Who Is Allah?

Who Is Allah?

There are 256385 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.

Seeker

Lowell, MA

#188520 Sep 11, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Will you Please explain in Plain English, what you mean by what you have written?
It did not make any sense to me!!
"Power of God"?
Getting "United as one being"?
Is that Trinity?
When was God Separated into parts?
We need you to explain this is simple English.
what you wrote did not make any sense, even though it used English Alphabets.
Well I can, but it isn't the same exact explanation as other Christians and it is less literal than some of theirs as I think it should be. But I can explain a logical way to think of Jesus as God on earth, in a certain respect, but also as the Son, but also how God can also be considered greater. And I can even quote the verses that give me this idea and it does make sense, whether one wants to accept it or not. It might be right or it might be wrong, but I can make it make sense. Making it make sense is not proof that I am correct, but I can make it make sense. That's all that anybody can do about any matters such as this, as nothing ever seems to get PROVEN in any religious matters and that is why it's called faith, not fact. When you claim that the Quran is God's words, that is faith, not fact, as it can never be PROVEN to be that and one can only make their best guess.
Alex WM

London, UK

#188521 Sep 11, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
I think the "Special Olympics of Reasoning" might be a better place.
Reminds me off this old Monty Python clip that relates very well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =jF-CkMpQtlYXX
Keep insulting disabled people, moron.

Back to your special Olympics and let us watch how BJ may have run away after palming the cross off to poor "simon"!!!!!

Watch from 7 minutes.......Life of Brian!

http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#188522 Sep 11, 2013
bmz wrote:
@ Stefano
Before Shamma buries all the posts, please respond to my post here:
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam/TT8...
Funny how you like Shamma burying things when he runs cover for you and buries my posts so that you can pretend I never raised them because you can claim they got lost or buried, so you didn't see them. For example, the earth and sky being slit apart and the sky being RAISED ABOVE the earth. I never did see you address that problem specifically, and that's OK, I expect that you never will. Your silence speaks volumes to me anyway and I suppose I should just read between the lines. So you don't have to answer that, and you are probably better off not doing so, and it would seem as though you are intelligent enough to realize that.
Alex WM

London, UK

#188523 Sep 11, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Mo!!! nyuck nyuck nyuck. Well at least you say "our" Prophet and not THE Prophet or everyone's Prophet. So I credit you for your accuracy.
lorra lorra Fluff.. but no substance!!
Alex WM

London, UK

#188524 Sep 11, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I can, but it isn't the same exact explanation as other Christians and it is less literal than some of theirs as I think it should be....
LOL!
This deluded deranged manic depressive jobless antisemitic islamophobe thinks that he is a cut "below" the rest of the Christians!
Well of course he is "special"....yep...a "special needs" case!

He has not answered any of these!!:
A)Is BJ(biblical Jesus) "The Only Begotten Son of God" or "The Only Begotten Son of god the father"?
(who is BJ's daddy? God or god the father?)

B)
……
If a person answers these SINCERELY, they will know that Jesus is NOT G-d.

READ the instructions carefully and answer the questions.

The instructions are very simple...
"Give YES or NO answers providing relevant chapters and verses as proof. No need for any additional comments or own interpretations"
…………………………

Show us where Jesus makes DIRECT claims in the first person as follows, in the Synoptic Gospels OR EVEN GOSPEL OF JOHN, by giving us chapter/verse as proof:

1. "I am God in 'the' flesh"
2. "I am God!"
3. "I am THE only begotten son of God"
4. "I am God in person"
5. "I am God Incarnate"
6. "I am THE Father and Father and I are one and the same person" 7. "I am made of sin"
8. "God is a trinity and I am part of that trinity or triune"
9. "I am your God who came to earth in human form as my own son to die on a Roman cross for the sins of Gentiles or the world or the entire humanity/"
10. "Through belief in my unconditional/loving/willing sacrifice as your God in human form as my own son, you can have eternal life"
11. "Therefore, Worship me and the cross"
12. "Father, ghost and I are co equal, co eternal and consubstantial gods forming a godhead"
13.“I, Jesus, existed before God as Word and I, Jesus, became God” 14.“Hey Philip! I am THE Father"
15. "Worship and kiss the cross and get your pope to kiss it, carry it with him and raise it like Moses' serpent"
16.“My mission is not to bring a book, but to die for sins of GENTILES and JEWS”
17. "I am your saviour (dear gentiles)

c) Is Jesus "fully man and fully God"

d) Define what a Trinity is in your own words.
MUQ

Qatif, Saudi Arabia

#188525 Sep 11, 2013
Alex WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Salaams, bro!
You have cornered and floored "seeker" several times with your brilliant posts.
He comes up with "words" and more "words" that "mean" nothing!
Seeker is yet another clueless deluded fool.
Keep up the good work.
Thank you for some great input.
Salaams, Alex WM
Thank you Brother for your appreciation.

