Who Is Allah?

Aug 24, 2007 Full story: The Brussels Journal 205,970

“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

#157251 Jan 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Fool of a Lying Muslim,
Matt 5:31 "It was said,'WHOEVER SENDS HIS WIFE AWAY, LET HIM GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE'; 32 but I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except for the reason of unchastity, makes her commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.
Wait, don't tell me. Let me guess.
Mohammad abrogated this prohibition on marrying a divorced woman because Jesus never taught it, or Zanaib was unchaste which is why Zaid divorced her, right?
As for your charge that Jesus was a fornicator, not even your adulterous "prophet" believed that about him.
Ignorant and clueless fool!

I never lie! Jesus was not living among Arabs. He would not have lasted 24 hours there. Even paul ran away from Arabia after he went in.

I quoted Matthew 5:27-28 and showed you the Hijab of eyes, commanded by Jesus!!!

27 “You have heard that it was said,‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#157252 Jan 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>Fool of a Lying Muslim,
You know this for a FACT because you were there.
Also, Mohammad did in FACT fly an invisible human/horse looking creature to heaven and back, while never physically leaving his bed. We know this is true because it's in the Qur'an!
Glory to (Allah) Who did take His servant for a Journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the farthest Mosque, whose precincts We did bless,- in order that We might show him some of Our Signs: for He is the One Who heareth and seeth (all things).

—Qur'an, sura 17 (Al-Isra), ayah 1

Then he [Gabriel] brought the Buraq, handsome-faced and bridled, a tall, white beast, bigger than the donkey but smaller than the mule. He could place his hooves at the farthest boundary of his gaze. He had long ears. Whenever he faced a mountain his hind legs would extend, and whenever he went downhill his front legs would extend. He had two wings on his thighs which lent strength to his legs. He bucked when Muhammad came to mount him. The angel Jibril (Gabriel) put his hand on his mane and said: "Are you not ashamed, O Buraq? By Allah, no-one has ridden you in all creation more dear to Allah than he is." Hearing this he was so ashamed that he sweated until he became soaked, and he stood still so that the Prophet mounted him.
-Muhammad al-Alawi al-Maliki
Here's what the Buraq looks like: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...
Hello, ignorant mischievous fool,

Qur'aan does not say that Muhammad rode Buraq.

M-al-Alawi al-Maliki is an ignorant fool. Some Muslims like him believe absurd stories, just as the Christians believe in the absurd stories of the gospels.

That Jesus walked on water, is absurd! And that Muhammad rode Buraq, is also absurd.
Mahmood

Woodstock, Canada

#157253 Jan 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
That is a defeatist attitude and a defeatist answer.
You have already proved to me that you have not read 'sooooo many' books on Islam.
I do not have to rely on anything. The point is that all polemicists including your goodself are ignorant fools, who think that the history of Islam was written by three bloody fools only, namely the trinity of Ibn Asshaq-Hisham-Waqidi, who wrote their scraps and rubbish 130 plus years after the Prophet had passed away and think that there was no one else who wrote. That is idiotic.
All anti-Islam folks and polemicists only talk through that junk and stuff of the three stooges.
Sometime ago, you had told me that you have a copy of the book by Ibn Ishaq. Right? There is no copy of any book by Ibn Ishaq. It does not exist.
Anyway, my point still is that you need to do more search in order to find out the names of folks, who wrote before those three bloody fools and what they wrote is still preserved.
Your comments also tell me that you have not even read the entire book written by the William Muir, the crudest polemicist, who wrote on the prophet and Islam and never realized how utterly absurd were his own Bible and his own religion Christianity.
If you had read so well as you claim, you would have known that. I don't believe that you are that well-read.
That's correct, I have read many books on Islam and bios on Mo and Muir happens to be only one of them. What has Muir written that others have not?

You on the other hand is a bull&hit artist par excellence, telling me that there are pre-Ishaq bios on Mo but refusing to release names and authors. The problem is that there is none. You have no names, no authors, nothing. You are lying when you tell me you have sources that pre-date Ishaq? And why would you believe those sources when you revile all material outside the Koran?

Ishaq's book was later completed by his student Hisham, this is old news, so lets not go there. However, for a moment let us agree that Ishaq/Hisham were both liars, what makes you so sure that the imaginary works that pre-date them are all true? A billion Mohammadans dont even know where the orignal copy of the Koran is.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#157254 Jan 3, 2013
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is it absurd? Allah (pbuh) can do anything he wishes to, like when he given a son mother Mary by his will. Without god doing this, anything will be a hoax.
Hello, Impostor

No Muslim will write pbuh after Allah's name.

