Muslim here. Ask me a question..

[freelight]

'Al - alamin', another spin.......

'Al - alamin', another spin.......

What's the meaning of Islam? | Distortion in "Islam" |

~*~*~

As I touched on earlier about 'rabb alamin' also meaning "the God who provides/develops tools & systems of knowledge or for gaining knowledge" (paraphrase) this is supported by Bilal Muhammad's 2013 translation -

The praise is for G-d, the Guardian Evolver of all the systems of knowledge.

And this presentation below, just another interesting take on the passage -

Distortion in "Al-Alamin"

Still nothing about Allah being 'satan'. Where in the world did that 'idea' come from? Here 'God' is presented as the one who informs, provides man with 'knowledge', tools to use towards enlightenment, health, well-being, peaceful relations, etc. It appears to be knowledge of God reflecting to man, and man reflecting that knowledge back to God. The lexicon article from Lane and the above presentation indicates what root words are involved behind 'alamin' or associated with it, so show that these meaningful translations (of lesser note) may provide deeper insight into the over-all meaning-context and possibilities of the phrase.

What's the meaning of Islam? | Distortion in "Islam" |

 

[Apple7]

Already been over this with you, and have satisfactorily addressed your misapplications, with logical resolutions, since you are grossly super-imposing an emphasis with Allah's lordship and twisting that to mean someone totally foreign to Islam.

You still fail to reply as to why you totally abandoned your googled 'Openburhan' website.

Why did you?

Less than two weeks ago, you were slavishly quoting from Openburhan, as evidence against Lane's Lexicon....now...total silence!

The last few pages of this thread are a testament to the fact that you were proven dead-wrong.....but you are not adult enough to admit defeat.

No, the passage does NOT prove neither indicate that Allah is Satan.....at all. There is no attribution, relation or association to a 'satan' at all in this passage here. Allah is praised for being Lord of all worlds, Lord of the universe (heavens & earth), Lord of all beings, Lord of all creation, or the Lord who provides/develops all tools & systems of knowledge, or to gain knowledge (this is another interesting meaning which can be derived via etymology, that I've noted a few persons translating the passage indicating) - just an interesting alternative here for deeper introspection....and still nothing here about Allah being Satan.

Again...

Given your abysmal track record, how is giving your unreferenced opinion going to convince anyone?

Its not.

How is posting a link to a page full of different English translations, none of which show ANY exegesis, going to convince anyone?

The only thing that you have shown is that NONE of the translators even agree with each other - otherwise there would be NO need for so many different ones!

At best, as I've already covered,....only 2 lexicologists which you quote from the bottom of Lane's commentary while bypassing the other commentators, assume the term refers to Allah being Lord of jinn and mankind. NOTE again (how many times do we have to go over this?)...only 2 people quoted by Lane 'assume' this refers to 'jinn and mankind'...did you read? AND mankind, NOT jinn alone, as if to give Allah a unique and special title or association with jinn exclusively. Follow?

By this fact and others, you have nothing in your bigoted claim on this particular term and passage to support your assumption since we've already shown in the resources provided that 'rabb alamin' can include 'jinn', 'mankind', 'angels' and 'all creation' (beings and things), and what it is referring to will be qualified or modified by the context in which the term is being used. - the nuance or specifics of this term therefore vary in certain passages.

Here you go again...

There are TWO terms in view here....NOT one!!!

How many times do you need to be told this before it sinks in?


Your deceit exposed again...


رَبُّ العَالَمِينَ as meaning the Lord of the jinn, or genii, and of mankind: Katádeh says, the Lord of all the created beings: but accord. to Az, the correctness of the explanation of I'Ab is shown by the saying in the beginning of ch. xxv. of the Kur-án that the Prophet was to be a نَذِير [or warner] لِلْعَالَمِينَ; and he was not a نذير to the beasts, nor to the angels, though all of them are the creatures of God; but only to the jinn, or genii, and mankind. (TA.) ― -b2- عَالَمٌ is also syn. with قَرْنٌ [as meaning A generation of mankind; or the people of one time]. (O, voce طَبَقٌ, q. v.)


If you were honest, then you would have posted the entire lexical entry but, you chose not to.

Instead, you align your position with that of a deceitful follower of islam, as you reference his website which leaves the entire yellow highlighted part OFF!

The yellow part of the definition seals the deal that the phrase refers directly to demons!

No wonder you keep looking the other way.


