reuters.
Speaking at a Cairo mosque, Morsi told worshippers Egypt was moving forward. "I fulfill my duties to please God and the nation," he said, the official news agency reported.
The president's decree said any decrees he issued while no parliament sat could not be challenged, moves that consolidated his powers but look set to polarize Egypt further, threatening more turbulence in a nation at the heart of the Arab Spring.
__________
I get it. Morsi will only be a temporary dictator for life.
no surprise!
butt-turd has a simple agenda!
and we all know it.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#154796 Nov 23, 2012
A brief history of Israel
1897: Zionism gets established
Jews have been scattered around Europe and Russia for centuries. However, they were never welcome anywhere, except for brief periods. Not surprisingly, many Jews dreamed of having their own nation.

In 1897 Theodor Herzl officially announced the creation of the Zionist movement. The goal of Zionism was to create a nation for Jews in Palestine. Their goal was not to make friends around the world, nor to love other nations or other people.

The problem they faced was that the Arabs who were living there had no desire to give it up. Also, Turkey had control of Palestine of this time, and Turkey refused to give any part of Palestine to the Jews.

A few Jews moved into Palestine at this time, but only in small numbers were allowed in, and they could not take the land for their own nation.

The Arabs were not concerned when the first few Jews arrived. The Arabs did not realize what was coming up in the future, just as the Native Americans did not realize what was happening when the Pilgrims landed on their shore. Only after a few years, when the quantity of Jews increased, did the Arabs become angry.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#154797 Nov 23, 2012
Zionists look for friends in high places
Britain was regarded as a world leader at this time (America in 1900 was not much above Australia in the world's social hierarchy). The Zionists thought that perhaps the British government could somehow help them.

The Zionists needed influence over the British government. They soon noticed a law firm in London in which one of the partners was also a government official. By going to this law firm for any legal help they needed,(or pretended to need), they would have access to a high-level government official. This gave them the opportunity to become friends (at least to a certain extent) with a government official. This contact with the law firm turned out to help them meet other government officials.

The Zionists spent a lot of time contacting British government officials and trying to convince them to help the Zionists cause, but the most the British government was willing to do was in 1903 when they offered to make some land in Uganda available to the Zionists.(Britain still had colonies around the world at this time.)

Since Turkey controlled Palestine, I have to wonder what the Zionists were thinking the British government could do for them. Did they think it was possible that the British government would convince Turkey into allowing a portion of Palestine to become Israel? Or did they think Britain would start a war with Turkey, drive the Turks out of Palestine, and then give Palestine to the Zionists?
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#154798 Nov 23, 2012
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Salaams brother!
butt-turd licker has nothing to do with christianity.
he is a non gentile barnacle on the backs of Christian gentiles.
Salaams, bro.

Must be a lovely evening there. I have to go to bed. Good night

How nice would it be to see a Christian insulting Mary loudly in the Vatican compound! All will love him. lol!
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#154799 Nov 23, 2012
The Brits, French, and Zionists try to use each other in WW1:::
Zionism got established in 1896, but not much happened with it until World War 1.
Exactly what role the Zionists played during World War 1 is a mystery. All we know for certain is that the Zionists were looking for help in creating Israel.
During wars there is a lot of lying, manipulation, spying, fake documents, and double crossing. You cannot expect historians to make sense of events during a war because the lying and deception is at extreme levels.
We know that during the war both the British and French governments gave the Zionists a document which offered support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine, although in such a vague manner that neither government was actually committing to anything.

Did the Zionists outsmart the British and French in order to get those documents?

Or did the British and French give the Zionists those documents in an attempt to use the Zionists in some manner?

Or (most likely) were all three groups trying to take advantage of one another?

Some historians believe the British government was trying to use the Zionists to bring America into the war, thereby providing Britain with some assistance.

In this scenario, Britain wanted the Zionists to encourage the American Jews to put pressure on the American government to get into in the war.

Other historians believe that some British government officials may have been thinking that it would be to Britain's advantage to have Zionists in Palestine because that would put some friends of Britain near the Suez canal.

Furthermore, some historians believe that some British officials also made promises to Arabs, while other officials made promises to France.

If this situation seems confusing, remember, this was a time of war. Individual government officials sometimes act on their own, promising things they cannot deliver, and promising things that conflict with the promises of other officials. And sometimes government officials make promises that they have no intention of keeping.

Nobody will ever know exactly what the Zionists, British, or French were thinking (most of those people are dead already), or who was involved in what, or how these three groups were trying to use, abuse, and/or double cross one another.

All we know is that in June of 1917 the French gave the Zionists a document that expressed support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine, and in November of 1917 the British government did also.

