"Allah" comes from the Arabic word "elah" - (Arabic) means 'a god' or something that is worshipped. This word (elah) can be made plural, as in "aleha" and it can be male or female. "Allah" comes from "elaha" but it brings more clarification and understanding.
Allah = Has no gender (not male and not female)
* "He" is used only out of respect and dignity - not for gender
Allah = Always singular - Never plural
* "We" is used only as the "Royal WE" just as in English for royalty
Allah =Means "The Only One to be Worshipped"
"Allah" is the same word used by Christian and Jewish Arabs in the Bible, before Islam came.
On page one [1] of Genesis in the Old Testament, we find the word "Allah" seventeen [17] times.
Allah = Has no gender (not male and not female)
* "He" is used only out of respect and dignity - not for gender
Allah = Always singular - Never plural
* "We" is used only as the "Royal WE" just as in English for royalty
Allah =Means "The Only One to be Worshipped"
"Allah" is the same word used by Christian and Jewish Arabs in the Bible, before Islam came.
On page one [1] of Genesis in the Old Testament, we find the word "Allah" seventeen [17] times.
Vastaukset 25
Vanhimmat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJBPpqUieN4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEh2dIhRjgs
'Now You See It - Now You Don't'
made by Christian
Ēl (אל) is a Northwest Semitic word and name translated into English as either 'god' or 'God' or left untranslated as El, depending on the context.
Cognate forms are found throughout the Semitic languages with the exception of the ancient Ge'ez language of Ethiopia. Forms include Ugaritic ’il, pl. ’lm; Phoenician ’l pl. ’lm, Hebrew’ēl, pl. ’⁏lîm; Aramaic ’l, Arabic ʾilāh; Akkadian ilu, pl. ilāti. The original meaning may have been 'strength, power'. In northwest Semitic usage ’l was both a generic word of any 'god' and the special name or title of a particular god who was distinguished from other gods as being the god, or even in our modern sense God. Ēl is listed at the head of many pantheons. El was the father god among the Canaanites. But because the word sometimes refers to a god other than the great god Ēl it is often difficult to be certain whether Ēl followed by another name means the great god Ēl with a particular epithet applied or refers to another god entirely. For example, in the Ugaritic texts ’il mlk is understood to mean 'Ēl the King' but ’il hd as 'the god Hadad'.
In Ugaritic an alternate plural form meaning 'gods' is ’ilhm, equivalent to Hebrew ’elōhîm 'gods'. But in Hebrew this word is also used for singular 'God' or 'god', is indeed by the most normal word for 'god' or 'God' in the singular (as well as for 'gods').
The stem ’l is found prominently in the earliest strata of east Semitic, northwest Semitic and south Semitic groups. Personal names including the stem ’l are found with similar patterns both in Amorite and South Arabic which indicates that probably already in Proto-Semitic ’l was both a generic term for 'god' and the common name or title of a single particular 'god' or 'God'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_(god)
ilāh is the Arabic for "deity". It is cognate to Northwest Semitic ’ēl and Akkadian ilu. The word is from a Proto-Semitic archaic biliteral ʾ-l meaning "god" (possibly with a wider meaning of "strong"), which was extended to a regular triliteral by the addition of a h (as in Hebrew Eloah). The word is spelled either إله with an optional diacritic alif to mark the ā (as is the case with Allah), or (more rarely) with a full alif, إلاه .
The feminine is ʾilāhah إلاﻫﺔ "goddess", with the article, al-ʾilāhah اﻻﻻﻫﺔ according to Lane's 1893 Lexicon referring to the great serpent in particular, "because it was a special object of the worship of some of the ancient Arabs", or the new moon (see also Allat).
In Islamic context, an ilah is the concept of a deity, lord or god and does not necessarily refer to Allah. The term is used throughout the Qur'an in passages detailing the existence of Allah as the only Ilah, and of the beliefs of non-Muslims in other Ilah(s).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilah
Ilah can be made as female form or plural. Same like jumala can be jumalatar or jumalat.
Ilah means deity. Allah means ONE AND TRUE GOD TO BE WORSHIPPED and from that form you CANNOT make female nor plural forms.
First!!
get that??
"gods" were called even naked statues in Greece. So? god can be any deity used for worship.
Only one true God - Allah(the one who deserves to be worshipped) doesn't have beginning nor the end. And he is not born neither he gave birth.
He is the Almighty.