Not.

Impressed.

 

[OCTOBER23]

Muslim NOT here. Ask me a question.. - November 13th, 2015, 11:04 AM

So much for muslim who venerate Mary.

 

[Apple7]

So, as far as ANY CLAIM of Allah being 'Satan' based on the term 'rabb alamin' (Lord of all sentient beings and all that exists), we using Al-Fatihah 1.2 as a first example in the Koran...this hardly holds as a 'proof text' or evidence of Allah being 'Satan', as there is no attribution, relation or association of Allah with 'satan' in the passage, apart from what you're improperly READING into the text. Furthermore as we shared before,....just because Allah is Lord of the jinn (because He is Lord of all beings, all creation), this does not make Allah into 'Satan'. This is so absurd that I find myself engaging this now as 'entertainment' besides my refutation of your claim and conclusion from a logical, sane and sound position of the facts involved in this case. Also,...I really have no vested interest in defending or rejecting 'Allah' or 'Yahweh' per se (as I'm not a devout mulsim or Jew), so I don't necessarily have a vested interest, agenda or bias either way here, but looking at this objectively from a textual, religious and philosophical perspective.

We are just getting started in demonstrating that the Koranic 'allah' is Satan.

Look a the progress you have made in just two short weeks.


1) You now fully accept Lane's Lexicon as the reference standard in Arabic lexicography. This is a 180 deg turn from your prior denial of it.

2) You have completely abandoned 'Openburhan'.

 

[Apple7]

There has been none ever intended.

Wrong.

Your deceit is well documented.

The more you deny, the worse you look....

As I shared previously, I have no deceit neither guile in this matter, since my commentary stands, AS there is absolutely NO REASON or PROOF here that Allah is Satan. Furthermore,....the two commentators above ONLY 'assume' that 'rabb alamin' means 'Lord of the jinn and mankind ' giving ch. 25 as a 'proof text' because it emphasizes a message from the prophet being sent down to be proclaimed to the world (mankind, the nations, the people...this might include 'jinn' too of course, all sentient beings that will be affected by the prophets ministry, but in this case it favors 'mankind'). STILL,....you have got no proof of a satanic conspiracy being perpetrated by Allah, NONE....but only what you're reading into the text. That is all you have.

UNDERSTANDING THE QURANIC TERM 'ALAMEEN'

25.1 further proves that 'allah' is lord of the demons.

 

[Apple7]

What's the meaning of Islam? | Distortion in "Islam" |

~*~*~

As I touched on earlier about 'rabb alamin' also meaning "the God who provides/develops tools & systems of knowledge or for gaining knowledge" (paraphrase) this is supported by Bilal Muhammad's 2013 translation -

No.

رب العلمين has only ONE meaning per the classic Arabic lexicons....'lord of the jinn, or genii, and of mankind.'

Deal with it, and stop running.

And this presentation below, just another interesting take on the passage -

Distortion in "Al-Alamin"

Still nothing about Allah being 'satan'. Where in the world did that 'idea' come from? Here 'God' is presented as the one who informs, provides man with 'knowledge', tools to use towards enlightenment, health, well-being, peaceful relations, etc. It appears to be knowledge of God reflecting to man, and man reflecting that knowledge back to God. The lexicon article from Lane and the above presentation indicates what root words are involved behind 'alamin' or associated with it, so show that these meaningful translations (of lesser note) may provide deeper insight into the over-all meaning-context and possibilities of the phrase.

Did you even bother to view this before ignorantly posting it?

First of all, the phrase under consideration, رب العلمين ,is not even addressed!

Secondly, no serious scholar of Koranic Arabic uses the Modern Arabic dictionary Mufradat al Qur'an as a reference!:rotfl:

What's the meaning of Islam? | Distortion in "Islam" |

So...

Now your position has been reduced-down to posting videos defending the evil violence of Islamic terrorism?!

By doing so, you are admitting that the devil is behind it!!!

 

[freelight]

Here we go again....lets be sensible.....

Here we go again....lets be sensible.....

You still fail to reply as to why you totally abandoned your googled 'Openburhan' website.

Why did you?

Less than two weeks ago, you were slavishly quoting from Openburhan, as evidence against Lane's Lexicon....now...total silence!

