Posted on 10/23/2001 8:39:39 AM PDT by spycatcher
Pre-Islamic Arabia's religion was one of superstition. Belief in jinns (genies), curse casting, magic stones, totems was the norm - and it was against this background that Allah arose. Although the Quran is claimed to be a heavenly writing with no earthly source, evidence of these very sorts of cultural influence is found in such places as Suras 55, 72, 113 and 114.
Animism, the belief that spirits inhabit rocks, trees and other elements was also very commonplace. Some of these stones were venerated and used as a focal point for the worship of a particular tribal god. No surprise, Muhammad's family had just such a stone for their own tribe - a black stone, in fact, that they kept at the Kabah (where the tribal idols were set up). The pagan rites of bowing toward Mecca, making a pilgrimage to the Kabah, running around it seven times, kissing it, then running to the river to throw stones at the devil all found there way into Islamic practice.
The final piece of the puzzle was in found in the religion of the Sabeans, an astral religion that worshipped the moon god and planned their religious rites around the lunar calendar. One such rite was fasting from crescent moon to crescent moon, a practice which would also be adopted by Muhammad.
If these things were not present before Muhammad received them from Allah (who himself is the moon god of Muhammad's tribe), why did Muhammad not have to explain what those words meant in the Quran? How would people have known who Allah was? ( or: what a jinn was? what the Kabah was? what the word Islam meant? etc.). Even the word "Islam" which many believe to mean "submission" was not an original word. In Arabic it was a secular term that denoted the strength and bravery of a desert warrior (a definition that accurately reflects the war-like tribes that founded Islam with bloodshed).
The Moon God
"Allah" is from the compound Arabic word "al-ilah" or in english "the god". Allah was known before Muhammad's time without a doubt. His name has been found in pre-islamic writings and other archeological finds. At the Kabah in Mecca over 350 gods were worshipped, but it was built especially for the chief deity - the moon god. Allah was the personal title of the moon god. Allah was married to the sun goddess. They produced three daughters, whose worship Muhammad would later make the mistake of condoning. The crescent moon symbol of Arabia came from this god.
Muhammad's family revered this particular god, and it is this idol that Muhammad declared to be the only true god. So, Allah - far from being the revealed God of the Bible as Muhammad would have us believe - is nothing more than an amplified pagan idol. Muhammad did not re-make the pagan god, he simply removed the lower deities from the rites of worship. That is why he never had to explain who Allah was. By definition, an idol converted in the 7th century into a new god cannot be the sama God revealed thousands of years earlier to Biblical prophets!
Is that it?
Islam thinks and acts as if Allah is the God of Abraham, but the Koran's description of Allah's character, demeanor, etc. is inconsistent with the Biblical account of YAHWEH, the God of Abraham presented there. Were YAHWEH and Allah the same, there would be no difference.
Of course, Islam claims that Judaism got it all wrong.
[No I'm not going to outline those disntinctions from the two books; the proof will be left to the student.]
Islam, Judaism, and Christianity have each been claiming that the others have "got it all wrong" for centuries.
And so it goes.
From Merriam-Webster's site: Main Entry: 1 god
Pronunciation: 'gäd also 'god
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English; akin to
Old High German got god
Date: before 12th century
If we also transferred some pagan deity over and said that was now our "Jesus" we wouldn't be honoring Jesus, but some other pagan idol (which would probably be a demonic entity)
| The Biblical God | Allah |
| is knowable | cannot be known |
| is personal | is far off |
| is revealed in three persons | is not the Father, Son nor Holy Spirit |
| is love | has no regard for man |
| is active in man's life and history | does not interact with man |
| is a spirit, has personality, loves, thinks, is omnipotent... etc. | is not definable, we are only told what Allah is not |
| is a God of grace | grace is not found in Allah, only judgment |
Dan
Biblical Christianity web site
Dan
You were born here, so you believe what you believe. They were born there, so they believe what they believe. But had your places of birth been reversed, you'd be every bit as vehement a defender of Allah.
And so it goes.
Christians who speak Arabic pray to "Allah". "Allah" means "God" in Arabic. Muslims are monotheists who are praying to the Creator of the Universe, whom they identify with the God of Abraham.
Now, they are mistaken about many of the attributes of God, but that doesn't mean they are praying to a non-entity. Are you saying that God doesn't hear their prayers?
If this is your logic, then, since either Jews or Christians are also seriously mistaken about the attributes of God, do you believe that God doesn't hear the prayers of whichever of those two groups doesn't understand Him correctly?
Technically speaking, Muslims do not worship a moon-god. Their proper name for God may have originally came from the name of their moon god, but Muslims are quite clear that God is transcendant and very far away from material existance. In fact, it could be argued that the God of Islam is TOO transendant- he has supposedly never even spoken to men directly. Men are not even created in God's image, because God is unlike anything in material existence, as well as completely different from all creation. This is the main reason that the God of Islam is not the God of Judaism and Christianity- it is a far better argument than the "Islam's God was taken from an ancient Arabic pagan moon God" argument.
Instead, I would argue that the reason why Islam's God is different is, as I mentioned above, he is too transendant. The God of Judaism interacts directly with the people- the God of Islam only sends angels. The God of Judaism created men in his image- the God of Islam only created men as servant to be his viceregents on earth (you can ask any Muslim, and they will tell you- men have nothing in common with their God). The God of Islam is different from the God of Christianity for the same reasons, and more. The God of Christianity became man, fully sharing in human nature (one man, two complete natures, two wills- the human fully in conformity to the divine). The God of Christianity is three persons who share in one essence and hence are one God, while the God of Islam, while being just one God, is also only one person. This list is by no means complete, but I just wanted to point out that the arguments that Islam's God is not the same as the Judeo-Christian God should be taken in the opposite direction from the way I see it going- they are different in their very natures.
