1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Is Allah a different god?

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by Paul of Eugene, Dec 20, 2001.

  1. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Aug 18, 2001
    Likes Received:
    Barbarian, let me ask you something.
    Suppose we both know a person named Susan.

    Do you suppose, just because we each are talking about a Susan who is a female human being that we are talking about the same person?

    The Allah of Islam and the God of the Bible are far more different than those two Susans. They are not the same at all.

    That seems wrong. They both talked to Abraham. We see that much of the Q'uran is based on Scripture. Allah emphasizes honesty, chastity, a single God, and submission to His will, followed by a lifetime in Heaven with Him. The last is not always part of Judaism, of course. Muslims don't worship Jesus, but then neither do Jews.

    It appears that you've perhaps not understood Islam. These characteristics certainly seem to be part of Christianity, as well.
  2. eString

    eString New Member

    Dec 25, 2001
    Likes Received:
    To all,

    Let me first kindly inform you that most of you are sadly utterly misinformed.

    Allah is neither a moon god, nor a pagan god. Allah is Arabic for “The God”, for He alone is the God, not any god, but THE GOD. This is His name, may He be glorified, even according to the Bible:

    “I am the Lord: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images."
    (KJV, Isaiah 42:8) ( Emphasis mine)

    Let us reason together, shall we? Is it not a fact that not all Christians are American? That not all of them are English speakers? Is it not fair to say that the Baptist Church/denomination is actually a minority?

    Believe it or not, there are others who are Christians too. The most important of which (for the purposes of our discussion here) are Christian Arabs. The question is thus as follows: how do these Christians (I have read numbering around 26 million or so; can anyone enlighten us as to the number of Baptists?) refer to their God? How is He called in their daily lives, and in their Bible?

    Here is something I came across which is most interesting. The following is a modified quote from the The word ALLAH in the Arabic Bible, by Robert Squirs, an ex-practicing American Christian, now a devoted Muslim.

    Please note how the word "Allah" mentioned in the Qur'an is same word the Arabic Bible uses in reference to Almighty God. The word "Allah" is underlined and emphasized in the scripture below, for your convenience.

    [Qu'ran 1:1 - English translation]
    "In the Name of God, the All-Merciful, the Compassionate"
    [Qur'an 1:1 - Arabic transliteration]
    "Bismi Allahi ar-Rahmani, ar-Raheem"
    [Qur'an 1:1 - Arabic]

    [Genesis 1:1 - English Bible - King James Version]
    "In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth ..."
    [Genesis 1:1 - Arabic transliteration]
    "Fee al-badi' khalaqa Allahu as-Samaawaat wa al-Ard ..."
    [Genesis 1:1 - Arabic Bible]

    [John 3:16 - English Bible - King James Version]
    "For God so loved the world, that He gave ..."
    [John 3:16 - Arabic transliteration]
    "Li-annhu haakadha ahabba Allahu al-'Aalama hataa badhala ..."
    [John 3:16 - Arabic Bible]

    [Luke 3:38 - English Bible - New King James Version]
    " ... the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God."
    [Luke 3:38 - Arabic transliteration]
    " ... bini Anoosha, bini Sheeti, bini Aaadama, abni Allahi."
    [Luke 3:38 - Arabic Bible]

    [Luke 1:30 - English Bible - King James Version]
    " ... Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favor with God."
    [Luke 1:30 - Arabic transliteration]
    " ... Laa takhaafee, yaa Maryam, li-annaki qad wajadti ni'amat(an)'inda Allahi."
    [Luke 1:30 - Arabic Bible]

    [Matthew 19:17 - English Bible - New King James Version]
    " ... there is none good but One, that is, God"
    [Matthew 19:17 - Arabic transliteration]
    " ... laysa ahadun Saalihaan illa waahidun wa huwa Allahu"
    [Matthew 19:17 - Arabic Bible]

    Indeed, if your browser can render foreign characters (IE 5 can), then please check out the following search result on the SVD Online Arabic Study Bible from http://bible.crosswalk.com. I have prepared the query by hand so as to display all occurrences of the Word "Allah" in Arabic as found in the Old Testament. The result numbered in the thousands! Do check it out.

    Now, surely these Christians are not worshiping a moon god, or are they? Surely they are not worshiping a pagan god, or are they? Beware of pride, folks. National and otherwise! It is an abomination to the Lord.

    006:016 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

    006:017 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

    006:018 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,

    006:019 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

    006:020 My son, keep thy father's commandment, and forsake not the law of thy mother:

    006:021 Bind them continually upon thine heart, and tie them about thy neck.

    006:022 When thou goest, it shall lead thee; when thou sleepest, it shall keep thee; and when thou awakest, it shall talk with thee.

    006:023 For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life:

    This pride test is your test in this life, people, I tell you.

    Here is a part of the message of prophet Mohammed peace be upon him (PBUH). He is your Comforter as foretold by Jesus Christ PBUH! Please do reflect on how Islam is any different (if at all) from what all the earlier prophets preached: keep the Law, follow the Commandments. (Even that of Solomon PBUH quoted above!).

    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:
    017.016: When We decide to destroy a population, We (first) send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true against them: then (it is) We destroy them utterly.

    017.017: How many generations have We destroyed after Noah? and enough is thy Lord to note and see the sins of His servants.

    017.018: If any do wish for the transitory things (of this life), We readily grant them - such things as We will, to such person as We will: in the end have We provided Hell for them: they will burn therein, disgraced and rejected.

    017.019: Those who do wish for the (things of) the Hereafter, and strive therefor with all due striving, and have Faith,- they are the ones whose striving is acceptable (to Allah).

    017.020: Of the bounties of thy Lord We bestow freely on all- These as well as those: The bounties of thy Lord are not closed (to anyone).

    017.021: See how We have bestowed more on some than on others; but verily the Hereafter is more in rank and gradation and more in excellence.

    017.022: Set not up with Allah any other god (O man) lest thou sit down reproved, forsaken.

    017.023: Thy Lord hath decreed, that ye worship none save Him, and (that ye show) kindness to parents. If one of them or both of them attain old age with thee, say not "Fie" unto them nor repulse them, but speak unto them a gracious word.

    017.024: And lower unto them the wing of submission through mercy, and say: My Lord! Have mercy on them both as they did care for me when I was little.

    017.025: Your Lord is Best Aware of what is in your minds. If ye are righteous, then lo! He was ever Forgiving unto those who turn (unto Him).

    017.026: Give the kinsman his due, and the needy, and the wayfarer, and squander not (thy wealth) in wantonness.

    017.027: Lo! the squanderers were ever brothers of the devils, and the devil was ever an ingrate to his Lord.

    017.028: But if thou turn away from them, seeking mercy from thy Lord, for which thou hopest, then speak unto them a reasonable word.

    017.029: And let not thy hand be chained to thy neck nor open it with a complete opening, lest thou sit down rebuked, denuded.

    017.030: Lo! thy Lord enlargeth the provision for whom He will, and straiteneth (it for whom He will). Lo, He was ever Knower, Seer of His slaves.

    017.031: Slay not your children, fearing a fall to poverty, We shall provide for them and for you. Lo! the slaying of them is great sin.

    017.032: And come not near unto adultery. Lo! it is an abomination and an evil way.

    017.033: And slay not the life which Allah hath forbidden save with right. Whoso is slain wrongfully, We have given power unto his heir, but let him not commit excess in slaying. Lo! he will be helped.

    017.034: Come not near the wealth of the orphan save with that which is better till he come to strength; and keep the covenant. Lo! of the covenant it will be asked.

    017.035: Fill the measure when ye measure, and weigh with a right balance; that is meet, and better in the end.

    017.036: (O man), follow not that whereof thou hast no knowledge. Lo! the hearing and the sight and the heart - of each of these it will be asked.

    017.037: And walk not in the earth exultant. Lo! thou canst not rend the earth, nor canst thou stretch to the height of the hills.

    017.038: Of all such things the evil is hateful in the sight of thy Lord.

    017.039: This is (part) of that wisdom wherewith thy Lord hath inspired thee (O Muhammad). And set not up with Allah any other god, lest thou be cast into hell, reproved, abandoned.

    017.040: Hath your Lord then distinguished you (O men of Makka) by giving you sons, and hath chosen for Himself females from among the angels? Lo! verily ye speak an awful word!

    017.041: We verily have displayed (Our warnings) in this Qur'an that they may take heed, but it increaseth them in naught save aversion.

    017.042: Say: If there had been (other) gods with Him, as they say,- behold, they would certainly have sought out a way to the Lord of the Throne!

    017.043: Glory to Him! He is high above all that they say!- Exalted and Great (beyond measure)!

    017.044: The seven heavens and the earth and all that is therein praise Him, and there is not a thing but hymneth His praise; but ye understand not their praise. Lo! He is ever Clement, Forgiving.
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)(Emphasis mine)


    [ December 26, 2001: Message edited by: eString ]
  3. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene New Member

    Oct 30, 2001
    Likes Received:
    OK Lemme try to put my viewpoint in another perspective.

    I expect, on judgement day, for God to face some people and say, "You told lies about me" when they used the word "Allah".

    And, of course, God will say to some others, "you told lies about Me" when they used the word "God".

    Now of course I have a serious disagreement with a muslim as to the truth about God and what He expects from us as far as how to find Him, how to be in right relationship with Him, and so forth.

    But I don't plan to add insult in an unnecessary fashion and say "You don't even worship the same God". Instead, I will say "We have disagreements about God between us."
  4. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Aug 18, 2001
    Likes Received:
    That would seem to be the Christian way. Amen, Paul.
  5. Barnabas H.

    Barnabas H. <b>Oldtimer</b>

    Jul 1, 2000
    Likes Received:
    eString, no disrespect to you, but it seems to me that it is you who are living in grand illusion as to the true identity of Allah in relation to Jehovah. And all the quotes you posted from the Qu'ran could not go against that fact. There is no correlation, there is no similarity - and if there is some vague similarity, it is only purely coincidental.

    P.S. Would appreciate if you could keep your replies brief. Thank you. [​IMG]
  6. eString

    eString New Member

    Dec 25, 2001
    Likes Received:
    Paul of Eugene

    I don't know whether I should thank you or not for restraining your inclination to add insult for what seems to be mysteriously some fault on my part.

    Anyway, I agree. After all, it does not matter one iota what you and I and the entire human population on this earth combined say who the true God is. Rather, what matters is what the prophets of God told us who exactly He is, and whether we (all of us) are following that true God or not. This is what matters.

  7. eString

    eString New Member

    Dec 25, 2001
    Likes Received:

    I am sorry if my posts were/are too long for you. Believe me I don't take any pleasure in making them this long! However, I pray that you judge the posts by their quality rather than by their length. For like many, I can very easily post one syllable words to say “did too”, and “did not”, but that is the five year-old way. That I won't do.

    Now, let me respectfully suggest to you that you should step back. Kindly consider the matter from every side. And then and only then pass your judgment. I hope you don't find that too much to ask. After all, this is what we were taught in schools, were we not?

    Let us reason together, if you wish. What is your proof that the Almighty God (Allah) of the Qur'an is not the Almighty God of the Bible?

    Is is my humble view, and this after debating with many Christians and for quite sometime now, that the Pauline doctrine of today's Christianity is at odds with the word of God as found in the Bible. As a matter of fact, I think it is fair to say (with no disrespect to you or any of the good people on this board whatsoever) that many of today's Christians are believing in the exact opposite of what Jesus Christ peace be upon him preached.

    Please verify with me that these quotes are from the Bible:

    "God is not a man that He should lie, nor a mortal that He should change His mind" (Numbers 23:19); the "…Eternal One of Israel will not lie nor change His mind: for He is not a man, that He should change His mind" (I Samuel 15:29), "Do not put your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no salvation!"(Psalm 146:3); "For will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain Thee; how much less this house that I have built?" (I Kings 8:27); "To whom then will you liken God? To what likeness will you compare Him to?" (Isaiah 40:18).
    Old Testament (Emphasis mine)

    Ask any Christian today and they will most probably tell you that God is/was a man! That God is/was the son of man! That the earth did manage to contain God! That God did change His mind to dwell on the earth! And that God did change His mind to become a man! This is the exact opposite of what the word of God preaches.

    Jesus PBUH himself said “…Hear, O Israel; the Lord OUR GOD is one Lord:” (Mark, 12:29) (Emphasis mine).

    [1] Emphasis on “the Lord”, i.e. the name of Almighty God! Allah! (Even according to the Arabic Bible.)
    [2] Emphasis on “our God”; note how Jesus PBUH includes himself in the crowed!
    [3] Emphasis on “one Lord”; note that Jesus PBUH says one Lord, not a Tri-une Lord!

    In fact the word “Tri-une”, and the word “Trinity” do not appear in the entire Bible! Now if Muhammad PBUH through Almighty God in the Qur'an preach that God is one, and Jesus PBUH says God is one (as opposed to Tri-une) then how can you go on to say that the God that Jesus PBUH preached about is not the one Muhammad and the Qur'an preach about?

    At the end of the day, Jesus PBUH says God is one, and Almighty God in the Qur'an says God is one; you on the other hand are telling us that God is Tri-une. Which is the false god here?

    Christians say the father is God, the Son 'is' God, and the Holy Spirit 'is' God. How many “Gods”? Since when was three equal to one a valid statement?

    By saying “Tri”, you are automatically arguing for PLURALITY IN GOD!!! And this at a time when the word of God as found in the Bible reveals:

    [1] Isaiah 46:9: "I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,"

    [2] Deuteronomy 32:39: "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me,"
    (Old Testament)

    Additionally, ask any Christian: “what do I need to do in order to get into heaven?” And they will almost invariably tell you that you have to accept Jesus as your lord and personal savior, accept his divine incarnation, his sacrifice, etc.

    If you ask them: “What about the Law and the Commandments?” They quote (St.) Paul who NEVER saw Jesus PBUH in the flesh to argue that they are now excused from the Law:

    “Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;”
    (Ephesians 002:015)

    But by following Paul, Christians have now come to believe in the anti of what Christ PBUH preached! When asked that same most important of questions, and in at least THREE DIFFERENT PLACES IN THE BIBLE, the Messiah of God answers as follows:

    18:018 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

    18:019 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.

    18:020 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.