I've not abandoned the 'openburhan' site here (why would I ?), and not sure what this even has to do with anything, how does such a presumption here support your case, beyond what your reading into this? :idunno:

Don't forget....that site deems the Hilali/Khan translation that puts (jinn, mankind and all that exists), in 'parenthesis' and a few other translations listed as either incorrect, far-fetched, non-conforming or misleading. How does that support your case? Openburhan does NOT support your translation/interpretation, your end conclusion. The vast majority of translations do not support yours. So whats your fuss? I've fully made my points, refutations and explanations for readers here, if any care to invest the time to inquire. I've treated Lane's lexicon on its own already. No faithful muslim commentator would agree with what your trying to do with the text, not a one. Since you're the one making the claim, the burden of proof is yours, but I've seen nothing convincing yet.

The last few pages of this thread are a testament to the fact that you were proven dead-wrong.....but you are not adult enough to admit defeat.

Quite the contrary. My points are valid and still stand.

Your deceit exposed again...


رَبُّ العَالَمِينَ as meaning the Lord of the jinn, or genii, and of mankind: Katádeh says, the Lord of all the created beings: but accord. to Az, the correctness of the explanation of I'Ab is shown by the saying in the beginning of ch. xxv. of the Kur-án that the Prophet was to be a نَذِير [or warner] لِلْعَالَمِينَ; and he was not a نذير to the beasts, nor to the angels, though all of them are the creatures of God; but only to the jinn, or genii, and mankind. (TA.) ― -b2- عَالَمٌ is also syn. with قَرْنٌ [as meaning A generation of mankind; or the people of one time]. (O, voce طَبَقٌ, q. v.)


If you were honest, then you would have posted the entire lexical entry but, you chose not to.

Instead, you align your position with that of a deceitful follower of islam, as you reference his website which leaves the entire yellow highlighted part OFF!

The yellow part of the definition seals the deal that the phrase refers directly to demons!

No wonder you keep looking the other way.

You're grasping at straws in your attempt to demonize Allah, since I've already shown that just because Allah is the Lord of jinn and mankind (all sentient beings with an intellect, the ability to know), this does not make Allah into a 'satan' or a 'devil'. It is stupid to assume this, illogical, nonsensical. Its bonkers. You can quote the bottom half of Lanes lexicon entry til the cows come home,...it still does not prove your interpreted conclusion about Allah being satan.

Lets cover this again.......

Notice in your lexicon quote above, only 2 lexicologists refer to 'rabb alamin' as meaning 'Lord of the jinn and mankind'....don't forget "and mankind",...there is no exclusive or special indication or naming of Allah in the term "rabb alamin" as being 'Lord of the jinn' in a specific or special way. I've said this before. ALSO,...even if somewhere in the Koran it says specifically that Allah ('God') is Lord or Creator of the jinn,...this does not make Allah into 'satan'. Hello? Your 2 lexicologists above (all you got, and add more if you can find any....this still does not support your end conclusion) also DO NOT support your translation, since in their example of chapter 25, they use this one instance in assuming that 'alamin' refers most probably to mankind (and jinn, since any 'sentient being' is purported to be included here in the context), as the messenger of Allah is sending the 'word' as a warning to the peoples (the nations, mankind, the worlds, all conscious beings, who have intellects, who can know anything). This is all that it is indicating in chapter 25, and is why these 2 commentators assume such, but note, not all instances of 'alamin' refer ONLY to mankind and jinn, since the term can also include all other sentient beings and the creation itself (all that exists)...this being determined by context. We've been over this.....again and again and again.

If you want to demonize Allah (remember, 'Allah' is just the Arabic 'word' for 'God', the Lord/Creator/Sustainer of all) into a 'satan', you'll have to try another method or bring better evidence to the table, because I find this 'evidence' pretty shabby and unconvincing. And I don't have to rant and rave about winning an argument here, since I've provided my points, logic and explanations supporting my opinion here, in light of what facts and research I've done thus far on this. Until better evidence comes along, wherewith I would be willing to change or modify my view or conclusion, it thus stands. Could you say the same? An honest researcher after truth would.

 

[freelight]

We are just getting started in demonstrating that the Koranic 'allah' is Satan.

Look a the progress you have made in just two short weeks.


1) You now fully accept Lane's Lexicon as the reference standard in Arabic lexicography. This is a 180 deg turn from your prior denial of it.

2) You have completely abandoned 'Openburhan'.

