Who Is Allah?

Who Is Allah?

There are 228276 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

#155768 Dec 9, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
The point is that Christianity itself blows away most of the lies, it concocted. The Christian scripture is a load of lies.
So, when I read Qur'aan, I know it is saying the same thing that I found out.
For example, Qur'aan rejects Trinity or the three Gods of trinity. The Christian scripture is totally silent on this matter. Trinity is not there in the Bible. On top of that, I do not find Jesus telling the big lie that God is triune or a trinity. So, Qur'aan is right!
According to Qur'aan, Jesus was the messenger of God. According to Christianity, Jesus is God.
I don't find Jesus saying anywhere, "I am God" or " I am the begotten son of God." So, Qur'aan rightly points out that God has not begotten a son and since there is no other God besides God, Jesus is not God.
So, Qur'aan exposes the lies of Christianity and that really is a good thing. Right?
Muhammad believed in what was revealed to him. The founding fathers of the Church believed in what pagan philosophers and other Godless men told them.
rabbee: so your load of prejudiced lies, against their load is worth what?

the only reason christian scriptures, have become lies. is because of the alterations, that have been done.

isn't it funny why the same old devil, is not trying to alter your quran? since it is not, a threat to the devil like the christian scripture only used to be. critical thinking, would suggest their is a problem there.
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#155769 Dec 9, 2012
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>What is most clear is that you believe only whatever confirms your assumptions.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markdroberts/ser...
The Paradoxical Path to Lordship

In my last post I examined one of the very oldest bits of evidence for early Christian belief about Jesus. As you may recall, the original Greek text of 1 Corinthians 16:22 contains the Aramaic phrase, marana tha, which means,“Our Lord, come!” This shows that some of the very earliest Christians actually prayed to Jesus after his death and resurrection, even addressing him as “Lord,” a term used for God himself. So, though we can’t tell exactly what the first followers of Jesus believed about him, they surely held him to be much more than a man. In some way they related to Jesus as if he were God himself.

Another very early piece of early Christian belief confirms and expands upon this conclusion. In his letter to the Philippians, written during the mid- to late-50&#8242;s A.D., the Apostle Paul speaks of Christ in quite exalted language:

Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus,
who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be exploited,
but emptied himself,
taking the form of a slave,
being born in human likeness.
And being found in human form,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to the point of death–
even death on a cross.
Therefore God also highly exalted him
and gave him the name
that is above every name,
so that at the name of Jesus
every knee should bend,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue should confess
that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:5-11).
Notice that Christ, prior to becoming human, was in the form of God and possessed equality with God. Then, in light of his obedient death, God exalted him and gave him the very name of God so that all creation might bow before him and worship him as Lord. Clearly Jesus is no longer in the “merely human” category.
At the latest, this passage was written about 25 years after the death of Jesus – a testimony to early Christian belief. Yet many respectable scholars believe that Paul did not actually compose this text, but borrowed it from an earlier piece of Christian liturgy. The peculiar linguistic form of this passage, combined with its use of language that is unusual for Paul, combined with its “confessional” quality, have persuaded many New Testament scholars that Paul employed a hymn that had been written earlier than Philippians. Just how much earlier we can’t tell. But, once again, we have in Paul’s letters, which are themselves the earliest Christian documents available to us, a piece of tradition which quite possibly goes back to an earlier stage of Christian history. Of course even if Paul composed the hymn in Philippians 2:5-11, it still counts as early Christian belief about Jesus.
See, Buford. That is another lie, a big one from Paul.

That is Paul's letter but there is nothing from Jesus at all, to support that cooked up passage by Paul.

We do not see Jesus talking about being in the form of God at all to any of his disciples or others. If Jesus had really said anything of this sort, he would have been killed the same day.

These lies were spread only after Jesus was gone. And most likely that letter of Paul was also a forgery and possibly another liar wrote in his name.

Can't trust anything that comes from the Church, her fathers and men, who penned letters.

Good night.

Just as you are quoting me another lie, the Church kept on coming with lies.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#155770 Dec 9, 2012
rabbee yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
rabbee: so your load of prejudiced lies, against their load is worth what?
the only reason christian scriptures, have become lies. is because of the alterations, that have been done.
isn't it funny why the same old devil, is not trying to alter your quran? since it is not, a threat to the devil like the christian scripture only used to be. critical thinking, would suggest their is a problem there.
Rabbee,

Please tell me if Jesus told anybody that he was God? Do you believe that Jesus was God?