    See also Mark 10:17-19, Matthew 22:35-40. Please note that there is no mention of the need to believe in any divine incarnation, that there is no need to believe in Jesus as one's lord and personal savior, that there is no need to believe in any sacrifice WHATSOEVER!

    And read:
    5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

    5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

    5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    According to Jesus Christ PBUH (of all people!) (St.) Paul and others of like mind, who preach divorcing Jesus' Gospel from the Law and the Commandments, “shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven.” Can you believe it?

    Concerning almost every utterance that Jesus PBUH makes in the N.T, Christians are now sadly believing in the exact opposite. From him denying deity, to his denying his crucifixion (yes this is no typo!), to his denying his resurrection, to his preaching one God, to his challenging his “alleged” relationship to David (See Mark 012:035), you name it, Christians now believe in the exact opposite of it!

    And why did all that take place? Because Christians have not headed the warnings of Jesus Christ PBUH. They have sadly went running after the easy message of (St.) Paul, who is credited with single handily writing more than half the N.T., without ever seeing Jesus PBUH in the flesh.

    You see, it turns out that believing in Paul is a make or break for the Christian believer (even if it sadly means ending up believing in the anti of what Christ preached). After all it was Paul who said:

    “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:
    (2 Timothy 002:008)

    And who is Paul, do you know?
    But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
    Acts 023:006

    BEWARE! Jesus says:
    Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
    Matthew 016:006

    Not that anybody cares.

  8. Helen

    Helen <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Aug 29, 2001
    Likes Received:
    In the past couple of days, I have had an interesting email exchange with a silent reader on this board who was a Muslim and is now a Christian. This person first wrote me to correct me regarding my use of Morey as a reference. I answered and received the following email, which I am cutting and pasting here with permission of the author. Before it starts, I would like to state that my copy of Morey is now in the garbage.



    Dear Helen,

    I just looked at your second to last response in the Allah thread and read this: "I received several emails from rather irate people (only one was not angry) regarding my use of Morey's work "Islamic Invasion" as a source. "

    I hope the non angry bit referred to my email! As you were kind enough to reply, let me tell you about myself a little bit and why I sent you that link.

    I'm an ex Muslim, and you wouldn't believe what satisfaction I get whenever I see my former religion getting debunked. However, I have a lot of respect for good scholarship as well, and poor scholarship from our side only serves to give more ammo to Muslims who have an easy job of thus discrediting even legitimate attacks on their evil religion (yes, I do think it is an evil and dangerous philosophy). You know how it is: if the enemy is caught resorting to lies in order to attempt to refute something, the enemy's other points get ignored and downplayed. When Morey's poor scholarship is exposed, it reinforces Muslims in thinking their religion must be the truth since non Muslims have such trouble raking up dirt against it.

    Interesting site you sent me to [http://answering-islam.org/]--I have been a frequent visitor for almost a year and must have read nearly everything there. It is mostly an excellent resource, well researched and rarely inaccurate.

    You say: "For someone Muslims discount as being a poor researcher and full of lies, they sure spend a LOT of time and energy trying to refute him!"

    They spend a lot of time trying to refute him because through deceptive research, he does a lot of damage to their faith by duping unsuspecting readers like yourself. Of course they spend time refuting him! Mr Jochen Katz --and other Christians--spend a lot of time trying to refute Islam too. And I'm sure I'm grateful for the efforts of all these people--the Christians who refute Islam, and the Muslims who expose pseudo scholarship, because I happen to be interested in the truth.

    Although I'm registered at the Baptist board, I didn't respond to some of your points in another one of your posts in the same thread because I couldn't care less what is done to Islam's image--I would never give false information about it myself, but if I see it getting discredited, whether fairly or unfairly, I have no interest in saving it from the damage. However, it's always safer to attack any philosophy where it's really false, or you'd end up attacking a strawman--so I thought I'd point out some of your factual errors.

    Limited vs. unlimited
    The God of the Bible is limited by His own nature. He cannot, for instance, lie, for He IS the truth.
    The Allah of the Q'ran has no such limitation. Lying is not off limits. He can do anything, anytime, anywhere.

    Not true. The nature of the Islamic god also limits him in exactly the same manner as it does in Christianity.

    Trustworthy vs. capricious
    This follows logically from the point above. the God of the Bible is absolutely trustworthy. He is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. He is immutable.
    The Allah of the Q'ran is unpredictable and capricious. This can be seen by his actions in the Q'ran. He cannot be trusted.

    I don't know which actions you mean from the Koran--I have read the Koran in full and see no actions by Allah that can be interpreted as being unpredictable and capricious. On the contrary, this is a charge often brought against Yahweh of the Old Testament.

    Active vs. Passive
    The God of the Bible entered personally into human history, both to reveal information to men as well as personally, as Jesus Christ.

    The Allah of Islam does not act in the history of the world, but communicates through angels, prophets and the Q'ran.

    While it is true that Allah communicates through angels and prophets, it can't be said he doesn't act in the history of the world, as he does actively participate in a manner similar to the one used by the God of Christianity. Especially as far as revealing information is concerned--what is revelation but that? A Creator-God, by definition, cannot be a passive god unless he states he doesn't take an interest in human affairs. As the concept of prayer is not foreign to Islam, we can't say he doesn't take a personal interest in his creatures or in human affairs.

    Attributes vs. ???
    The Bible gives both positive and negative attributes of God.

    The Q'ran only gives the negative, saying what Allah is not, never what he is.

    Allah's attributes--the names of Allah describing him--are a major part of Islamic theology. At the end of almost every verse in the Koran, you can find statements of what Allah IS, not what he is not ("most gracious", "oft forgiving", "merciful", et cetera). There are ninety nine--no less!--names of Allah, all describing a unique quality that he alone possesses to the fullest extent. For example, he is Light ('Nur'), he is Wisdom ('hakim'), he is Mercy ('Rahman'), et cetera.

    Grace vs. Works
    The God of the Bible provides salvation free for man through grace by the work of Jesus Christ.

    The concept of grace is entirely foreign to Islam and never mentioned in the Q'ran. There is no salvation offered men, and any positive in the afterlife must be earned by each man, and is probably not available to women at all.

    The thing about grace: you are right. However, salvation IS offered--otherwise, wherefore Hell and Heaven?--but it is offered through two things: belief and good conduct. Good conduct without faith will avail you nothing. Faith without good conduct will avail you nothing. Both must go together, but mercy and forgiveness are held out. The only unforgiveable sin is not having faith. Eg, if you have faith but were less than sterling in conduct, there is hope for forgiveness after a period of purgatory.

    Women are of course offered an equal chance for salvation. There is no discrimination against them at least in that respect. The Koran treats men and women equally in spiritual matters--in earthly matters, it's another story again.
  9. Eric B

    Eric B Active Member
    Site Supporter

    May 26, 2001
    Likes Received:
    From WTC Memoirs:
    Us Christians argue with them on the Sonship of Christ, the Trinity, and many spend a lot of time trying to discredit the name Allah. They claim this is a totally false deity that has nothing to do with the God of the Bible; just some "moon god" chosen out of a pantheon. (360 gods worshiped at the Kaaba and Muhammad picked one of them). But the word allah actually means ("the God"); al is the definite article, and ilah is "god", and is directly related to the Hebrew el, or eloah, from which we get elohim, and also the Aramaic elah. All the other 'gods' were actually attributes of the one true God (rahman-- "the merciful"; rahim, "the compassionate", etc. and some of these words are even the same as in biblical Hebrew!). The Arabs began worshiping them as separate gods. It was just like in Israel and all other human societies, where the true God would become "unknown" (Acts 17:23), lost amidst idols. (Someome could have accused Paul of picking "Theos" out of a Greek pantheon.) So attacking the name Allah is starting from the wrong angle. Now of course, the other charge is that Allah "has no Son", so theologically, Allah, as defined by the Muslims is not the same as the God of the Bible. But then YHWH-Elohim ("Ha Shem") as defined by the Jews has no Son either. In fact, Jesus is not even a prophet of his, and especially not his "messiah" or "word", but rather a false teacher at worst (even though some may refer to him as a "good rabbi"). But most of these Christians would never accuse the Jews of worshiping a false god. So likewise we should be fair, and challenge the Muslims on theology, not a name (and I have yet to see what they suggest Arabs who receive Christ should call the Creator).
  10. eString

    eString New Member

    Dec 25, 2001
    Likes Received:
    Eric B

    I salute your honest presentation. Raising the hat.

    And Amen to theological debate! Although I will tell you that it is Christians that shy away from that (note the sudden silence in response to what I posted; not that I blame them), and have been doing the same since the time of the crusades. And do you know why? Because Islam is the honest truth. It is because Islam cannot (I repeat: cannot) be defeated in any logical and honest scholarly debate context. This is not because I wish for it to be so. Nor is it because I am special in any way shape or form. No. It is because Almighty God in the first person says it is the truth. And as such it can never be vanquished.

    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:
    002:111 And they say: "None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian." Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful."

    002:112 Nay,-whoever submits His whole self to Allah and is a doer of good,- He will get his reward with his Lord; on such shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

    002:113 The Jews say: "The Christians have naught (to stand) upon; and the Christians say: "The Jews have naught (To stand) upon." Yet they (Profess to) study the (same) Book. Like unto their word is what those say who know not; but Allah will judge between them in their quarrel on the Day of Judgment.
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)

    Almighty God commands us (Muslims) to challenge Christians and Jews for proof of their wishful claims (i.e., to ask Jews to prove that the Messiah PBUH is not Jesus, that they are His chosen people on race grounds; to ask Christians to prove that we have no salvation, to prove that the Messiah 'is' a deity, a part of a Trinity, that the road to salvation is what they claim, that Christ Jesus PBUH was crucified [for their atonement], that he was resurrected thereafter, etc.). Almighty God wants us (all of us) to reason. The point thus seems to me that those who reason will be able to find the truth, those who don't will find nothing but lies and/or will be following nothing but their own desires as opposed to the commandments of Almighty God.

    Indeed the question that will be asked to those who end up in hell is most revealing:

    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:
    036.055: Verily the Companions of the Garden shall that Day have joy in all that they do;

    036.056: They and their associates will be in groves of (cool) shade, reclining on Thrones (of dignity);

    036.057: (Every) fruit (enjoyment) will be there for them; they shall have whatever they call for;

    036.058: "Peace!" - a word (of salutation) from a Lord Most Merciful!

    036.059: But avaunt ye, O ye guilty, this day!

    036.060: "Did I not enjoin on you, O ye Children of Adam, that ye should not worship Satan; for that he was to you an enemy avowed?-

    036.061: "And that ye should worship Me, (for that) this was the Straight Way?

    036.062: "But he did lead astray a great multitude of you. Did ye not, then, understand?
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)

    And understanding comes from being fair, from being humble that one DOES NOT know everything, and most importantly from reading. How many people here did try to learn about Islam first hand, as opposed to learning about it from what Christians themselves preach? Did anyone here read the Qur'an?

    The first of the revelations that angel Gabriel PBUH passed on from Almighty God unto Muhammad PBUH was “Read”, whereupon Muhammad PBUH (who was illiterate) replied in fear: “I am not learned.” “Read” the angel PBUH repeated. Again the prophet PBUH replied that he was not learned. “Read” the angel repeated, and it was then that the prophet understood that he was supposed to recite after the angel.

    Here are the first of the revelations:

    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
    096:001 Read! in the name of thy Lord and Cherisher, Who created-
    096:002 Created man, out of a (mere) clot of congealed blood:
    096:003 Read! And thy Lord is Most Bountiful,-
    096:004 He Who taught (the use of) the pen,-
    096:005 Taught man that which he knew not.
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)

    Amazingly, this incident is the fulfillment of a Biblical prophecy:
    29:11 And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:

    29:12 And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.

    Talk about debate. The Qur'an is the last and seal of all revelations, yet many men and women still refuse to read it. Reason: sealed hearts! What a shame.

  11. eString

    eString New Member

    Dec 25, 2001
    Likes Received:
    To Helen's email “friend”,

    It might be harsh on my part to say this, but I find your email to Helen rather contradictory. Yes some might admire your taking the time to correct some of her conscious and misguided effort to quote those so called “scholars”, whose sole interest is to deceive rather than inform, but it still is a fact that the approach you suggested is no more objective than what you yourself abhorred.

    A person interested in the honest truth does not learn (nor advise another to learn) about any “new” belief and (in the case of Islam a religion in competition with Christianity) from its critics only, as you seem to be suggesting.

    Rather, one reads and learns first hand from the source, from its scholars, and compliments that with what the critics say. It is only through this approach that a relatively objective person will find out the truth from the lie.

    And I recommend that all people who are interested in any truth (as opposed to tribal truth) invest in a translation of the Holy Qur'an. (Pickthal's and Yusuf Ali's are two of the most [accurate] popular translations). I also recommend the following sites:

    [1] Answering the Missionaries
    - You can find here contributions from all sorts of people, ex-practicing American Christians, now devoted Muslims included.
    [3] Christ in Islam
    [4] Mohammed in the Bible
    [6] Muslim Christian Dialogue
    [7] Real-Audio Christian-Muslim debate: Is the Bible God's word?
    [8] Real-Audio Christian-Muslim debate: Crucifixion: Fact or Fiction
    [9] What did Jesus really say?

    Quite a compliant, wouldn't you say? Whatever you might want to call it, such reasoning is not a valid logical ground for the search and adoption of any truth. If one were to follow such reasoning then all this faith thing would be false. After all, who likes the talk of laws, Hell, and the guilt of sin, and what have you.

    Worst still, one might make whatever he/she wishes into a “god”, only because he/she likes it, even when is is a false god! And thus, and according to this flawed logic, a burger qualifies to some as a “god”! Likewise, a pink Cadillac qualifies to another as yet another ”god”! One's loved one would then also qualify as yet another “god”! Satan himself (Allah forbids!) might qualify as yet another “god”! Which is a complete none-sense! Almighty God is one and He is (all glory be to Him) none of the above!

    And so, one does not go about his search struggling with the commandments. You are approaching your search (if at all) backwards! Rather, one first searches for the true God, and having found Him, he/or she then surrenders to His every command. He simply knows better.