Addressed in my last post. Lane's Lexicon quote has been hashed over already....and it still stands that 'rabb alamin' does NOT refer to or mean 'lord of the jinn' in any special or specific sense. Therefore you'd have to come up with much better evidence to conclude that such a weak example or reference proves Allah is satan, because it does no such thing.

I don't know what you are meaning about abandoning 'openburhan' for any reason whatsoever,...its a good site, but limited. One can access more translations of the Koran and commentary on other sites.

 

[freelight]

Wrong.

Your deceit is well documented.

The more you deny, the worse you look....

I've been holding my ground here fine thanks. I'm not sure where any 'deceit' is coming from, but will consider who mentioned it first (the source).

25.1 further proves that 'allah' is lord of the demons.

Lets try again chap. 25 here. - out of 45 or so translation,.....none translate 'alamin' as 'jinn' (alone, specially or specifically), because such a term cannot mean 'jinn' only, and in this verse, it is most definitely speaking more about mankind, the nations, and then including all other sentient beings (jinn, angels, all creation)...in as much as the proclamation of the word of God will affect these beings and/or the whole of creation. So there you have it. To assume this or any other verse proves Allah is some kind of 'satan', is projecting (reading into things).

 

[freelight]

No.

رب العلمين has only ONE meaning per the classic Arabic lexicons....'lord of the jinn, or genii, and of mankind.'

Deal with it, and stop running.

Read the whole lexicon first, not just the bottom half, and over 40 translations of the Koran where 'rabb alamin' is translated, and they do not agree with your assumption above, since alamin can refer to not only all sentient beings (not specifically jinn only) but all that exists, all creation.

Did you even bother to view this before ignorantly posting it?

Of course, why would I post something that I didn't read or view first? As a responsible researcher, that would be idiotic.

So...

Now your position has been reduced-down to posting videos defending the evil violence of Islamic terrorism?!

By doing so, you are admitting that the devil is behind it!!!

I'd be respectful of the rules here, there is no need to blast your font so large and appear to be shouting. As far as this video defending "the evil violence of Islamic terrorism', - you apparently didn't watch the video.

The videos are put out by 'Revealer TV' by the Muslims of United States IRH / Non-profit Peace and Anti-war Association. Please watch the short video on the 'meaning' of the word 'Islam' first and research this peace-loving and health-promoting organization. They do not support terrorism.

 

[Apple7]

I've not abandoned the 'openburhan' site here (why would I ?), and not sure what this even has to do with anything, how does such a presumption here support your case, beyond what your reading into this? :idunno:


Don't forget....that site deems the Hilali/Khan translation that puts (jinn, mankind and all that exists), in 'parenthesis' and a few other translations listed as either incorrect, far-fetched, non-conforming or misleading. How does that support your case? Openburhan does NOT support your translation/interpretation, your end conclusion. The vast majority of translations do not support yours. So whats your fuss? I've fully made my points, refutations and explanations for readers here, if any care to invest the time to inquire. I've treated Lane's lexicon on its own already. No faithful muslim commentator would agree with what your trying to do with the text, not a one. Since you're the one making the claim, the burden of proof is yours, but I've seen nothing convincing yet.

You've googled enough to know that Lane's Lexicon is the reference standard par excellence.

If you had any googled 'dirt' on the Lexicon, no doubt you would have attempted to use it.

But...there is none.

Period.

You already acknowledge that un-referenced comments such as 'far-fetched', etc, emanate from the webmaster of that particular website, and most certainly not from scholarly works such as Lane's Lexicon.

Clinging to an un-referenced comment just because you like what it says, is pure desperation.

Quite the contrary. My points are valid and still stand.

You have no points.

Any that you think that you have, you merely google from the web.

Not scholarly, and not researched, at all.

You're grasping at straws in your attempt to demonize Allah, since I've already shown that just because Allah is the Lord of jinn and mankind (all sentient beings with an intellect, the ability to know), this does not make Allah into a 'satan' or a 'devil'. It is stupid to assume this, illogical, nonsensical. Its bonkers. You can quote the bottom half of Lanes lexicon entry til the cows come home,...it still does not prove your interpreted conclusion about Allah being satan.

Fact is, lexicography is pretty incriminating regarding who 'allah' really is....and that would be Satan, himself.

Its understandable why you would want to reject this...because it utterly destroys your world-view.

If it was of no issue, then you would not have been so deceitful of the lexical entry to begin with!!

What are you so afraid of?

Lets cover this again.......

