• CFN has a new look, using the Eagle as our theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • CFN welcomes a new contributing member!

    Please welcome Beetow to our Christian community.

    Blessings in Christ, and we pray you enjoy being a member here

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

Allah is not the God of Abraham

seekandlisten said:
The way you have it still reads the same to me so what is this 'translation error'? I guess I should of quoted the whole passage. Here it is:
Translate/interpret it however you want, my argument isn't on 'interpretion of Scripture'.
Here is the correct TRANSLATION.
An interpretation is not a translation. Micah 4:5. For all the people will walk in the name of their Elohiym; and we will walk in the name of Yahwah our Elohiym for ever and ever.
 
mdo757 said:
Here is the correct TRANSLATION.
An interpretation is not a translation. Micah 4:5. For all the people will walk in the name of their Elohiym; and we will walk in the name of Yahwah our Elohiym for ever and ever.

I realize interpretation is not the same as translation, and like I said in the last post that you posted the 'correct translation,' it still 'reads' the same to me when taken with the rest of the passage so there was no need to post it twice.

cheers
 
seekandlisten said:
mdo757 said:
Here is the correct TRANSLATION.
An interpretation is not a translation. Micah 4:5. For all the people will walk in the name of their Elohiym; and we will walk in the name of Yahwah our Elohiym for ever and ever.

I realize interpretation is not the same as translation, and like I said in the last post that you posted the 'correct translation,' it still 'reads' the same to me when taken with the rest of the passage so there was no need to post it twice.

cheers
There is a huge difference between people walking in the name of their gods, and people walking in the name of their Elohiym. Elohiym means "God of Life", or, "God of the Living."
 
mdo757 said:
seekandlisten said:
mdo757 said:
Here is the correct TRANSLATION.
An interpretation is not a translation. Micah 4:5. For all the people will walk in the name of their Elohiym; and we will walk in the name of Yahwah our Elohiym for ever and ever.

I realize interpretation is not the same as translation, and like I said in the last post that you posted the 'correct translation,' it still 'reads' the same to me when taken with the rest of the passage so there was no need to post it twice.

cheers
There is a huge difference between people walking in the name of their gods, and people walking in the name of their Elohiym. Elohiym means "God of Life", or, "God of the Living."

Yet if you take into consideration the 4 verses before verse 5 what is it talking about? I don't know other languages nor am i a scholar that can completely understand word 'breakdowns', 'roots' and so on, so I'll let 'God' speak to me in English. A quick search gave me these meanings for 'Elohiym'

"Meanings
I. God, god, gods
II. rulers, judges, angels
III. Pl. intensive - god, goddess"
 
seekandlisten said:
I realize interpretation is not the same as translation, and like I said in the last post that you posted the 'correct translation,' it still 'reads' the same to me when taken with the rest of the passage so there was no need to post it twice.

Yet if you take into consideration the 4 verses before verse 5 what is it talking about? I don't know other languages nor am i a scholar that can completely understand word 'breakdowns', 'roots' and so on, so I'll let 'God' speak to me in English. A quick search gave me these meanings for 'Elohiym'

"Meanings
I. God, god, gods
II. rulers, judges, angels
III. Pl. intensive - god, goddess"
Those are interpretations not translations. Some study books are better than others.
Aramaic and Arabic for the word God is [ IL ], as in Israil. Ancient Hebrew was also IL, but later changed to EL. Yahwah is God's personal name and all of the other names are titles. Eloah means "God of Above." Elohiym means "God of the Living" or, God of Life." Also, elohiym can translate as "gods of life," for those who have life immortal. Allah is not a Hebrew word for God, or a concept of God. Allah is not in the bible, and Yahwah is not in the Quran. The Arabic people knew the God of Abraham as Yahwah according to the Moabite Stone. From the days of Abraham, Allah, AKA Alilah was known as the morning sun god. Translation of Alilah: "The god ascends."
 
mdo757 said:
Those are interpretations not translations. Some study books are better than others.
Aramaic and Arabic for the word God is [ IL ], as in Israil. Ancient Hebrew was also IL, but later changed to EL. Yahwah is God's personal name and all of the other names are titles. Eloah means "God of Above." Elohiym means "God of the Living" or, God of Life." Also, elohiym can translate as "gods of life," for those who have life immortal. Allah is not a Hebrew word for God, or a concept of God. Allah is not in the bible, and Yahwah is not in the Quran. The Arabic people knew the God of Abraham as Yahwah according to the Moabite Stone. From the days of Abraham, Allah, AKA Alilah was known as the morning sun god. Translation of Alilah: "The god ascends."