It is absurd because Jesus was heavier than water. He would have sunk straight away.

Technically speaking, a body has to displace more water to be able to float. The soles cannot displace that kind of volume.

God can also give a baby to a cow also but God wouldn't be called the father of the calf.
Alex123 aka WM

Ilford, UK

#157261 Jan 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Hello, Impostor
No Muslim will write pbuh after Allah's name.
It is absurd because Jesus was heavier than water. He would have sunk straight away.
Technically speaking, a body has to displace more water to be able to float. The soles cannot displace that kind of volume.
God can also give a baby to a cow also but God wouldn't be called the father of the calf.
Hi brother,

Jesus is heavier than water, but if God wanted him to walk over the water, who we are to tell it's a hoax? If god wanted to give to a virgin a son without sexual intercourse who we are to tell it's a hoax? Allah can do everything beyond our imagination.

God is father of everything, which implies he's also the father of cattle.

Salaams.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#157262 Jan 3, 2013
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi brother,
Jesus is heavier than water, but if God wanted him to walk over the water, who we are to tell it's a hoax? If god wanted to give to a virgin a son without sexual intercourse who we are to tell it's a hoax? Allah can do everything beyond our imagination.
God is father of everything, which implies he's also the father of cattle.
Salaams.
No wonder God is the father of the Holy Cow in India. lol!
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#157263 Jan 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
CORRECTION:
Truth be told, Jesus' enemies at the time of his appearance in Israel thought that he was a demon possessed and empowered bastard, being certain that his mother Mary was a FORNICATOR who, for whatever reason, was rescued from the penalty of death, as specified in the law of Moses as it applied to FORNICATORS, by some lawbreaking guy named Joseph who decided to marry her anyway, according to Luke.
rabbee: people need to be much more careful, when talking about TheG-D Child. as you can see the primary bases for this, in Parashas Bereeshees. as it indicates, that only Adam, is arrived by some sort of virgin surrogate birth.

and that adam and his assigned mate, also return in a similar manner. and do not think i had trouble, with G-D telling me this. how i am THEIR, Male child adam. and that i have a surrogate Mother, and a non-earthly PROGENITORS. and that i was actually conceived in HEAVEN, and then somehow placed in Her woumb. and is hard to comprehend, since this is not the normal birth process taught by the world.

and that there is more going on, in this whole worlds birth process. than even science, can comprehend. it is all too precise and accurate thrice again, to be happening the way science is telling it. you can't even imagine, the shock i felt. when i finally realize, what G-D had came and said to me that day, to THEIR Male Child.

essentially that science, had lied to us all, about how we all get here so precisely, one, two, three, or four times. with everyone that had been here twice before, all being here again so accurately. because even science, cannot accept that kind of precision control from G-D.

as you have no idea, of the implications of everything G-D came and said to me for that about half an hour. when G-D stopped all of physical totality, to come to speak to THEIR Son adam. in the great show and tell, unlike anything this world could even imagine. and my Parent, Both have the power to do this all.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#157264 Jan 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
Truth be told, no Messiah was promised by God to the Hebrews and others through Moses and the Torah.
Truth also be told, the Messiah was never supposed to be the so-called 'Son of God'. No such thing as "the Son of God" was ever mentioned or promised
to the Hebrews and the Jews.
Truth also be told, God never told anyone that God would come down as the Messiah.
Truth again be told, the Messiah for whom the Jews were and still are waiting for, was and is supposed to be a man coming from the line of David. And we don't know if there is a person, who can claim that he is truly from David's line. Even DNA and other methods would not be of any help.
Truth be finally told, God can create anything that God wishes to. So, God created a man by the name Jesus, without any man touching his mother. That was no problem for God. No big deal!
End of the story.
rabbee: that! is an outright lie. since G-D has forever promised, that Noach, Avraham, Yeetzak, Yaachov, Moshe, Daveed, Shlomoh, Adam and adam and his mate, and Shet, Enoch, shall always appear here in TheStory of Creation in always the exact same precise order. and that your all lying about it, won't change any of this in TheHappening.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#157265 Jan 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
<quoted text>I suppose that in your circle of friends, you are regarded as the most brilliant...
rabbee: touche!
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#157266 Jan 3, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Well the Talmud has got that wrong, because the Last of Prophet has come and the world till its end shall need the sayings and actions of the last prophet.
But there are many things in your post with which I agree.
rabbee: horse man ur! there are many more prophets, to come after my being here. including, Shet, Enoch, and Noach again! no different than the last two times, or other Torot times before. your story of being here in non-creation here in TheStory of Creation is a lie.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#157267 Jan 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
One can be accused of adultery, only when one screws a married woman, who is another's wife.
Zainab was a widow before she married Zayd.
Zayd was not a legally adopted son. The Prophet treated that slave as one loves a son. He was not even the Prophet's own slave.
After their marriage turned sour, Zayd divorced her.
The Prophet married her after their divorce.
So, there was no adultery committed.
The biblical Jesus was having fun with girls and women without even marrying them. You know jolly well that Jesus was maintained by women and was a man of women. The Church cleaned it up. So, you see a white-washed biblical Jesus.
Cheers
rabbee: that, is a lie. adultery is when you have any sexual relation, with anyone G-D does not consider as your wife/s. and the fact is, that even worshiping false g-d/s is also considered as adultery. even fornication, and sodomy, is considered as adultery. and any relationship, not true to G-D is considered as adultery.

