It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Allah the Lord God of Israel? Or a liar?

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 01:16 PM
link   
If one simply reasons and compares bits and pieces of information provided in these two books. We can clearly see that one has been inspired by some other entity than the other.

Here's some examples of statements found in both the bible and quran. The only reason one can compare the bible with the quran is because the "we" who inspired the quran also claimed to inspire the torah and the prophets of the old testament, even Jesus, see this quote below here from the quran.


Surah 4:163-165
163We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms
164Of some messengers We have already told thee the story; of others We have not;- and to Moses Allah spoke direct;-
165Messengers who gave good news as well as warning, that mankind, after (the coming) of the messengers, should have no plea against Allah: For Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.


NOTE:
Now a while back bodrul was kind enough to send me a geocities link to a "proper" translation of the quran, as he saw it. The problem is the link is down at the moment and I cannot quote and link from there. So I'll be using this one. As correctness of letter isn't the point here. The truth is. Surely these are close enough translations to get to the truth.



So as we see above, the quran if true should not contradict what supposedly the same spirit had already inspired in the old testament. As the quran is indeed a newer work.

________________________

Ok, let's start in the begining.

Surah 2:34
34And behold, We said to the angels: "Bow down to Adam" and they bowed down. Not so Iblis: he refused and was haughty: He was of those who reject Faith.


Hmm, now where have I heard this before. Seems like there is some book called the life of adam and eve, if my memory is right, that contains the same mess.

Of course now this requires a bit of reason, so bear with me.

Remember how previously the "we" that inspired the quran claimed also to inspire David and the Psalms?

Now let's quote this from the Psalm number 8:

Psalm 8
1O LORD, our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth! who hast set thy glory above the heavens.

2Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.

3When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained;

4What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?

5For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

6Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:

7All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field;

8The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas.

9O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth!


Now, if the quran's "we" and the bible's "our" (as in let us make man in our image) are the same person.

Shouldn't they say the same thing? Unless allah is a hypocrite. Allah wouldn't be a hypocrite now would he?

Anyway back to the point. We see the angels were made to bow down and worship Adam as says the quran. On the same note the Psalms state that we are made a little lower than the angels?

Would something a little higher be made to worship something a little lower?

Reason this with me too:

Exodus 20:1-6
1And God spake all these words, saying,

2I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

3Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

4Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.

5Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

6And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.


Now if the same one who spoke those commandments then turned around and claimed to make angels break that commandment. Would that not make him a hypocrite?

Either that OR these two written testimonies are inspired by two different individuals.

Now I ask the simple question based on this evidence. This is only a drop in the ocean compared to the evidence there is too.

Is Allah the LORD GOD of ISRAEL?

*Caps lock title edit*

[edit on 10-12-2007 by dbates]




posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Abrahamic religions... *sigh*

Root cause of so much conflict in history. Why couldn't we all just be happy little dogma-lacking pagans?

*cough*

Whatever, this is going to turn into a huge debate... -_-;

[edit on 12/9/2007 by Kacen]



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 06:01 PM
link   
Also as picking through here it seems that "Allah" installs spiritual blindness on his enemies. Boy satan does love to play the counterfeit now doesn't he? He's done the very thing he claims to do to his enemies with his own religious puppets.


Surah 2:17-18
17Their similitude is that of a man who kindled a fire; when it lighted all around him, Allah took away their light and left them in utter darkness. So they could not see.
18Deaf, dumb, and blind, they will not return (to the path).


_______

Here "Allah" tells "Israel" not to mix truth with falsehood.

Surah 2:42
And cover not Truth with falsehood, nor conceal the Truth when ye know (what it is).


________


Surah 2:109
Quite a number of the People of the Book wish they could Turn you (people) back to infidelity after ye have believed, from selfish envy, after the Truth hath become Manifest unto them: But forgive and overlook, Till Allah accomplish His purpose; for Allah Hath power over all things.


One way to smooth over a lie I suppose. No point in discerning fact from fiction, now is there?
________


Surah 2:111
And they say: "None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian." Those are their (vain) desires. Say: "Produce your proof if ye are truthful."