You know what, all I'm getting from you is repeating the same 'argument' over and over. Goodfriday who I believe has more knowledge then I on the language aspect of it addressed this a little better earlier. I have read the opposing argument into the word 'elohiym'. I am not a language scholar so I'm not going to pretend like I know what I'm talking about here to argue your 'point'. I'm not Hebrew, Latin, Greek, or Arabic so whatever 'word' each uses to speak of the same 'God' doesn't matter to me, somehow it does to you. In doctrine Islam is very different but the 'God' they follow is the same 'God' Christianiy and Judaism follow. Unless you have something new to present I'll leave it at this.

"Elohiym is defined in the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible’s Hebrew Dictionary as:
H430; ?????; 'elohiym; el-o-heem'; Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

As you can see in this definition there are many uses for this term. It can identify the Supreme God, to gods, to angels, to human judges, and even to large cities."
 
If you are truly seeking and listening, then truth would be narrowly defined, and not broad and all encompassing. Most always the interpretation "The Lord" is used in place of God's personal name Yahwah. Saying that Yahwah is Allah is a serious blasphemy against the God of Abraham.
 
of course he isnt, anyone would know (if they have studied the bible and islam) that islam is a major anti-christ and was the major religion of the beast in revelations.
 
yepimonfire said:
of course he isn't, anyone would know (if they have studied the bible and Islam) that Islam is a major anti-christ and was the major religion of the beast in revelations.
I think he is ignoring the correct terminology to support the Idea that we worship the same God. I see Islam as the red horse. The biblical ID does not support Islam as that [beast/nation.]
 
If I may be permitted a linguistic comment on this issue:

So throughout the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for "God" is elohiym. As all standard sources agree, this word is actually a plural form meaning "gods", even though it has been translated as "God" (singular) in all subsequent Greek and Latin Bibles. But this plural is simply a plural. It means "gods". And the singular eloh means "god".

Hebrew eloh is clearly and demonstrably the same word as Arabic allah. They mean the same thing: "god" or "God". Arabic and Hebrew are related Semitic languages. Also, the vowels were originally not written so the words are practically identical.

So any disrespect towards Allah (as frequently shown on this Forum) is disrespect towards Eloh - who is the God of the Bible (and our Judge)... but hey...if you want to risk it...

The only difference in usage between the two is that the Hebrew OT Bible has the plural and the Koran always the singular (as does the New Testament). In other words the Hebrew Old Testament speaks of "gods" and the Koran always speaks of "God". It is the Hebrew OT that is clearly polytheistic, giving this away by using "gods" throughout, while the Koran just uses "God" in the singular (as does the New Testament).

There's a good example of this (mis)translation issue at Gen 3:5 where the sameHebrew word elohiym is translated as "God"and "gods" in the same verse:

Gen 3:5 For God (= elohiym) doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods (= elohiym), knowing good and evil.

An obvious alternative translation would be to have both as "gods" - since that's what the Hebrew clearly and obviously says - but there aren't many Bible translators brave enough to do this.

This truth (that eloh = allah) is unacceptable for many because it reveals the gulf between an originally polytheistic Old Testament on the one hand, and a monotheistic New Testament and Koran on the other. This is a far cry from the false notion of "Judeo-Christianity" vs. pagan Islam so avidly pushed by our official Churches and Governments as justifications for bombing, killing and torturing Arabs and Afghans and for stealing their lands and resources.