    Think of the VCR as a parable. The manufacturer that made this device gives you with it a catalog full of instructions of what every part is for, how to use it, what not to do with it, etc. And thus a logical human being does not question the black wire hanging from the back of the VCR. No. Having known (and accepted) that the manufacturer knows better, and that this catalog is authored by it and that it is (the manufacturer) the one who built the VCR, then we take its catalog for what it is. We plug that wire (without questioning) into a 120 A/C socket. If we try to ignore the instructions (and try to play smart) and cut the wire (because we don't like it!), or plug the VCR into a 240 A/C socket then say goodbye to the VCR!

    The same is with us humans and Almighty God. We must never question the need of that black wire hanging from the back. We first establish with certainty that this is Almighty God, who created us, that is speaking in the scripture. And having done so, we then follow His catalog (His scripture) without questioning! Who can possibly know more about us than our creator? No one.

    Beware! This was Satan's fatal sin! The evil racist one questioned Almighty God's wisdom. Result: Satan was cursed and banished for eternity for his childish racist arrogance. Here is the incident for those of you who didn't have the chance to read the Qur'an. Please note that the proper name of Satan is Iblis in the Qur'an (which sounds like the first syllable of Bleez-bub the prince of devils as found in the N.T.), his name became Satan because he disobeyed Almighty God and was thus no longer to be counted with the angels:

    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:
    038.071: When thy Lord said unto the angels: Lo! I am about to create a mortal out of mire,

    038.072: And when I have fashioned him and breathed into him of My Spirit, then fall down before him prostrate,

    038.073: The angels fell down prostrate, every one,

    038.074: Not so Iblis: he was haughty, and became one of those who reject Faith.

    038.075: He said: O Iblis! What hindereth thee from falling prostrate before that which I have created with both My hands? Art thou too proud or art thou of the high exalted?

    038.076: He said: I am better than him. Thou createdst me of fire, whilst him Thou didst create of clay.

    038.077: He said: Go forth from hence, for lo! thou art outcast,

    038.078: And lo! My curse is on thee till the Day of Judgment.

    038.079: He said: My Lord! Reprieve me till the day when they are raised.

    038.080: He said: Lo! thou art of those reprieved

    038.081: Until the day of the time appointed.

    038.082: He said: Then, by Thy might, I surely will beguile them every one,

    038.083: Except Thy Servants amongst them, sincere and purified (by Thy Grace).

    038.084: He said: The Truth is, and the Truth I speak,

    038.085: That I shall fill hell with thee and with such of them as follow thee, together.

    038.086: Say: No reward do I ask of you for this (Qur'an), nor am I a pretender.

    038.087: Lo! it is naught else than a reminder for all peoples

    038.088: And ye will come in time to know the truth thereof.
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)

    I put it to you that once any person says that he/she knows better than God that he or she will most probably face the same fate as that of Satan. And since Almighty God is a PERFECT MOST JUST God, then I put it to you that this same test that Satan took (and failed!) is the one all humanity will have to take as well. This is why it makes perfect sense that the seal of the prophets is an illiterate Arab. Will humans humble themselves like the angels and obey the command of Almighty God and believe in His wisdom, however absurd the command might appear to those of little knowledge? Or will they say they know better! That they are better than that Arab?

    For all intents and purposes the side you claim has the truth appears to be following Paul not Christ, peace be upon him. Christ says up, they say down. Christ says left, they say right. The doctrine of today's Christianity does not follow the Biblical Christ. It follows some other Christ. Sad, but very true. I take no pleasure in saying this, but these things you now believe in are the fruit of their thoughts.

    Here is Almighty God, warning you about the evil which is the Anti-Christ:
    6:19 Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not Hearkened unto my words, nor to my law, but rejected it.
  12. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Jul 13, 2000
    Likes Received:
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by eString:
    Let us reason together, if you wish. What is your proof that the Almighty God (Allah) of the Qur'an is not the Almighty God of the Bible?

    I typed this letter to the editor of the local paper here in response to a front page article of the experience of one "Christian" who had converted to Islam. The media portrays Islam as a peaceful religion with their god being the same as ours. It is not.

    To the Editor:
    Your article, Nov. 5, "From Christian to Muslim," which was a front page story, had much misinformation in it. Spelliscy chose to leave her Catholicism and embrace Islam because she "could accept it in its totality, not just take some parts and reject others." I will agree with that. It does provide a total religion, a total package. But there are other options, such as Biblical Christianity. She says that "Islam is a religion of peace and love." This is being touted by the gullible media everywhere, but it is not true. Allah, their god, has 99 attributes, attributed to him, but love is not among them. He is a god of vengeance, not of love. The U.S. claims to be waging a war against terrorism, yet Islamic nations have been practicing terrorism everywhere within their own borders for ages. In Pakistan, an Islamic Republic, there were 17 Christians gunned down in their church by Muslims just recently. This is not an isolated incident. Persecution of Christians in Pakistan has been going on before that time and will continue to go on. In fact, since then it has only increased. In Saudi Arabia, one is not allowed to hold even a Bible study without being persecuted. Persecution of Christians goes on in nations like Malaysia, Indonesia, Sudan, Nigeria, Iraq, etc. This is terrorism. It is not limited to anthrax and planes crashing into the towers in New York. It is carried out everywhere in every Islamic state. There have been more Christians persecuted for their faith in the Twentieth Century than in any other century.
    Spelliscy claims that "women are equal to men in the eyes of God." This is not what their holy book, the Koran, teaches. If fact the Koran teaches in Surah 4:176, "unto the male is the equivalent of the share of two women." Here the context is inheritance. But the suggestion is that two women equal one man.
    The Koran allows for more than one wife. It specifies how those women are to be treated in Surah 4:34, "Men are in charge of women because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other...
    So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them."
    Surah 4:4, "Marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four."
    These verses hardly teach that women are equal to men, and they certainly do not teach men to treat their women in a civilized manner. Why are these things never brought out by either Muslims or the media?
    Spelliscy claims that "some rights were given to Muslim women centuries before their western counterparts." If she would study the Bible, she would find that women under Judaism and Christianity owned property. In the story of Ruth, Naomi owned the land that her husband had left her. In the New Testament, Lydia was a seller of purple and had a business of her own. In the Second Epistle of John, John writes to the "elect lady," a well-known Christian woman, perhaps one of some apparent wealth. When Peter was released from prison in Acts 12, he went to the "house of Mary," the mother of John Mark. It was Mary's house.
    At the end of the article she makes the claim that "Islam means peace." Nothing could be farther from the truth. Islam means submission. Any Muslim cleric will tell you that. Islam is a religion of submission. That is why there is no fear in their soldiers to go to the front lines and fight a super-power with sophisticated weapons. They submit to the will of Allah, knowing that they will be rewarded by him (so they believe). It is not a religion of peace. Ask any Christian who has had experience living in an Islamic nation.
    If Leah Spelliscy, Joanna, and others truly want to find peace and joy, they will find it in the One who is called "Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace" (Isaiah 9:6). Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man comes to the Father but by Me."
  13. John Henry

    John Henry New Member

    Nov 29, 2001
    Likes Received:
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Barbarian:

    "Allah" is both a proper name, and a generic name for "god", as is our usage of "God" and "god". For the same reason.

    [ December 24, 2001: Message edited by: The Barbarian ]

    The Scriptures do not teach that "God" and "god" are proper names. They are rather titles like Mr., Dr., Pastor, King, etc. [​IMG]

    Here is why I say that:

    By John Henry


    * NOTES



    "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)

    The first occurrence of the word "God" in the Bible is in Genesis 1:1. The word translated "God" here is "Eloheem". It is the plural form of El. Eloheem is not a proper name, but rather a title. Inferior gods lesser in power to the Almighty are also called "eloheem". [1] The word is also translated "judge", "great", and "mighty".


    El-o-heem (Hebrew)

    The word "el-o-heem" [Strong's #0430] occurs in the Old Testament 2,606 times. It refers to God Almighty at least 2,347 times (i.e. Gen 1:1; Deut 6:4). It refers to lesser and false gods at least 252 times (Gen 31:30; Ex 22:20; Deut 32:17).

    El (Hebrew)

    The word "el" [Strong's #0410] occurs in the Old Testament 245 times. It refers to God Almighty at least 214 times (i.e. Gen 14:18-20, 28:3 , 35:11, 43:14, 48:3 Ex 6:3; Jer 32:18; Isa 7:14, 43:12; Nah 1:2). It refers to lesser and false gods at least 16 times (i.e. Ex 15:11, 34:14; Deut 32:12; Ps 44:20, 81:9 ; Dan 11:39; Mal 2:11), and an idol once (Isa 57:5). It also means power, might, strong.

    El-o-ah (Hebrew)

    The word "el-o'-ah" [Strong's #0433] occurs in the Old Testament 56 times. It refers to God Almighty 50 times (i.e. Deut 32:15; Job 11:7 ; Prov 30:5; Isa 44:8), and to lesser gods 6 times (i.e. 2 Chron 32:15; Dan 11:37-39; Hab 1:11). Islam claims that "el-o'-ah" is the Hebrew equivalent for the name of Allah, their god.

    El-aw (Aramaic)

    The word "el-aw" [Strong's # 0426] occurs 78 times in the Old Testament. It is the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew "el-o'-ah". Portions of Ezra, Jeremiah and Daniel were written in Aramaic. It is only in these portions that the word "el-aw" is found. El-aw refers to God Almighty at least 60 times [i.e. Ezra 5:11-17; Dan 2:27, 3:17, 25, 6:22-23]. It refers to lesser and false gods 15 times [i.e. Jer 10:11; Dan 2:11, 3:12]. Islam claims that "el-o'-ah" is the Aramaic equivalent for the name of Allah, their god. However, as we have already noted it is not the name of God at all, but a title designating Almighty God and lesser gods. [1]


    God's proper name is Jehovah or Yahovaw or Yahweh which means "the One who is" (Strong's #03068; also "Yah", Strong's #03050, translated "JAH" and "LORD"). The Name is spelled YHWH and is unpronounceable except with the vowel pointings of the Hebrew word, "ad-o-noy" (Strong's #0136) which is most often translated, "Lord". Adonoy is a title, spoken in place of Jehovah as a Jewish display of reverence. In English "Jehovah" is most often translated "LORD" with all capitol letters. The Lord Jehovah's name comes from Exodus 3:14 where He called Himself, "I AM THAT I AM". Prior to the time of Moses God was known as "Shaddai" (Strong's #07706), "the Almighty" (i.e. Gen 17:1, 35:11; Job 33:4, 34:10, 12, 37:23). Examples of the use of the LORD Jehovah's holy name follow:

    Exodus 3:14-15: "And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."

    Exodus 6:3: "And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them."

    Exodus 15:3: "... the LORD is his name."

    Deuteronomy 28:58: "... fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD."

    Isaiah 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images."

    Isaiah 47:4: "As for our redeemer, the LORD of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel." (cf. Isa 54:5, Jer 50:34)

    Jeremiah 32:18: "Thou shewest lovingkindness unto thousands, and recompensest the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them: the Great, the Mighty God, the LORD of hosts, is his name." (Jer 10:16, 31:35, 33:2, 48:2, 51:15, 19; Amos 4:13, 5:8, 9:6)

    Jeremiah 23:6: "...this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS."

    Psalm 68:4: "Sing unto God, sing praises to his name: extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name JAH, and rejoice before him."

    Psalm 83:6-8, 16-18: "The tabernacles of Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagarenes; Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre; Assur also is joined with them: they have holpen the children of Lot. Selah. ... Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek thy name, O LORD. Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish: That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth."

    God's Names, I AM THAT I AM and LORD signify externality. His association of these names with His Name, Almighty, by which He was know unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob show that He is the all powerful eternal One (Exodus 3:14-15, 6:3)


    Now back to the title Eloheem in Genesis 1:1. The "heem" sufix makes it plural. Some ask, "How can one speak of one God in the plural?" The Bible says, "The LORD our God is one LORD" (Deut 6:4). Look at it closely:

    "The LORD [Yahweh] our God [Eloheem] is one LORD [Yahweh]."

    Put another way: "Jehovah our Trinity is one Jehovah."

    Hopefully this explanation will help: God says that He "created man in his own image". If God is a Tri-Unity then He must have made man a trinity also. Note these passages of Scripture:

    Genesis 1:26: "... God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness .... So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

    1 Thessalonians 5:23: "And the very God of peace sanctify you WHOLLY; and I pray God your whole SPIRIT and SOUL and BODY be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."

    Just as the One True God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, is a Holy Trinity, so likewise each man is a trinity. God made him that way in His own image and likeness. This is an indisputable fact.

    "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are One." (1 John 5:7)

    Put still another way Deuteronomy 6:4 may be explained like this:

    "The LORD [the Great I AM] our God [the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost] is one LORD [all powerful self existing One]."


    In Hebrew Genesis 1:1 reads like this, except from right to left:

    beresheet barah Eloheem eht hashamayim vaeht haeretz

    Which translated into English is:

    [In beginning] [created] [God] [aleph/tahv] [heavens] [and] [earth]

    The first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet are "aleph" and "tahv" respectively. They are to Hebrew what A and Z are to English and also correspond the Greek "alpha" and "omega". Together the "aleph" and "tahv" are pronounced "eight". Rabbinic scholars call this word, "the word of creation". In Genesis 1:1 "eight" is translated along with "Eloheem" as "God". All this helps us understand John 1:1-3 and Revelation 1:8 much better.

    John 1:1-3: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."

    In Revelation 1:8 the Lord Jesus says, "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty."

    Clearly the Word who became flesh (John 1:14) is found in the very first verse of the Old Testament. Clearly Christ, the Word, is Almighty Jehovah of the Old Testament, along with the Father and the Holy Spirit.

    Also note that the "aleph" and "tahv" is the center word in Genesis 1:1 forming an Hebrew menorah of sorts. The Menorah of the Old Testament Tabernacle and Temple had seven lamps on it. Three on either side pointed in toward the center servant lamp that was used to light the other 6 lamps. This gives added meaning to John 1:4-5 and Revelation 1:12-13:

    John 1:4-5: "In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not."

    Revelation 1:12-13: "And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; And in the MIDST of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man...."