What you need is to be on the Right Side of truth and then every things becomes easy.

The problem is that Mr. Seeker is standing on the left side of truth and thinks he is on the right side!!

That is why he throws tantrums, starts calling me and my prophet names, starts abusing him and does every type of dramatics, except proving "who" is the object of prophesies which I Quote to him.

This is the general condition of every one of these "experts"...

Just watch what happens when we reach Deut. 18:18, which he was dieing for when we started this discussion, now he will say, he is already done and does not feel any "inner urge" to respond to my post.

Sad end to one, who started with so much energy, is it not?

I thank you brother for your support and appreciation.

Regards,

MUQ
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#188526 Sep 11, 2013
Tabari VIII:116
Mohammad the Moralist

Ishaq:511 "So Muhammad began seizing their herds and their property bit by bit. He conquered home by home. The Messenger took some of its people captive, including Safiyah, and her two cousins. The Prophet chose Safiyah for himself."

Tabari VIII:121
Ishaq:515 "Safiyah was brought to him, and another woman with her. Bilal led them past some of the Jews we had slain including the woman's dead husband. When she saw them, the woman with Safiyah cried out, slapped her face, and poured dust on her head. When Allah's Prophet saw her, he said,'Take this she-devil away from me!'"

Ishaq:327 "Allah made booty lawful and good. He used it to incite the Muslims to unity of purpose. So enjoy what you have captured."

Tabari VIII:124
Ishaq:516
Bukhari:V5B59N541 "Having finished with Khaybar, the Apostle went to Wadi Qura and besieged its people for a while. Then we headed back to Medina, halting at Qura toward sunset. With Muhammad was a slave lad of his whom Rifa'ah had given him. Suddenly, as we were setting down the saddle of the Prophet, a stray arrow came and hit the slave boy, killing him. We congratulated him, saying,'May he enjoy Paradise!' But Allah's Apostle said,'Certainly not! The sheet of cloth on his back is now being burnt on him in the Hell Fire!' He pilfered it from the booty of the Muslims following the Khaybar raid before it was duly distributed."
MUQ

Qatif, Saudi Arabia

#188527 Sep 11, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>The Trinity is the Spirit of God Manifested as three persons of God performing the Will of God.
The Spirit of God is not subjected to the physical created laws of God.
So now, you have started revealing "secrets" about this Trinity, what took you so long my Dear, "Assumed" I knew it all, did you?

Why Spirit of God should "manifest in Three persons"? Any thing Mystical about the figure three?

And which of the "Three Persons" are doing the will of God?

Then NONE of the three persons shall be God or Equal to God?

Where is Unity then?

Gets your head rolling? Does it not?

Thanks for explaining Trinity to me in Plain English!!

PS:

And you will say in the end, we cannot understand, because we do not have spirit of God inside us!!

And you have one third of Trinity inside you?

Is "He" or "She" or "It" present inside you all the time?
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#188528 Sep 11, 2013
Does Deuteronomy 18:15-18 predict the coming of Muhammad?

http://carm.org/deuteronomy-18-muhammad

Deuteronomy 18:15-18

“The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear, 16 according to all you desired of the LORD your God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying,‘Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, nor let me see this great fire anymore, lest I die.’ 17 And the LORD said to me:‘What they have spoken is good. 18 I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him (NKJV)."

In spite of the claims of Muslims, there are many reasons why this passage does not refer to prophet Muhammad.

“Brethren” Refers to Jews

First, given the context of Deuteronomy 18, the term “brethren” is referring to their fellow Israelites. Deuteronomy 18:2, says “They shall have no inheritance among their brethren.” Also, elsewhere in the book of Deuteronomy the term “brethren” refers to fellow Israelites (Deuteronomy 17:15). Since the term “brethren” refers to Israelites, why would God raise up a prophet from the enemies of Israel, the Arabs?
Muhammad from Ishmael

Second, Muhammad came from Ishmael, as Muslims admit, but heirs to the Jewish throne came from Isaac. The Torah states,“My covenant I will establish with Isaac,”(Genesis 17:21). Later, God repeats the same message,“In Isaac your seed shall be called,”(Genesis 21:12).
Prophetic Line through Isaac

Third, the Qur’an teaches that the prophetic line came through Isaac, not Ishmael:“And We bestowed on him Isaac and Jacob, and We established the Prophethood and the Scripture among his seed”(29:27). However, Yusuf Ali adds the word Abraham in the translation to make it read:“We gave (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob, and ordained among his progeny Porphethood and Revelation.” By adding Abraham, it is possible to include Muhammad in the prophetic line! However, Abraham is not found in the Arabic text of the Qur’an which Muslims consider to be perfectly correct!

