Who Is Allah?

Who Is Allah?

There are 256357 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.

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#189236 Sep 16, 2013
Seeker wrote:
Phallics wrote:
"Nonesense, everybody can see that I am intelligent and articulate without sexual hungups and I am probably the most popular poster on these forums."
First of all, mister intelligent spells it nonesense instead of nonsense.
Probably it was an intelligent and articulate error.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189237 Sep 16, 2013
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
The uneducated desert Arabs weren't that uneducated. They didn't believe him, they were forced to believe him through wars so the only choice they had die or being Muslims, they choose the second option.
Some of that is actually true. He actually originally built up his army through successful raids and people started to follow him because of all of the booty they were able to steal. The part about the people of Medina at that time judging who is a good leader to be followed or not by how successfully they led raids, is true according to historians. And that was how he was able to build up 10,000 men, an overwhelming sized force to invade Mecca and take it without a fight. And the Meccans were stupid enough to enter into a 10 year treaty with him that he had no intentions of ever keeping one moment longer than he had to. After all, how could Allah's apostle be denied the Kaaba one moment longer than necessary? So basically, he lulled them into a false sense of security to gain time to build his army up, and the Meccans were stupid enough to fall for it.
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget that once the so called prophet died the Arab tribes that were conquered by him thought that this is the occassion to be free and started the rebellions, but Muhammad's companions were able to suffocate that though with some difficulty.
I didn't know about that part.
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#189238 Sep 16, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you mean by ancient copies of the manuscripts? Is Mark considered an ancient copy but John is not? Some historians have them as having only 20 years of difference in their earliest dates of their guesses. But then again, it is all just a best guess anyway. Nobody knows for sure when the first copies of any of the Gospels came about, they can only guess from the copies they have found and can only date them in a semi speculative manner.
The Church does not have any original of anything for the first four hundred years. Assuming these gospels were written around 410 AD, it would mean that the ancient copies would have been made after that.

I mean copies of copies written in, say around 450 AD. That is the best guess.

Yes, it is nothing but speculation. However, the Church has come up with her own History department, which fraudulently dates them to 50-120 AD, which is a lie anyway.

It cracks me up, when Christians tell me that Mark, Matthew and Luke wrote their books before the destruction of the Temple. And then I am told that John wrote between 90-110 AD, and his gospel also does not talk about the destruction of the Temple. Funny reasoning! Isn't it?
bmz

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#189239 Sep 16, 2013
Shamma wrote:
Jesus is the Son of God and Jesus expressed Gods mercy on the women.
That Jesus is the Son of God is fraud and absurd. And the next problem is that there is no proof of that.

How many times do I have to debunk that lie and a myth generated by men, who never knew Jesus and never sat in his company?

This is one pudding in which there is no proof.

An important debunking by Jesus himself:

Every time he was asked by Satan and others, if he were the son of God, Jesus never said YES to that. Instead he called himself son of man, which simply means man.

Satan's probing confirmed that Jesus was not the son of God. If he were, he would have told him frankly, "Yes, buddy! I am the son of God!" However, Jesus said nothing foolish like that himself.

Son of man does not mean son of God. End of the story.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189240 Sep 16, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
The Church does not have any original of anything for the first four hundred years. Assuming these gospels were written around 410 AD, it would mean that the ancient copies would have been made after that.
Go talk to historians who date them much earlier. Stop making up your own nonsense and link credible historians for a change. You actually link nothing because you are too lazy to actually research it, and that's fine, but don't bother others with your lazy assumptions and inventions.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#189241 Sep 16, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
That Jesus is the Son of God is fraud and absurd. And the next problem is that there is no proof of that.
How many times do I have to debunk that lie and a myth generated by men, who never knew Jesus and never sat in his company?
This is one pudding in which there is no proof.
An important debunking by Jesus himself:
Every time he was asked by Satan and others, if he were the son of God, Jesus never said YES to that. Instead he called himself son of man, which simply means man.
Satan's probing confirmed that Jesus was not the son of God. If he were, he would have told him frankly, "Yes, buddy! I am the son of God!" However, Jesus said nothing foolish like that himself.
Son of man does not mean son of God. End of the story.
Whether you believe Jesus is the Son of God or not does not changes the facts of history.