Prior to the arrival and initial codification of Islam on the Arabian Peninsula in 622 CE, year one of the Islamic calendar, the physical centre of Islam, the Kaaba of Mecca, did not hold only the single symbol of "the God" as it does now. The Kaaba was instead covered in symbols representing the myriad demons, djinn, demigods and other assorted creatures which represented the profoundly polytheistic environment of pre-Islamic Arabia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabian_mythology
Sanat ovat vain sanoja, ei itse asioita. Nimikin on vain sana. Kun sanotaan Jussi ja Pekka, ne eivät ole henkilöitä. Ne ovat henkilöiden nimiä. Sama nimi voi olla kahdella tai useammalla henkilöllä.
Tämä Allah-juttu ei ole yhtään kummempi. Kun Jumalaa pidetään persoonana, ilmeisesti Allah ja kristittyjen Jumala ovat eri persoonat, koska heillä on erilaiset käskyt ja eri uskonkirjat.
Kysyn nyt muslimeilta, onko Allah persoona? Jeesus oli ihminen ja persoona ja sanoi olevansa yhtä Jumalan kanssa. Raamatun Jumala on persoona.
"On page one [1] of Genesis in the Old Testament, we find the word "Allah" seventeen [17] times."
Lukekaapa arabiankielistä Raamattua. Siellä Allah on mainittu tuhansia kertoja, ellei useamminkin.
Onko kysymys vaikea?
>Onko Koraanin Allah persoona?
Onko skitso persoona? :)
Let there be no doubt - Muslims worship the God of Noah, Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus - peace be upon them all. However, it is certainly true that Jews, Christians and Muslims all have DIFFERENT CONCEPTS of Almighty God. For example, Muslims - like Jews - reject the Christian beliefs of the Trinity and the Divine Incarnation. This, however, doesn't mean that each of these three religions worships a different God - because, as we have already said, there is only One True God. Judaism, Christianity and Islam all claim to be "Abrahamic Faiths", and all of them are also classified as "monotheistic". However, Islam teaches that other religions have, in one way or another, distorted and nullified a pure and proper belief in Almighty God by neglecting His true teachings and mixing them with man-made ideas.
Suffice it to say that just because someone claims to be a "monotheistic" Jew, Christian or Muslim, that doesn't keep them from falling into corrupt beliefs and idolatrous practices. Many people, including some Muslims, claim belief in "One God" even though they've fallen into acts of idolatry. Certainly, many Protestants accuse Roman Catholics of idolatrous practices in regards to the saints and the Virgin Mary. Likewise, the Greek Orthodox Church is considered "idolatrous" by many other Christians because in much of their worship they use icons. However, if you ask a Roman Catholic or a Greek Orthodox person if God is "One", they will invariably answer: "Yes!". This lip-service, however, does not stop them from being "creature worshipping" idolaters. The same goes for Hindus, who just consider their gods to be "manifestations" or "incarnations" of the One Supreme God.
mutta minä vastaan suomeksi.
Et vastannut kysymykseeni onko Allah persoona.
Kertaat sitä vanhaa väiettä, että kristityt ovat väärentäneet alkuperäistä ilmoitusta.
>>Islam teaches that other religions have, in one way or another, distorted and nullified a pure and proper belief in Almighty God by neglecting His true teachings and mixing them with man-made ideas.
Jeesus itse puhui Jumalasta isänä ja opetti rukoilemaan Jumalaa isänä. Evankeliumin mukaan Jumala puhui taivaasta ja ilmoitti Jeesuksen pojakseen.
Matt. 3:17
Ja katso, taivaista kuului ääni, joka sanoi: "Tämä on minun rakas Poikani, johon minä olen mielistynyt".
Matt. 17:5
Hänen vielä puhuessaan, katso, heidät varjosi valoisa pilvi; ja katso, pilvestä kuului ääni, joka sanoi: "Tämä on minun rakas Poikani, johon minä olen mielistynyt; kuulkaa häntä".
Mark. 1:11
Ja taivaista tuli ääni: "Sinä olet minun rakas Poikani; sinuun minä olen mielistynyt".
Mark. 9:7
Ja tuli pilvi, joka peitti heidät varjoonsa, ja pilvestä kuului ääni: "Tämä on minun rakas Poikani; kuulkaa häntä".
