PDA

View Full Version : اللة the name of



omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 07:18 AM
When was the name اللة given to Muhammad as the name of "the God"?

Was given or was just presumed by the Qur'an?
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Abz2000
08-14-2015, 09:38 AM
The term has existed in many variations of the semitic tongue, in Arabic however, the distinction between ilah And Allah is clear,
aramaic and hebrew appear to have used El to refer to the divine, and Eli to refer to the divine in personal context, As in Allah, ilah, ilahi. so basically the contrast is made between the terms God and "god" and "my god".

So when we say Allah, we mean "the one and only Great God".
in Islam it is more a quality than a noun. since it is backed up by many descriptions and attributes.

you are aware that the bible records that when God spoke to Abraham pbuh He was not known by the term "Yahweh" but "Almighty God".
And that when Moses asked God whom he should say sent him, he was told : I AM THAT I AM.
the words i presume were EHYE ASHER EHYE? And not yahweh, and God knows best.

Those who claimed to be followers of Jesus (especially the Arab ones) resorted to calling Him Ar-Rahmaan (the Graceful/Merciful),
and God replies:


Chapter Name:Al-Isra Verse No:110

0قُلِ ادْعُواْ اللّهَ أَوِ ادْعُواْ الرَّحْمَـنَ أَيًّا مَّا تَدْعُواْ فَلَهُ الأَسْمَاء الْحُسْنَى وَلاَ تَجْهَرْ بِصَلاَتِكَ وَلاَ تُخَافِتْ بِهَا وَابْتَغ
بَيْنَ ذَلِكَ سَبِيلاً

{110*017:110*Khan:Say (O Muhammad SAW): "Invoke Allah or invoke the Most Beneficent (Allah), by whatever name you invoke Him (it is the same), for to Him belong the Best Names. And offer your Salat (prayer) neither aloud nor in a low voice, but follow a way between.

017:110*Maulana:Say: Call on Allah or call on the Beneficent. By whatever (name) you call on Him, He has the best names. And utter not thy prayer loudly nor be silent in it, and seek a way between these.

017:110*Pickthal:Say (unto mankind): Cry unto Allah, or cry unto the Beneficent, unto whichsoever ye cry (it is the same). His are the most beautiful names. And thou (Muhammad), be not loud-voiced in thy worship nor yet silent therein, but follow a way between.

017:110*Rashad:Say, "Call Him GOD, or call Him the Most Gracious; whichever name you use, to Him belongs the best names." You shall not utter your Contact Prayers (Salat) too loudly, nor secretly; use a moderate tone.

017:110*Sarwar: (Muhammad), tell them, "It is all the same whether you call Him God or the Beneficent. All the good names belong to Him." (Muhammad), do not be too loud or slow in your prayer. Choose a moderate way of praying.

017:110*Shakir:Say: Call upon Allah or call upon, the Beneficent Allah; whichever you call upon, He has the best names; and do not utter your prayer with a very raised voice nor be silent with regard to it, and seek a way between these.

017:110*Sherali:Say, 'Call upon ALLAH or call upon Al-Rahman, by whichever name you call on HIM, HIS are the most beautiful names.' And utter not thy Prayer aloud, nor utter it too low, but seek a way between.

017:110*Yusufali:Say: "Call upon Allah, or call upon Rahman: by whatever name ye call upon Him, (it is well): for to Him belong the Most Beautiful Names. Neither speak thy Prayer aloud, nor speak it in a low tone, but seek a middle course between."
Therefore the descriptive qualities take precedence over names and the statement I AM THAT I AM makes sense and fits with the unrivalled name for Almighty God (Allah).

it leaves no room for "my milkshake - it's bettr'n yours".
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 09:46 AM
also useful to bear in mind that the first verses revealed to the final messenger of God may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, didn't contain the term Allah, but contained descriptions of who He was.
The descriptive verses also left no doubt about the fact that He wasn't one among many when trying to make sense of what had been revealed and Who was revealing to him.
It was so profound and life changing that it drained all his energy (possibly due to the number of psychological conflicts it at first presented given the setting).