The only place Jesus is not accepted as the Son of God is in the Quran, and the Quran was written 700 years after the historical event of Jesus death and resurrection.
And Muhammad had no evidence that proves that it did not happen.
And there are eye witnesses to the event and so the Quran's creditability is non-existence.

Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189242 Sep 16, 2013
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
The word Atheism derives from the Greek word atheos which means without god. What does without god mean?
I think it means what it says, there is no God.
STEFANO COLONNA wrote:
<quoted text>
It means a lot of things. This is why you have a lot of branches in Atheism, and some of them fit very well with Agnosticism. Furthermore there is no a common definition of Atheism but a range of definitions. You know, there is a current of thought called Christian Atheism where the belief in god is ignored or rejected and at the same time the moral teachings of the Nazarene are practised.
Well that would be nothing more than appreciating the teachings of Lao Tzu, or Confucius because they are practical and wise. Their teachings had nothing to do with whether there is a God or not, as far as I can remember. But there is so much I can go into from a book that I thought was astounding called "Awareness" by Anthony Demello that I could go into, but it gets far too deep and complicated, even if he managed to put all of this abstract stuff in the most tangible way possible better than anyone else did, it still isn't all that tangible. Too much to bother to go into.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189243 Sep 16, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
That Jesus is the Son of God is fraud and absurd. And the next problem is that there is no proof of that.
How many times do I have to debunk that lie and a myth generated by men, who never knew Jesus and never sat in his company?
This is one pudding in which there is no proof.
An important debunking by Jesus himself:
Every time he was asked by Satan and others, if he were the son of God, Jesus never said YES to that. Instead he called himself son of man, which simply means man.
Satan's probing confirmed that Jesus was not the son of God. If he were, he would have told him frankly, "Yes, buddy! I am the son of God!" However, Jesus said nothing foolish like that himself.
Son of man does not mean son of God. End of the story.
Where did Jesus tell Satan that he was the Son of Man? I couldn't find that part.
Rabbeen Al Jihad

Salt Lake City, UT

#189244 Sep 16, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Your stupidity is simply mind blowing. Go see if you can win a third grade spelling bee. Go become the master and top student of a Kindergarten class.
Salaamz SpleeFr! LOL! forgive me mr.perfect,I am but a lowly worm in comparrison to your azzzholiness.Perhaps in your divine compassion you would consider makeing me your akolite.After all, I live to be as perfected as you! oh master of the Universe. LOL! CheerZ
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189245 Sep 16, 2013
Eric wrote:
<quoted text>
HaShem itself is a substitution. And it is a substitution for the same reason. The original was the tetragrammaton.
Here's a helpful read: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14...
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189246 Sep 16, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Where did Jesus tell Satan that he was the Son of Man? I couldn't find that part.
bmz believes that because Jesus didn't "prove" his "son of God" credentials to Satan by jumping through Satan's various test hoops, it follows that Jesus wasn't the "son of God." You see, it doesn't matter to bmz that Jesus effectively countered every one of Satan's inducements by quoting Scripture, and actually soundly DEFEATED Satan on that score, by which I mean to point out the obvious, namely, that bmz understands nothing at all about Jesus, or about spiritual warfare, or about Christianity, period.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189247 Sep 16, 2013
CORRECTION:

bmz STUPIDLY believes that because Jesus didn't "prove" his "son of God" credentials to Satan by jumping through Satan's various test hoops, it follows that Jesus wasn't the "son of God." You see, it doesn't matter to bmz that Jesus effectively countered every one of Satan's inducements by quoting Scripture, and actually soundly DEFEATED Satan on that score, by which I mean to point out the obvious, namely, that bmz understands nothing at all about Jesus, or about spiritual warfare, or about Christianity, period.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189248 Sep 16, 2013
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

Matthew 4

New International Version (NIV)
Jesus Is Tested in the Wilderness

4 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted[a] by the devil. 2 After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 The tempter came to him and said,“If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”

4 Jesus answered,“It is written:‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’[b]”

5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 6 “If you are the Son of God,” he said,“throw yourself down. For it is written:

“‘He will command his angels concerning you,
and they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’[c]”

7 Jesus answered him,“It is also written:‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’[d]”

8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 “All this I will give you,” he said,“if you will bow down and worship me.”