So Allah is just a name for God - and every time a US drone blows away a Muslim family or a US guard rapes a Muslim prisoner (at taxpayers' expense), then God notices.
 
we kill them deliberatly as policy? or rape them as official policy, i like your bias and the muslim extremists dont behead their captives , that's fake and lies then. What happened in aby gharib was wrong and it has been fixed.
 
disruptor said:
If I may be permitted a linguistic comment on this issue:

So throughout the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for "God" is elohiym. As all standard sources agree, this word is actually a plural form meaning "gods", even though it has been translated as "God" (singular) in all subsequent Greek and Latin Bibles. But this plural is simply a plural. It means "gods". And the singular eloh means "god".
Elohiym and Eloah are name titles, not His personal name. Interpretations are not translations. El means God in Hebrew, and Al means "the" in Arabic. The word allah in the bible is not the same word as in Arabic. They are completely linguistically different. Allah in the bible is not Gods name or name title, nor is it any concept of Him.
 
KumiOri said:
Let me clarify then, I completely disagree with anyone, not in anger mind you, who thinks this god named Allah is the same as the the God of Yisrael. The first and foremost evidence for me is in Allahs own words that he "begetteth not nor is he begotten". He tells me to deny the Sonship and Deity of Christ, he tells me to deny the crucifixtion and resurrection of Christ. All of these things are the very foundation of Christianity and Allah tells me to deny it?

I cannot not follow such a god.
Don't Jews reject Sonship and Deity of Jesus as well, yet you probably do not have problems with accepting that they worship the same God? If that is so, then please elaborate, for i find it hard to reconcile this with your above reasoning.
 
I apologize for such delay in responding allow me to elaborate. There are Jews (circumcised in the flesh) and there are Gentiles (pagans, devil worshippers, everyone other than a Jew) both of whom have rejected the Diety and Sonship of Christ. In fact it is true, that anyone who rejects this truth is in danger of spending eternity in a place that was prepared for the Adversary and his angles.

From my studies I find there are in Gods eyes three groups of people. The Jew circumcised in the flesh, the Gentiles, and the Church. Of these three, the Jew and Gentile are in the same boat without Christ and lost. Then there are those who have been called forth to be followers of Christ.

The Breath and the bride say come
kumi, ori Sar Shalom
 
Allah was one of the many names in the pantheon of gods in Arabia from about 700 BC. To show that Allah, or IL, and Allat, had been around for a long time already, they were honored in many Arab personal names. In times of great stress, or pleadings, the Northern Arabs used the god-form, FHLH, which meant, "so, O Allah."
The goddess form used just as often was FHLT which meant, "so, O Allat." This shows that Allah was well established in North Arabia and he also had a consort named Allat. ILAHA was used for the sun god. This shows that Allah was the sun god figure and Allat was the moon goddess. Allat was the high goddess. In Safatic inscriptions of Hauran, she was referred to as Alilat, Alitta, Hallat, and her Babylonian title was Allitu. In the Southern part of Arabia she was ILAT. Linguistic variation take place by migration along trade routes going back through Phoenicia, Assyria, Babylon, and Sumer.

The Nabataeans claimed that Allat was the goddess-consort of Dusares, which is the same North Arabian marriage between Tammuz and Ishtar, the Babylonian godhead. Allah was the exact unquestionable linguistic male gender compliment of Allat, with suffix gender distinctions on the LIL root. Wadd was the only moon god to the Arabs. carved in stone in North Arabia
Yemenites, circa 3 BC, built a temple of Wadd on the Greek Island of Delos! Wadd got around, but he was the only moon god, unless we let Sin in, who was a moon god, but never in the evolution of the pantheon from Sumer, home of Allah and Allat.

The Islamic notion of monotheism attached to Allah is not present in North Arabian inscriptions. Winnett, in an article for The Moslem World, gives a number of inscription quotes, including Allah, Allat, Dhu-Ghabat, Nahy, with Manat and LIL, coming up frequently in names of the writers. In one inscription Allah is asked to send the Jinn (devils) to aid the writer. Vengeance is called for from Allah on other men competing for the lover of the writer. Please don't think lightly of these writers. They were carving their zeal in stone with metal instruments, and that takes a serious mind and some time. It is a vastly greater undertaking than carving ones initials in tree bark. Winnett shows that common to Allah in the inscriptions is the attribute, "abtar" or "childless." The revelation that Allah had no offspring, which Mohammad claimed in Koran, Sura 108 and 112, was used by Mohammad as a correction for the Christian doctrine regarding the Sonship of Jesus Christ.

