اللة the name of

[omarstfollower]

I can't edit from tapatalk?

 

[Abz2000]

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?

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.

 

[greenhill]

That's the thing [MENTION=37521]omarstfollower[/MENTION], 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.


eace:

 

[Abz2000]

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.

 

[Abz2000]

That's the thing [MENTION=37521]omarstfollower[/MENTION], 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.


eace:

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

 

[omarstfollower]

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.

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.

 

[omarstfollower]

That's the thing [MENTION=37521]omarstfollower[/MENTION], 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.

 

[Abz2000]

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.

 

[Abz2000]

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/increaseiman/htmlfiles/static/105944940987611.shtml

 

[greenhill]

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).

eace:

 

[Ken Zaraki]

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

 

[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.

 

[Abz2000]

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.).

 

[omarstfollower]

Currently not available to focus on this, will gone back to it.