    It is very interesting that there is a five pronged menorah found in the five books of Moses. These first five books of Moses, the Law, are called the "Torah" in Hebrew. There are specific words encoded in the opening paragraphs of these five books. By counting every fifty letters in Genesis and Exodus the word "Torah" is spelled out. Beginning with the first "tahv" and counting 50 letters you come to the letter "vav"; then counting another 50 letters you come to "resh"; and counting another 50 letters you come to a "hay". This spells the word "Torah" (Law) in Hebrew. Similarly in Numbers and Deuteronomy the word "Torah" is spelled out except it is spelled backwards beginning with the "hay", then the "resh", then the "vav", and finally the "tahv". The letters are at 50 letter intervals in Numbers, but 49 letter intervals in Deuteronomy. It is as if the Law in Genesis and Exodus are facing inward toward Leviticus, and the Law in Numbers and Deuteronomy are facing backward to Leviticus.

    In Leviticus there is a different word spelled out and at a different interval. Counting at 8 intervals beginning with the second letter in verse one which is a "yod" you get: "yod", "hay", "vav", "hay" which spells "Jehovah". [2]

    Here is a graphic of it:

    Torah &gt; Torah &gt; YHVH &lt; Torah &lt; Torah


    The sequencing of the letters that spell Jehovah in the first verse of Leviticus, and pronunciation of the first and last letters of the Hebrew alphabet, "aleph" and "tahv" are both eight.

    Numbers in the Bible frequently have special meanings. For example: 1 signifies unity and primacy; 2 is for division, difference, and can mean enmity; 3 shows completeness; 4 symbolizes the world; 5 means grace; 6 is the number of man; 7 is for perfection, and 8 is the number of new beginnings, resurrection, and infinity.

    In Greek as well as in Hebrew the letters of their alphabets are used for numbers too. In Greek when the letters of the Lord's name, Jesus (meaning Saviour), are added together you get a total of 888. Not only so, but other names and titles of His holy name in Greek are multiples of 8. Observe: 1) Messiah = 656 [8 x 82], 2) Lord = 800 [8 x 100], 3) Son = 880 [8 x 110], 4) Saviour = 1,408 [8 x 176], 5) Christ = 1,480 [8 x 185], 6) Emmanuel = 25,600 [8 x 3200]. [3]


    Coincidences? Of course not! The law of probability forbids that. These are evidences that God has built into of the Greek and Hebrew alphabets, evidences to fact of the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    These facts also refute the the false teaching of Islam and show that neither eloah, nor elaw, nor allah is the holy Name of God. Mohammed's is proven to be a false prophet for teaching that God has no son, and for adding to God's holy Word, the Bible.

    Proverbs 30:4-6: "Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his Son's name, if thou canst tell? Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." (cf. Psalm 2)

    A man's name is only as good as his word. So it is with man, so it is with God. He magnifies His Word above all His name.

    Psalm 138:2: "I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name."

    What is God's Name? It is LORD Jahovah, JAH, it is God with us (Immanuel), it is Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace, His name is Jesus (Saviour). Jesus Christ's Name is above every name. His name is Christ. His name is I AM. Jesus said:

    "I AM the living bread which came down from heaven..." (John 6:51)

    "...I AM the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." (John 8:12)

    "...Ye are from beneath; I AM from above: ye are of this world; I AM not of this world." (John 8:23)

    "...if ye believe not that I AM he, ye shall die in your sins." (John 8:24)

    "...Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM." (John 8:58, cf. 18:5-6)

    "I AM the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved..." (John 10:9)

    "...I AM come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly." (John 10:10)

    "I AM the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep." (John 10:10; cf. Mark 10:18)

    "...I AM the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live." (John 11:25)

    God cannot die. That's why He was "made flesh" (John 1:14). He was born so He could die (Heb 10:5-10). "...God was manifest in the flesh..." (1 Tim 3:16) "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." (Rom 8:3) The Bible says:

    Isaiah 7:14: "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his NAME Immanuel."

    Matthew 1:21: "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins."

    Isaiah 9:6: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his NAME shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."

    Philippians 2:5-11: "...Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a NAME which is above every NAME: That at the NAME of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

    Acts 4:12: "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other NAME under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved."

    Jesus Christ is coming again! Are you ready to meet Him? Will you meet Him as Saviour or Judge?

    Revelation 19:11-13: "And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his NAME is called The Word of God."

    1 John 5:7, 11-12: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. ... And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life."

    John 1:12: "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his NAME."


    1. False Gods Are Also Called El-aw [0426], El-o-ah [0433], El [0410], And El-o-heem [0430] (These words simply mean deity, be it true, false, usurped or bestowed)

    A. Habakkuk 1:6, 11: "I [God] raise up the Chaldeans, that bitter and hasty nation, which shall march through the breadth of the land, to possess the dwellingplaces that are not theirs. ... Then shall his mind change, and he shall pass over, and offend, imputing this his power unto his god [0433]."

    B. Jeremiah 10:11: "Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods [0426] that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from under these heavens."

    C. Daniel 5:4: "They drank wine, and praised the gods [0426] of gold, and of silver, of brass, of iron, of wood, and of stone."

    D. Exodus 12:12: "For I will pass through the land of Egypt ... against all the gods [0430] of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD [03068]."

    E. Exodus 15:11: "Who is like unto thee, O LORD [03068], among the gods [0410]? who is like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders?"

    F. Psalm 82:1, 6: "...God [0430] standeth in the congregation of the mighty [0410]; he judgeth among the gods[0430]. ... I have said, Ye are gods [0430]; and all of you are children of the most High."

    G. 1 Chronicles 16:25: "For great is the LORD [03068], and greatly to be praised: he also is to be feared above all gods [0430]."

    H. Isaiah 37:38: "...he was worshipping in the house of Nisroch his god [0430]..." (Nisroch = "the great eagle", an idol of Nineveh worshipped by Sennacherib; symbolised by the eagle-headed human figure; cf. 2 Kings 19:37; 2 Chron 32:21)

    I. Danial 1:1-2: "In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god [0430]; and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god [0430]." (Nebuchadnezzar's god = Nebo / Bel, "two different titles for the same god" [Hislop, p. 34], "the prophetic god" [Hislop, pp. 25-26], "The Prophet" [Hislop, pp. 256, 260])

    J. Jonah 1:5: "...the mariners were afraid, and cried every man unto his god [0430]..."

    K. Micah 4:5: "For all people will walk every one in the name of his god [0430], and we will walk in the name of the LORD [03068] our God for ever and ever."

    2. J. R. Church and Gary Stearman, The Mystery Of The Menorah, pp. 34 -37; Prophecy Publications, P. O. Box 7000, Oklahoma City, OK 73153, 1993.

    3. E. W. Bullinger, Number In Scripture, pp. 203 - 204, Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI 49501, 1967.

    [ December 29, 2001: Message edited by: John Henry ]
  14. Eric B

    Eric B Active Member
    Site Supporter

    May 26, 2001
    Likes Received:
    To eString:
    Islam has alot of historical and philosophical arguments against Christianity, such as rehashing old crucifixion/resurrection hoax theories, and alot of incomplete logic. The Sign of Jonah, for instance, argues that if Jonah was alive in the whale for 3 days, then Christ must have been also alive for 3 days to really fulfil the prophecy. But the issue was not "alive"/"dead", but simply the 3 days. The theme is "burial", and Jonah's whale is a type of Christ's burial, not Christ's burial being an antetype of Jonah's whale, as if the whale was the significant subject. This is the way Biblcal interpretation often works. It is based on one point, not everyuthing mentioned. Otherwise, Christ would have to have been three days in the whale as well.
    As for the literal "three days/three nights" argument, there are Christian groups that hold the Wednesday crucifixion, Sat. night resurrection, Armstrong having been one of them, though he was very off in many other areas. I held this position, and still do not dogmatize, but there is alot of evidence for the traditional Christian view, such as the three days/nights being an idiom that meant any part of three days (even if it didn't include both the daytime and nightime of all three), and it was a play on numbers, so three was the key word. The two events did not have to be identical in all the other espects.
    In the Qur'an passages you quote, notice God had commanded Satan to fall prostrate to Adam, and he fell when he refused. But just as you criticize Christians for "shirk" (partners with God), wouldn't this fall into the same category? In Isaiah He says "My glory I will not share with another", so he has never commanded anyone to worship man. (Our theology teaches Jesus is apart of the divine nature, so He is not a "partner" with God.)
    As for the rest of the arguments of Islam, as I point out on Role and Teachings of Islam, we need to start our assessment of what is the truth by asking "What is God's will for man?. When We look in the scriptural record, we are then faced with the subset questions of What is man's problem?" and "What is God's solution for it?" Islam sees that Israel failed God's mission He chose them for by not keeping the Law, but then assumes the solution is new laws, and a new "chosen people" with their own prophet who is now the "final word". So everyone must take on Arabic names and change the direction of prayer from Jerusalem to Mecca, and visiting its shrine. But does this really solve our sin problem? For one thing, where is the sacrifice for sin God always demanded? It seems we're just repeating the same mistake as the Israelites. Only the Christian Gospel addresses and points us to the solution of the problem. And before you say "But Christians aren't perfect either", that is one of the distinctive points of the message. Man, even walking in the "truth" can not be perfect, so that's why a sinless Christ had to be sacrificed. Christianity is [supposed to be] all about the righteousness of God, not man. I don't see where my taking an Arabic name and praying towards Mecca is going to help me stand before God.
  15. FaithRemains

    FaithRemains New Member

    Dec 28, 2001
    Likes Received:
    Neither muslums nor Jews worship the true God. Out of all the reasons you could give, there is a very definite biblical one.

    1 John 2:23 "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father"

    Judiasm and Islam both deny that Jesus is the Son of God, that he died for our sins, that he rose again, and that he is the only way to be saved. Because they deny Jesus they don't have the Father.

    Think about it rationally also. Jesus IS God. (John 10:30 "I and my Father are one.") If you deny the deity of Jesus, you are denying God.
  16. eString

    eString New Member

    Dec 25, 2001
    Likes Received:

    Kindly allow me to say that your post is full of misinformed second hand information.

    It seems to me that your post rests on three false assumptions: [1] That what you claimed about Islam and Muslims is true, and [2] That because these things are true that then the Allah of the Qur'an is not the one the word of God as found in the Bible preach about, and that finally [3] that Jesus 'is' God (as the word of God in the Bible reveals), and is thus not Allah of the Qur'an.

    For the sake of the argument ONLY, let me grant you that what you claimed in the first assumption is true. How can that then aid your theory that the God of the Qur'an is not the Almighty God that talked with Moses PBUH?

    You see whether you realize it or not, you are employing that flawed logic mentioned above: I don't like it, therefore it is not the truth. This is NOT a valid test for the search and adoption of any truth. Your opinions (as well as mine I assure you) are inconsequential when the matter pertains to the reason and wisdom behind the commandments of Almighty God.

    When a soldier receivers an order, he never questiones the wisdom behind the order. This is simply not his business. And if you insist on knowing why, let me tell you that he simply does not see the big picture. The commander does.

    The army thus provides a mechanism for making sure that the commander was the one who issued the order. And having made sure that the order has come from the commander (as opposed to from the enemy), the soldier is then expected to obey, no questions asked.

    And so (and like Helen's friend) you are approaching your search (if at all) backwards! Studying and struggling with the commandments IS NOT a valid vehicle for finding the truth and dismissing the lie. Finding who Almighty God is must be the first task. You, on the other hand, are trying to see if the commandements are suitable and then we are seeing you declare: “This set of commandment seems ridiculous, and thus this doctrine is false.” And you seem to continue to argue that: “This commandement seems fine with me, and thus this doctrine is the truth.”

    Well, allow me to say that this is a futile illogical endeavour that WILL MOST PROBABLY NEVER lead anyone to the true God or His truth!

    If the liking logic is THE LETMUS TEST of finding God and His truth, then go ahead and worship whatever you like! No, DHK. This is not the way to go.

    Additionally, and also if we grant you (and only) for the sake of argument that what you assume in [1] is true, are you then going to judge a belief by what its adherents practice at some X point in time? This too is not the way to go. One judges a belief by what it preaches, not by what its adherents say it preaches! For like it or not, your approach is a misguided one that will lead to everywhere but to the truth. You see if one were to follow your flimsy logic, one would then argue that the true religion of God condones the worship of statues of stones. And that thus it is false! After all the Children of Israel and at one point in time did worship Baal!

    But having said that, let me humor you anyway and show you that even your first assumption was false to start with. This claim you make is an OUTRIGHT LIE! Or shall I say an indication of the now infamous second-hand information trap that most Christians seem to be very willing to fall into.

    Need I remind you that Almighty God is PERFECT, even according to the Muslim teachings. And as such He is also a Loving God. But to refute your rhetric, one of the ninty nine attributes you mentioned is indeed “Wadood.” In my Arabic-Arabic dictionary this word is defined as follows: “(Wadood) the loving.” (Mukhtar El-Sahah, by Muhammad El-Razi, Arabic Book House, 1981).

    You can sure claim from here until the end of time that the camel is the king of the jungle. That is very easy to do. However, the mere notion that you can make such a claim DOES NOT make your claim a valid one! We need proof! You have provided none. Not that you would have had any to provide, even if you tried. After all, these attributes are there for all to read. And their meanings are also availalbe for all those interested in honest research.

    Another point is that you should never rely on second hand information in matters of eternal life and death, such as the one we are discussing here.

    The same thing here. That the US claims it is not waging war on Islam does not autamically mean that she is not. Words are cheap as you and I know.

    If a person had lived in the time of the Scribes and Pharisees and asked them why were they making life difficult for the Messiah of God, they would have probably told him that they were not waging war nor prosecuting the Messiah! They would most probably have claimed that they were protecting their way of life, the true religion of God!

    But you and I know that the Scribes and the Pharisees were practicing the very thing they would have very easily denied doing! And so mere words and claims, not to forget national pride makes nothing right. Many Muslims believe (some would argue rightfully so) that the United States has been and and for quite some time now repeatedly prosecuting Muslims. Not that I can do anything about it. You be the judge.

    How can you explain to these Muslims that the USA is not waging war on Islam when it is THE ONLY nation that backs Israel in the Security Councel with its Veto when almost all countries agree that what Israel continues to do is illegal, if not criminal? How can you explain to these Muslims that the USA does not wage war on Islam when they see it aiding Israel in its acts of injustice by providing weapons, technology, investment, and foreign aid, not to forget moral support to the inhumane acts that Israel has been invloved in since its inception?