Jesus Fulfilled Deuteronomy 18:15-18 Perfectly

Fourth, Jesus fulfilled Deuteronomy 18 perfectly. He came from his Jewish brethren (Galatians 4:4). Deuteronomy 18:18 says,“He shall speak to them all that I [God] command Him.” Jesus said,“I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father taught Me, I speak these things”(John 8:28; cf. John 12:49). Finally, Jesus called himself a “prophet”(Luke 13:33) and the people considered him to be a prophet (Matthew 21:11; Luke 7:16; 24:19; John 4:19; 6:14; 7:40; 9:17).

Therefore, given the above evidence, it is Jesus, not Muhammad who fulfilled this prophecy in Deuteronomy 18.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#188529 Sep 11, 2013
Alex WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Dear sweet Shamma....
These questions have been set at your level so that you may respond easily.
Let's stick to "god being a holy trinity", Shamma.
Please explain....
When BJ looked up to heaven and was shouting to father..."why have you forsaken me?"..was he talking to himself or to a higher being?
These two seem to be distinct persons.
The "ghostly" dove seems a separate thing, that chose to descend on his head in River Jordan!
..........
You say "god" is a holy trinity?
**Is "god" the father a holy trinity or only PART of the holy trinity?
**Is "god" the son a holy trinity or only PART of the holy trinity?
**Is "god" the ghost a holy trinity or ony PART of the holy trinity?
Where is GOD in this "trinity" pot of stew or is "he" THE POT? LOL
Thank you...
You are a senseless person that does not pay attention and never learns about God.
Jesus is the Divine Son of God.
Having the nature of God and the nature of man.
On the Cross Jesus emptied himself of the nature of God and was left alone on the cross in the body God prepared for Jesus in the womb of Mary the Virgin to die on the cross.

The man nature of Jesus cried out to God His Father and said "My God why has thou forsaken me."

At that moment Jesus suffered for the sins of us all accomplishing the will of the Father.

If you were a child of God ALEX YOU WOULD UNDERSTAND WHY GOD PUT JESUS THROUGH ALL THE SUFFERING ON THE CROSS.

BUT YOU ARE NOT A CHILD OF GOD, SO IT MEANS NOTHING TO YOU.

You try to satisfy your ignorance by ridicule of God by insulting Jesus works of redemption on the cross.

Your head is empty of the knowledge of God Alex.

You are a dumb ass Muslim Alex, Allah the Muslim god is a created god in your mind Alex.

The Muslim god you believe in Alex does not exist.
truth

Mahogany Creek, Australia

#188530 Sep 11, 2013
God can't be liar!!!

Don't you!
-rejection of first parents

Did God reject?
Yes it is.
then
How we become save?

I'N'RI

Where is liar?

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#188531 Sep 11, 2013
Alex WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Shamma before you can explain trinity, can you answer this?
Is BJ fully man and fully God?
If you worshiped God Alex you would know the answer.
Yes! Jesus is fully God and fully man.

This is a game to you and BMZ, and MUQ because you think you have the truth of the Quran on your side.

But your are mistaken, the Quran are the fabricated lies of Muhammad.
So the joke is on Muslims for believing in their false prophet Muhammad.

Are you having fun Aklex?
I am having a ball seeing your work your way to the fires of hell.

I did my part in trying to enlighten your mind.
So I don't feel guilty seeing you work your way to hell.

Just keep your screams down low in hell when you go there Alex, I don't want to hear evil people creaming in their suffering in the fires of hell.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#188532 Sep 11, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Well he is generally correct. Much of Daniel parallels Revelations. He probably brought Daniel up because in Daniel it mentions many similar visions as it does in Revelations. Particularly Daniel 7 and 8. And after the symbolic visions are mentioned, it actually says what the visions symbolize. This should be enough evidence for you right there that visions such as these are meant to be symbolic, not literal and Daniel 7 and 8 makes that very clear. So there is no reason not to read Revelations the same way. You constantly misinterpret and misread everything. These scriptures are not the Quran and are not meant to be read in a literal fashion like the Quran, but you constantly have a difficult time understanding that and instead you read it literally like one does with the Quran. I keep explaining this error to you, but you never listen.
Neither is he correct nor you are on this, Seeker. And why did you bring up Qur'aan when it had nothing to do with these wild and strange visions? You accuse of bringing in the Bible. Right?