The first references included the term "your Master/Lord".
someone else may be able to clarify when Allah used the term Allah.
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 10:24 AM
now my turn to ask, where did the writers of this find the word: Allah?

رسالة يوحنا الأولى
from 1 John ch4
5 GNA

أيّها الأحِبّاءُ، لا تُصَدّقوا كُلّ رُوحٍ، بَلِ اَمتَحِنوا الأرواحَ لِتَرَوْا هَلْ هِـيَ مِنَ اللهِ،
لأنّ كثيرًا مِنَ الأنبـياءِ الكَذّابـينَ جاؤُوا إلى العالَمِ. وأنتُم تَعرِفونَ رُوحَ اللهِ بِهذا: كلّ رُوحٍ يَعترِفُ بِـيَسوعَ المَسيحِ أنّهُ جاءَ في الجَسَدِ يكونُ مِنَ اللهِ،
وكُلّ رُوحٍ لا يَعتَرِف بِـيَسوعَ لا يكونُ مِنَ اللهِ
، بَلْ يكونُ روحُ المَسيحِ الدجّالِ الذي سَمِعتُم أنّهُ سيَجيءُ، وهوَ الآنَ في العالَمِ. يا أبنائي، أنتُم مِنَ اللهِ
وغَلَبتُمُ الأنبـياءَ الكَذّابـينَ، لأنّ اللهَ
الذي فيكُم أقوى مِنْ إبليسَ الذي في العالَمِ. هُم يَتكَلّمونَ بِكلامِ العالَمِ، فيَسمَعُ لهُمُ العالَمُ لأنّهُم مِنَ العالَمِ.

Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 11:51 AM
Interesting.

If the word Allah was "found" in Christianity then why was Jesus name not taken?
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 11:56 AM
it has been used in the Arabic tongue dmba$$
Jesus is not a semitic name, it is a romanized variation.

Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 11:59 AM
Well, how about Yeshua?
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 12:11 PM
i wasn't there,
i can ask God for you InshaAllah if you don't accept Islam and get a chance.
you can however ask yourself why the hebrew language has variations such as Joshua (yaheshwa) and 'Esau.
now tell me, were the disciples of Jesus Christians or Muslims?
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 12:17 PM
You want to change the topic?

No thanks.
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 12:18 PM
Abz2000 am I right to say that Muhammed first received just the first 5 verses from Surah 96?
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 12:28 PM
Originally Posted by omarstfollower
You want to change the topic?
No thanks.
listen dude, you got a detailed answer on the first "topic" then switched the "topic" to "Jesus".
since have had the decency to somewhat patiently answer your questions, i certainly have a right to expect an answer to my reasonable questions.
even Moses pbuh demanded even chances and absence of falsehood in his encounter with pharaoh.

Originally Posted by omarstfollower
Abz2000 am I right to say that Muhammed first received just the first 5 verses from Surah 96?
i do believe that to be the case.


now tell me, were the disciples of Jesus Christians or Muslims?
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 01:00 PM
here's the correct answer:

The word*muslim*(Arabic:*مسلم‎,*IPA:*[ˈmʊslɪm];*English*/ˈmʌzlɨm/,/ˈmʊzlɨm/,*/ˈmʊslɨm/*or*moslem/ˈmɒzləm/,*/ˈmɒsləm/[13]) is the*participle*of the same verb of which*islām*is the*infinitive, based on the*triliteral*S-L-M*"to be whole, intact".[14][15]
*It is a liturgical phonology that is formed from two components; the pronoun prefix "mu" and the triconsonantal root "slim".[16]*
A female adherent is a*muslima*(Arabic:*مسلمة‎). The plural form in Arabic is*muslimūn*(مسلمون), and its feminine equivalent is*muslimāt*(مسلمات).
the words submission and peace are also from variations of the same root.