    How can you explain to these Muslims who see starved Iraqi Children looking like ghosts in the laps of their helpless mothers, Palestinian kids blooded everyday by (you guessed it) American weoponary that the USA is not waging war on Muslims? “Why is it”, these Muslims ask, “that when a Muslim country acts in violation of some law that the mighty USA is then trigger happy, but when Israel acts a million times as wicked that the USA then turns a blind eye and even blames Muslims?”

    This is not an issue that can prove or disprove any deity, pal! This issue has nothing to do with our discussion. But even so, put these matters in front of fair God fearing Christian and he too will be puzzled at the double standard.

    After all how can you exlpain to anyone that if Pres. Bush can call the Taliban an accomplice in what Al-Qaaida did in NY (because they have aided, sheltered and protected them), that one can not then acuse the US with the same evil that the Taliban were condemned for? How?

    The problems between Christians and Muslims in the Middle East are in the realms of your wishful thinking, I am sorry to say. It was on CNN that a Pakistani Christian Priest conceded that NEVER BEFORE that incident you refer to were Pakestini Christians prosecuted in Pakistan. Sure you can claim what you wish, but words are cheap. We need proof in support of your wishful claim, ones that now will have to discredit those first hand accounts of native Christians!

    And if one were to imploy simple reason one would easily come to the conclusion that your thoery is in the realm of utter conjecture.

    If it was THE Muslim norm to prosecute Christians in the Middle East then it follows that you would have found not one Christian still living there! But this is not the case! There are Christians in Nigeria, Pakistan, Turkey, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Yemen, Palestine, to name a few. I have read that Arab Christians (alone) number around 26 million. If what you say has one iota of truth in it then you would have never found these people breathing to this day. If what you claim was true, these people would have been either wiped out, or became Muslims themselves. The fact that they still living and practising their faith refutes your unsubstantiated remarks.

    In case you don't know, Palestian Christians insist that Jesus PBUH was Palestinian! To this day and age these people REFUSE to share a state with their Jewish bretheren in scriptures and prefer instead to join their Muslim neigbors in a Palestinian state of their own! Can you believe it! Dr. Hanan Ashrawi (among others!), a female member of the Palestinain National Council (effectively the Palestian Parliment) and a frequent guest on CNN and other news organizations, is a Christian!

    If you were to visit the holy land you will find the most amazing thing. The keys to the door of the Chruch of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem are entrusted not to Christians, and not to Jews, no! They are entrusted to (of all people) Muslims! A Muslim family has been entrusted with the task of every day opening the doors of the Church to Chrisians and priests of all denominations. At night the Chruch is closed again and the keys are returned to that Muslim family. And this has been the case for generations!

    And this is not dictated by Muslims! This arrangement is agreed by all Christians (Pope included) as they thought this would prevent any one denomination from being in full and absoulute control of the Church. How unjust can you be! Surely if these local Christians in one of the holiest Christian lands on this earth agreed with your misinformed missionary propaganda that they would have never trusted Muslims with their holy places nor would they have ever contemplated sharing with them a homeland of their own!

    And do you know why local Chrisians of the holy land (and others in the Middle East) trust Muslims this much? Let me tell you why.

    When the Romans were driven out of Jerusalem by Muslims, the Christian priests in charge of the city refused to talk and deal with the Muslim commander. They demanded to talk with the Muslim Khalifite, Omar Ibn Al-Khatab, who resided south in the Arabian Peninsula.

    The Khalifite obliged. And refusing to take the advice of his councelors, he rode his camel in his Arabian cloths which reached just below his keens and started his way north alone through the desert to meet what Allah SW (Allah is the proper name of Almighty God, translated "The God", just as Eloyim is translated as Ho Theos i.e., "The God" in the "Septuagint," the Greek translation of the Old Testament which was done at least two centuries prior to the coming of Jesus), calls in the Qur'an the people of the Book.

    Having seen the Muslim leader in such a humble sorry state, the priests could not believe that he was what he claimed he was. After all they were used to the fancy ways of the Romans. But after they were convinced, lo and behold the Muslim noon prayer was upon the Muslim Khalifite. Out of hospitality, the Christian priests invited him to pray inside that very Church which I urge you to visit. The Khalifite refused. He said, and I paraphrase: "I worry if I pray inside, Muslims will consider this place their own saying: Omar prayed here." And he politely apologized and prayed outside the Church, on the dusty floor. Can you imagine any triumphant ruler doing such a thing?

    From that day onward the relationship between Muslims and Christians in that city (and that part of the world) florished. Did you know that these Christians that you say are prosecuted on the hands of Muslims fought hand in hand against the Crusaders! I am not kidding!

    The incidents in all those other places you mentioned (except Suddan) are clashes. The situation in Suddan is (even according to the United Nations) civil war. The population of the south wants to seperate from the country. Surely one cannot say that Spain is prosecuting the Basques if the Spaniards fought the Basque sepratists, or that the north of the United States was prosecuting the South in the American Civil war, etc.? Why then do you consider all those other cases legitate national struggles against seperatists, but when it comes to Suddan you then spin it to say that Muslims are Prosecuting Christians? Do you see why Muslims whole-hearly believe that you are waging war against them? You are being “unjust” is what they claim, and some would argue rightfully so.

    Concerning the clashes in those other countries, however, let me say this. Clashes in English means that there are two sides and that these two sides clashed! That there is a Christian side to start with (and this after centuries of Muslim rule and the existence of mostly a Muslim majority) is to your discredit! Persecution entails that one party is strong and the other is weak. But if they both are able to clash (as you yourself conceded) then you are making a false claim as regards prosecution.

    If what you claim is fact, then only one side should be attacking and the other suffering. Moreover, there wouldn't have been a Christian side to start with! That they clash is not an indication that Muslims are prosequting Christians! For in the same time that Muslims are clashing with Christians, is the very same time that Christians are clashing with Muslims! Who started all this clashing is the question, and I don't suppose you have any hard proof in support of your hitherto unsubstantiated empty claims, or do you?

    And did you know that Tariq Aziz, the Iraqi Foriegn Minister is a Christian! I bet you didn't know that, or did you? You are being utterly mislead for nothing but political purposes and to squeeze those dollars out of your pocket “to aid your fellow Christians!” Well I have news for you: Your tax dollars are aiding (for one thing) Israel murder Christians and keep worshipers out of Bethlehem! Rejoice!

    When you visit a country, you normally would obtain a visa. Every country has its own visa requirements. Is this not a fact? And so, if one were to visit the Chinese Republic of Taiwan and apply for a visa and the visa application stipulated that you do not recognize the Commmunist regime of mainland China, what would you do? If the need to visit Taiwan is that important then that you would most likely submit to the conditions stipulated in the visa application. If you do not like the conditions, then you can refuse to apply and thus not visit Taiwan. End of story. No one is forcing any person to visit any place, Taiwan and Mecca included, you see.

    The same with Mecca in Saudi Arabia. If you wish to visit this holy place you have to submit to some visa conditions, namely: that you proclaim in public that there is no God except Allah, and that Muhammad PBUH is His prophet. By this you would become Muslim. If you don't like that condition, fine. No one is forcing you to visit Mecca! Where is the prosecution there! Did anyone force anyone to visit Mecca? Because it is only then that your claim would carry any logical weight!

    If you actually agree to submit when visiting an X country that you are not to use drugs, then you are not expected to use them! If you use them IN VIOLATION of your visa conditions, then don't whine I am being prosecuted! You signed an agreement! And like all others, you and I will and must be held accountable.

    And did you know that there are actually Gospel and prayer services done by priests for American soldiers stationed in Saudi Arabia? Many of them (preists and soldiers) were introduced to Islam in such gatherings! And many did jump the Christian ship after listening to a Muslim preacher talking with a Bible in his hands. No fun intended. But if you think that Muslims are not allowed to own a Bible then you are (yet again) mistaken. Muslims are commanded in the Qur'an to believe in all the scriptures that Almighty God has revealed. Emphasis is on His scriptures, as opposed to what you and others say are His scriptures. I myself have three versions of the Bible, if that will allay your concerns.

    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:
    002:135: They say: "Become Jews or Christians if ye would be guided (To salvation)." Say thou: "Nay! (I would rather) the Religion of Abraham the True, and he joined not gods with Allah."

    002:136: Say ye: "We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam)."
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)

    Women are given that inheritance right only in special cicumstances! These circumstances are are when she (as a daughter of the deceased) has a brother (from the same). There are other circumstances when she inherits more than the man! That you forgot to mention of course!

    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:
    004:011 Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half. For parents, a sixth share of the inheritance to each, if the deceased left children; if no children, and the parents are the (only) heirs, the mother has a third; if the deceased Left brothers (or sisters) the mother has a sixth. (The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts. Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Al-wise.

    004:012 In what your wives leave, your share is a half, if they leave no child; but if they leave a child, ye get a fourth; after payment of legacies and debts. In what ye leave, their share is a fourth, if ye leave no child; but if ye leave a child, they get an eighth; after payment of legacies and debts. If the man or woman whose inheritance is in question, has left neither ascendants nor descendants, but has left a brother or a sister, each one of the two gets a sixth; but if more than two, they share in a third; after payment of legacies and debts; so that no loss is caused (to any one). Thus is it ordained by Allah; and Allah is All-knowing, Most Forbearing.
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)

    Please note how the father of the deceased (the grandfather, a man!) will in most circumstances get a share LESS THAN that of the daughter of the deceased (a woman!). Also note how (in verse 4:12) (yet another circumstance!) that a brother and a sister of a deceased will share in the inheritance! I am no scholar, but I have heared that in this circumstance THIS IS AN EQUAL SHARE!

    You are picking and choosing! Almighty God is the most Just. Every circumstance has its Law. And because unlike her western counterparts, a Muslim woman is cherished and is not expected to provide at all for the house hold, Almighty God gives her husband a bigger share. He is thus expected to take care of his second half and their children without expecting any help from her, whatsoever! And so furnishing the home is the duty of the husband, as is all the other expenses. You name it, he has to provide for it, not the wife who can keep her inheritance invested never to touch it as long as she is married. And as such, it makes perfect sense that Almighty God aids that person in this most enormous of tasks.

    And (yet again) you are mistaken if you are hinting that Islam allows for no property for the Muslim women. Even before Islam, the Women of that region of the World had property. In fact Khadeejah PBUH, the first wife of the prophet PBUH, and at age 40 was one of the wealthiest if not the wealthiest persons in Mecca!

    And as any objective person can read from above, it is by commandements of Almighty God in the Qur'an that women's properties, be they sisters, daughters, or mothers, are guranteed.

    Contrast all the above with what the Bible that you hold in your hands preaches about women:

    [1] Forbidden to open their mouths in the Church: “. . for it is a SHAME for women to speak in the Church" (1 Corinthians 14:34-35).

    [2] Chop off her hands for saving her husband's life. (Deuteronomy 25: 11-12).

    [3] Her husband to rule over her. (Genesis 3:16).

    [4] The head of the woman is the man. (1 Corinthians 11:3).

    [5] Man can sell his daughter. (Exodus 21:7).

    I DARE YOU to quote anything from the Qur'an as regards treating women that comes close to what the Bible you hold in your hand preaches the society to do to them!

    Are you claiming that becasue the Qur'an allows (as opposed to commands) the taking of more than one wife that because of that the God of the Qur'an is not the true God of the Bible.

    Brace yourself:
    [1] Genesis 004:019: “And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.”

    [2] Genesis 031:017: “Then Jacob rose up, and set his sons and his wives upon camels;”

    [3] There is even an EXPLICIT law about this in the Bible:
    Deuteronomy 021:015 If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated:

    Deuteronomy 021:016 Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn:

    Deuteronomy 021:017 But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.

    [4] 1 Samuel 027:003: “And David dwelt with Achish at Gath, he and his men, every man with his household, even David with his two wives, Ahinoam the Jezreelitess, and Abigail the Carmelitess, Nabal's wife.”

    [5] 1 Samuel 030:005: “And David's two wives were taken captives, Ahinoam the Jezreelitess, and Abigail the wife of Nabal the Carmelite.”

    [6] 2 Samuel 005:013: “And David took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem, after he was come from Hebron: and there were yet sons and daughters born to David.”

    [7] 1 Kings 011:003: “And he (Solomon) had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: ...“

    Must I go on? That you have amongest yourself invented a new Law (or choosen to disregard) the word of Almighty God that is in the Bible) is your choice. I can only refer you to read Matthew 015:009: ”But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”

    This matter is yet further proof that Christrians have now come to believe in the Anti of what the word of God and Christ Jesus PBUH preached. After all it is Jesus Christ PBUH himself in the flesh in the first person that said:

    5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

    5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

    5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    And so the Messiah peace be upon him makes it crystal clear that if the Law allows for polygamy (and it clearly does) then he did not come to destroy what the law allows! He came to fulfill the law he said. Not one title (I repeat: not one title) shall pass from the law, he says, until this heaven and earth pass away! And if anyone (such as yourself) (these are his words!) shall break the least of these commandement and shall teach men so shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. These are not my words!

    And thus, it should be evidently clear to any objective fair reader that based on this matter, the Qur'an, the word of God as found in the Bible, and the Messiah of God are in total agreement! Therefore, the God of Moses PBUH is not the God of the Qur'an?

    Here is an interesting Christian polygamy site, by the way.

    Islam is Arabic for peace, surrender, submission. The word shares roots with the Hebrew “Shalom.” And thus Islam is Peace (This is what it means!). It is peace with Almighty God and utter surrender and submission to His commands, which if implemented (as all the prophets of God even in the Bible call for-- Jesus PBUH included!) WILL bring peace and justice to this world. National pride and national security interests bring iniquity to this world, and everything but peace. Ask those Christians in the holy land what they think.

    This is a quote from my reply to a Christian in another religious board:

    Please note that the verses you quoted are examples of duality. This takes place when any verse allows for a second interpretation. Please note that even from the Muslim perspective these verses make very good sense. You see, like all other prophets, Jesus PBUH had the capability to give eternal life to those Almighty God willed to save. Was not Moses PBUH capable of that? Was not any earlier prophet capable of that? Or are you claiming that the entire human population that dwelled on this earth prior to Jesus' birth were/are doomed to eternal damnation?