Notice in your lexicon quote above, only 2 lexicologists refer to 'rabb alamin' as meaning 'Lord of the jinn and mankind'....don't forget "and mankind",...

That would be TWO more than what you have....and since demons possess humans, why would it not be included in the definition?

Use your head.

there is no exclusive or special indication or naming of Allah in the term "rabb alamin" as being 'Lord of the jinn' in a specific or special way. I've said this before. ALSO,...even if somewhere in the Koran it says specifically that Allah ('God') is Lord or Creator of the jinn,...this does not make Allah into 'satan'. Hello? Your 2 lexicologists above (all you got, and add more if you can find any....this still does not support your end conclusion) also DO NOT support your translation, since in their example of chapter 25, they use this one instance in assuming that 'alamin' refers most probably to mankind (and jinn, since any 'sentient being' is purported to be included here in the context), as the messenger of Allah is sending the 'word' as a warning to the peoples (the nations, mankind, the worlds, all conscious beings, who have intellects, who can know anything). This is all that it is indicating in chapter 25, and is why these 2 commentators assume such, but note, not all instances of 'alamin' refer ONLY to mankind and jinn, since the term can also include all other sentient beings and the creation itself (all that exists)...this being determined by context. We've been over this.....again and again and again.

Where are YOUR lexical references to the contrary?

Answer: You don't have any.

You are blowing hot air...

:cigar:

If you want to demonize Allah (remember, 'Allah' is just the Arabic 'word' for 'God', the Lord/Creator/Sustainer of all) into a 'satan', you'll have to try another method or bring better evidence to the table, because I find this 'evidence' pretty shabby and unconvincing. And I don't have to rant and rave about winning an argument here, since I've provided my points, logic and explanations supporting my opinion here, in light of what facts and research I've done thus far on this. Until better evidence comes along, wherewith I would be willing to change or modify my view or conclusion, it thus stands. Could you say the same? An honest researcher after truth would.

Again...

Where are your lexical sources to the contrary?

 

[Nick M]

Question of the day for any muslim still hanging around TOL.

Why was this baby set on fire?

View attachment 21287

 

[Apple7]

Addressed in my last post. Lane's Lexicon quote has been hashed over already....and it still stands that 'rabb alamin' does NOT refer to or mean 'lord of the jinn' in any special or specific sense. Therefore you'd have to come up with much better evidence to conclude that such a weak example or reference proves Allah is satan, because it does no such thing.

Not according to Lane's Lexicon.

The longer you deny, the more desperate you look.

I don't know what you are meaning about abandoning 'openburhan' for any reason whatsoever,...its a good site, but limited. One can access more translations of the Koran and commentary on other sites.

Obviously, the only things that you can present here are things which you google from the web.

You have no time invested other than your google time.

That's not research....anyone with a pulse and an internet link can do what you are doing.


Let's keep you honest:

The comment that you hold so very dear to your heart from Openburhan....from whom does it emanate? Show us...and provide their exegetical reasoning.


If you can't even do this....well, then you are most desperate indeed...

 

[Apple7]

I've been holding my ground here fine thanks. I'm not sure where any 'deceit' is coming from, but will consider who mentioned it first (the source).

You are floundering.

Lets try again chap. 25 here. - out of 45 or so translation,.....none translate 'alamin' as 'jinn' (alone, specially or specifically), because such a term cannot mean 'jinn' only, and in this verse, it is most definitely speaking more about mankind, the nations, and then including all other sentient beings (jinn, angels, all creation)...in as much as the proclamation of the word of God will affect these beings and/or the whole of creation. So there you have it. To assume this or any other verse proves Allah is some kind of 'satan', is projecting (reading into things).

Pull up the verse for discussion of the Arabic terms.

Or...is it more fun to give your own personal un-referenced commentary from the sidelines...?

 

[Apple7]

Read the whole lexicon first, not just the bottom half,

Done.

What's your continued excuse for truncating it?

and over 40 translations of the Koran where 'rabb alamin' is translated, and they do not agree with your assumption above, since alamin can refer to not only all sentient beings (not specifically jinn only) but all that exists, all creation.

Show us any of your 40 translations that show their exegetical reasoning behind their rendering.

I'll be waiting.

Of course, why would I post something that I didn't read or view first? As a responsible researcher, that would be idiotic.

Look at this folks.

FL conveniently overlooks my question as to why Mufradat al Qur'an was used in this googled video.