It is the other way round. John was so obsessed with the lamb that he built his dreams by plagiarizing Daniel's dreams.

It is Revelation that paralleled Daniel after a huge span of time..

Interpretation is a different matter. What both saw were really animals and strange beasts.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#188533 Sep 11, 2013
Seeker wrote:
Did you notice why I quoted them?
No!

Was I supposed to?

I saw the post and responded.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#188534 Sep 11, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>The Trinity is the Spirit of God Manifested as three persons of God performing the Will of God.
The Spirit of God is not subjected to the physical created laws of God.
If God was just a single Spirit He could not be presence every where at the same time.
God would be like our sun that stays in one place and his rays of light would only be seen as during the day as we live in a planet that is in orbit around the sun.
In that sense God would be a created being.
But God is uncreated.
The person of God are not three different persons having three different mind sets.
Each Spirit of God are the same substance of God having the same mind of God performing the Will of God.
If the Trinity of God was based on a pagan God, the three person of God would each have a separate mind set of their own, and at times would be in conflict with each other.
But God is unique in that His three spirits are one in substance and one in nature of the same one Spirit of God.
In that uniqueness of God, God has an inner life of His own and does not need to seek out side council.
All things are brought to perfection by Gods self sustaining efficiency.
This is really getting not only absurd but also hilarious. His three spirits? Please have mercy upon God.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#188535 Sep 11, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>If you worshiped God Alex you would know the answer.
Yes! Jesus is fully God and fully man.
This is a game to you and BMZ, and MUQ because you think you have the truth of the Quran on your side.
But your are mistaken, the Quran are the fabricated lies of Muhammad.
So the joke is on Muslims for believing in their false prophet Muhammad.
Are you having fun Aklex?
I am having a ball seeing your work your way to the fires of hell.
I did my part in trying to enlighten your mind.
So I don't feel guilty seeing you work your way to hell.
Just keep your screams down low in hell when you go there Alex, I don't want to hear evil people creaming in their suffering in the fires of hell.
Shamma,

There is no such thing as fully God and fully man.

If your God came down to earth as a cat, that cat would still be your God. You cannot say the cat was was fully God and fully animal.