Luuk. 3:22
ja Pyhä Henki laskeutui hänen päällensä ruumiillisessa muodossa, niinkuin kyyhkynen, ja taivaasta tuli ääni: "Sinä olet minun rakas Poikani; sinuun minä olen mielistynyt".
2. Piet. 1:17
Sillä hän sai Isältä Jumalalta kunnian ja kirkkauden, kun tältä ylhäisimmältä kirkkaudelta tuli hänelle tämä ääni: "Tämä on minun rakas Poikani, johon minä olen mielistynyt".
.........
Kun tämä on selvästi teksteissä, kuinka sen voisi hylätä? Näitä tekstejä ei ole muuteltu kirjoittamisen jälkeen.
Toinen asia on, ettei ihmisillä ole mitään mahdollisuutta tutkia, millainen Jumala taivaassa on. Pitää vain hyväksyä vanhojen tekstien ilmoitukset. Mitä siihen on vastaan väittämistä, jos Jumala ilmoittaa, että hänellä on poika?
>>>>Et vastannut kysymykseeni onko Allah persoona.>>Jeesus itse puhui Jumalasta isänä ja opetti rukoilemaan Jumalaa isänä.>Evankeliumin mukaan Jumala puhui taivaasta ja ilmoitti Jeesuksen pojakseen.>Matt. 3:17
Ja katso, taivaista kuului ääni, joka sanoi: "Tämä on minun rakas Poikani, johon minä olen mielistynyt".
Matt. 17:5
Hänen vielä puhuessaan, katso, heidät varjosi valoisa pilvi; ja katso, pilvestä kuului ääni, joka sanoi: "Tämä on minun rakas Poikani, johon minä olen mielistynyt; kuulkaa häntä".
Mark. 1:11
Ja taivaista tuli ääni: "Sinä olet minun rakas Poikani; sinuun minä olen mielistynyt".
Mark. 9:7
Ja tuli pilvi, joka peitti heidät varjoonsa, ja pilvestä kuului ääni: "Tämä on minun rakas Poikani; kuulkaa häntä".
Luuk. 3:22
ja Pyhä Henki laskeutui hänen päällensä ruumiillisessa muodossa, niinkuin kyyhkynen, ja taivaasta tuli ääni: "Sinä olet minun rakas Poikani; sinuun minä olen mielistynyt".
2. Piet. 1:17
Sillä hän sai Isältä Jumalalta kunnian ja kirkkauden, kun tältä ylhäisimmältä kirkkaudelta tuli hänelle tämä ääni: "Tämä on minun rakas Poikani, johon minä olen mielistynyt".
että tämä on islam palsta? Islamia koskeviin kysymyksiin ei tällä palstalla ole koskaan saatu vastauksia. Nyt sinä innostut selittämään Raamattua.
Sinun tapasi käsitellä Raamatun tekstejä on väärä.
Raamattu ei ole tieteellisellä tarkkuudella kirjoitettua. Matematiikan kaavat ja luonnontieteen lait ovat tarkkoja, mutta Raamattu ei ole täsmällistä samalla tavalla. Onhan evankeliumien kertomukset säilyneet vain ihmisten muistissa kymmeniä vuosia tai yli sata vuottakin. Jos Jumala oli halunnut olla täsmällinen, hän olisi antanut ne heti kirjoittaa kirjaksi. Jeesus ei kirjoittanut mitään, vaikka osasi lukea ja kirjoittaa.
Raamatun sanoma ei ole noissa kohdissa, missä sinä löydät virheitä ja ristiriitaisuuksia. Raamatun sanoma on Jeesuksen puheissa. Ymmärrät kai, että Jeesuksella oli sanoma ihmiskunnalle? Ei hän turhan takia tänne tullut ja antautunut kidutettavaksi ja ristiinnaulittavaksi. Niin tärkeä se sanoma oli.
Sinun esittämäsi ristiriitaisuudet eivät mitään muuta Jeesuksen sanomassa.
>>Yes, Jesus was son as many others, it's simply a metaphore.
Muilla Jumalan pojilla ei ollut samanlaista tehtävää kuin Jeesuksella. Myöskin hänen syntyperäänsä pidetään poikkeuksellisena. Hän oli siis samaa alkuperää kuin Jumala.
Tämä venyy nyt liian pitkäksi. Koska islam on palstan aihe, en käsittele kristinuskoa laajemmin tällä palstalla.
Pääasia on siis, että Raamattu on kirjoitettu hengelliseksi oppaaksi, eikä tieteelliseksi kirjaksi.