So...why was it?

I'd be respectful of the rules here, there is no need to blast your font so large and appear to be shouting. As far as this video defending "the evil violence of Islamic terrorism', - you apparently didn't watch the video.

The videos are put out by 'Revealer TV' by the Muslims of United States IRH / Non-profit Peace and Anti-war Association. Please watch the short video on the 'meaning' of the word 'Islam' first and research this peace-loving and health-promoting organization. They do not support terrorism.

Your true light comes through.

You are an islamic sympathizer.

You post Islamic propaganda videos which defend islamic terrorism!

 

[freelight]

'Allah' thru the eyes of a muslim......

'Allah' thru the eyes of a muslim......

Your true light comes through.

You are an islamic sympathizer.

You post Islamic propaganda videos which defend islamic terrorism!

Anyone who knows me, knows I'm no "Islamic sympathizer" but respect the good, value and meanings aligned with universal truth and wisdom in all faith-traditions, so as long as they exist and have some benefit to the greater whole of humanity in revealing 'God' and the sacred dimension of life in human experience.

The videos I posted DO NOT AT ALL promote Islamic terrorism, and any one who watches the video on what 'Islam' means from that particular organization (an anti-war, peace-promoting society) will see that. Your knee

Now moving along to your 'claim' that Allah is 'satan' would be a more interesting subject, since you would have to provide the 'criteria' and 'evidence' whereby such a claim could be substantiated. We would note that 'Allah' is the Arabic word of 'God', (etymology issues/contests granted) so while it seems to be used as a proper noun(name) by muslims.... on a level with 'Elohim' it refers to 'God/a god' or 'The God' (Deity),...so a muslim consider 'Allah' to be the One Lord and Creator of all, which would also be that one 'God' whom all monotheistic religious faiths worship or revere, no matter what 'name' they call this 'One God', holding to a true monotheistic system. Now in these points alone I understand there is much debate, concerning the 'name' of 'Allah' and if 'Allah' is the same 'God' as the 'God' depicted in the Bible (well who is differentiating and why?), and much will vary by subjective belief and speculation on various levels.

Even beyond all this, I recognize one universal omnipresent Deity or infinite intelligence, infinite Spirit, infinite consciousness being the origin, source and 'context' in which all knowledge, information, light, energy, life inheres and arises as 'creation', and this universal, absolute reality is the root of all, the uncaused cause of all existence, all worlds, all phenomena.

So,...the heart and spirit of all souls attuned to this reality, have access to 'God' (if you want to personalize this 'Deity' and relate to 'God' as a divine person, or in any 'personal' way as well). Understanding this there is a fundamental truth at the core of all religious paths that have touched this primal reality and reflect it within their traditions, mythologies and intimate 'religious experience', so while each person experiences 'God' uniquely and differently, it is still that one universal reality and 'light of awareness' at the heart of all they are 'realizing' at the 'root', .....although it is reflected in human experience in myriad ways, as 'Light' exists and is reflected thru the various facets of a diamond, and further translated by the 'mind', hence all the artistic expressions and variations of language communicating that reality.

 

[Apple7]

Anyone who knows me, knows I'm no "Islamic sympathizer" but respect the good, value and meanings aligned with universal truth and wisdom in all faith-traditions, so as long as they exist and have some benefit to the greater whole of humanity in revealing 'God' and the sacred dimension of life in human experience.

The videos I posted DO NOT AT ALL promote Islamic terrorism, and any one who watches the video on what 'Islam' means from that particular organization (an anti-war, peace-promoting society) will see that. Your knee

There would have been absolutely no need for you to post videos defending islamic terrorism, if, in fact, you didn't think there was an issue to be defended in the first place.

Again....your sympathy for islam continues unabated, as you post videos which you, yourself, cannot even defend.

Please tell us with what resources the makers of these films even defined their terms with?

A mis-interpretation of the word 'islam' can result in terrorism?!

Come on.....stop defending terrorism!!!

Now moving along to your 'claim' that Allah is 'satan' would be a more interesting subject, since you would have to provide the 'criteria' and 'evidence' whereby such a claim could be substantiated.

Already have.

Still waiting for you to refute it...

We would note that 'Allah' is the Arabic word of 'God', (etymology issues/contests granted) so while it seems to be used as a proper noun(name) by muslims....