and i am sorry, but Benee Adam had an inclusive Mate according to scripture. and had no need for sexual-intercourse, with any of the women then. so your innuendo is sheer, blasphemy against Both Him and G-D. your are trying to add to scripture, beyond what is actually stated. and you can't comprehend, why G-D is even more angry at muslems, than even christians?
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#157268 Jan 3, 2013
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is it absurd? Allah (pbuh) can do anything he wishes to, like when he given a son mother Mary by his will. Without god doing this, anything will be a hoax.
rabbee: no! your all-h is limited, to what My G-D says. and even G-D HIMSELF, limits HIMSELF by Only giving TheTorah. even G-D giving us all with, mental free will is G-D placing limits on what THEY BOTH do as ONE. and the condition for entering GanEden, again is not in your condition.
rabbee yehoshooah adam

Denver, CO

#157269 Jan 3, 2013
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi brother,
Jesus is heavier than water, but if God wanted him to walk over the water, who we are to tell it's a hoax? If god wanted to give to a virgin a son without sexual intercourse who we are to tell it's a hoax? Allah can do everything beyond our imagination.
God is father of everything, which implies he's also the father of cattle.
Salaams.
rabbee: well not according, to monte python. if they float, there a witch. so i ain't going to tell you, what i have appeared to have done too.
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#157270 Jan 3, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
No wonder God is the father of the Holy Cow in India. lol!
Salaams bro, this is Real Alex and seems an imposter is using my name.
You know how to check...ok?
Salaams
WM
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#157271 Jan 3, 2013
rabbee yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
rabbee: no! your all-h is limited, to what My G-D says. and even G-D HIMSELF, limits HIMSELF by Only giving TheTorah. even G-D giving us all with, mental free will is G-D placing limits on what THEY BOTH do as ONE. and the condition for entering GanEden, again is not in your condition.
allah pbuh..lol
what an X person would write that....lol
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#157272 Jan 3, 2013
south asian rajesh the cowmilker posting as Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi brother,
Jesus is heavier than water, but if God wanted him to walk over the water, who we are to tell it's a hoax? If god wanted to give to a virgin a son without sexual intercourse who we are to tell it's a hoax? Allah can do everything beyond our imagination.
God is father of everything, which implies he's also the father of cattle.
Salaams.
tell tale..hi brother..lol..X factor..
Allah can do anything that Allah wills and not what you will rajesh suliman the liar..
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#157273 Jan 3, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Misleading is a matter of opinion.
Its been my experience among modern Judaism that there is a breadth of diversity on this and other subjects.
For what its worth, very little in the Talmud stands without a counter opinion.
Correct...
One can mislead others by pretending to know it all.
The Gentile Christian has been and is being misled by some non-gentiles who know exactly what to say and do to keep the poor ignorant gentiles on a leash.
It's quite simple...the poor ignorant gentile christian relies on non-gentile to give a "true" interpretation of the non-gentile books upon which they rely to prove the validity of their mangod..
The non-gentiles reject that mangod and according to the non gentile books the mangod was cursed and got rid of and the mangod is in hell immersed in poo..
Now how comical does one wish to make this relationship?
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#157274 Jan 3, 2013
Buford wrote:
The Life of Muhammad:
An Inconvenient Truth
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/histo...
Timeline of Muhammad's Life (A.D)
570 - Born in Mecca
576 - Orphaned upon death of mother
595 - Marries Kadijah - older, wealthy widow
610 - Reports first revelations from angel at age of 40
619 - Protector uncle dies
622 - Emigrates from Mecca to Medina (the Hijra)
623 - Orders raids on Meccan caravans
624 - Battle of Badr (victory)
624 - Evicts Qaynuqa Jews from Medina
624 - Orders the assassination of Abu Afak
624 - Orders the assassination of Asma bint Marwan
624 - Orders the assassination of Ka'b al-Ashraf