If we can show that Allah is actually the LORD's adversary and the quran is an inspired work of devils attempting to counterfeit HIM and take countless blind souls to hell.

Couldn't that possibly be a start?



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I feel this thread is intentionally driven from a bias perspective. And maybe we should talk about the hypocritical errors in the Torah, or maybe even the 1011 hypocritical renderings, or factually falsities in the New Testament? Only after we've proven both of these books to be the divine word of man only, should we move to the youngest of the Abrahamic religions.


What do you say?



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
I feel this thread is intentionally driven from a bias perspective. And maybe we should talk about the hypocritical errors in the Torah, or maybe even the 1011 hypocritical renderings, or factually falsities in the New Testament? Only after we've proven both of these books to be the divine word of man only, should we move to the youngest of the Abrahamic religions.


What do you say?


Arguing living word to dead letter, would be comparable to banging one's head against a brick wall. I've been taught well.

This is not my intention with this thread. If all we have to work with is what one sees and what the other doesn't. The argument is useless.

Let me try to explain clearer.

The only reason one has any grounds what so ever to compare book against book, is this. As stated before, check closer. The same being that inspired the quran also claimed to inspire the OT, well at least the most of it (see the quote in the OP).

If the devils that inspired the quran hadn't claimed to also inspire the law and some of the prophets, then this discussion would be pointless.

The objective here is to simply point out that the quran is inspired by some other being other than the LORD GOD of ISRAEL. That's it.



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by WiseSheep
 


And the same obviously goes for the old testament and new, correct? Seeing as how there's a considerable amount of differences between the two in ideology alone, right? For example, the idea of what "hell" is in the old testament compared to theatrics of the new testament. Or even, the role of Lucifer in books. Why would Lucifer be the "prosecutor" of men in the old, but has a completely different role in the new.

Ideology on where "the bad people go" have quite the considerable differences in the old testament comparison to the new. Maybe the new testament is also based on a different god. That would explain why the "hells" are so different, and also why "the king of the underworld" roles are completely opposite. But, hey, why compare those things if you didn't have an agenda?



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
And the same obviously goes for the old testament and new, correct? Seeing as how there's a considerable amount of differences between the two in ideology alone, right?


Weren't you quick to tell me you didn't need Jesus Christ the other day?

Without him you will never understand his things, because he's the teacher. You'd be as well off banging your head against a wall, than even trying.

Those who find all those contradictions you mention don't know him, therefore their brains are scrambled. They find all these contradictions to their own destruction.


This thread is gonna be cluttered enough as it is, especially when it starts receiving a delightful Muslim or two, that is willing to teach me about Allah.

Maybe you could start another thread on the subject?



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 07:03 PM
link   
It seems that religious books are more akin to intellectual and spiritual roadmaps (i.e. guides) to finding Oneness than actual accounts of creation or the claim that one can only be happy through the path of a single book.

I find it all very similar to the martial arts...

There are many teachers, many styles, and many techniques. Each teacher prefers a particular style, and each style uses certain techniques that can only be found in that particular style. They are all equally valid and practicing any one of them will lead to inner discipline and eventual mastery of the martial art as long as the effort and commitment made are in earnest. Some prefer and find it easier to practice Aikido, while others prefer and find it easier to practice Tai Chi... To claim one martial arts is better than the other would simply be a matter of personal preference.

(in humor)
As we all know, Drunken Boxing is by far the most common... :w:




posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by WiseSheep
 


I don't need Jesus, Muhammad, God, or any other being that others rely on. I'm dependent only on myself, and characterized only by my own good deeds and forthcomings. I don't believe any of these men were absolutely right in their ways, and should only take the best of their knowledge and principles and apply them to my own godless life. If we were to follow any religion (with the exception of Buddhism in a non-philosophical sense.) to it's every word, we would find ourselves to be a mess. Collectively. These "books of god" are so riddled with errors they are the obvious work of man, not god. Everyone who reads into them and takes away anything other than the basic morality that the books convey are doing themselves a considerable disservice.

I believe Muhammad was just as every other prophet. A man, who was trying to do his best for those around him. The books surrounding these men are erroneous, because humans are erroneous. If that's what you want to prove about Islam, than it will be an easy conquest. After you're done dismantling the faith of others, you should do the same with your own. I don't doubt that the critical evaluation of your own religion will be much more difficult than tearing down the beliefs of others. From my own experience, you're in for quite the heartbreak.



[edit on 9-12-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]



posted on Dec, 9 2007 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadFlagBlues
 


I agree!

And yet...the OP is asking whether "God/Allah is the same 'God'/Allah in the Bible/Torah as in the Quran?"

How do we justify the position of the Almighty, when on one hand, 'the Quran stated': (paraphrasing) 'Bow down and worship Adam.'

And on the other hand: The Bible/Torah states implicitlyin the Commandments: Thou shalt not have NO other gods before me -which indicates no other worship, but only to God.?

There are only these possibilites:

1. The Bible/Torah/Quran are false - Manmade stories.
2. The Bible/Torah/Quran are true historical events.
3. The Bible/Torah/Quran are man-made accounts with some plausibility surrounding an original theme.
4. The Bible/Torah are more accurate than the Quran. (Historically preceding accounts/documents - preceding Quran?
5. The Quran is better documentation than the Bible/Torah?
6. The Torah is the most 'accurate' - Jewish Scribes espouse to re-create/re-publish the Torah in its 'true entirity', from generation to generation.

The list goes on and on.

We are comparing 'one set of deity discrepencies' with another.

~Ducky~



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 04:00 AM
link   
TheDuckster has a point. Your debate isn't going to go that well, because Muslims believe that the previous Scriptures were corrupted by man, hence the need for the Final Revelation.

For example, Muslims believe humans (or at least Adam) are 'greater' than Angels because Angels have no free will. What they do in worship of God is because that is what they have to do. Also, they believe that mankind has knowledge of the world and nature around them, while angels do not.
Another example, Muslims do not believe man is made in the image of God.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
TheDuckster has a point. Your debate isn't going to go that well, because Muslims believe that the previous Scriptures were corrupted by man, hence the need for the Final Revelation.


Yes he displayed the very point I was attempting to get across. True the corruption by man claim would be about the only excuse they could come up with.

After all, our father wouldn't dare choose an entire genetic line of people and prophets, to later reveal his final revelation to the bondwoman's son, now would he? One would certainly have to question Allah's divinity, because if the quran is 100% truth, he appears to be rather forgetful.

When certain things are viewed in light, Allah, compared to Jehovah, appears to be more of a corrupt fallen man or angel, rather than the divine perfect holy creator.


Originally posted by babloyi
For example, Muslims believe humans (or at least Adam) are 'greater' than Angels because Angels have no free will.


Well if angels have no free will then why didn't iblis be the nice little puppet they believe he is and bow down to Adam too, according to the quran?



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by WiseSheep
 



WiseSheep.

You're missing the point that the Duckster has made. You're basing the truth and differences between two books on an originally and initially flawed book. The same book that you base your entire life off of is flawed in correlation with the Old Testament as you're accusing the Qur' an of being in correlation with the new testament.

You can't compound truths based on existing discrepancies.


Edit: I'm a jerk.

[edit on 10-12-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by WiseSheep
 

I apologise if I wasn't clear. The Quran says that the previous scriptures were corrupted by man. This is what the Muslims believe.

Anyhow, are you saying that according to the God of the entire Mankind, one line of people is any more important than another? According to the Quran, every people were sent a messenger, not just the people of the Middle East.

According to the Quran, Iblis is not an angel. He is a Jinn (Created from fire).

[edit on 10-12-2007 by babloyi]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
Are you saying that according to the God of the entire Mankind, one line of people is any more important than another?


In the old covenant yes. The creator is the GOD of Abraham, and Isaac, and of Jacob. Jacob became Israel and out of Israel came the Messiah.

At this point in time, all are equal. The circumcision now is not of the genitals but of the heart, which is something man has no control over what so ever.

If anyone becomes Israel now, it's GOD's doing. No amount of baptisms or religion, or trips to the local onion dome will get one there.


Originally posted by babloyi
According to the Quran, every people were sent a messenger, not just the people of the Middle East.


Then one messenger shouldn't contradict the other. Should they?

What I mean is the over all truth of the message.