"...että tämä on islam palsta? Islamia koskeviin kysymyksiin ei tällä palstalla ole koskaan saatu vastauksia. Nyt sinä innostut selittämään Raamattua. "
Whenever you are pushed into corner you reply same thing to everyone.
Why don't you just admit that your religion is confusing and contradicting?
Be honest for once in your life.
"Jeesus ei kirjoittanut mitään, vaikka osasi lukea ja kirjoittaa."
had Injil(Evangelium) inspired by God,about which Quran also talks, and which was probably lost or burned on purpose, when he clearly denied to be son of God or God himself. That didn't suit to church who wanted to mix paganism with Jesus' teachings.
He was simply God's servant.
After him bunch of unknown authors without last name wrote about him.
"Myöskin hänen syntyperäänsä pidetään poikkeuksellisena. Hän oli siis samaa alkuperää kuin Jumala."
How can that be? Does God have mother then? Is that Mary? So your God has human mother?? Your God needs sleep? Your God eats and go to toilet? Indeed if your God is Jesus, Christians worship NOT the same God as Jews and Muslims do.
Christians worship human being.
Jesus' birth was indeed miraculous. As it was creation of Adam, or even more, since Adam didn't have neither father nor mother!!
By your logic then Adam was also exception and plus reffered in Bible as son of God, so why you don't worship him??
Most Christians believe that God is one eternal being who exists as three distinct, eternal, and indivisible persons: the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ the eternal Word), and the Holy Spirit.
Christianity continued from Judaism a belief in the existence of a single omnipotent God who created and sustains the universe. Against this background belief in the divinity of Christ and the Holy Spirit was expressed as the doctrine of the Holy Trinity,[24] which considers that the three persons of God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) share a single Divine substance. This substance is not considered divided, in the sense that each person has a third of the substance; rather, each person is considered to have the whole substance. The distinction lies in their relations, the Father being unbegotten, the Son begotten of the Father, and the Holy Spirit proceeding.[25] The "begetting" does not refer to Mary's conceiving Jesus, but to a divine begetting before Creation.
In Reformed theology, the Trinity has special relevance to salvation, which is considered the result of an intra-Trinitarian covenant and in some way the work of each person. In its simplest form, the Father elects some to salvation before the foundation of the world, the Son performs the atonement for their sins, and the Spirit regenerates them so they can have faith in Christ, and sanctifies them.[26]
Christians believe the Holy Spirit inspired the Scriptures,[27] and that his active participation in a believer's life (even to the extent of "indwelling", or in a certain sense taking up residence within, the believer) is essential to living a Christian life.[28] In Catholic, Orthodox, and some Anglican theology, this indwelling is received through the sacrament called Confirmation or, in the East, Chrismation. Most Protestants believe that the Spirit indwells a new believer at the time of salvation. Pentecostal and Charismatic Protestants believe the baptism with the Holy Spirit is a distinct experience separate from other experiences like conversion, and many Pentecostals believe it will always—or at least usually—be evident through glossolalia (speaking in tongues).
Christians trace the orthodox formula of the Trinity — Father, Son, and Holy Spirit — back to the resurrected Jesus himself, who used this phrase in the Great Commission (Matthew 28:16-20).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity
kakka was invented at Council of Nicaea 300 years after Christ!!!
Traditional narratives of the 7th and 8th century are a complete construct and cannot stand up to historical examination on the basis of archeological and epigraphical evidence and non-Muslim records.
The Arabs were in fact pagan when they assumed power in the 7th century in the regions formerly ruled by the Byzantine Empire.
The Arabs took control almost without a struggle, because Byzantium had effectively withdrawn from the area long before.
After taking control, the Arabs adopted a simple monotheism based on Judaeo-Christianity, which they encountered in their newly occupied territories, and gradually developed it into an Arab religion which culminated in Islam in the mid-8th century .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossroads_to_Islam:_The_Origins_of_the_Arab_Religion_and_the_Arab_State
In Hagarism the authors make an examination of the archaeological, Arabic, Armenian, Coptic, Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin and Syriac records of the early 7th century and present their conclusions drawn from corresponding primary sources to present an account of early Islam at odds with the traditionally accepted version derived from Muslim historical accounts.