10 Jesus said to him,“Away from me, Satan! For it is written:‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’[e]”

11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

a. Matthew 4:1 The Greek for tempted can also mean tested.
b. Matthew 4:4 Deut. 8:3
c. Matthew 4:6 Psalm 91:11,12
d. Matthew 4:7 Deut. 6:16
e. Matthew 4:10 Deut. 6:13
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189249 Sep 16, 2013
bmz,

Why would it ever have occurred to Satan to ask Jesus if he was the Son of God?

Oh wait, don't tell me. Let me guess. This was the Church Fathers spinning lies at Nicea, right?
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189250 Sep 16, 2013
CORRECTION:

bmz,

Why would it ever have occurred to Satan to ask Jesus if he WERE the Son of God?

Oh wait, don't tell me. Let me guess. This was the Church Fathers spinning lies at Nicea, right?

(English is future perfect weird like that!)
MUHAMMAD THE GREATEST MAN

Alexandria, Egypt

#189251 Sep 16, 2013
Allah is the same God that all the prophets, including Jesus, in the Holy worshipped and called their adherents to believe in and to worship, hence, the claim that the god of Muslims is not the god of the Holy Book is absurd and untenable. Cognates of the name "Allah" exist in other Semitic languages, including Hebrew and Aramaic.
http://www.knowmuhammad.org/allah
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189252 Sep 16, 2013
MUHAMMAD THE GREATEST MAN wrote:
Allah is the same God that all the prophets, including Jesus, in the Holy worshipped and called their adherents to believe in and to worship, hence, the claim that the god of Muslims is not the god of the Holy Book is absurd and untenable. Cognates of the name "Allah" exist in other Semitic languages, including Hebrew and Aramaic.
http://www.knowmuhammad.org/allah
It isn't a question of "Allah," but of that so-called "prophet" of yours who was, according to authoritative MUSLIM records, a thief, a murderer, a rape enabler, a slave owner and trader, and a Jew hating bigot, among other sterling qualities, while you, being his benighted worshiper, are a servant of his evil, for "Allah," of course.
Eric

Lisle, IL

#189253 Sep 16, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
From your understanding, why is it so bad to give God a name? I have my own ideas about it that I explained to Stephano, but I would like to hear yours. You are Jewish, so your explanation and understanding of it would certainly be relevant and you would have the most right to explain it from the Jewish perspective.
G-d has lots of names. What is bad is to place G-d's name in a medium where the name itself can be disrespected. I gave the scriptural references to the sanctity and holiness of the name itself. If one is not to use G-d's name in vain, one must protect the name from being a nullity; destroyed; etc.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189254 Sep 16, 2013
"I am the greatest!" ~ Muhammad Ali

http://search.yahoo.com/search...
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189255 Sep 16, 2013
The god of Muslims is Muhammad.

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 Humans in America 100,000 years earlier than pr... 24 min Ted Haggard s Mas... 8
News Harding to open biblical archaeology museum Apr 15 Plunder 5
News Archaeologists Reconstruct Face of Medieval Man... Mar '17 kornadnez 1
News Blackbeard's anchor recovered off coast (May '11) Feb '17 Pretty Pharts 12
Fossilised tooth Feb '17 Navigator 1
News 700-year-old poop found, still reeks (Apr '14) Feb '17 Ancient Phart 27
News Aglukkaq re-announces Franklin Centre for Gjoa ... Feb '17 stand on guard 4 ... 1
More from around the web