This does not imply that Mohammad knew a monotheistic god personally. It implies that Mohammad picked Allah, a god who could not keep a wife, so other gods impregnated Allat, the wife of Allah. Arab monotheism had its roots in North Arabia 500 years before the birth of Christ. Though Allah was childless, it is clear that Allah had a consort named Allat. The original reason they never produced a son is because the doctrine of pagan Babylon, from which Allah evolved, said that the goddess could produce a son without being sired by the god in residence.

Much later, the North Arabian reason Allah never had a son was because Allat went to other gods to sire her. Mohammad's monotheism is a myth. Allah and Allat, along with devils (Jinn) and a whole community of deities, were happily making their way to Mecca in North Arabia circa 500 BC. This Hajj of Allah might better be called "the migration of the gods to Mecca." It was a divine caravan! Olmstead draws the divine couple together by reporting an inscription at Dedan which said, "Naamil (note the IL root), son of Hafraz. Allah is exalted." From Tema comes another voice blasting the inferior god, "Salm is a mean god" and, "A foul god is Salm." Olmstead then associates Allah with the gods reported by Herodotus-- Dionysus, Alilat, and Orotalt. Alilat is Allat, the consort of Allah.

It is interesting to note that a Dedanite inscription makes reference to Geshmu the Arab, Nehemiah's opponent. This is the kind of historic cross reference which is glaringly missing in the Koran. Mohammad was terrified of the Allah / Allat connection. He allowed the family to exist momentarily, by way of the "Satanic verses" in Sura 53, but he saw at once that he could not counterfeit Christianity and win the Jews with an earthly physical family for the Islamic godhead.

The Jews in Medina liked Mohammad's monotheism, so Allah had to be divorced from Allat for the Jews to go for the new cult. Mohammad could not understand how Allah could have a son who was a god but not physically sired by God. Mohammad believed that all sons are produced in the marriage bed. Allah made the journey from Sumer to Northern Arabia. It is clear that Allah's role in the advent of Islam in 625 AD, is written history. Mohammad claimed he found Allah in the Kaaba after he threw out all of the other pagan gods. Allah is the pagan god who survived best and who migrated over 2000 miles from Babel to Mecca. It is now clear that Mohammad's claim to a heritage in Elohim is the most exquisite of blasphemies. Allah is the god of Islam. Allat was its goddess.
 
I think it presumptuous of non -Arabic people trying to correct Arab Christians who have a 2,000 year history with Christianity, that they cannot use the word for God in Arabic. I mean paleese! :o
 
Adullam said:
I think it presumptuous of non -Arabic people trying to correct Arab Christians who have a 2,000 year history with Christianity, that they cannot use the word for God in Arabic. I mean paleese! :o
Did you even read what I wrote, about how the Arabs also knew the God of Abraham as Yahwah, the same God as the Jews. Allah historically has no relationship with the God of Abraham.
 
I thought I should remind those who live in Islamic countries, that having that information that I posted in this thread, in their possession, is a death penalty in some places.
 
If I am not mistaken it said in the Quran “133. Were ye witnesses when death appeared before Jacob? Behold, he said to his sons: "What will ye worship after me?" They said: "We shall worship Thy Allah and the Allah of thy fathers, of Abraham, Isma'il and Isaac,- the one (True) Allah. To Him we bow (in Islam)."


“Thy Allah and the Allah of thy fathers, of Abraham, Isma'il and Isaac,- the one (True) Allah. To Him we bow (in Islam)." This line draw my attention because the name of Ismail is mentioned here. As at known from Bible Ismail was the son of Abraham and Hagar (she was Sarah`s servant and she was from a pagan nation). Ismail was not a child of promise, Isaac was a child of promise. And I do not remember that somewhere in the Bible it was said “God of Abraham, Isma'il and Isaac†but “God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob†(the patriarchs).

It is possible to make an assumption that sons of Ismail were ancestries of Arab people and those people who later became Muslims. Moreover God promised to make a great people from sons of Ismail.

And maybe due to this reason it said in the Quran that “Allah of thy fathers, of Abraham, ……â€

(I am Christian and believe in Trinity, and in Salvation through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ)
 
Back
Top