The Qur'an describes many*prophetsand messengers as well as their respective followers as Muslim:*Adam,*Noah,*Abraham,*Jacob,*Moses*and*Jesu s*and his*apostles*are all considered to be Muslims in the Qur'an.
The Qur'an states that these men were Muslims because they submitted to God, preached His message and upheld His values, which included praying, charity, fasting and pilgrimage.
Thus, in Surah 3:52 of the Qur'an, Jesus' disciples tell Jesus, "We believe in God; and you be our witness that we are Muslims (wa-shahad be anna muslimūn)."
In Muslim belief, before the Qur'an,*God*had given the*Torah*to*Moses, the*Psalms*to*David*and the*Gospel*to*Jesus, who are all considered important Muslim*prophets.
And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people.
And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
Acts 11:26
Am i therefore correct when i say that the terms "Christian" and "church" were terms unrecognized by The Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth?

Reply

sister herb
08-14-2015, 01:11 PM
Originally Posted by omarstfollower
Well, how about Yeshua?
Yeshua (ישוע, with vowel pointing יֵשׁוּעַ – yēšūă‘ in Hebrew) was a common alternative form of the name יְהוֹשֻׁעַ ("Yehoshuah" – Joshua) in later books of the Hebrew Bible and among Jews of the Second Temple period. The name corresponds to the Greek spelling Iesous, from which, through the Latin Iesus, comes the English spelling Jesus.

Yup, this I asked from Mr. Google.
Reply

sister herb
08-14-2015, 01:15 PM
Originally Posted by omarstfollower
Interesting.

If the word Allah was "found" in Christianity then why was Jesus name not taken?
The word Allah didn´t fond in Christianity - its just an Arabic word means the God like brother Abz2000 tried to explain to you before.
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 01:16 PM
And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
Matthew 16:18ASV

Not correct.

It's just an association.
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 01:53 PM
dude, are you just arguing simply for the sake of argument or are you totally unfamiliar with anything semitic?
church is a totally alien term,
the people of the time wouldn't have had a clue what you were on about.

Church*[Old English*cirice, circe;*Middle English*chereche, chiriche, chirche;*whence*churche, cherche,*etc.: -Greek*Kuriakon...]
Kirk*The Northern English and Scottish form of CHURCH, in all its senses.

In the earlier Greek It was pronounced*"ku-ri-a-kos"*or*"ku-ri-a-kon."*As you can see, this word doesn't even resemble the Greek word*"ecclesia"*whose place it has usurped. The meaning of*"Ku-ri-a-kos"*is understood by its root:*"Ku- ri-os,"*which means*"lord."*Thus,*"kuriakos"*(i.e.,*"church") means*"pertaining to the lord."*It refers to something that pertains to, or belongs to, a lord. The Greek*"kuriakos"*eventually came to be used in Old English form as*"cirice"*(Kee-ree-ke), then*"churche"*(kerke), and eventually*"church"*in its traditional pronunciation. A church, then, is correctly something that*"pertains to, or belongs to, a lord."

Now, as you can see, there is a major problem here. The translators broke the rules in a big way. When they inserted the word*"church"*in the English versions, they were not translating the Greek word*"kuriakos",*as one might expect. Rather, they were substituting an entirely different Greek word. This was not honest! The word*"church"would have been an acceptable translation for the Greek word*"kuriakos."*However, not by the wildest imagination of the most liberal translator can it ever be an acceptable translation for the Greek word*"ecclesia."*Are you following this? Consider it carefully. This truth will answer many questions you've had about churches, and the kingdom.

"Ecclesia"*is an entirely different word with an entirely different meaning than*"kuriakos."*In fact, the Greek word*"kuriakos"*appears in the New Testament only twice. It is found once in I Corinthians 11:20 where it refers to*"the Lord's supper,"*and once again in Revelation 1:10 where it refers to*"the Lord's day."*In both of those cases, it is translated*"the Lord's..."*- not*"church."*This word does not appear again in the New Testament. Nonetheless, this is the unlikely and strange history of the word*"church"*as it came to the English language. Eventually, through the manipulation of organized religion*"church"*came to replace*"ecclesia"*by popular acceptance. Again, we must emphasize the importance of knowing word meanings in order to know the intent of those who wrote the Scriptures.

THE CORRECT MEANING OF "ECCLESIA"

Now, let's look at the word,*"ecclesia". This Greek word appears in the New Testament approximately 115 times. That's just in this one grammatical form. It appears also in other forms. And in every instance, except three, it is wrongly translated as*"church"*in the King James Version. Those three exceptions are found in Acts 19:32, 39, 41. In these instances the translators rendered it*"assembly"*instead of*"church."*But, the Greek word is exactly the same as the other 112 entries where it was changed to*"church"*wrongly.In Acts 19,*"ecclesia"*is a town council: a civil body in Ephesus. Thus, the translators were forced to abandon their fake translation in these three instances. Nonetheless, 112 times they changed it to*"church."*This fact has been covered-up under centuries of misuse and ignorance. The Greek word "ecclesia" is correctly defined as: "The called-out (ones)" [ECC = out; KALEO = call]. Thus, you can see how this word was used to indicate a civil body of select (called, elected) people.According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:In the New Testament, "ecclesia" (signifying convocation) is the only single word used for church.*It (ecclesia) was the name given to the governmental assembly of the city of Athens,*duly convoked (called out) by proper officers and possessing all political power including even juridical functions.Obviously, in Greece an ecclesia had no resemblance to a church. An*"ecclesia"*was a civil assembly in Athens even before the writing of the New Testament. In the Oxford Universal English Dictionary (considered the standard for the English language) the word*"ecclesia"*is listed in its English form as used by our English forefathers. (Nowadays, only forms of the word appear - like,*"ecclesiastical").


http://www.aggressivechristianity.ne...s/ecclesia.htm
The word “church” comes from an old Greek phrase which meant “the Lord’s house”, but then, it is important to find out who used that Greek term, and especially, which “lord” they used it as a reference to. In this study, it will be shown that the word “church” is not a translation of the*NT*Greek noun*ekklêsia, and that it is not connected to the first century believers’ fellowships but refers to something altogether different, something that arose later.This study contains translation-related notes. If you have been subjected to dogmas which claim that some particular bible-version has all things right and has no errors, make sure to read the article*esa032.htm.Some bible-translations do not use the word “church”.

For instance Tyndale in his 1525 translation used it only twice, in both cases as a reference to buildings that were used for idol worship.

Acts 14:13 Then Iupiters Preste which dwelt before their cite brought oxe and garlondes vnto the churche porche and wolde have done sacrifise with the people. (TYN)

Acts 19:37 For ye have brought hyther these me[n] whiche are nether robbers of churches nor yet despisers of youre goddes. (TYN)

Again, in the above-quoted 1525 Tyndale version the word “church” is found only in those two passages, both of which refer to idol temples. – When it comes to the Greek word*ekklêsia, Tyndale translated it as “congregacion”.In the same way, a number of later translations do not contain the word “church” but render*ekklêsiaas “assembly” or “congregation”. – Below, it will be shown what the origin of the noun “church” is and what it actually points to and is a name for.

http://www.biblepages.net/ega061.htm

anyway, that was a secondary term, the subject you evaded was that the term christian or "masiheen" are false innovations, the essential fact is that those who believed in God and His messengers, and accepted all of the messengers, from the time of Adam up until now, are referred to in Arabic as Muslims (wholesome people of fidelity). While those who reject God, attribute partners or offspring to God or seek to make distinctions between the messengers, claiming to believe some and rejecting others, are ungrateful kafirs (infidels).
that's in essense.
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 03:07 PM
Abz2000 you see, I asked a simple question followed by a reasonable one (Jesus). You are the one that wants to debate.

Very interesting what you brought up about the work "church" and "Christian". But semantics it's not enough to fill the gap.

For instance:
If Jesus didn't say "ekklesia" and a word was "replaced". The question now is, what was it?
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 03:09 PM
(ROFL, nice video BTW)
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 03:11 PM
(بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ اقْرَأْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ * خَلَقَ الْإِنْسَانَ مِنْ عَلَقٍ * اقْرَأْ وَرَبُّكَ الْأَكْرَمُ * الَّذِي عَلَّمَ بِالْقَلَمِ * عَلَّمَ الْإِنْسَانَ مَا لَمْ يَعْلَمْ)
[Surat Al-Alaq 1 - 5]
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 03:13 PM
Mistake
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 03:13 PM
I can't edit from tapatalk?
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 04:19 PM
Originally Posted by omarstfollower
Abz2000 you see, I asked a simple question followed by a reasonable one (Jesus). You are the one that wants to debate.
for every question you asked, you gave no acknowledgenent or positive response to the detailed answers you received other than "interesting", then went on to other points as if attempting to find fault, that seems a little rude does it not?
(of course, it wouldn't appear rude to one who knew it was God or Gabriel asking in order to test ones's level of knowledge), interaction amongst humans requires a little courtesy?

Originally Posted by omarstfollower
Very interesting what you brought up about the work "church" and "Christian". But semantics it's not enough to fill the gap.

For instance:
If Jesus didn't say "ekklesia" and a word was "replaced". The question now is, what was it?
God knows, i recall no better than you recall the day when God brought you forth from the back of Adam and asked you if He is your Master.

there are however two possibilities depending upon context.
if the context is regarding the fellowship of believers, then circle or circa or even the morphed terms church, congregation assembly, ummah, nation might make sense,
if it is regarding a specific place of worship then it would have possibly been Beth El (house of God), or the term which has morphed into "synagogue" , in Arabic it is referred to as Bait Allah (House of God) or Masjid (place of prostration).

the word temple also is an adopted term which was usually used by greek roman types,
we refer to the House in Jerusalem as Masjid al Aqsa, the Furthest Mosque.
i do sometimes wonder what exactly i'll end up finding buried under my temples though.
a corruptive influence for me.
Reply

greenhill
08-14-2015, 04:34 PM
That's the thing @omarstfollower , many things have been altered with regards to Christianity, language changes, no more Aramaic, and the spoken words of Jesus are mere translations now. The original words don't exist. Why set on a journey to find what word Jesus used. By miracle, we have a text that has the original words, verbatim, as follow up message for mankind that is there for our research, why not start to look there first? The Quran. God's original words, (for us to find the right translation) rather than an account by some learned student and edited by successive clerics.

Hence the difference between islam and Christianity, like Abz2000 painstakingly demonstrated, we can check the words, get to the root and define the interpretation with greater understanding. With all the Bible existing in translated versions, where do you start? What if it the translations were 2,3 or more languages removed, with edits?

Do consider the Bible you are reading.


:peace:
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 04:35 PM
and if it was something even deeper, it could be the State of being.
i.e the United States of planet earth in submission to God, consisting of people in an Islamic State within and without.
remember, the Kingdom of God is within you :)
so establish His will, Kingdom, Rule on earth even as it is in heaven.
24/7 jihad to serve God and establish the Quran, the completed revelation guiding unto all truth (the eternal gospel), in self, family and society.

you cannot serve ceasar and God at the same time if both are at odds, so you make sure you and ceasar enjoin the rules of God, or satan becomes the "god" of your world.
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 04:57 PM
Originally Posted by greenhill
That's the thing @omarstfollower , many things have been altered with regards to Christianity, language changes, no more Aramaic, and the spoken words of Jesus are mere translations now. The original words don't exist. Why set on a journey to find what word Jesus used. By miracle, we have a text that has the original words, verbatim, as follow up message for mankind that is there for our research, why not start to look there first? The Quran. God's original words, (for us to find the right translation) rather than an account by some learned student and edited by successive clerics.

Hence the difference between islam and Christianity, like Abz2000 painstakingly demonstrated, we can check the words, get to the root and define the interpretation with greater understanding. With all the Bible existing in translated versions, where do you start? What if it the translations were 2,3 or more languages removed, with edits?

Do consider the Bible you are reading.


:peace:
reminds me of the game we used to play in school on rainy days - chinese whisper.
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 05:30 PM
Originally Posted by Abz2000
for every question you asked, you gave no acknowledgenent or positive response to the detailed answers you received other than "interesting", then went on to other points as if attempting to find fault, that seems a little rude does it not?
(of course, it wouldn't appear rude to one who knew it was God or Gabriel asking in order to test ones's level of knowledge), interaction amongst humans requires a little courtesy?
It's not enough?
Were you hoping for me to covert?
You must of gotten carried over.

What do you mean find fault?
I think you just trying to get ahead of me, or be a step ahead. Again, you and the rest that have replied seem so eager to start a debate or lead it to it.


Originally Posted by Abz2000
there are however two possibilities depending upon context.
if the context is regarding the fellowship of believers, then circle or circa or even the morphed terms church, congregation assembly, ummah, nation might make sense,
if it is regarding a specific place of worship then it would have possibly been Beth El (house of God), or the term which has morphed into "synagogue" , in Arabic it is referred to as Bait Allah (House of God) or Masjid (place of prostration).

the word temple also is an adopted term which was usually used by greek roman types,
we refer to the House in Jerusalem as Masjid al Aqsa, the Furthest Mosque.
i do sometimes wonder what exactly i'll end up finding buried under my temples though.
a corruptive influence for me.
Now that's my point, the end result of the "congregation" or people under a lordship is IT regardless of the word. The idea is still there. Now, I'm not here to prove it, just want to throw in some sense.
Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 05:33 PM
Originally Posted by greenhill
That's the thing @omarstfollower , many things have been altered with regards to Christianity, language changes, no more Aramaic, and the spoken words of Jesus are mere translations now. The original words don't exist. Why set on a journey to find what word Jesus used. By miracle, we have a text that has the original words, verbatim, as follow up message for mankind that is there for our research, why not start to look there first? The Quran. God's original words, (for us to find the right translation) rather than an account by some learned student and edited by successive clerics.

Hence the difference between islam and Christianity, like Abz2000 painstakingly demonstrated, we can check the words, get to the root and define the interpretation with greater understanding. With all the Bible existing in translated versions, where do you start? What if it the translations were 2,3 or more languages removed, with edits?

Do consider the Bible you are reading.


[emoji14]eace:
I could bring few points about the Qur'an from this, but it's not the topic.

But yes, I am careful to which Bible I use. I just hope you do the same when quoting the Qur'an to non Arabic speakers. :)
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 07:09 PM
come on then mate, please let us in on the secret :) what's the topic?
funny the way you referred to your bible and his Quran,
we're children of Adam, stuck on a giant space ship from which we need to steer out successfully, all accountable to the same Creator and source of guidance, who is not a contradiction, is very subtle, and requires that we use the guidance and subtle hints along with the intellects that He has given us to know Him and live life according to His guidance, we have to find the truth and come to it, it's His, there's no longer room for "it's mine".
the confusion on local and global copyright along with globalpeer to peer internet trading should've been a hint by now.

if we find the truth, we absorb and follow it - and reject it at our own peril.
Reply

Abz2000
08-14-2015, 07:15 PM
Originally Posted by omarstfollower
It's not enough?
Were you hoping for me to covert?
You must of gotten carried over.
there's no harm in keeping an open mind, some of the most knowledgeable do, here's one which i was just reading:

http://www.islamcan.com/cgi-bin/incr...40987611.shtml
Reply

greenhill
08-14-2015, 07:59 PM
Thanks. :shade:

Yes, I have to be very careful. I am accountable for the wrong info I give out and on the Day of Recogning I will be questioned.

Hence why there is very little change in the practice of worship in islam. Yes culture sets in with regard to communities, on matters of marriage etc. But in general, there's no real innovation or change.

There is one All Powerful Creator, who is the Most (as per what Abz2000 listed Merciful etc) that is known by the name of Allah.