There are other Arabic terms rendered as God....surely you know this.

on a level with 'Elohim' it refers to 'God/a god' or 'The God' (Deity),...so a muslim consider 'Allah' to be the One Lord and Creator of all, which would also be that one 'God' whom all monotheistic religious faiths worship or revere, no matter what 'name' they call this 'One God', holding to a true monotheistic system. Now in these points alone I understand there is much debate, concerning the 'name' of 'Allah' and if 'Allah' is the same 'God' as the 'God' depicted in the Bible (well who is differentiating and why?), and much will vary by subjective belief and speculation on various levels.

'Elohim' is not the name of the Biblical God.

You are pretty lost....

 

[freelight]

Lets get things straight.......

Lets get things straight.......

There would have been absolutely no need for you to post videos defending islamic terrorism, if, in fact, you didn't think there was an issue to be defended in the first place.

Again....your sympathy for islam continues unabated, as you post videos which you, yourself, cannot even defend.

Please tell us with what resources the makers of these films even defined their terms with?

A mis-interpretation of the word 'islam' can result in terrorism?!

Come on.....stop defending terrorism!!!

Calmly read my last response to you on the videos and actually watch them. I have nothing to defend or explain beyond what I already have, and the videos and their makers definition of terms and their openly peace-promoting and anti-war organization is plain for all to see. You seriously need to relax.

Already have.

Still waiting for you to refute it...

You certainly did NOT prove Allah is Satan beyond your own 'assumption', and certainly not by your interpretation of the word 'rabb alamin' used in Al-Fatihah 1.2 or elsewhere, which is the heart of our earlier debate, wherewith I held my ground.

You'll have to come by some better criteria and evidence to prove 'Allah' is Satan (or whoever besides the one monotheistic God) worshipped by muslims. Another thing to consider beyond bigotry and technicalities used to demonize others, is the fact that many God-loving muslims may actually worship God using the name 'Allah' (many Arabic Christians do), believing this to be the 'God' of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the one and only Creator and Lord of all worlds ('rabb alamin' ).

You might be able to argue that they may are worshipping a distorted or altered image of the 'real God', but they still worship the One Creator God, their concept of IT nonetheless. Then it falls down to the question of who is worshipping the most correct version of 'God', the best presentation of Deity? Both Islam and Judaism/Christianity are religions of the 'Book'. They have their own 'God' and 'Book'. But there is only One Real God eh? - and many different 'versions' of said 'God',...so...you've got a gumball machine of many different colours, but its all the same gum :crackup:

yes....the humor is intentional.....

There are other Arabic terms rendered as God....surely you know this.

Well, 'Allah' appears to be the most acceptable and proper 'term',...would you suggest any others?

'Elohim' is not the name of the Biblical God.

'El' may not be a 'name' per se...but they did worship 'El' in various forms from that root word, 'eloha', 'elohim', and these denote or refer to 'God' or 'gods'. So....:idunno:

It could be argued whether YHWH is even a name, rather an acronym for Deity assumed as the absolute mystery of 'Being', 'He who IS', the Self-subsisting/existing One, the Eternal Being, the One who will BE all He will BE, the I Am, the Universal Creator/Creative Intelligence, the One who brings all into being, who becomes whatever He will be, for his people, at any time, all the time.

Since we don't even know what real vowels to put inbetween the cosonants, we can guess a variety of spellings/pronounciations....and settle for a commonly accepted of 'Yah-weh', although some even contest that. But it works. But concerning the evolution of this name, the UB covers some insights on this here. You do know there are two creation story traditions (elohim and yahwist) and the tribes of Hebrews worshipped their share of different 'gods' before assuming 'monotheism', so that 'El' and 'Yahweh' were among these, who eventually got merged into the same 'God' more or less. Yes, even 'gods' evolve.....

You are pretty lost....

I think I hold my own, and if and when I'm lost I study, research and keep at it until I get some light to know what directions to move in (you know, 'God' gave us all an inner compass). That's what a student of truth is ever about....he keeps asking, seeking and knocking like Jesus instructed....its an ongoing process. While 'Elohim' may be just a title for 'God' or 'gods',..some may have used it as a name as well, a name, term, title referring to 'God'. I'm sure we could split hairs here. Just like the name 'Allah', its a term referring to the One and Only God, understood in the strictest monotheistic sense.

 

[Apple7]

Calmly read my last response to you on the videos and actually watch them. I have nothing to defend or explain beyond what I already have, and the videos and their makers definition of terms and their openly peace-promoting and anti-war organization is plain for all to see. You seriously need to relax.