625 - Battle of Uhud (defeat)
625 - Evicts Nadir Jews
627 - Battle of the Trench (victory)
627 - Massacre of the Qurayza Jews
628 - Signing of the Treaty of Hudaibiya with Mecca
628 - Destruction and subjugation of the Khaybar Jews
629 - Orders first raid into Christian lands at Muta (defeat)
630 - Conquers Mecca by surprise (along with other tribes)
631 - Leads second raid into Christian territory at Tabuk (no battle)
632 - Dies
What if a man you knew began telling people that God was routinely speaking to him and only him - and that the "revelations" he claimed to be receiving were mostly about him and his relative importance to all other people? Say, for example, that this self-proclaimed prophet insisted that God had declared him to be the 'perfect example' for mankind and that others were therefore to accord him with special privilege, unwavering obedience, wealth and earthly desires, including all of the slaves and women that his lust could handle.
Such figures still arise from time to time. Some of the more dynamic manage to develop a small group of followers so taken with their leader's self assurance that they willingly offer their own children to him for "marriage" or even kill on his behalf if requested.
Would it really validate the message of any such cult leader if his followers did successfully kill and seize the property of anyone who dared disagree? What if they gradually expanded their power and numbers in such fashion that eventually they were enough to be recognized as a major world religion? Would that make the cult leader's claims about himself true? Would it really change the fact that what they believe ultimately sprang from the imagination of a narcissist?
In 610, an Arab salesman with a commanding personality attracted a small cult of credulous fanatics by claiming to be a prophet. Though his "revelations" were self-referential and occasionally contradicting, he was successful in manipulating his followers with promises of heavenly reward and threat of divine wrath. The god heard only by him told them to lie and steal for him, to give their children to him for sexual pleasure and, eventually, to gruesomely murder his detractors.
There are two ways to approach a study of Muhammad. One is with reverence and the other is with skepticism. Thinking persons choose they latter. They are not influenced by the number of Muslim believers in the world today or by their force of belief because these are meaningless for determining truth. They care only about fact.
Thanks to frijoles you can reject that man Muhammed.
How about now following Frijoles advice and rejecting BJ as a liar and a sinner.
Frijoles says that Jesus is NOT a Prophet or Messiah.
Frijoles also says that Jesus is not mangod.
You are too stupid to realise your own ignorance!
Deal with it moron...
Alex123 aka WM

London, UK

#157275 Jan 3, 2013
Rajesh the south asian worm posting as Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey non-gentile bu(tteredbuttturd lick)ford still think about my phallus? lol
Real AleX has never used that word in 2013...
butthe non-gentile bu(tteredbuttturdlick)ford has used it..
Frijoles

Stamford, CT

#157276 Jan 3, 2013
Alex123 aka WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Correct...
One can mislead others by pretending to know it all.
The Gentile Christian has been and is being misled by some non-gentiles who know exactly what to say and do to keep the poor ignorant gentiles on a leash.
It's quite simple...the poor ignorant gentile christian relies on non-gentile to give a "true" interpretation of the non-gentile books upon which they rely to prove the validity of their mangod..
The non-gentiles reject that mangod and according to the non gentile books the mangod was cursed and got rid of and the mangod is in hell immersed in poo..
Now how comical does one wish to make this relationship?
Too many nons

Perhaps the most descriptive term to cover your discourse is not "non" but "nonsense"

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
Forbidden Archaeology: How the Smithsonian cove... Nov 25 Kid_Tomorrow 1
Diversity is a codeword for White genocide Nov 20 7970kgl 1
Researchers Disagree About Age, Purpose of Ston... (Oct '08) Nov 19 Garry Denke 11
Origin of Hindu Brahmins (Aug '08) Nov 17 sham 183
Heracles to Alexander: Ashmolean Museum unveils... (Apr '11) Nov 16 Macedonian 25
Mexican Government Claims US Auction House Sold... Nov 13 Concerned 1
Remains of Ice Age infants uncovered in Alaska Nov 12 Kid_Tomorrow 1

Archaeology People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE