Who Is Allah?

Aug 24, 2007 Full story: The Brussels Journal 209,659

“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

#189886 Sep 20, 2013
news wrote:
Shove it, you show your phucked up attitude into your own Islamic hellhole. You got a free ticket to call other religion anything you want, when truth is told above your religion, it hurt and and your head gets hot.
You did not read my educational post. Here it is, so read it again and learn:

Nonsense! No such word in Arabic!

When you do not know Arabic, don't talk! Which ignorant fool gave you that absurd meaning?

The Arabic words in the verse are "AHSANAT-FARJAHA", and this is a phrase, which simply means
"overcome carnal desires" or "restrain carnal desires" and "keep chaste".

Here is how any sensible reader would laugh at your stupidity and that of your likes. Read this verse from Surah 23, titled the Believers (Muminoon):

Transliteration: "Waallatheena hum lifuroojihim hafithoona"

Translation by Asad: "and who are mindful of their chastity,"

So, by your silly and absurd meaning, men also have vagina, because the word Furoojihim is in there. Is it?

Does Furoojihim mean men's vaginas to you? LMAO!

I am in a charitable mood and in Jesus Mode these days. Don't ever do this again. If you do, I will ask you to do something very dirty to the Son of God.

Your sin is forgiven this time.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189887 Sep 20, 2013
JOEL THUMBS UP wrote:
<quoted text>
You shit through your mouth, Jesus freak.
Grow up, boy.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189888 Sep 20, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
That only shows that you next to nothing about life of our prophet and you have a very dirty and sewer filled mouth.
Seeing you people, sometimes I think "Yes, Allah can do anything"!!
To make perfect pig out of you people!!
MUQtard,

I didn't make up the MUSLIM source material that I have quoted. It establishes what I have posted about that so-called "prophet" of yours, that he was in fact a thief, a liar, a sadistic murderer, an enslaver of women and children, and a rape enabler, if not a rapist himself. You EXCUSE such behavior that today would be prosecuted as criminal, because for you, the end, eliminating paganism and polytheism, justifies the means, no matter how savagely brutal.

Yes, "Allah can do anything," including inflicting Mohammadanism on the world's "infidels" and "disbelievers."

Go, throw stones at the devil. It's what Adam did in Mecca.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189889 Sep 20, 2013
"The shameful part is that the Father deceived Jesus and never told him that he was going to get him killed." ~ bmz,
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189890 Sep 20, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
How come you lost ALL Interest in Deut. 18:18?
I lost interest in the debate itself, as you are not able to properly participate in one, and I explained exactly why. You already know what I think about 18:18 and others have said the same thing. But you think that an important part of any prophecy that cannot be met should merely be ignored. I think that if an important part cannot be met then the person cannot be the fulfillment of that prophecy, regardless of any similarities in other parts and regardless of what prophecy or person we are talking about. So there really is no point in discussing any prophecies with you at all since I think you have a completely irrational point of view in general. So I am not running, as 18:18 was actually what I did want to discuss and thought we originally were going to discuss, but it's just simply pointless having any debate about any of this if a person thinks that one can just ignore an important part that cannot be met and merely focus on what can be met. I had no idea just how irrational you were before I ever even entered into this and would have never done so had I known because I would have recognized it as a complete waste of time.

Moving on.
El Cid

Saint Albans, WV

#189891 Sep 20, 2013
MUQ wrote:
Deut. 18:18
This is a very clear prophesy of a prophet to come after Moses, who will be like Moses….now referring to closing verses of Deut.“No prophet like Moses has appeared again, God conversed with him face to face”(Ch 34 V 10).
And we know that the present book of Deut. Was written almost 1000 years after Moses….so all of the major and minor prophets of Biblical OT had come and gone and this prophesy was not fulfilled.
Then referring to Gospel of John Ch1 V 19-27…when Jews asked from John the Baptist “Are you “That Prophet”…” meaning prophet like Moses….shows that upto that time this “Prophet like Moses” had not appeared for Jews.
So now we have only two candidates for this prophesy, either Jesus Christ or our Prophet Mohammad (peace be on both
these messengers of Allah).
Third option that we "should wait" for another prophet Like Moss to come along is remote and fruitless.
Component parts of the Prophesy:
So let us break down this prophesy into component parts and see, who of these two persons satisfies them most:
a. He shall be a Prophet
(He shall be known and shall be famous as a Prophet. In other words being Prophet shall be His Important Quality).
b. He shall be like Moses
(In mission, in duties and in its completion and execution).
c. He shall be raised from the “brethren” of Jews.
d. God shall put His Words into the mouth of This Prophet.
e. The prophet shall only speak what God shall command him.
f. If any one does not listen to that Prophet’ message (when he is speaking in the name of God), God Himself shall call that man to account
(This is a warning, to show how Important and critical is the mission of That Prophet. No one should take it lightly).
Gospel of John and Deut 18:18:
Before we go further , let us go to Gospel of John Ch-1 verse 19-27, where Jews asked John the Baptist, THREE Distinct Questions:
A. Are you Christ?
B. Are you Elijah?
C. Are you THAT PROPHET?
They ask John the Baptist for three different and distinct personalities, Christ, Elijah and THAT PROPHET , but some how Christians see only TWO personalities here and ether the forget the third one or mix Christ and THAT PROPHET into one!!
Jews were very clear in their mind about THREE personalities, that is why they asked John again
“Why you baptize when you are neither Christ, Nor Elijah and not THAT PROPHET”?
Again our Christian friends see only TWO personalities?
Is it not strange?
In case of God when there is absolute Unity, they make 1 into Three and when there are 3 personalities, they make them into 2!!
They certainly need a lesson in basic Arithmetic!
Any Comments Please?
You are happy to quote John's Gospel, except when it proves you wrong!

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

John Testifies About Jesus

1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said,“Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! 30 This is the one I meant when I said,‘A man who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’ 31 I myself did not know him, but the reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel.”

32 Then John gave this testimony:“I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. 33 And I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me,‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ 34 I have seen and I testify that this is God’s Chosen One.”[f]

f. John 1:34 See Isaiah 42:1; many manuscripts is the Son of God.

http://biblehub.com/isaiah/42-1.htm

Isaiah 42:1 "Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations."

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#189892 Sep 20, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>You can shove your Quran scriptures up your ass BMZ, they are worthless!

The Trinity Is Jewish

By Rachmiel Frydland
Most modern Jewish people seem to have made their "peace" with Jesus of Nazareth. Some consider Him to be a great, Jew, or even the greatest Jew who ever lived. Some of our Jewish leaders, as Dr.Heinrich Graetz and Dr. Joseph Klausner, compliment Him on His teaching. Some admire His parables and purity, as Moses Montefiore; and Some as Sholem Asch and others, even consider Him to be the Messiah of the Gentiles. Today we often meet Jewish people who acknowledge that Jesus is the Messiah for Jew and Gentile alike; and some are even willing to share these convictions with other Jewish people. What then holds such Jewish people back from joining with us and accepting Jesus as their personal Lord and Savior?
The hindrance some have expressed to the writer of this article is the reluctance to accept the fact that Jesus is supernatural. Moreover, from childhood we have been inculcated with Maimonides' Thirteen Principles one of which is:
I firmly believe that the Creator, blessed be his name, is One: that there is no oneness in any form like his; & that he alone was, is, & ever will be our God.
We have been thus brought up to think that if we believe that God is One, then this idea excludes any idea of God manifesting Himself through Jesus the Messiah. This Christian concept of God's triunity seemed to us to be a Gentile and pagan idea. NOT SO! Christians, as well as Jewish people, must believe in One God. There is no other. The God of Abraham. Isaac and Jacob is the God of the Jewish people and of the Christians. The Hebrew Scriptures of the Old Testament are authoritative for the Jew and for the Christian. In them is found the confession that
is authoritative for all of us.
Hear. O Israel. the LORD our God, the LORD IS ONE. Deuteronomy 6:4
TRIUNITY IN TANAKH (Old Testament)
While it is universally admitted by both Jews and Christians that God is One and that there is no one beside Him, we are also compelled to acknowledge that the triunity of God is clearly taught in the Torah, the Prophets, and in the Writings --- that is in the whole Tanakh, the Hebrew Scriptures of the Old Testament, & the New Testament. Not only in the Tanakh but also in the Talmudical & Rabbinical writings this concept is well known. Space does not permit us to present proofs from all the sources in this short article. Here we present just a few challenging proofs:
THE TORAH: When God (Elohim) create the world He wanted to make absolutely clear to His creation that He is not some abstract mathematical unitarian principle with no analogy in all creation, as some of our philosophers tried to present Him under Aristotelian influence. Instead we read in the holy Torah these words:
And (Elohim) said. Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:
and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle,
& over all the earth. Genesis 1:26
Shamma,

You can shove the Trinity up your arse because it is worthless. Thanks

The Jews DO NOT believe in your Trinity. They will also tell you to shove the Trinity up your arse, if you write something similar to them.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#189893 Sep 20, 2013
El Cid wrote:
I should note that bmz is a self-proclaimed EXPERT on Christian doctrine.
No, Buford.

I am just a critic.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189894 Sep 20, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Where and when did I say that he said, Seeker?
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam/TT8...

I probably should stop being hard on you and be a little more tolerant, because you aren't being dishonest, you honestly just can't even keep track of what you yourself say, let alone others.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#189895 Sep 20, 2013
El Cid wrote:
"The shameful part is that the Father deceived Jesus and never told him that he was going to get him killed." ~ bmz,
I responded to news' post # 189600 on page 8955 in which news wrote:

"Then the Quran says - Allah is the best deceiever (plotter)!!!!"

That is how I ridicule an unintelligent remark and hammer back, when I see such ridiculous remarks coming from a hardcore polemic Christian. You should not feel upset and bad.

You can now stop repeating.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189896 Sep 20, 2013
El Cid wrote:
<quoted text>You are happy to quote John's Gospel, except when it proves you wrong!
I even warned him about that because if he wants to quote from John, then he has to acknowledge all of the verses from John that clearly paint Jesus as divine. This is why I bagged out of the debate because there is no logical consistency to be found in this guy. He'll change the rules to suit his needs, and then change them back when he thinks it suits his needs. For example, he said that Isaiah 9:6 is clearly talking about something that either already happened or something that will happen in Isaiah's time. Then, when he gets to a prophecy about Muhammad, he acknowledges that it could have been talking about Solomon, but he says that would be too soon as Solomon came too soon afterwards. So the rules seem to change as needed.

And he can't even understand any problem with doing things like this, so there really is no basic sense of proper rationality and consistency to be found in him. So how does one have a debate with someone like that if the rules are just going to keep changing as he needs them to change? It's a pointless waste of time if someone can't see that they are doing this and recognize the problem with doing this.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189897 Sep 20, 2013
El Cid wrote:
<quoted text>
f. John 1:34 See Isaiah 42:1; many manuscripts is the Son of God.
http://biblehub.com/isaiah/42-1.htm
Isaiah 42:1 "Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations."
Don't waste your time as I have already gone through that with him and pointed out the possible parallel and he just dismissed it, and then said that Jesus did not bring justice, but Muhammad did. And then I pointed out that nobody has actually brought justice to the nations yet and Muhammad never will because he is not going to return, but Jesus will if he returns as is predicted. It didn't matter to him. It wasn't what he wanted to hear. They have this bizarre switch in their minds that allows them to turn their minds on and off whenever it suits them. So it is a complete waste of time. You can't get anywhere with someone like that. If Allah has sealed our hearts, then surely he has also sealed their minds.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#189898 Sep 20, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
Shamma,
You can shove the Trinity up your arse because it is worthless. Thanks
The Jews DO NOT believe in your Trinity. They will also tell you to shove the Trinity up your arse, if you write something similar to them.
Its there in the Scriptures so it does not matter what the Jews believe, it's what God reveals.
Muhammad was just a pagan desert bandit and only cared about raping, robbing, and committing murder for booty and slaves.
Muhammad pretended to be a prophet by borrowing scripture from other religions.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#189899 Sep 20, 2013
My post #189781 on page 8963 in response to news' post:

" "news wrote:

That is because Muhammad took it exactly the way you are thinking. becaus in Quran Muahmmad said angel Gibril blew Allah's soul in Mary's chastity and thus Jesus was born under a date tree." "

I, BMZ, wrote: "Stop telling lies, please. Do not emulate the lying Christian evangelists and the lying Church fathers.

Neither Qur'aan nor Muhammad said that Gabriel removed Jesus' mother's panty and blew into her vagina.

That is preposterous!"

And then, Seeker, you asked me in your post #189786 on the same page:

"Where did he say removed her panty?"

And I replied in my post #189885 on page 8968

"Where and when did I say that he said, Seeker?"

It was I, who had added the word 'panty' and it was not news.
MUQ

Dammam, Saudi Arabia

#189900 Sep 20, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
I lost interest in the debate itself, as you are not able to properly participate in one, and I explained exactly why. You already know what I think about 18:18 and others have said the same thing. But you think that an important part of any prophecy that cannot be met should merely be ignored. I think that if an important part cannot be met then the person cannot be the fulfillment of that prophecy, regardless of any similarities in other parts and regardless of what prophecy or person we are talking about. So there really is no point in discussing any prophecies with you at all since I think you have a completely irrational point of view in general. So I am not running, as 18:18 was actually what I did want to discuss and thought we originally were going to discuss, but it's just simply pointless having any debate about any of this if a person thinks that one can just ignore an important part that cannot be met and merely focus on what can be met. I had no idea just how irrational you were before I ever even entered into this and would have never done so had I known because I would have recognized it as a complete waste of time.
Moving on.
I KNOW what you think about Deut. 18:18 and how eager were yoy to discuss it.

I avoided it at that time, because we had not laid a proper foundation, without laying a foundation, there is no purpose in having a discussion in the air.

I laid proper foundation and told that it is not only Deut. 18:18 which prophecies about our prophet, there are many more verses in OT and NT books.