If you are going to the effort to post islamic sympathizing videos, then you should take the effort to defend them.

You certainly did NOT prove Allah is Satan beyond your own 'assumption', and certainly not by your interpretation of the word 'rabb alamin' used in Al-Fatihah 1.2 or elsewhere, which is the heart of our earlier debate, wherewith I held my ground.

Again...

Where are your lexical entries to the contrary?

You have none.

You'll have to come by some better criteria and evidence to prove 'Allah' is Satan (or whoever besides the one monotheistic God) worshipped by muslims. Another thing to consider beyond bigotry and technicalities used to demonize others, is the fact that many God-loving muslims may actually worship God using the name 'Allah' (many Arabic Christians do), believing this to be the 'God' of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the one and only Creator and Lord of all worlds ('rabb alamin' ).

Ask those followers of islam if their god has an only begotten Son named Jesus Christ.

That's what I thought....

:cigar:

You might be able to argue that they may are worshipping a distorted or altered image of the 'real God', but they still worship the One Creator God, their concept of IT nonetheless.

Nope.

Then it falls down to the question of who is worshipping the most correct version of 'God', the best presentation of Deity? Both Islam and Judaism/Christianity are religions of the 'Book'. They have their own 'God' and 'Book'. But there is only One Real God eh? - and many different 'versions' of said 'God',...so...you've got a gumball machine of many different colours, but its all the same gum :crackup:

yes....the humor is intentional.....

Muslims worship Satan.

Well, 'Allah' appears to be the most acceptable and proper 'term',...would you suggest any others?

There are many.

Start googling...

'El' may not be a 'name' per se...but they did worship 'El' in various forms from that root word, 'eloha', 'elohim', and these denote or refer to 'God' or 'gods'. So....:idunno:

Show us.

It could be argued whether YHWH is even a name, rather an acronym for Deity assumed as the absolute mystery of 'Being', 'He who IS', the Self-subsisting/existing One, the Eternal Being, the One who will BE all He will BE, the I Am, the Universal Creator/Creative Intelligence, the One who brings all into being, who becomes whatever He will be, for his people, at any time, all the time.

It is according to scripture.

But, then again, when have you ever been a student of anything other than the internet?

Since we don't even know what real vowels to put inbetween the cosonants, we can guess a variety of spellings/pronounciations....and settle for a commonly accepted of 'Yah-weh', although some even contest that. But it works. But concerning the evolution of this name, the UB covers some insights on this here. You do know there are two creation story traditions (elohim and yahwist) and the tribes of Hebrews worshipped their share of different 'gods' before assuming 'monotheism', so that 'El' and 'Yahweh' were among these, who eventually got merged into the same 'God' more or less. Yes, even 'gods' evolve.....

Your 'god' may evolve...but Yahweh does not.

I think I hold my own, and if and when I'm lost I study, research and keep at it until I get some light to know what directions to move in (you know, 'God' gave us all an inner compass). That's what a student of truth is ever about....he keeps asking, seeking and knocking like Jesus instructed....its an ongoing process.

No.

You do not.

While 'Elohim' may be just a title for 'God' or 'gods',..some may have used it as a name as well, a name, term, title referring to 'God'. I'm sure we could split hairs here. Just like the name 'Allah', its a term referring to the One and Only God, understood in the strictest monotheistic sense.

Again....you keep attempting to link the 'allah' of the Koran to that of the Holy Bible.

Won't work.

Never has worked.

 

[Zeke]

If you are going to the effort to post islamic sympathizing videos, then you should take the effort to defend them.




Again...

Where are your lexical entries to the contrary?

You have none.






Ask those followers of islam if their god has an only begotten Son named Jesus Christ.

That's what I thought....

:cigar:







Nope.




Muslims worship Satan.







There are many.

Start googling...





Show us.





It is according to scripture.

But, then again, when have you ever been a student of anything other than the internet?






Your 'god' may evolve...but Yahweh does not.






No.

You do not.






Again....you keep attempting to link the 'allah' of the Koran to that of the Holy Bible.

Won't work.

Never has worked.

Irrelevant the Kingdom of Christ, John 18:36, Luke 17:20-21, Neither religion taken literally have any other concern but this worlds kingdom for the perceived chosen, both manifest the love and theology of man and not the Divine Love that is all things to all people.