Allah started creation. His name would carry down with time. Seeing as the Books were given in semitic language, the name of the First and Only being (Allah) became a generic word when successive generations substituted the Allah they cannot see to something they can see, idol worship and the creation of god (the non powerful) as a generic term.

So the education would be strange, having to switch the mentality that there is no generics for iLah. There is no god. It's just been Him known through His semitic name all the way throughout history. Ignorant man misled by Syaitan created substitutes (that we now classify as 'god' and worst still, put Allah amongst that rank).

:peace:
Reply

Ken Zaraki
08-14-2015, 08:46 PM
Originally Posted by omarstfollower
And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
Matthew 16:18ASV

It's just an association.
David Benjamin Keldani wrote an interesting (Islamic) view on this.
From his book "Muhammad In The Bible":
"When Jesus Christsurnamed his first disciple Shim'on (Simon) with the significant title of"Petros" (Peter), he must evidently have had in his mind this ancientsacred Sapha which had been lost long ago! But, alas! we cannot positively setout the exact word which he expressed in his own language. The Greek formPetros in the masculine gender - Petra in the feminine - is so unclassical andunGreek, that one is astonished at its being ever adopted by the Churches. DidJesus or any other Jew ever dream of calling the fisherman Bar Yona, Petros?Decidedly not. The Syriac version called Pshitta has frequently rendered thisGreek form into Kipha (Kipa). And the very fact that even the Greek text haspreserved the original name "Kephas," which the English versions havereproduced in the shape of "Cephas," shows that Christ spoke theAramaic language and gave the surname "Kipha" to his principaldisciple. The old Arabic versions of the New Testament have frequently writtenSt. Peter's name as "Sham'un' as-Sapha"; that is to say, "Simonthe Stone." The words of Christ: "Thou art Peter," etc., havetheir equivalent in the Arabic version in the form of "Antas-Sapha"(Matt. xvi. 18; John i. 42, etc.). It follows, therefore, that if Simon is theSapha, the Church which was to be built on it would naturally be the Mispha.That Christ should liken Simon to Sapha and the Church to Mispha is very remarkable.
I believe that theGreek Sophia is to be identified etymologically with the Hebrew word; and theidea that the Muslim word sophia (sowfiya) is derived from the soph, whichmeans "wool," ought to be abandoned. The true Sophia - or wisdom -the true knowledge of God, the true science of religion and morality, and theinfallible selection of the Last Messenger of Allah from among all His Messengers,belonged to the ancient institution of Israel called Mispha, until it wastransformed into the Mispha of the Nassara or Christian. It is indeed marvelousto see how complete is the analogy and how the economy of God concerning Hisdealings with man is carried on with absolute uniformity and order. The Misphais the filter where all the data and persons are filtered and strained by the Musaphphi(Hebrew, Mosappi) as by a colander (for such is the meaning of the word); sothat the genuine is distinguished and separated from the false, and the purefrom the impure; yet centuries succeed each other, myriads of Prophets come andgo, still the Mustapha, the Elected One, does not appear. Then comes the Holy Jesus;but he is rejected and persecuted, because there existed no longer in Israelthat official Mispha which would have recognized and announced him as a trueMessenger of God who was sent to bear witness to the Mustapha that was the LastProphet to follow him. The "Grand Assembly of the Synagogue" convokedand instituted by Ezra and Nehemiah, the last member of which was "Simeon theJust" (ob 310 B.C.), was succeeded by the Supreme Tribunal of Jerusalem,called the "Sahedrin"; but this latter Assembly, whose President wasthe Nassi or the "Prince," condemned Jesus to death because it didnot recognize his person and the nature of his divine mission. A few Sophis,however, knew Jesus and believed in his prophetical mission; but the crowds atone time mistook him for the Mustapha or the "elected" Messenger ofAllah, and seized and acclaimed him king, but he vanished and disappeared fromamong them. He was not the Mustaplta, otherwise it would be ridiculous to make Simonthe Sapha and his Church the Mispha; for the office and the duty of the Misphawas to watch and look for the Last Messenger, so that when he came he would beproclaimed as the Elected and Chosen One -the Mustapha. If Jesus were theMustapha, there would be no need for the institution of the Mispha any longer.This is a very deep and interesting subject; it deserves patient study. Prophet Muhammad alMustapha is the mystery ofthe Mispha, and the treasure of the Sophia".