I've been wondering about this. The Eastern Christians I know speak either Greek or Ukrainian. I've seen wild claims on FR about Islam being a dressed up moon-god cult, but so far all I've seen for documentation is a Jack Chick tract and a web site which displays similar (ie: zero) credibility. Still looking...
AB
Don't you find it at all peculiar that the only thing that seperates your vehement belief in your God, and their vehement belief in their God, is the geographical accident of your birth?
Had you been born elsewhere, you'd be every bit as convinced of the "truth of Allah" as you are currently convinced of the "truth of God". Doesn't this give you even a moment's pause for consideration?
Dan
Translation: I can't refute his points.
Nonetheless, let us be honest in our critique of Islam. Allah is the Arabic word for God, used before Mohammed by Arabic speaking Christians, and still used in Arabic language Christian liturgies. There are some who argue that features of Mohammed's false teachings are drawn from an Arabian pagan moon god, but to say "Allah" is this moon god is absurd.
Incidentally tomorrow is the feast of St. Harith and the martyrs who died with him. St. Harith was the Christian leader of a city in what is now Yemen, who, with most of the citizens of his city were martyred by Arab pagans in 524. The city was retaken by the Ethiopians with assistance from the Empire, and was a pilgrimage site until its churches in honor of the martys were destroyed by the Muslims. (More proof that the attempt to credit Mohammed with giving the Arabs monotheism is a lie. He corrupted the Christian monotheism they already had.)
Thy martyrs, Harith and his companions, O Lord have received from Thee crowns of life and incorruption, for armed with Thy strength, they vanquished the tyrant and overcame the demons' strenghtless presumption. Wherefore by their intercessions grant our souls great mercy.
--the Troparion of the St. Harith and his companions
And I would have at least seen Ghandi as preferable to the schizo personality of Mohammed. Mahatma Ghandi said, "It is a constant torture to me that I am still so far from Him whom I know to be my very life and being. I know it is my own wretchedness and wickedness that keeps me from Him."
That would have led me to Christianity and Jesus. Just look for the truth and let that guide your beliefs, don't mold truth to fit your preconceived notions.
That flies in the face of reason.
Had you been indoctrinated into the Islamic tradition as a youth, you would worship Allah and read the Koran today. But instead, you were indoctrinated into the Christian tradition, so you worship God and read the Bible.
If you don't recognize this truth, then I submit that you are deluding yourself.
Why do you think that religious belief and theology are always the result of indoctrination when there are clear counter-examples?
Had you been born elsewhere, you'd be every bit as convinced of the "truth of Allah" as you are currently convinced of the "truth of God". Doesn't this give you even a moment's pause for consideration?
I'd like to raise the possibility that there would be more worship of Yahweh and Jesus in geographic areas occupied by islamics if they would end the practice of killing Christians.
Just as there are handfuls of those raised in the Christian faith, who later converted to Islam.
The fact remains, that the odds are overwhlemingly in favor of the indoctrination of youth. If you were taught by your elders to be Islamic as a youth, then you will very likely embrace the Islamic faith. Likewise for the Christian faith.
Hence, the difference between the choice to embrace Islam or Christianity, is overwhelmingly correlated to the geographical accident of one's birthplace. And whether Christian or Islamic, the defenders of the respective faiths are equally convinced of the "truth" of what they were taught as children.
Why is this such a hard thing for you to admit?
Just as those of the Islamic faith would assert that there would be more worship of Allah, had the crusaders not come.
And so goes the ebb and flow of theistic history...
Unfortunately for relativists, Christ happens to be unique, essential, infallible, and easily superior in character to all men who ever lived. Millions that aren't even Christians realize he was the greatest man in history, but just don't want to accept his hard truths and unique claim to be the lamb and son of God. So they just say he was the greatest of all the prophets.
Yeah, that seems to fit.
If you rejected it, does that make you nothing more than contrarion?
Would you have been a contrarion if born in an Islamic country? (If so, it would not have been for long.)
Of course, if you were born in an Islamic country, you wouldn't have been you. You would have been someone else. Thus, at best the question is foolish.
At best.
Sorry, but I don't think you're being honest with yourself.
"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world...."
Who is deluded?
It is very clear (to all but the most delusional of observers) that the indoctrination of one's youth determines the likely faith of one's adult life. That doesn't mean there aren't exceptions (nor did I suggest otherwise).
My point is that the odds are overwhelmingly in favor of those standing in defense of the "truth" of Christianity on this thread, being the same ones standing in defense of the "truth" of Islam had they been born elsewhere.
Why would anyone of sound mind seek to deny this?
If Islam claims to worship the God of Abraham, and Isaac... why did they keep the crescent moon as their "logo"?
Nevertheless, "Allah" is now simply the Arabic word for God.
Arabic speaking Christian converts say "Allah"; Maronite Rite (Lebanese) Catholics say "Allah"; Maltese (a language related to Arabic) speaking Christians say "Allah"; and Moghrabi (Moroccan, though now mostly in Israel) Jews say "Allah". In ordinary speech, anyway. Some may pray in other languages.
Those who would deny that the faith into which individuals are indoctrinated as youths, overwhelmingly determine the faith that they practice as adults.
That's who.
What was the 'indoctrination' of YOUR youth?
I actually see many adherents of Islam as cult victims. I don't hate them, I feel sorry for them and am trying to understand the hook and whip that keeps them in line. The violent ones though, as you say... "should keep in mind: what goes around comes around." These people are nothing but criminals and will face "Infinite Justice." Unfortunately most Muslims seem to be silent or supporting the demonic violence aginst the infidels. Of course to you that *isn't hateful* right?
Same reason the jews keep the Star of David around... ancestor's worhip of Ishtar.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.