Now you have time and opportunity to discuss every word of Deut. 18:18 and present your case.

It is very strange that you developed "cold feet" when the opportunity is so clear and open.

It is not called "proving your point" if you just express them, so my dear brother, behave like a reasonable man and put your point of view and objection in my reasoning.

Otherwise, people will think that your "loss of interest" is nothing but running away from this important discussion.

This discussion in much more important and fruitful than what I see you are engaged in on this thread.

By dear brother, be a man and bite your bullet and come forward.

This is my sincere appeal to you.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189901 Sep 20, 2013
Shamma wrote:
<quoted text>
Muhammad pretended to be a prophet by borrowing scripture from other religions.
He didn't just borrow them, he hijacked them to use as a foundation or basis because he had no scriptures to use from the descendants of Ishmael. Then he leveled the charge of corruption against them so that he could rewrite them as he needed so that he could make himself into a Prophet. More like 20% profit as far as I can tell. There is even a Sura titled "The Booty".

And yet Muslims will tell you that he did nothing but defend himself. How can invading someone elses lands and stealing a whole bunch of booty be considered self defense? And then, when we consider that he clearly condoned rape as well, it gets even worse. It just boggles my mind to see the excuses that these people make up for things that are clearly right in front of their face from Islamic sources themselves.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#189902 Sep 20, 2013
Shamma wrote:
Its there in the Scriptures so it does not matter what the Jews believe, it's what God reveals.

Muhammad was just a pagan desert bandit and only cared about raping, robbing, and committing murder for booty and slaves.
Muhammad pretended to be a prophet by borrowing scripture from other religions.
No, Trinity is not there in the Scripture.

It is a post-Jesus crude derivative. God never revealed that filth, Shamma.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189903 Sep 20, 2013
MUQ wrote:
<quoted text>
I KNOW what you think about Deut. 18:18 and how eager were yoy to discuss it.
I just got done explaining to you for the fifth time why any serious debate with someone who thinks like you is pointless, and you even ignore that as well. There is no such thing as consistency within you, and one cannot have a debate with someone who cannot be consistent. You can't just apply one set of rules, when it suits your needs, and then change the rules when it suits your needs. For example, with Isaiah 9:6, you said it is talking about something that will happen in Isaiah's lifetime. But then, when it came to a prophecy that you think is about Muhammad, you acknowledged that it could have been talking about Solomon, but said that would be too soon and Solomon came too soon to be a fulfillment of that prophecy. Presto!! Allah Kazam!!! The rules change just when you need them to.

And for the fact that you can't even recognize your own inconsistencies where you change the rules to one thing if you think it will suit your needs, and change them again when you think it suits your needs, means that there cannot be any sort of truly rational discussion with you that will ever lead anywhere. If the bar keeps moving, how can any fruitful discussion ever take place when you can merely move the bar to whatever you need it to be?

Why don't you just continue the discussion with El Cid, until he learns the same thing about you and bags out on it as well?
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#189904 Sep 20, 2013
bmz wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Trinity is not there in the Scripture.
It is a post-Jesus crude derivative. God never revealed that filth, Shamma.
You guys just keep repeating the same things to each other and you never get anywhere. All you are doing is exchanging dogmatic opinions so neither of you will ever get anywhere with each other.

bmz

Since: Mar 08

Singapore

#189905 Sep 20, 2013
Seeker wrote:
There is even a Sura titled "The Booty".
Booty is not a bad word in the Scriptures.

The Arabic word is Al-Anfaal and if you read the various translations at this link, you will find that most of the European translators have used the word Spoils.

http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/8/1/defaul...

LIke wise, you can also read to familiarize yourself about the use of various words in the Bible for a comparative study:

http://biblehub.com/2_chronicles/14-13.htm

I liked this translation by Holman:

"Then Asa and the people who were with him pursued them as far as Gerar. The Cushites fell until they had no survivors, for they were crushed before Yahweh and His army. So the people of Judah carried off a great supply of loot. "

Now, you will consider it a BIG LOOT or BOOTY as in the case of a robbery, since you are a native speaker of English. However, we will consider it as spoils of war, not a looted booty.

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
New Archaeology Field Forum Jan 29 Archyx 1
On This Day: King Tut's Tomb Discovered (Feb '13) Jan 25 Sambool Khan 14
Province set to buy Grace Islet; ends First Nat... Jan 21 Bob 1
Prehistoric sex toys are kind of hard to look at Jan 13 texastwostep 1
10 World's Oldest Things From Armenia Jan 12 Mary joe 42
Archaeology: New technologies reveal hidden sec... Jan 11 kirann 1
Ancient mummy prepared for public exhibition af... Jan 8 lol 2
More from around the web