His own disciples never believed that he was God. The thought did not even enter their minds.

Theirs is a heap or load of lies, Rabbee.

Thanks for writing: "the only reason christian scriptures, have become lies. is because of the alterations, that have been done."

However, I must say, that their scripture began with lies and lies were plied upon. It is quite natural to see folks covering a lie with lies.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#155771 Dec 9, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
See, Buford. That is another lie, a big one from Paul.
That is Paul's letter but there is nothing from Jesus at all, to support that cooked up passage by Paul.
We do not see Jesus talking about being in the form of God at all to any of his disciples or others. If Jesus had really said anything of this sort, he would have been killed the same day.
These lies were spread only after Jesus was gone. And most likely that letter of Paul was also a forgery and possibly another liar wrote in his name.
Can't trust anything that comes from the Church, her fathers and men, who penned letters.
Good night.
Just as you are quoting me another lie, the Church kept on coming with lies.
rabbee: their is nothing more worthless, than fighting their own crap with your own crap. since that only attracts the lord of flies, and their baal-tzeeboob followers.
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#155772 Dec 9, 2012
bmz wrote:
Rabbee,
Please tell me if Jesus told anybody that he was God? Do you believe that Jesus was God?
His own disciples never believed that he was God. The thought did not even enter their minds.
Theirs is a heap or load of lies, Rabbee.
Thanks for writing: "the only reason christian scriptures, have become lies. is because of the alterations, that have been done."
However, I must say, that their scripture began with lies and lies were plied upon. It is quite natural to see folks covering a lie with lies.
What's the point in even trying to discuss anything with you? John's Thomas addresses the resurrected Jesus as "My Lord and my God," and Jesus didn't disavow it, but this can only have been a later addition and fabrication because it contradicts what the Arab Spelunker and War Lord that you adore dictated to his scribes via "Jibreel." Isn't that right?
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#155773 Dec 9, 2012
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Rabbee,
Please tell me if Jesus told anybody that he was God? Do you believe that Jesus was God?
His own disciples never believed that he was God. The thought did not even enter their minds.
Theirs is a heap or load of lies, Rabbee.
Thanks for writing: "the only reason christian scriptures, have become lies. is because of the alterations, that have been done."
However, I must say, that their scripture began with lies and lies were plied upon. It is quite natural to see folks covering a lie with lies.
rabbee: how can i truly answer that, using your fake name? i cannot condone the use, of that fake name in any way. least i be guilty, of supporting some kind of idolitry.

using any falsified information, in any discussion removes truth from that discussion. but i shall tell you this, according to corrected scripture. that the time of Appointment, was not at hand.

for the time of Appointment, is not untill the end of the sixth day as always. when HaMosheeach, is Appointed as your L-rd of all physical totality for the last day.

this is when, HaMosheeach shall be your G-d. and all the clues supporting this, are included in TheTorah for the last time, G-D gave this whole Story of Creation, for the previous seven days.

and my contention is, that you all and your grandmother have made absolutly no progress in This Story of Creation, this time again. G-D gave this world another seven days, to make amends with. and this whole world has sooo totally blown it again.

and whether G-D gives you with, a seven day stay of execution again. well i will not know that for sure, untill is see who my appointed mate is.

if it is the same mate, as the other times. then you all get another seven days again to try and make amends. if not sorry about that, you all and your grandmother sarah faye ann carney did it to yourselves. since you all punched out, your own eternal lights.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#155774 Dec 9, 2012
so essencially as long as sarah faye ann carney, is the appointed grandmother of this whole world. then every person, who has ever been physically born in the her linage is physically and precisely born again(the resurrection of the dead).

so that whether or not, you are given with eternal life, is entirely up to your attitude here in TheStory. so you are only blowing out your own candle, by not being true to G-D here in ThisStory of Creation again.

so lying will not, save you. mentally pretending to not be here, in TheStory of Creation will not save you. and you cannot verify truth, using any errant scriptures from errant taking critters.

and the only scripture i know of, that is all written by G-D and given to anyone. is called, TheTorah.
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#155775 Dec 9, 2012
Sahih Bukhari 3:34:432

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: that while he was sitting with Allah's Apostle he said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence."

IOW, Mohammad permitted his soldiers to RAPE their female captives, thereby establishing for all time that ALLAH APPROVES OF RAPE!!!

Thank you, Mohammad!