The French document was so vague that it essentially stated, "Hey, a homeland for Jews! Great idea! Good Luck!"

The British document had a bit more substance. Not surprisingly, the French document never became important to the Zionists, while the British document became referred to as the “Balfour Declaration”.

The Balfour Declaration stated that the British government would help the Jews create a homeland in PALESTINE AS LONG AS IT DID NOT BOTHER THE REAL PALESTINIANS.

Exactly how the British could accomplish such a feat was what we might refer to as “a minor detail” that the British never bothered to explain.

The British government had agreed to something that they could easily back out of on the grounds that they cannot see how they can help the Jews without annoying the Palestinians.

What this means is that the Zionists did not get anything of value from the British or the French.

Did the British or the French get anything from the Zionists? Since it appears that the Zionists helped encourage America to get into the war, it seems that the British got what they wanted. Therefore, we might say that it appears as if the British outsmarted the Zionists in this particular situation.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#154800 Nov 23, 2012
Britain becomes guardian of Palestine:::

World War One changed the situation dramatically in Palestine because Turkey was a loser in that war.

British troops in 1918 drove the Turks out of Palestine.

The Palestinians then became free to have their own nation again, but they did not have a government because they had been under Turkish control for many generations.

Britain agreed to maintain some troops in Palestine and protect the area until 1948 in order to give the Palestinians have a chance to form their own government and recover from the war.

This policy became official in 1922 when the League of Nations agreed to the plan.

The British protection was scheduled to stop in 1948, at which time it was assumed the Palestinians would be capable to taking care of themselves.

The protection of Palestine by the British created a dilemma for the Zionists.

The goal of Britain was to protect Palestine from outside forces, and that meant protecting them from Zionists.

However, the Balfour Declaration would come back to haunt the British.

When Turkey had control of Palestine, that declaration was a meaningless piece of paper.

Now that Britain was guardian of Palestine, the Jews would use it to pressure the British into letting Jews emigrate to Palestine.

After the war the Jews took the Balfour Declaration to the League of Nations and convinced them to approve it also.

Then they could put even more pressure on the British government by saying that even the League of Nations agrees to the idea of a Jewish home in Palestine. The Zionists had outsmarted the British.

(MY FOREFATHERS HAVE LOTS TO ANSWER FOR...)
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#154801 Nov 23, 2012
Jews arrive in Palestine in large numbers:::

The Jews would push the British government into allowing a group Jews to emigrate to Palestine.

However, whenever a group of Jews arrived in Palestine, it would cause fights with the Arabs.

The British would respond by forbidding more Jews from emigrating to Palestine.

The Jews would then repeat the process. They would hold up the Balfour Declaration and beg, plead, and manipulate.

Time after time the British government officials would agree to allow another group of Jews to emigrate to Palestine, which would create fights in Palestine, and then the British would forbid Jews from emigrating to Palestine.

This cycle repeated over and over. Palestine was becoming a battlezone between Zionists and Palestinians, and the Zionist population kept rising.

The British government let themselves get pushed into a ridiculous situation.

They had signed the Balfour Declaration which gave their approval to a Jewish homeland in Palestine, but their main priority was to protect palestinians.

There was no way the British could appease both groups of people. They ended up doing what politicians in democratic nations do all the time. Namely, they occasionally appeased both groups.

The end result was that the situation became more of mess than before they got involved.

As the population of Jews in Palestine increased, the Jews became increasingly arrogant and demanding.

Some of the Jews eventually reached a point where there were no longer content to kill only the Arabs; specifically, they occasionally attacked the British, and even killed some British soldiers.

Israel had become more important than the lives of their British friends.
Morales

UK

#154802 Nov 23, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Salaams, bro.
Must be a lovely evening there. I have to go to bed. Good night
How nice would it be to see a Christian insulting Mary loudly in the Vatican compound! All will love him. lol!
He might insult Mary in the Vatican but he will not be put to death

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.

Anthropology Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News What's under Columbus/Franklinton?Thousands of ... Tue They cannot kill ... 3
News 8,000-year-old female figurine uncovered in cen... Sep 16 Stephany McDowell 1
News On the canvas: Museum digs up modern collection Sep 15 Albert 1
News Dore Gold: Archaeology is best defense of Jewis... Sep 13 naman 2
News Pioneers' graves to be relocated (Jul '07) Sep 12 ima hoosier 187
News Editorial: Return of Native American remains em... Sep 6 really 1
News Student:"Get To Know Your Local Stripper" (May '07) Aug '16 Jamesbeck23 24
More from around the web