    Indeed, and also because he is a prophet, even Mohammed PBUH is capable of doing the exact same thing:
    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:
    "8.24": O you who believe! answer (the call of) Allah and His Apostle when he calls you to that which gives you life; and know that Allah intervenes between man and his heart, and that to Him you shall be gathered.
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)

    Does that make Mohammed PBUH God? No!

    The same with the John 14:6. Please note that Jesus is using a parable. But even then, he is still making perfect sense. Please note that Jesus says he is the way. Since when was any "way" the final destination? Isn't clear to you that the job of Jesus PBUH (being the way) is to lead people to the final destination of Almighty God? Isn't it clear to you that if someone rejoices in the way and dances around the door and forsakes the destination that he/she will never reach Almighty God?

    And so yes, Jesus PBUH indeed represented the way and the light and reward of eternal life to his contemporary followers. Just as Moses PBUH was the way and the light and just like Noah PBUH was the way and light, and just like Jonah PBUH was the way and the light and just like Lut PBUH was the way and the light. Could any of the followers of any of these prophets have (or would have) reached the final destination of Almighty God without the light and guidance that these prophets offered?

    And no true worthy God prays to himself, Christian. He was a man you say? But your own Bible says God is not a man!
    End of quote

    Please refer to my reply to John Henry & the Conjecture post below for a discussion of the other quotes you posted & your 3rd false assumption.

    Your approach to refuting the fact that Allah is the God of Abraham, Jacob, and Moses peace be upon them, and discrediting Islam or its teachings is irrational. Allow me to explain. It seems to me that Christian missionaries, and having found nothing wrong with the Muslim scriptures or the Muslim God, are trying to refute the rational thought behind specific Muslim teachings. Like you, they put their preconceived notions, prejudices, and tribal culture (their human often selective and subjective sense of what is politically correct and appropriate or not, etc.) on the one hand, and then compare all that to the beliefs and commandments that Almighty God makes in the Qur'an on the other hand. If they don't match, and they hardly ever do, then these people cry out: "See. It is a false doctrine. It is a fabricated religion."

    Why? Because they don't like what it preaches! Since when did any human have ANY say in what Almighty God declares as right or wrong? Since when did the notion: "I don't like it, therefore it is not the truth" ever become a valid test for any truth?

    If truth to you means that you should like it, then go ahead get rid of the Bible and sit down you and people of like mind and author a nice novel and make a religion out of it! This is what the church of Scientology did. For like it or not, the novel is there, inside your head, and it is from which you are reading to us that God is a man, a son of man, that Polygamay is not allowed, that the Law is now out the window.

    Luke 006:046: "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?"
  17. eString

    eString New Member

    Dec 25, 2001
    Likes Received:
    John Henery

    Interesting post. But you or the person you quote are adding to the scriptures as you please!

    To give just one example, consider John 6:51, you posted the verse like so: "I AM the living bread which came down from heaven..." (John 6:51)

    When it actually is: “I am the living bread which came down from heaven...” (John 006:051).

    Or consider John 8:12, you posted the verse like so: "...I AM the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." (John 8:12).

    The verse actually SHOWS NO EMPHASIS like so: “... I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.” (John 8:12).

    You (or the author) are adding to the scriptures ONLY to make a point, and a false one at that! That “I AM” as quoted from Exodus is in fact capitalized, unlike those other N.T. quotes you posted to argue that Jesus PBUH was claiming to be that “I AM.” If he were trying to do argue that, you would have found his words capitalized EXACTLY like the scribes capitalize that “I AM” in Exodus. But they don't do that! Your own professional Biblical scholars don't do that! No! They left it to that author you quote to do their job for them!

    Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.” (Deuteronomy 4:2)!!!

    Anyway, let us examine this claim. But before we start, please be reminded that Jesus explicitly denied deity (see Luke 18:18-20, Mark 10:17-19 for just a few). Note how he turns down the goodness that was offered to him. Please reflect in earnest: which True PERFECT God is not good?

    Jesus PBUH even referred to Almighty God as his God (John 20:17)! Christ even prayed to that God! (See Matthew 26:39). Note how he prayed like Muslims do!

    The question now is thus: How can a worthy "God" deny deity, confess his loyalty to Almighty God, and even pray to Him? Would a worthy God pray? Would any god pray to himself?

    Moreover, Jesus PBUH appears:

    [1] Powerless: "I can of mine own self do NOTHING . . ." (John 5:30).

    [2] Had no knowledge of the hereafter: "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, NEITHER THE SON, but the Father " (Mark 13:32)

    [3] Was ignorant of the seasons: 'And seeing a fig tree afar of having leaves, he came if happily he might find any thing there on. and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves, FOR THE TIME OF FIGS WAS NOT YET." (Mark 11:13)

    [4] Jesus PBUH as a thirsty "God'?: " . . (Jesus) saith, I THIRST." (John 19:28)

    [5] Jesus PBUH as a weeping "god"?: "Jesus WEPT." (John 11:35) Remember that this is the shortest verse in the Bible! (Only two words)

    [6] Imagine a "god" being tempted by the devil: "Where he (Jesus) stayed forty days, being tempted by Satan" (Mark 1:13)

    I appeal to all the good God put in you. Does he appear like a divine "God" to you, or does he seem the human Apostle of God, the Messiah that he is?

    Here is the take of Robert Squires (an ex practicing American Christian-- now a devoted Muslim) to the invented Tri-une God, to a question posed by a Christian:

    CHRISTIAN: If this does not show one aspect of God talking to the other aspects, to whom was he talking? The alternate use of the plural "us" and "our", and the singular "his", clearly indicate that God is both one and three (or at least more than one; the idea of three was clarified by Jesus, who spoke of Father, Son and Holy Spirit). I understand that Muslims claim that these ideas were added later by Paul, but the fact of the occurrence in the Old Testament, which is also the Jewish scripture, shows that this is not the case.

    RS: Even though Matthew 28:19 groups the "Father, Son and the Holy Spirit" together in one sentence, this is far from a proof of a Triune Deity. Like all other verses that Christians use for justifying their beliefs, there's always another explanation - and usually one that is more true to the text. Suffice it to say that in formulating their doctrines, Christians not only ignore the EXPLICIT denials of divinity which were made by Jesus, but they also interpret the ambiguous phrases to fit their pre-conceived notions. Christians sometimes try to downplay the denials of divinity by (more-or-less) saying that "we believe Jesus was a human being". However, they miss the simple fact that claiming to be a human-being is one thing, but DENYING that you're God is quite another.

    Yes, Jesus spoke of "Father, Son and Holy Spirit", but in the language of the Jews who lived prior to and during the time of Jesus, saying "Father", "son" and "Holy Spirit" didn't imply a Triune Deity. If it did, the New Testament writers would have been explicit about it, but they weren't. Need I cite the numerous places in the Old Testament where people, prophets, etc., are called the "son(s) of God" or the passages where "God's spirit" is His Wisdom, an angel or a spirit subordinate to Him? It may be argued that it cannot be established with certainty whether the "Holy Spirit" in the Old Testament is portrayed as part of God or a spirit external to God that does His will, but this only discredits the clarity of the Old Testament.

    In spite of all this, the Oneness and transcendence of God in the Old Testament is rather explicit in many places. Need I cite them? One nice verse is 2 Samuel 22:32, where David says: "For who is God ['El] but the Lord ['Ado-nai]? And who is a rock except our God ['Elohaynu]?" Obviously, no division in the Unity of God is intended by this verse, and logically quite the contrary. The context and context of this verse shows that these titles are befitting only of "One" not three. In spite of the sometimes confusing use of the Hebrew word "'El" in the Old Testament (sometimes it is used for God, sometimes for an angel, etc.), the Oneness of God is still fairly EXPLICIT. However, evidence for the Doctrine of the Trinity is at best IMPLICIT, and can ONLY be justified if one has pre-conceived notions. Due to the fact that the Oneness of God in the Old Testament is rather explicit, if the New Testament teaches the Doctrine of the Trinity then that only discredits the New Testament.

    One way to avoid such confusion is to have a text like the Qur'an where the proper name of God is explicit - "Allah". Additionally, another way which Muslims avoid being influenced by new far-fetched interpretations is to realize that the best interpretation of the Qur'anic and hadith texts is by those who belonged to the early generations of Muslims. This ensures that no one can come along hundreds of years later and claim that they have a "better" interpretation than the one that has always been accepted. Certainly, people have tried to come up with heretical interpretations, but anyone who looks at the clear teachings of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, as well as the early Qur'anic commentaries, will see that such a thing is strongly condemned.

    RS: In regards to the presence of the "us" and "our" in the Old Testament, this is actually a proof against Christian belief since they were never understood in the way Christians understand them until the time of (St.) Paul or later. In Semitic usage, it is customary for one in authority to speak of himself in the plural. For examples of this, see 2 Samuel 16:20 and Ezra 4:16-19. So who was God talking to in Genesis? That's easy: His heavenly hosts. In other places where He uses "We" or "Us", He is talking to man, Moses, the Children of Israel or whomever the particular statement in question was intended for. Even if, for argument's sake, I accept that God is talking to Himself, that doesn't imply plurality of "aspect".

    Almighty God, in the Qur'an, uses the Arabic word for "We" when He makes some statements, but no one who knows the Arabic language ever understood it as an argument for plurality. This is what we call the "Royal We", or the "Plural of Majesty", and it is mentioned in almost any book on Arabic grammar. English has much the same thing.

    When a King or Queen issues a proclamation, they say "We, the King of England...". This is also done by monarchs in Arabic-speaking countries. Who are they talking to when they do this? Their intended audience of course, not themselves. The examples given above (i.e. 2 Samuel 16:20 and Ezra 4:16-19), also demonstrate this. Additionally, it can also be shown that even though the Hebrew word "Eloyhim" is plural in form, it can be singular in meaning. See Judges 13:21-22 where ONE angel is seen but it is referred to as "'Eloyhim", i.e. the plural. In another place, Exodus 22:8, "'Eloyhim" is used to refer to a plurality of HUMAN judges. (You may have to crack your Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible to get at some of these!)

    And how about the woman, upon seeing Samuel, who says to Saul: "I see "'Eloyim" coming out of the earth". (I Samuel 28:13). Certainly only a single individual is referred to here, not a plurality, even though the verb following "'Eloyhim" is in the plural! Verse 14 of I Samuel 28 clearly shows that one person is referred to and that no plurality is implied. So suffice it to say that plural forms, in both Arabic, Hebrew and English, don't necessarily imply plurality. That "plurality of the Godhead" is implied in the language of the Old Testament (which is admittedly imprecise) is just an invention by Christians in order to fill a theological need.

    The Greek translation of the Old Testament (known as the "Septuagint" translates "'Eloyhim" as "ho Theos" (i.e. the God). This is a SINGULAR translation which was done at least two centuries prior to the coming of Jesus, peace be upon him, and shows that the implication of plurality in these words is a purely Christian invention. In spite of all this, if you still want to believe that the "Godhead", as Christians often refer to It, is "plural", then that belief is to your own discredit. It seems to me that the Bible is in need of a clear and unambiguous revelation from God so that people can sort all of this out!

    RS: I FEEL I SHOULD RE-EMPHASIS THE FOLLOWING POINT: In some of your statements above, you're clearly arguing for PLURALITY IN GOD!!! Christians have been doing this for ages. These "nominal monotheists" - but "functional tritheists" - who clumsily go searching for "plurality" in God in order to prove their man made creed! You, however, use the word "aspects", which is kind of slippery. Why don't you use the word "person" or "hypostasis"? These are the official and agreed upon words. Are you afraid of these words and that they might sound too crude for Muslims? Let's talk about "God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God, begotten not made" . . . But regardless of the language, the simple fact remains that you're trying to argue that God is plural!

    If you ALSO say that He is One, then you're arguing for mutually exclusive concepts. That's why I refer to it as "double-speak". The human mind isn't made for such concepts. If you say that God is a "mystery" or "incomprehensible", then show me in the words of Jesus in the New Testament where it says that "paradox" and "mystery" are mental vehicles for reaching the truth. This is a Greek, not a Semitic-Hebrew idea. If we believe that God is merciful, then the TRUTH which He reveals should be MANIFEST and the teachings should be EXPLICIT.
    A Muslim response to a Christian response

    Here is the take of Keith G. Morehead, who has authored another article dedicated to refuting the wishful Trinitarian Eloyhim interpretation:

    The chief application of this interpretation by Trinitarians is in the Shema found in Deuteronomy 6:4: Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one (echad) LORD. Hebrew: Shema Israel, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai echad. They believe that since elohim is a uniplural noun describing the three members of the Trinity as the one God, and echad is a uniplural adjective describing several items in one unit or group, that the Shema is a perfect description of the triune God. The Trinitarian interpretation results in Deuteronomy 6:4 ceasing to be a verse supporting the oneness of God; it becomes a verse portraying the characteristics of their triune God. They interpret it to say: Hear O Israel, our three separate Jehovahs, is one unit of Jehovah.

    Trinitarian application:
    Genesis 2:24: Therefore shall a man ldave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one (echad) flesh.
    Oneness reply:
    The Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (TWOT) states: "Adam and Eve are described as "one flesh"(Genesis 2:24), which includes more than sexual unity" but when we use 1 Corinthians 6:16 as a cross reference, it appears that it means exactly sexual unity causing them to be "one flesh." What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh.

    Trinitarian application:
    Exodus 24:3 And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one (echad) voice .
    Oneness reply:
    One what? One person's reply? No! One voice. Does "one voice" being heard mean that of "all the people" there was only one individual speaking? Of course not! It is simply understood to be the voice of many people speaking in unison so that you heard one sound. In this text using the word echad, does "one" really mean "one" in the context that it is meant to be used?

    Trinitarian application:
    Numbers 13:23 And they came unto the brook of Eshcol, and cut down from thence a branch with one (echad) cluster of grapes, and they bare it between two upon a staff.
    Oneness reply:
    Again, you must ask yourself the question: One what? One grape? No. One cluster of grapes. Is one cluster of grapes the same as one grape? Absolutely not! In addition to that, the word here is grapes (plural). If echad was used in reference to the word grapes, the phrase would be nonsensical. In the phrase, "one cluster," does one sufficiently describe what the numeral "one" is supposed to describe? Without a doubt!