Originally posted by babloyi
According to the Quran, Iblis is not an angel. He is a Jinn (Created from fire).


One way to get around the free will thing isn't it? Just call him a Jinn and be done with it. It'd be nice if everything was that easy.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by WiseSheep
Then one messenger shouldn't contradict the other. Should they?

What I mean is the over all truth of the message.

And we come back to the fact that the Quran says the Previous Scriptures were corrupted by man. Sure, perhaps the 'overall truth' is the same, and doesn't contradict. How are you going to show a comparison of the overall truth when according to the Quran, the other scriptures were corrupted?



Originally posted by WiseSheep
One way to get around the free will thing isn't it? Just call him a Jinn and be done with it. It'd be nice if everything was that easy.

* Babloyi shrugs
I don't know about nice and easy. It is in the Quran. What can I say?

[edit on 10-12-2007 by babloyi]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 08:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
You're missing the point that the Duckster has made.


No he solidified my point here.

Let's try this:
You have one book declaring one GOD, saying not to do something.

You have another book declaring to be the same GOD who inspired the other book, yet declaring himself to be something totally different.


Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
You're basing the truth and differences between two books on an originally and initially flawed book.


Based on who's word? If the quran is a new declaration of 100% truth. Shouldn't "allah" at least line up with the character of the one who inspired the bible?

Rather than declaring things that just totally contradict him?


Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
The same book that you base your entire life off of is flawed in correlation with the Old Testament as you're accusing the Qur' an of being in correlation with the new testament.


There's a small problem with this. My entire life isn't based on a book. If it were I'd be dead. How will a book save you? Have you ever thought about this? The life is not in the book, the life is life itself. Eternal life itself. The book is only here as a second witness, testifying to the life itself. Didn't one once say out of the mouth of two or three witness let all things be established? Or something to that effect.

Well we have two witnesses. One written in letter and one written in our heart, they both agree. That's what makes this so powerful and unshakable. It can't be moved.

This book testifies to my entire life, not this little one here, we are talking FOREVER. Because it is what has been installed in me. Not by the book, but the one who inspired it.


Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
You can't compound truths based on existing discrepancies.


True. The point is, both claim to be inspired by the creator. If this is true they both should line up. They either will or they won't.

The whole point is to show that one book is inspired by one "person" and the other authored by another. Two different deities. Where one is falsely claiming to be the other.



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by WiseSheep
 


Well, if your logic is correct, that would mean the same sort of discrepencies would negate the relation between the Old Testament and the New, correct?



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
Well, if your logic is correct, that would mean the same sort of discrepencies would negate the relation between the Old Testament and the New, correct?


Not in the same sense. The new testament confirms the old, it fulfills it. It fulfills what the creator had spoken previously that he was going to do. It doesn't do something as insane as make the declaration that angels were made to bow down to Adam when clearly the creator wouldn't do such a thing and transgress his own law.

Jeremiah 31:31-34 explains this new covenant that is now, but if one doesn't care for the truth, what's it to them?


Oh boy, but there we go again. An attempt to argue something with one who refuses to see it.

[edit added link]

[edit on 10-12-2007 by WiseSheep]



posted on Dec, 10 2007 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by WiseSheep
 


I do see where you're coming from, but I think your points are kind of weak. You have an obvious agenda, so this makes the initial question not even worthy of discussion. But, I'll continue to discuss this with you, for sake of argument.

Even though the Qu'ran says angels should bow to Adam doesn't necessarily mean they're of two different gods. As the perception of hell changes in the new testament, couldn't the same be true for similar little flaws in the Qu'ran. I know you wish that Islam weren't related to Christianity, but Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all peas in the same pod. I know it's hard to deal with, but there's no denying that. The writers of the NT also had quite the heads up on the situation, given that the OT was written in a conceptual way, giving the next generation all the power to fill in the blanks at will. If these minor differences convince you they are not the same god, I'm sure you know deep down you're lying to yourself.

These religions are based from the same god. That's why they're called Abrahamic religions. There's discrepancies in the OT in correlation with the NT, and the same goes for the NT and the Qu'ran.

It is what is is.


[edit on 10-12-2007 by DeadFlagBlues]




top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join