Salaam

Reply

omarstfollower
08-14-2015, 09:01 PM
Sbz2000 the topic is just that: the name.

Because it was never given in those verses or the few after. But as you said, according to you and I agree, it's not his Name.
Reply

Abz2000
08-15-2015, 06:18 AM
Originally Posted by omarstfollower
Sbz2000 the topic is just that: the name.

Because it was never given in those verses or the few after. But as you said, according to you and I agree, it's not his Name.
One can see deep wisdom behind refraining from using the term Allah in the first revelation, it would have conjured a bunch of images in the mind of the listener.
the term "your Master/Lord" along with the uniqe descriptive qualities left no doubt in the pondering listener as to the magnificence and Oneness of the Being sending the Message.
it wasn't just what the verses contained, but the profound meanings they implied.

say for instance, when i hear the name "hamzah ibn abd al muttalib" , the first thing i remember is the guy "anthony quinn" from "the message",

have you not read of the circus kangaroo court set up pretending to confuse Jesus with another unknown Jesus - creating confusion and watering down in the minds of those present?

here's what i said, please don't twist it:

Therefore the descriptive qualities take precedence over names and the statement I AM THAT I AM makes sense and fits with the unrivalled name for Almighty God (Allah).
there is NO NAME that i am aware of in the sense of tom harry joe sally,
it appears that He is above that, what i am clarifying is that the term "Allah" has unique qualities that appear unmatched by other names, therefore if we were to discard all other names and choose a single name in order to fit the Islamic descriptions best, Allah would be that name.

the reason the pagans got it muddled up was possibly the fact that they deviated from the teachings of "PATRIARCH" Ibraheem (may the peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) and retained names and rites.

Anyways, when you look at Ibraheem (pbuh) in the Quran, you notice he'd prefer to use descriptions rather than names.
and after bouts of sparring and drawing the liar in, he'd deliver the unrivalled knockout blow with the Name, leaving no doubt as to the personality behind the name.

Chapter Name:Al-Anaam Verse No:79

9إِنِّي وَجَّهْتُ وَجْهِيَ لِلَّذِي فَطَرَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضَ حَنِيفًا وَمَا أَنَاْ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ

{79*006:079*Khan:
Verily, I have turned my face towards Him Who has created the heavens and the earth Hanifa (sincerely/uniquely) and I am not of Al-Mushrikun (associators/pagans/polythiests(see V.2:105)".

أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِي حَآجَّ إِبْرَاهِيمَ فِي رِبِّهِ أَنْ آتَاهُ اللّهُ الْمُلْكَ إِذْ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ رَبِّيَ الَّذِي يُحْيِـي وَيُمِيتُ قَالَ أَنَا أُحْيِـي وَأُمِيتُ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ فَإِنَّ اللّهَ يَأْتِي بِالشَّمْسِ مِنَ الْمَشْرِقِ فَأْتِ بِهَا مِنَ الْمَغْرِبِ فَبُهِتَ الَّذِي كَفَرَ وَاللّهُ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ

{258*002:258*Khan:
Have you not looked at him who disputed with Ibrahim (Abraham) about his Lord (Allah), because Allah had given him the kingdom?
When Ibrahim said (to him): "My Lord is He Who gives life and causes death."
He said, "I give life and cause death."
Ibrahim said, "Verily! Allah causes the sun to rise from the east; then cause it you to rise from the west."
So the disbeliever was utterly defeated.
And Allah guides not the people, who are Zalimun (wrong-doers, etc.).
Reply

omarstfollower
08-15-2015, 03:35 PM
Currently not available to focus on this, will gone back to it.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!