It is just that your God became a cat.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#188536 Sep 11, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you Brother for your appreciation.
What you need is to be on the Right Side of truth and then every things becomes easy.
The problem is that Mr. Seeker is standing on the left side of truth and thinks he is on the right side!!
Look, I say what I believe in detail, and I answer every single point you try to make in detail, while you ignore half of the things that I say and only answer the parts you think you can answer and then pretend the other parts never even existed. Sorry, but this is not a discussion, it is merely a complete attempt at manipulation on your part and picking and choosing what you want to answer, and what you don't want to answer and then dictating the order that YOU want the discussion to go or think it should go so that it is most beneficial for your ideas. This simply is not a proper discussion in any universes, and I am not going to allow this nonsense anymore and I never should have in the first place.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
That is why he throws tantrums,
I only object to the way you are conducting this conversation. You have dictated what can be asked and what cannot and have dictated the order in which things shall be discussed. That isn't right in any universe and it is not going to continue. Just because your twisted sense of reasoning can't see the problem with this, does not mean that anybody should appease it.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
starts calling me and my prophet names,
I said Muhammad condoned rape and I proved it using Islamic sources themselves and you had nothing specific to say about that except to call me biased. Well if I am biased, then so is Bukhari and Sahih Muslim where these things can be found. And so is the Quran itself where condoning of rape is also found. You make it sound like I am just making all of this up out of thin air, but I quote the sources accurately and all you can do is to level some general, incorrect charge of bias to avoid specifically addressing what I have quoted. Sorry, but that ain't gunna work. This is yet another reason why I have no more interest in pursuing this with you. You cannot conduct yourself properly in a fair, two sided, objective manner, so you do not deserve someone's time and attention.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
starts abusing him and does every type of dramatics, except proving "who" is the object of prophesies which I Quote to him.
I don't have to prove who they are. YOU are the one who makes the claim, so the burden of proof is on you. Hasn't anybody ever taught you that? Where do you get your twisted sense of logic from that violates basic reasoning? You have it completely backwards. If you make the claim, then the burden of proof is on you. Have you noticed that if I say I think Isaiah 9:6 is about Jesus, I try to explain why I think that and I have never challenged you to tell me who YOU think it applies to? That's because the burden of proof is upon me if I make the claim. Same exact thing if you make a claim about Muhammad being the one prophecised. How come nobody has ever explained this very basic rule to you? This is what I mean about you having no decent education.
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the general condition of every one of these "experts"...
Just watch what happens when we reach Deut. 18:18, which he was dieing for when we started this discussion, now he will say, he is already done and does not feel any "inner urge" to respond to my post.
Sad end to one, who started with so much energy, is it not?
I thank you brother for your support and appreciation.
Regards,
MUQ
No, what is really sad is your complete lack of proper education and the fact that you don't even have any idea of all of the logic errors you are making because you are not educated enough to realize them. What is also sad is all of the time I have wasted with someone like you when I should have known better right from the beginning.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#188537 Sep 11, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
No!
Was I supposed to?
I saw the post and responded.
And you didn't read the post I was responding to to get an idea of why I replied with those verses? If not, then maybe this explains why you often behave in such a clueless manner. I'm always assuming that you fully read things and their context, but maybe I should stop assuming that. Now this is starting to make a little more sense to me. Sometimes, it isn't that you just can't understand, it's that you don't even bother to. The reasons for some of your posts seeming so clueless have just gotten a little less mysterious to me.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#188538 Sep 11, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Neither is he correct nor you are on this, Seeker. And why did you bring up Qur'aan when it had nothing to do with these wild and strange visions?
Because you are reading symbolic visions in the Bible in the same manner that you read the Quran and I have explained to you that one cannot do this as often the Bible uses symbolic language. And my example of the prophecies in Daniel which parallel some of the ones in Revelations proves it. First it gives the vision, THEN it actually says what the symbolic visions actually mean. They are NOT literal, they are symbolic. So the visions are symbolic and not to be taken literally.
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
You accuse of bringing in the Bible. Right?
I am not attacking the Quran to defend the Bible as attacking the Quran does nothing at all to defend the Bible. I never make that logical error like you do. And in this case, I'm not even defending the Bible, I am telling you how to read it properly. I merely brought the Quran up to tell you that you are not supposed to read certain parts of the Bible the way someone is supposed to read the Quran, aka literally. I cannot understand why I have to explain this to you. Why do I have to explain common sense to you?
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
It is the other way round. John was so obsessed with the lamb that he built his dreams by plagiarizing Daniel's dreams.
It is Revelation that paralleled Daniel after a huge span of time.{/QUOTE]

That has absolutely nothing at all to do with whether visions like these are to be taken literally or symbolically. What is the matter with your sense of reason?

[QUOTE who="bmz"]<quoted text>
Interpretation is a different matter. What both saw were really animals and strange beasts.
And in Daniel, the actual meanings of the symbolic visions were explained in the same chapter after the symbolic visions were mentioned. That should tell you right there how one is supposed to take these visions. Symbolically. Honestly, what is so hard for you to understand about this?

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#188539 Sep 11, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Before hitting the keyboard, you must read and understand first. Seeker and I were not discussing Daniel's dream.
We were talking about the bloodied 4-legged lamb that John saw in his vision or dream. You can find that in Revelation.
Did Daniel see a bloodied lamb in his vision. Did he see a lamb opening scrolls with his hooves?
Think before you butt in aimlessly.
Before wanted to answer me and hitting the keyboard you must think and read thrice or even more to understand simple posts.

I suggested you to read about Daniel's dreams/visions because they are symbolic, a concept totally unknown to you and they have something in common with what you and Seeker were discussing about.

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 Obama names Utah, Nevada monuments despite oppo... Dec 30 Off Topic 5
Ark of the Covenant @ Stonehenge Dec 30 YHWH Allah 2
News New theory on Stonehenge describes it as 'an an... (Mar '15) Dec 22 Lucifer 9
C-h-e-a-p K-i-t-c-h-e-n-s For Sale Middlesbrough Dec 19 Anonymous 1
The Epiphany Window is a Map of Stonehenge Dec '16 Garry-Denke 4
News A trip to Israel gives Hanukkah new meaning for... Dec '16 drain the swamp 1
News Lubbock's bounty of free museums lure visitors ... Dec '16 Tom 1
More from around the web