But wait! There's more!

Qur'an 4:24

Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise.

IOW, CAPTIVE women, even if married, may be RAPED. All "others," meaning those who AREN'T captives and AREN'T married, must be given their "required due."

Thank you again, Mohammad, for revealing "Allah" to the world of "infidels" like me. I can hardly wait to become a Muslim and start raping captive married women, in accordance with "Allah's" will!!!
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155776 Dec 9, 2012
Buford wrote:
Sahih Bukhari 3:34:432
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: that while he was sitting with Allah's Apostle he said, "O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence."
IOW, Mohammad permitted his soldiers to RAPE their female captives, thereby establishing for all time that ALLAH APPROVES OF RAPE!!!
Thank you, Mohammad!
But wait! There's more!
Qur'an 4:24
Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise.
IOW, CAPTIVE women, even if married, may be RAPED. All "others," meaning those who AREN'T captives and AREN'T married, must be given their "required due."
Thank you again, Mohammad, for revealing "Allah" to the world of "infidels" like me. I can hardly wait to become a Muslim and start raping captive married women, in accordance with "Allah's" will!!!
hello non-gentile bu(ttturdlick)ford!!
Why don't you answer some real questions instead of talking about buhari who is not in the Quran?
You are a non-gentile...so tell us about your religion.
HughBe

Kingston, Jamaica

#155777 Dec 9, 2012
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you HughBe.
There is no effrot to convert for the sake of God.
Conversion here is of convenience and domination.
This also goes to strengthen my claim about the "hijack" of titles using "god" as excuse!
From...Abraham to Isaac..instead of Ishmael...from Isaac to Jacob instead of Esau...and worst of all...from Jacob to Judah instead of other 11 including Joseph!!
Good old Judah, the father of those who finalised the books long after Moses!
Why should they convert?
They think that all others are not worth converting.
The coach to heaven is full accoding to thme!!!!
They have limited God's mercy on creation by limiting the ringside tickets to 12x12000 judah boys!!
Peace.
1. You are welcome, Alex.

2. Alex "There is no effrot to convert for the sake of God.
Conversion here is of convenience and domination."

3. Truly CONVERSION is NOT mentioned in the passages below and indeed it could NOT have been mentioned because no one who was CAPTURED or STOLEN from their family and homeland would CONVERT to a foreign religion in 30 days.

This point also exposes the LIES of the rabbis.

It tells that a Jewish MAN can marry a non-Jew.
It exposes the LIE of the rabbis that the MOTHER determies Jewish identity. In the current context the WIVES of the Jewish men would be NON-JEWS and there is no mention of identity issues.

God NEVER told Israel that He would not regard the offsprings, of these unions, as Israel.

"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."
Frijoles

Madison, CT

#155778 Dec 9, 2012
HughBe wrote:
<quoted text>
1. You are welcome, Alex.
2. Alex "There is no effrot to convert for the sake of God.
Conversion here is of convenience and domination."
3. Truly CONVERSION is NOT mentioned in the passages below and indeed it could NOT have been mentioned because no one who was CAPTURED or STOLEN from their family and homeland would CONVERT to a foreign religion in 30 days.
This point also exposes the LIES of the rabbis.
It tells that a Jewish MAN can marry a non-Jew.
It exposes the LIE of the rabbis that the MOTHER determies Jewish identity. In the current context the WIVES of the Jewish men would be NON-JEWS and there is no mention of identity issues.
God NEVER told Israel that He would not regard the offsprings, of these unions, as Israel.
"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."
Dont quit your day job.
HughBe

Kingston, Jamaica

#155779 Dec 9, 2012
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Dont quit your day job.
Don't quit your NIGHT job, Frijoles.