According to the authors, the historical documents presented in the book suggest that the Arab conquests and the formation of the caliphate was a peninsular Arab movement inspired by Jewish messianism, who in alliance with Jews attempted to reclaim the Promised Land from the Byzantines. The authors present documentation to support their thesis that the Qur'an was the product of 8th century edits of various material taken from a multitude of Judeo-Christian and Middle-Eastern sources, and that Muhammad was the herald of Umar "the redeemer"; a Judaic messiah.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hagarism:_The_Making_of_the_Islamic_World
* Although the unreliability of the Arabic literary sources has been known for a century, only recently have scholars begun to explore its full implications, thanks largely to the ground-breaking work of the American scholar who worked in Britain, John Wansbrough.
* Philologists and scholars look skeptically at the Arabic written sources and conclude that these are a form of "salvation history" - self-serving, unreliable accounts by the faithful.
* The huge body of material, that Islamic revisionist scholars find, is mostly spurious. So unreliable do the revisionists find the traditional account, Patricia Crone has written, that "one could, were one so inclined, rewrite most of Montgomery Watt's biography of Muhammad in reverse." For example, an inscription and a Greek account leads Lawrence Conrad to fix Muhammad's birth in 552, not 570.
* Patricia Crone finds that Muhammad's career took place not in Mecca but hundreds of kilometers to the north.
* Yehuda D. Nevo and Judith Koren find that the classical Arabic language was developed not in today's Saudi Arabia but in the Levant, and that it reached Arabia only through the colonizing efforts of one of the early caliphs.
* The Arab tribesmen who conquered great swathes of territory in the seventh century were not Muslims, perhaps they were pagans.
* The Qu'ran is a not "a product of Muhammad or even of Arabia," but a collection of adaptations from earlier Judeo-Christian liturgical materials stitched together to meet the needs of a later age.
* Most broadly, "there was no Islam as we know it" until two or three hundred years after the traditional version has it (more like 830 AD than 630);
* Islam developed not in the distant deserts of Arabia but through the interaction of Arab conquerors and their more civilized subject peoples.
* Quest for the Historical Muhammad raises basic questions for Moslems concerning the prophet's role as a moral paragon; the sources of Islamic law; and the God-given nature of the Koran.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Quest_for_the_Historical_Muhammad
like these writings ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephrem_the_Syrian
http://books.google.com/books?q=Ephrem the Syrian quran
>>Whenever you are pushed into corner you reply same thing to everyone.
Ei tuo ole totta.
>>Why don't you just admit that your religion is confusing and contradicting?
Olen jo selittänyt sinulle, että takerrut sivuseikkoihin Raamatussa. Raamatun sanoma ei ole niissä asioissa.
>>Be honest for once in your life.
"Rehellisyys maan perii", opetettiin meille jo lapsesta saakka. Asia ei siis ole minulle uusi.
Opetettiinko se sinulle lapsena?
>>How can that be? Does God have mother then?
Jumala on henki. Samoin myöskin Jeesus.
Joh. 4:24
Jumala on Henki; ja jotka häntä rukoilevat, niiden tulee rukoilla hengessä ja totuudessa."
>>By your logic then Adam was also exception and plus reffered in Bible as son of God, so why you don't worship him??
Aatami ja Eeva rikkoivat Jumalan tahtoa vastaan.
Käärme petti heidät.
Oletpas sinä ivallinen muita kohtaan. Hahaata vain toivottelet muille otsikossa. Eipä näytä usko kantaneen mitään hedelmää muihin suhtautumisessa.
Lue Marian tunnustus niin tiedät jotain paljon enemmän. Raamattu on oman aikansa inhimillinen kirja, jonka sivuilla eri aikojen ihmiset tulkitsevat Jumalan sanomaa ja Jeesuksen sanoja. Alusta saakka on ollut erilaisia näkemyksiä Jeesuksesta. Joten on luonnollista, että kirja kuvaa erilaisia näkemyksiä myös. Koraani on vastaavalla tavalla opetusten suhteen ristiriitainen ja epäyhtenäinen. Välillä kielletään, välillä sallitaan samat asiat.
Jumalan rakkauteen- toisin kuin muslimien uskoon - mahtuvat erilaiset tulkinnat Jeesuksesta. Raamatun historiallisuudesta seuraa, että Joka Muhammedin ja Miriamin on mahdotonta ymmärtää sitä oikein, ellei ole perehtynyt historialliseen kultuurympäristöön ensin. Seemiläinen kirjoitustapa on kerronta ja tarina.