    The majority of texts are similar:

    Genesis 2:21 And LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one (echad) of his ribs.
    How many ribs? Maybe God took a single rack of ribs (As you would receive a rack of barbecue ribs in a restaurant).

    Genesis 22:2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one (echad)of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
    How many mountains did Abraham go to?

    Exodus 25:19 And make one (echad) cherub on the one (different word) end and the other cherub on the other end.
    How many cherubs on one side?

    Leviticus 16:5 And he shall take of the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats for sin offering, and one (echad) ram for a burnt offering.
    How many rams? Maybe God meant a "whole herd"? He said one; Trinitarians claim that one is supposed to mean a group.

    Numbers 10:4 And if they blow but with one (echad) trumpet, then the princes, which are heads of the thousands of Israel, shall gather themselves unto thee.
    Were they supposed to blow with an orchestra of trumpets in unison?

    Of the 943 times (by my count) echad is translated "one," it is translated to indicate a single character 901 times. In the remaining instances when it is involved in describing a group effort, it still means one.
    Who is Jesus: Echad
  18. eString

    eString New Member

    Dec 25, 2001
    Likes Received:
    To DHK, and John Henry

    Allow me now to quote myself in response to most (if not all your other points); the name of the person that this was addressed to is changed to Christian for privacy reasons.

    What you are doing is what is referred to as conjecture, guesswork. This is not valid evidence for the presentation of any truth, even in human courts.

    If the unjust and imperfect human race does not charge nor punish anyone with a crime if there was ever a shadow of a doubt, then how can you imply that Almighty God the MOST JUST and PERFECT MOST MERCIFUL God will do otherwise, Christian? How?

    If Jesus PBUH were Almighty God (and he is not!) and wanted you and I and the entire world to worship him, he would have EXPLICITLY said so as in: “I am Almighty God,” or as in: “I am equal to Almighty God”, or as in: ”Worship me or else you are going to end up in the Hell-fire,” or as in: “if you worship me you will end up in Heaven.” But he NEVER made such statements throughout his stay on this earth.

    And you cannot possibly rely on Paul for the presentation of any evidence. After all, if Jesus PBUH wanted to preach what Paul volunteered on his behalf, Christ PBUH would have done so himself. The Messiah spent no less than thirty something years on this earth preaching all sorts of things. Did he forget to preach those other things you quote Paul preaching? Why must you rely on John to dream it, or Paul to volunteer it, LET JESUS SPEAK IT!

    Moreover, the word of God as found in the Bible EXPLICITLY rules out the possibility that God is a man, that will dwell on this earth (See “God is not a man” Post for verse references). And thus, no man dwelling on this earth can be God, nor can (like all other humans) inspire any divine revelations, not the books of the likes of Paul, and not those of any other.

    Besides, Paul, and this by the testimony of the N.T., Christian Scholars (I repeat: Christian scholars), and History NEVER saw Jesus PBUH in the flesh. And so, for you to actually quote Paul as evidence would be implying that Jesus 'is' God and that as such he appeared to Paul and inspired his books. But this is putting the cart in front of the horse!

    You cannot possibly try to prove something by considering as fact that which you are trying to prove! This is against all basic logic and reason. No. One first proves that Jesus 'is' God, AND THEN AND ONLY THEN can one logically quote Paul as evidence in support of anything.

    But would you believe it? Can you believe that Muhammad PBUH the illiterate Arab of the 6th Century had enough insight to pin point with exactness the problem we are discussing here? But no! This is not Muhammad PBUH speaking, this none other than Almighty God in the first person.

    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:
    053:023 These are nothing but names which ye have devised,- ye and your fathers,- for which Allah has sent down no authority (whatever). THEY FOLLOW NOTHING BUT CONJECTURE and what their own souls desire!- Even though there has already come to them Guidance from their Lord!
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an) (Emphasis mine)

    ISAIAH 9:6
    You are quoting was is called a prophecy. And what is a prophecy? I have heard this word defined as “word pictures of events that will happen in the future.” I am open to a better definition.

    For any prophecy to be regarded as valid evidence then we must both agree that it [1] pertains to some thing/someone/some action we can identify and that [2] that it actually did come to pass. fair enough? Fair enough.

    Now. Please read it carefully. Here is the quote from my KJV:
    “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government SHALL BE upon his shoulder: and his name SHALL BE CALLED Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”
    Isaiah 9:6 (Emphasis mine)

    Does the name of Jesus PBUH appear there? How do you know that this verse pertains to Jesus PBUH? A fair answer must be a definite No, at least to the first question.

    And so and if Jesus' name is not there, how do you know that this verse talks about Jesus PBUH? Are you going to say that the picture it describes fits the description of Jesus PBUH, and that this prophecy did come to pass?

    I won't argue with you that Jesus PBUH never had the government of his shoulder, for we (meaning Muslims) do accept that Jesus PBUH will have (Shall have) the government on his shoulder.

    But what I will dispute is the guesswork you are applying to your interpretation of that verse. Note how it says “the government SHALL BE upon his shoulder”, but that it says “his name SHALL BE CALLED Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God...” Do you understand what I am getting at?

    People might call you a million different things, but this does not make you ANY of these things, Christian! Must I give examples? People might CALL you “ugly, ******” and “selfish”, (not that I am insinuating you are any of these things!), does that act of calling make you what they called you, Christian? NO!!!

    And so, if that verse pertains to Jesus PBUH, it still does not aid your cause. In fact, this verse acts to discredit your argument! Indeed, if this verse pertains to Jesus PBUH and this word is an accurate reporting of Almighty God's word (and I think it is so), the Most Wise has made it clear that this son WILL HAVE the government on his shoulder (exactly like we Muslims believe), but that he WILL BE CALLED all those other things too. And as all humans can realize calling is different from being! If the word of God wanted to convey that this son ”shall be ... the Mighty God” it would have said so! This is what language is for! This is what was used in the government part. No? But here it uses “he SHALL BE CALLED... the Mighty God” which is EXACTLY what you and other Christians do now!

    And so you see you are reading that this verse is proof that Jesus 'is' the mighty God ONLY because you have preconceived notions, because you have that blinking light in the back of your head that tells you Jesus 'is' God! But this is not the way to present evidence. What you presented here is no proof. It is what they call conjecture. You are guessing that this verse pertains to Jesus PBUH, and then guessing further that “shall be called” is the same as “shall be” and IT HARDLY EVER IS!

    JOHN 1:1, JOHN 1:14
    Please take another look. THIS IS NOT JESUS PBUH SPEAKING! These are the words of John, or whoever wrote them. If you present this to any court as evidence you are sure to be denied the right to do so.

    You see, again, you are putting the cart in front of the horse, and building your proof on the STILL UNPROVED FACT (THE ONE YOU ARE TRYING TO PROVE!) that Jesus 'is' God and that as such he can inspire John, or whoever wrote that verse.

    If Jesus PBUH wanted to preach these words he would have done so himself, in the flesh, with his own tongue, while he was walking this earth. And he had enough time to do so. And so there is no need for you to claim it on his behalf, as is it the same with John.

    Having said that let me introduce a scholarly view into the discussion here. The following is a quote from the freely available book “Christ in Islam”, by Ahmed Deedat.

    "Where does Jesus say - "I am god," or "I am equal to god," or worship me" I asked the Rev. D. D. from Canada, again.

    Reverend Morris took a deep breath and took another try. He quoted the most oft-repeated verse of the Christian bible. - John 1:1.

    "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with god and the word was god."

    Please note, these are not the words of Jesus. They are the words of John (or whoever wrote them). Acknowledged by every erudite Christian scholar of the bible as being the words of another Jew, Philo of Alexandria, who had written them even before John and Jesus were born and Philo claimed no divine inspiration for them.


    No matter what mystical meaning that Philo had woven around these words .. we will accept them for what they are worth.

    Since the manuscripts of the 27 books of the new testament are in Greek, a Christian sect has produced its own version and has even changed the name of this selection of 27 books to "Christian Greek scriptures"! I asked the reverend whether he knew Greek? "Yes," he said, he had studied Greek for 5 years before qualification. I asked him what was the Greek word for "god" the first time it occurs in the quotation - "and the word was with god"? He kept staring, but didn't answer. So I said, the word was HOTHEOS, which literally means "the god".

    Since the Europeans (including the north Americans) have evolved a system of using capital letters to start a proper noun and small letters for common nouns, we would accept his giving a capital "g" for god; in other words HOTHEOS is rendered "the god" which in turn is rendered - God. (eString commentary: i.e. "..the word was with God").

    "Now tell me, what is the Greek word for god in the second occurrence in your quotation - "and the word was god"? The reverend still kept silent. Not that he did not know Greek, or that he had lied - but, he knew more than that, the game was up. I said the word was TONTHEOS, which means "a god".

    According to your own system of translating you ought to have spelt this word God a second time with a small "g" i.e. god, and not God with a capital "G"; in other words TONTHEOS is rendered "a god". Both of these, "god" or "a god" are correct.
    (eString commentary: i.e. " and the word was a god")


    And in the Old Testament, the Lord said unto Moses, "see, I have made thee a god to Pharoah" (Exodus 7:1). "Why do you use a small "g" for "god" when referring to Moses instead of a capital "g" as you do for a mere word - 'word' - "and the word was God."
    Christ in Islam, Ahmed Deedat.

    Indeed, in the "New translation of the Bible" (1922) by the famous Dr. James Moffatt, it reads; "the Logos was Divine." Logos=word, Divine = could this mean: from a Godly source? And, also in "The Complete Bible - An American Translation" (Smith-Goodspeed) and "The Authentic New Testament" by Hugh J. Schonfield.

    And this many might argue corresponds accurately with "And ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's." (Corinthians 3:23), and with ".. O Mary! Verily Allah gives you the glad tidings of a Word from Him, his name will be Messiah Jesus.." (Translation, Holy Qur'an, 3:45).

    So what to do? Whom do you believe? Is Jesus "God", or "a god" like Moses or "God's"? Are we supposed to guess? And this at a time when Jesus PBUH himself denied deity! Guesswork is never valid proof and it is inadmissible in courts, Christian. Do you think The Most Just and Perfect Almighty God of the universe will allow guesswork as an excuse for any to take partners with Him, or as evidence against others when imperfect humans don't?

    JOHN 5:18
    Where can you find Jesus PBUH talking in the quote you posted? How can you say that this is what he said about himself, and then quote his enemies!

    That he broke the Sabbath is not the issue. If you are arguing that if one breaks the Sabbath (and instructs others to do the same in special circumstances) and that having done so that Jesus PBUH is then making himself equal with God, then you are sadly no better than those enemies of Christ who repeatedly stoned him!

    The fact that the LAW reports David and the priest of the house of God breaking the Sabbath (as the Messiah indicates in the N.T.) was to the Jews' discredit, as it is now to yours. The fact that this David incident is in the LAW means that the Mercy of Almighty God is PART of the Law. Those enemies of Christ PBUH believed what they believed IN SPITE OF THE LAW, not BECAUSE OF IT. Please reflect how you (whether you meant it or not) are any different.

    JOHN 8:24
    And what is the Greek word used there? Did Jesus PBUH speak Greek?

    You are reading that capitalized “He” to mean “God” only because you have preconceived notions. You are putting the cart in front of the horse again. Did not the Jews disbelieve in the Messiah? (Messiah is Hebrew for the anointed one- common reference in the Bible for prophets anointed by God- Masseh in Arabic, Christos in Greek, from which we get the word Christ)?

    Could not that “he” be a reference to the Messiah? And so Jesus PBUH was effectively telling them that if they disbelieved that “I am he” i.e. Christ, then they shall die in their sins?

    And so you are guessing again! This verse (for the sake of argument only) can take another interpretation. What you are effectively doing is guessing between the two and accepting that which suites your preconceived notions. Not that this makes your effort a valid vehicle for the presentation of any truth.

    JOHN 8:58, Exodus 3:14
    Allow me to quote myself from an earlier post on this and other boards:
    Concerning that "I am", that "I am" is a subject and verb, not a noun like you conveniently argue. Even your Bible scribes and editors understood that.

    John 8: 52-58 is often misunderstood as an indication of Jesus' existence before that of Abraham, peace be upon all the prophets of God. This is not true. Jesus was not in existence before Abraham-- not in the sense that Christians want people to believe. Allow me to explain.

    If Jesus were in existence at the beginning of time, as a co-equal part of the Trinity in time and stature with no part being a micro second before or after the other, then why call one "Father" and the other "Son"?

    Did the act of "Begetting" take place? If Yes where was the "Son" before it? If No then why use the term "Begotten Son"?

    No. Jesus was not in existence before Abraham in the Trinitarian/Christian sense. The Word of God (which caused Jesus' existence), the same Divine Command "Be" was the one Jesus PBUH was referring to:

    She said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: Allah createth what He willeth: When He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is,
    (Translation, HQ, 3:047)

    This same command “Be” was indeed in existence before Abraham. God Almighty is not subject to time. Nothing that emanates from Him is-- including His Word "Be" that created Jesus.

    Besides Jesus, there were others who were either anointed, consecrated or made holy, before their births. (see Ps. 89:20, Is. 45:1, 61:1; 1 Sam. 24:6). God did take a solemn covenant from Novah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus - son of Mary, and Muhammad before they were sent, reveals the Qur'an.

    Bible records, God came to prophet Jeremiah and said to him:

    "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations." Jeremiah 1:5.
    "Muslim Answers" Akbarally Meherally.

    And so it should not be hard to imagine that Almighty God anointed/anoints His prophets and Holy men without being subject to time-- as He never is. And because in His infinite wisdom, God Has/Had the Word (Be) in His plans before Abraham (or any other human) was born, then one can certainly argue that the Word of God (Jesus) (Be) exited before Abraham-- exactly like that consecration of Jeremiah was done before the existence of anyone. Jesus is no different. The Plans and Words of God are not subject to time.

    Additionally, the Bible editors, translators and transcribers CLEARLY quote Jesus PBUH using the small letters. And these same people quote the other verse in question differently.

    The Bible describes God asking Moses to say to the sons of Israel: "I AM hath sent me unto you." (Exodus 3:14).

    Now, it should be clear to any objective observer that even the professional Bible scholars/editors recognize that Jesus is not claiming to be that "I AM", if they believed so, you would have found Jesus' response capitalized just like they capitalized that Exodus verse.