How is business?
HughBe

Kingston, Jamaica

#155780 Dec 9, 2012
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Dont quit your day job.
Oh, I have shipped the tampons for you, as requested.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155781 Dec 9, 2012
HughBe wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, I have shipped the tampons for you, as requested.
thats cheap and disgusting...why this sort of conversation guys!
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#155782 Dec 9, 2012
HughBe wrote:
<quoted text>
1. You are welcome, Alex.
2. Alex "There is no effrot to convert for the sake of God.
Conversion here is of convenience and domination."
3. Truly CONVERSION is NOT mentioned in the passages below and indeed it could NOT have been mentioned because no one who was CAPTURED or STOLEN from their family and homeland would CONVERT to a foreign religion in 30 days.
This point also exposes the LIES of the rabbis.
It tells that a Jewish MAN can marry a non-Jew.
It exposes the LIE of the rabbis that the MOTHER determies Jewish identity. In the current context the WIVES of the Jewish men would be NON-JEWS and there is no mention of identity issues.
God NEVER told Israel that He would not regard the offsprings, of these unions, as Israel.
"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."
Thank you for your comments.
When weird stuff from their books are mentioned they panic.
They will say these are not applied in modern times!
Then why hang on to an out of date claim to a land?
All in or all out.
If they can't use the religious books in their entirety they must bin them.
No cherry picking...
Take care HughBe.
Frijoles

Madison, CT

#155783 Dec 9, 2012
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
thats cheap and disgusting...why this sort of conversation guys!
Ask Hughbe. He is the one with the sexuality issues.

Though I do find it humorous that you find this cheap and dsigusting, but your paranoa conspiracy stuff not. Whatver floats your boat, I suppose.
uhuh

Sevilla, Spain

#155784 Dec 9, 2012
Borg3of7 wrote:
<quoted text>
and if they choose not to agree to this arrangement? Choosing a mate is a personal & private matter...not to be infringed upon by social edicts & certainly not a choice to be foisted upon children.
Rebecca gave "comfort" to her 40 yr old hubby Isaac inside the tent (Gen 24:67) ehem
the traditional view is that she was 3 at the time
the matriarch of Israel
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#155785 Dec 9, 2012
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
hello non-gentile bu(ttturdlick)ford!!
Why don't you answer some real questions instead of talking about buhari who is not in the Quran?
You are a non-gentile...so tell us about your religion.
I get that you'd rather not even try to defend your rape approving and enabling "prophet" when it's so much more fun to rip into the "naked pagan" of your perverted obsession.

Take your meds.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#155786 Dec 9, 2012
uhuh wrote:
<quoted text>
Rebecca gave "comfort" to her 40 yr old hubby Isaac inside the tent (Gen 24:67) ehem
the traditional view is that she was 3 at the time
the matriarch of Israel
rabbee: yes and stupid idiots, would also agree. that Revecha gave birth, to her first child at the age of 4.

i can't believe any of you, could be that stupid. to even pass on such, obviously mythological lashon tzarah.

i swear the real animal world, makes you talking critters look stupid. even they don't have relations, untill the female is of bearing age.

i do not even say, this world can't get any more stupid. because i am sure, how much more sucessful you all can get at it.
Buford

Hurricane, WV

#155788 Dec 10, 2012
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnab...

Gospel of Barnabas

The Gospel of Barnabas is a book depicting the life of Jesus, and claiming to be by Jesus' disciple Barnabas, who in this work is one of the twelve apostles. Two manuscripts are known to have existed, both dated to the late 16th century and written respectively in Italian and in Spanish—although the Spanish manuscript is now lost, its text surviving only in a partial 18th-century transcript. Barnabas is about the same length as the four Canonical gospels put together, with the bulk being devoted to an account of Jesus' ministry, much of it harmonized from accounts also found in the canonical gospels. In some key respects, it conforms to the Islamic interpretation of Christian origins and contradicts the New Testament teachings of Christianity.

This Gospel is considered by the majority of academics, including Christians and some Muslims (such as Abbas el-Akkad) to be late and pseudepigraphical; however, some academics suggest that it may contain some remnants of an earlier apocryphal work (perhaps Gnostic, Ebionite or Diatessaronic, redacted to bring it more in line with Islamic doctrine. Some Muslims consider the surviving versions as transmitting a suppressed apostolic original. Some Islamic organizations cite it in support of the Islamic view of Jesus.
__________
IOW, it's a late forgery.

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.

Archaeology Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Customs officials crack down on Pakistan's mill... (Aug '12) 13 hr mICHEAL 24
need info on a artifact I found Jul 20 neyney 1
News Archaeology and Mormonism (Jun '07) Jul 17 Barnsweb 104
News Tonga's Nukuleka, the birth place of Polynesia (Jan '08) Jul 15 Tui_Tonga 1,973
'Skulls, Shamans and Sacrifice in Stone Age Bri... Jul 13 Dave 1
Are 2 Million People Really Buried In 74 Graves? Jul 12 Candy 1
News From riches to ruins: Ancient Greeks 'stored mi... Jul 1 SpaceBlues 1
More from around the web