Peace be upon those who follow guidance,
Brother Eesa has an interesting take on this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XdW6_HvZ6Y
Brother Eesa has an interesting take on this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XdW6_HvZ6Y
Let's call God Allah
- Thread starter glo
- Start date
- Replies 46
- Views 8K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | PHP 8.4 patch for vBulletin 4.2.5
Woodrow
May Allah have mercy on him رحمة الله عليه
- Messages
- 17,217
- Reaction score
- 4,224
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
At first thoughts that appears to be a very logical and reasonable conclusion.
Now let us go about with a few possible scenarios.
Scenario one:
God(swt) does not exist. We are all products of self occurring simple flukes in the fabric of the space-time continuum.
This thing we call life is merely an artifact of a complex chemical reaction. The only difference between living matter and non-living is the complexity of a self replicating chemical reaction.
Now this is either a singularity that has only occured once or it is a continuous reoccuring event. Logic seems to dictate that if the events that brought about matter and life could possible happen, the same events can be replicated, this rules out the probability of it being a one time event.
If this is not a one time event, this should have occured many times and there should be remnants of previous matter still abundant in the known universe. Yet all matter that can be detected is the same age.
I can find no explanation as to how matter could be created as a single event, unless it is the product of an external being.
Scenario 2
God(swt) exists, but he has no interest in us, no personal awareness of us as individuals. That sounds possible. But, does it make any sense that a being capable of creation would be unaware of His creation. w
Would a creator create with no purpose? Are we simple art forms that were made for a simple moment of curiosity?
Not a very pleasant thought.
Now it seems that a carrying creator would have in some manner made his presence and our purpose known to us. Us theists say that is what he has done and continues to do.
But, like the man said "To the Believer no proof is needed, to the unbeliever no proof is sufficient."
glo
IB Legend
- Messages
- 8,472
- Reaction score
- 1,785
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Christianity
Those are interesting points, Gene.
Looking at it this way, the notion of everybody calling God Allah in an attempt to improve the relationship between the faiths could back-fire, and become offensive and even more divisive instead! :-\
Personally, I believe the only way to bring peace and understanding to interfaith relationships, is to learn about each others faiths, acknowledge to similarities and the differences and finally accept that those differences exist.
God bless
Woodrow
May Allah have mercy on him رحمة الله عليه
- Messages
- 17,217
- Reaction score
- 4,224
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Naturally I feel that it would be wonderful if everybody called God(swt) Allah(swt).
However, I think the reason why a person calls Him Allah(swt) is important. If the person sincerely believes that is His name, no problem. But, if a person is doing to simply pacify and appease others that is hypocritical and also a very insincere method of being condescending.
However, I think the reason why a person calls Him Allah(swt) is important. If the person sincerely believes that is His name, no problem. But, if a person is doing to simply pacify and appease others that is hypocritical and also a very insincere method of being condescending.
glo
IB Legend
- Messages
- 8,472
- Reaction score
- 1,785
- Gender
- Female
- Religion
- Christianity
Who is brother Eesa??Peace be upon those who follow guidance,
Brother Eesa has an interesting take on this:
Uthman
LI News Service
- Messages
- 5,513
- Reaction score
- 1,216
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
Calling God “Allah” would be submission to Islam
By KATHLEEN PARKER
WASHINGTON | It was bound to happen — and it seems fitting that a cleric named Tiny would think of it.Roman Catholic Bishop Tiny Muskens of the Netherlands has decided that the way to ease Muslim-Everybody Else tensions is to start using “Allah” instead of “God.” Noting that God does not care what we call him, Muskens thought, why not yield a little to Muslim ways?
Or would that be submit, the literal meaning of “Islam”?
“ ‘Allah’ is a very beautiful word for God,” Muskens said on Dutch television. “Shouldn’t we all say that from now on we will name God ‘Allah’?”
Muskens pointed out that in Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country where he spent eight years, priests use the word “Allah” in Catholic Mass.
For the sake of peace, prosperity and clarity in the shire, let the record reflect that Muslims did not ask for this, though some in the Netherlands embraced the idea as a conciliatory gesture, and in the United States, some Muslims greeted the suggestion with enthusiasm.
Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, told Fox News.com that calling God “Allah” wouldn’t require a theological leap for Christians. “It reinforces the fact that Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the same God,” Hooper said.
Besides, as Muskens pointed out, “Allah” is a lovely sounding word.
Thus, in the spirit of Christian charity and Western tolerance, I’ve been trying it out with mixed results.
The Doxology of my Protestant childhood is problematic with the two-syllable Allah instead of the monosyllabic God, but not impossible: Praise Allah, from whom all blessings flow. Praise him, all creatures here below. Not perfect, but workable.
America’s familiar childhood blessing is downright euphonious: Allah is great, Allah is good, let us thank him for our food. But the Apostle’s Creed is a mess: I believe in Allah the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ his only son ... . Oops.
Contrary to Hooper’s one-God claim, Christians and Muslims don’t really worship the same God. Although both religions are monotheistic — and if there’s just one God, there’s just one God — Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God and Muslims think otherwise. That’s not a small doctrinal difference. In fact, at the risk of exhausting the obvious, Christianity doesn’t exist without, um, Christ.
Changing Western language, symbols and making other accommodations to ease relations between old Europe and new isn’t only a conciliatory gesture or even mere appeasement. It is submission by any other name.
Language may be a manmade limitation, as Janaan Hashim said, speaking for the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago, which endorses Muskens’ idea. But language is not meaningless.
Muskens conceded that his idea likely wouldn’t catch on right away. We might need another 100 years or so, but he predicted that, eventually, “Allah” will be the word. Given that European Muslims are procreating at three times the rate of non-Muslims, it may be sooner than that. Peace be upon us.
© 2007 Washington Post Writers Group
Source
By KATHLEEN PARKER
WASHINGTON | It was bound to happen — and it seems fitting that a cleric named Tiny would think of it.Roman Catholic Bishop Tiny Muskens of the Netherlands has decided that the way to ease Muslim-Everybody Else tensions is to start using “Allah” instead of “God.” Noting that God does not care what we call him, Muskens thought, why not yield a little to Muslim ways?
Or would that be submit, the literal meaning of “Islam”?
“ ‘Allah’ is a very beautiful word for God,” Muskens said on Dutch television. “Shouldn’t we all say that from now on we will name God ‘Allah’?”
Muskens pointed out that in Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country where he spent eight years, priests use the word “Allah” in Catholic Mass.
For the sake of peace, prosperity and clarity in the shire, let the record reflect that Muslims did not ask for this, though some in the Netherlands embraced the idea as a conciliatory gesture, and in the United States, some Muslims greeted the suggestion with enthusiasm.
Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, told Fox News.com that calling God “Allah” wouldn’t require a theological leap for Christians. “It reinforces the fact that Muslims, Christians and Jews all worship the same God,” Hooper said.
Besides, as Muskens pointed out, “Allah” is a lovely sounding word.
Thus, in the spirit of Christian charity and Western tolerance, I’ve been trying it out with mixed results.
The Doxology of my Protestant childhood is problematic with the two-syllable Allah instead of the monosyllabic God, but not impossible: Praise Allah, from whom all blessings flow. Praise him, all creatures here below. Not perfect, but workable.
America’s familiar childhood blessing is downright euphonious: Allah is great, Allah is good, let us thank him for our food. But the Apostle’s Creed is a mess: I believe in Allah the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ his only son ... . Oops.
Contrary to Hooper’s one-God claim, Christians and Muslims don’t really worship the same God. Although both religions are monotheistic — and if there’s just one God, there’s just one God — Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God and Muslims think otherwise. That’s not a small doctrinal difference. In fact, at the risk of exhausting the obvious, Christianity doesn’t exist without, um, Christ.
Changing Western language, symbols and making other accommodations to ease relations between old Europe and new isn’t only a conciliatory gesture or even mere appeasement. It is submission by any other name.
Language may be a manmade limitation, as Janaan Hashim said, speaking for the Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago, which endorses Muskens’ idea. But language is not meaningless.
Muskens conceded that his idea likely wouldn’t catch on right away. We might need another 100 years or so, but he predicted that, eventually, “Allah” will be the word. Given that European Muslims are procreating at three times the rate of non-Muslims, it may be sooner than that. Peace be upon us.
© 2007 Washington Post Writers Group
Source