    But they don't do that. No. Almost all knowledgeable Christian scholars refer to that verse to try to argue that Jesus was in existence before Abraham, not that he is that “I AM”.

    Even grammar yields itself to that point of view and away from yours.

    "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." (John 8:58).


    "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, Jesus."
    (Noun [Jesus] substitution test in John 8:58).

    Does that make sense to you? Is it not evident that the "I am" of Jesus in the original verse is a subject and verb-- like the Bible editors understood?

    Let's try the noun test in Exodus:

    "I AM hath sent me unto you." (Exodus 3:14).


    "God hath sent me unto you." (Noun [God] substitution test in Exodus 3:14).

    Now that makes sense!

    Moreover, please explain how could this be possible:
    "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad."
    (John 8:52)

    This CLEARLY and EXPLICITLY shows that Abraham was in existence before Jesus!

    Let the Qur'an explain all this to us:
    003.081: Behold! Allah took the covenant of the prophets, saying: "I give you a Book and Wisdom; then comes to you a messenger, confirming what is with you; do ye believe in him and render him help." Allah said: "Do ye agree, and take this my Covenant as binding on you?" They said: "We agree." He said: "Then bear witness, and I am with you among the witnesses."
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)

    We are told that God Almighty (Allah in Qura'nic language-- which literally means "THE GOD") took a covenant of all the prophets that they should confirm and help each other. This is identical to the incident of Jeremiah 1:5 where God Almighty speaks to prophet Jeremiah before his birth.

    And so, Abraham did know Jesus before Jesus was born, and likewise Jesus knew Abraham before Abraham was born-- just like all prophets knew each other before any of them were born. [And they all knew God, before they were born into this world!]

    If you don't believe that God Almighty is capable of that, and that this has not taken place, then how else would you explain that Abraham knew Jesus before he (Jesus) was born?: "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad." (John 8:52)?

    And so what was in existence before Abraham PBUH is THE PLAN, and THE WORDS of Almighty God of which Jesus is/was one! Almighty God's Plans and Words are not subject to time.
    “Did too”, “Islam and Christianity - Theology” thread, eString.

    JOHN 10:30-33
    You are taking things out of context!

    Let me quote Mr. Deedat again:
    I had taken Rev. Morris D. D. and his wife, to lunch at the "Golden Pea-cock". While at the table, during the course of our mutual sharing of knowledge, the opportunity arose to ask, "where?" and without a murmur he quoted, "I and my father are one" - to imply that God and Jesus were one and the same person. That Jesus here claims to be God. The verse quoted was well known to me, but it was being quoted out of context. It did not carry the meaning that the doctor was imaging, so I asked him, "what is the context?"

    The reverend stopped eating and began staring at me. I said, "why? don't you know the context?" - "You see, what you have quoted is the text, I want to know the context, the text that goes with it, before or after."


    It is unfair on the part of the reverend, having failed to provide the context, then to ask me, "do you know the context?" "Of course," I said. "Then, what is it?" asked my learned friend. I said, "that which you have quoted is the text of John chapter 10, verse 30. To get at the context, we have to begin from verse 23 which reads:

    23 and Jesus walked in the temple in Solomon's porch.

    John, or whoever he was, who wrote his story, does not tell us the reason for Jesus tempting the devil by walking alone in the lion's den. For we do not expect the Jews to miss a golden opportunity to get even with Jesus. Perhaps, he was emboldened by the manner in which he had literally whipped the Jews single-handed in the temple, and upset the tables of the money-changers at the beginning of his ministry (John 2:15).

    24 then came the Jews round about him. and said unto him, how long dost thou make us to doubt? if thou be the Christ, tell us plainly.

    They surrounded him. Brandishing their fingers in his face, they began accusing him and provoking him; saying that he had not put forth his claim plainly enough, clearly enough. That he was talking ambiguously. They were trying to work themselves into a frenzy to assault him. In fact, their real complaint was that they did not like his method of preaching- his invectives, the manner in which he condemned them for their formalism, their ceremonialism, their going for the letter of the law and forgetting the spirit. But Jesus could not afford to provoke them any further- there were too many and they were itching for a fight.

    Discretion is the better part of valour. In a conciliatory spirit, befitting the occasion:-

    25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and you believed not: the works that I do in my father's name, they bear witness of me.

    That is to say, the miracles bear witness of my prophet-hood and of me being the Messiah.

    26 but ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

    Jesus rebuts the false charge of his enemies that he was ambiguous in his claims to being the Messiah that they were waiting for. He says that he did tell them clearly enough, yet they would not listen to him, but

    27 my sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

    28 and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

    29 my father which gave them me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my father's hand.

    How can anyone be so blind as not to see the exactness of the ending of the last two verses. But spiritual blinkers are more impervious than physical defects. He is telling the Jews and recording for posterity, the real unity or relationship between the father and the son. The most crucial verse -

    30 I and my father are one.

    One in what? In their omniscience? In their nature? In their omnipotence no! One in purpose!

    That once a believer has accepted faith, the messenger sees to it that he remains in faith, and God Almighty also sees to it that he remains in faith. This is the purpose of the "father" and the "son" and the "holy ghost" and of every man and every woman of faith.

    Let the same john explain his Gnostic mystic verbiage.

    “That they all may be one: as thou. father, art in
    me, and in thee, that they also may be one in us...

    I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made
    perfect in one....” John 17:20-22

    If Jesus is "one" with God, and if that "oneness" makes him God, then the traitor Judas, and the doubting Thomas, and the satanic Peter, plus the other nine who deserted him when he was most in need are God(s), because the same oneness which he claimed with God in John 10:30, now he claims for all "who forsook him and fled" (Mark 14:50) - all "ye of little faith" (Matthew 8:26) - all "o faithless and perverse generation." (Luke 9:41)


    The expression "I and my father are one," was very innocent, meaning nothing more than a common purpose with God. But the Jews were looking for trouble and any excuse will not do, therefore, -

    31 the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

    32 Jesus answered them, many good works have I shewed you from my father
    for which of those works do you stone me?

    33 the Jews answered him, saying, for a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself a god.

    In verse 24 above the Jews falsely alleged that Jesus was talking ambiguously. When that charge was ably refuted, they then accused him of blasphemy which is like treason in the spiritual realm. So they say that Jesus is claiming to be God - "I and my father are one". The Christians agree with the Jews in this that Jesus (pbuh) did make such a claim; but, differ, in that it was not blasphemy because the Christians say that he was God and was entitled to own up to his divinity.

    The Christians and the Jews are both agreed that the utterance is serious. To one as an excuse for good "redemption", and to the other as an excuse for good "riddance".

    Between the two, let the poor Jesus die. But Jesus refuses to co-operate in this dirty game, so -

    34 Jesus answered them, is it not written in your law, I said, ye are gods?

    35 If He called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the
    scripture cannot be broken;

    36 say ye of him, whom the father hath sanctified, and sent into the
    world, thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the son of God?

    He is bit sarcastic in verse 34, but in any event, why does he say: "your law"? Is it not also his law? Didn't he say: think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets: I am come not to destroy, but to fulfill (The Law). For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass away, one lot or one title shall in no wise pass from The Law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:17-18)

    "ye are gods:" he is obviously quoting from the 82nd. Psalm (verse 6) "I have said, ye are gods: and all of you are, the children of the most High."

    Jesus, continues, "if He (i.e. God Almighty) called them gods, unto whom the word of God came (meaning that the prophets of god were called 'GODS' and the scripture cannot be broken (in other words- you can't contradict me!)" - Jesus knows his scripture; he speaks with authority; and he reasons with his enemies that "if good men, holy men, prophets of God are being addressed as "gods" in our books of authority, with which you find no fault - then why do you take exception to me? - when the only claim I make for myself is far inferior in our language, viz. "a son of god" as against others being called "gods" by God himself.

    Even if I (Jesus) described myself as "god" in our language, according to Hebrew usage, you could find no fault with me."

    This is the plain reading of Christian scripture. I am giving no interpretations of my own or some esoteric meaning to words!
    “Christ in Islam”, Ahmed Deedat.

    Are these Jesus' words? Why does the text say "Thomas answered", was he asked a question? Most importantly, why is there an exclamation mark (!) at the end of it?

    Are you familiar with the Sign of Jonah? The learned men of the Jews had asked Christ for a sign to prove that he was the Messiah, remember?

    No sign but one.
    12:39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign: and there shall NO SIGN BE GIVEN TO IT, but THE SIGN OF THE PROPHET JONAS:

    12:40 FOR AS JONAS WAS three days and three nights in the whale's belly; SO SHALL THE SON OF MAN BE three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
    Matthew (Emphasis mine)

    And how was Jonah PBUH for three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, Christian? ALIVE! Ask any Christian how was Jesus in the heart of the earth? DEAD they will tell you! Jonah ALIVE, Jesus DEAD! Jesus had said to the Jews that the son of man was going to be like Jonah was, i.e. Alive! Not Dead!

    And behold he was alive, even when Christians say he was dead!
    Mark 016 011 And they, when they had heard that he WAS ALIVE, and had been seen of her, believed not.

    or read:
    001 002 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:

    001 003 To whom also he SHEWED himself ALIVE after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

    Thomas had to believe that Almighty God can save Jesus and keep him alive, notwithstanding that horrendous hanging on the cross as as reported in the Bible. Thomas had to believe what Almighty God is capable of without seeing or feeling Jesus!

    But this is the doubting Thomas we are talking about. He had to see with his own eyes and feel with his own hands. Jesus obliged. Thomas is SPEECHLESS! He cries out: "Oh my God I cannot believe it!" He directs that call at Almighty God of the heavens not at Jesus! This is why you find that exclamation mark (!) at the end of the verse in most Bibles except the KJV, like so:

    "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28).
  19. eString

    eString New Member

    Dec 25, 2001
    Likes Received:
    (Conjecture II, continued from Part I)

    You can only reach your conclusion because you have that blinking light in the back of your head that says: "Jesus 'is' God!" He is not!

    Let me repeat it again: Thomas didn't believe that the Messiah was ALIVE as the disciples had told him (or as the Messiah had previously prophesied); he wanted to see with his own eyes and feel with his own hands. Jesus obliged. Thomas is SPEECHLESS. He cried out in utter disbelief: "My Lord and My God!" this is why you have an exclamation mark at the end of his cry even in your own Bible. And he directs that call at Almighty God of the Heavens not at Jesus!

    Surely you would not rebuke me if I cried: "My God!" in your direction after you show me your unhurt arm after your serious fall into an empty pool. Any person would have expected you to break your arm in umpteen places. Now if you escape the fall unhurt, then the only response you must expect from me is that of utter bewilderment and disbelief. And I certainly was not calling you God, Christian. And certainly you would not take notice of that call as being a reference to you being God.

    This is exactly the case with that Thomas incident. The man is baffled beyond belief. His only response is to exclaim and cry: "My Lord and my God!" Jesus PBUH rebuked him for not believing that Almighty God is capable of saving him (Jesus) and keeping him ALIVE against all odds, in fulfillment of the sign of Jonah. This is why Jesus says: "Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed:" i.e. that Almighty God is able to do this and save me. And he continues: "blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed." Indeed they are.

    PSALM 45:6
    You are guessing yet again! You are reading every “Him”, ”He” and ”Lord” from the Old Testament (even when Hebrew and Aramic have no capital letters!) to be a reference to Jesus PBUH ONLY because you bring preconceived notions to the discussion. When appropriate all references to Almighty God in the Old Testament (and the N.T.) are meant to be reference to Almighty God, the Lord, the God, Allah-- not Jesus PBUH!

    Consider this:
    002:029 It is He Who hath created for you all things that are on earth; Moreover His design comprehended the heavens, for He gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments; and of all things He hath perfect knowledge.

    002:030 Behold, thy Lord said to the angels: "I will create a vicegerent on earth." They said: "Wilt Thou place therein one who will make mischief therein and shed blood?- whilst we do celebrate Thy praises and glorify Thy holy (name)?" He said: "I know what ye know not."

    002:031 And He taught Adam the names of all things; then He placed them before the angels, and said: "Tell me the names of these if ye are right."
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an)

    Can you see what I am getting at. Can you see the references to “He” and “Lord” there? If one was to follow your flimsy logic one would then quote this (among many other verses!) from the Qur'an where there are references such as “He”, “Him”, and “Lord” and go on to claim that this is a reference to Jesus!

    ISAIAH 44:6, REV. 1:17
    Again you are employing SERIOUS CONJECTURE. First of all the book of Revelations is the dream of John, and (thus) and in fact nowhere will you be able to find Jesus PBUH making any statement in that book in the first person.

    But having said that, you are again considering those references as pertaining to Jesus PBUH ONLY because you have that blinking light in the back of your head that tells you that Jesus 'is' God. What is your proof that these references are not pertaining to Almighty God Himself, as opposed to His prophet, the Messiah Jesus PBUH?

    You are guessing Christian. Guesswork is NEVER considered valid evidence for the presentation in any court, or any truth.

    Here is something to reflect upon. The following exchange will take place on the Day of Resurrection:

    In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful:
    5:116: And when Allah will say: O Jesus son of Mary! did you say to men, Take me and my mother for two gods besides Allah he will say: Glory be to Thee, it did not befit me that I should say what I had no right to (say); if I had said it, Thou wouldst indeed have known it; Thou knowest what is in my mind, and I do not know what is in Thy mind, surely Thou art the great Knower of the unseen things.

    5:117: I did not say to them aught save what Thou didst enjoin me with: That serve Allah, my Lord and your Lord, and I was a witness of them so long as I was among them, but when Thou didst cause me to die, Thou wert the watcher over them, and Thou art witness of all things.

    5:118: If Thou shouldst chastise them, then surely they are Thy servants; and if Thou shouldst forgive them, then surely Thou art the Mighty, the Wise.
    (Translation, Holy Qur'an).
    End of Quote


    PS Eric B. Please bear with me.
  20. DHK

    DHK <b>Moderator</b>

    Jul 13, 2000
    Likes Received:
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by eString:

    When a soldier receivers an order, he never questiones the wisdom behind the order. This is simply not his business. And if you insist on knowing why, let me tell you that he simply does not see the big picture. The commander does.

    This is why Islamic "soldiers" flew unquestionably, suicide missions into the WTC towers. They simply obeyed.