Posted on 01/10/2016 5:05:08 AM PST by Jandy on Genesis
With the rise of Islamic aggression, many question whether the God of Islam is the God of the Bible and the One revealed in the person of Jesus Christ. To adequately address this question, separate issues must be addressed. They are the linguistic development of ancient names for God found in the Qur'an and the Bible, and the theological distinctions between Islam's understanding of God and the Christian understanding of God.
Linguistic Development
The oldest known name for the Creator in the Bible is El (ʾÄl) which corresponds to the Proto-Semitic Ê-L. The L likely was a symbol of a throne or chief's seat and indicated power and authority. The Northwest Semitic ʾÄl is cognate to the Proto-Arabic ʾIlÄh and the Akkadian ilum. Akkadian was the language of Nimrod's kingdom in the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. Nimrod was a Kushite kingdom builder according to Genesis 10:8: "Kush became the father of Nimrod; he became a mighty one on the earth."
In Nigeria, the Hausa translation of the Bible uses Allah to designate the Creator and the God and Father of Jesus Christ. Allah is also used in Syrian Bibles. As a designation for God, Allah corresponds to the archaic El in the Hebrew Bible, as Dios in Spanish corresponds to Dieu in French. The name was used among Arabian and Syrian peoples long before the time of Mohammad. Allah is the compressed expression of al-ilah, meaning THE God.
Among Abraham's ancestors there were many names for the Creator. These included YHWH, Yah, El and Ilum. Another ancient name for God as Father is Ausa, sometimes spelled Asa. The Asante tribe bears this name. Asa-nte means "the people of Asa." The Egyptian word Asa refers to God as father. The word "Hausa" probably has a similar meaning: ha-Ausa, meaning the people of God.
(Excerpt) Read more at virtueonline.org ...
So they don't worship the same God as Christians?
didn’t they kill him?
There is no Allah but Satan, and Muhammad was his murdering pedophile.
Also, the Romans did not successfully kill God.
Protestants were the ones that killed God. Even Nietzsche figured that out centuries ago.
See tagline...
so YOU say.
Do Baptists want to behead Methodists, Catholics or Jews? Or Vice versa?
They have differences to be sure on points of theology but in no case does their understanding of God incite them to violence against another sect or religion.
So it seems that they do not worship the same God at all.
If muslims worshipped the Christian God, why did they feel a need to create their own religion in the 7th century? If they worshipped the Christian God, they instead would have simply been Christians.
I like the quotation and it makes sense to me. Please provide me the ‘footnote’ source information for the JQ Adams quotation. I want to be able to cite it when I use what you have posted with other folks, who will most likely ask me ‘where did you find that’.
Thanks,
I found it here, excellent article BTW
http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=7&article=1142
thank you.
It was one Muslim that decided he needed to create his own god. one that would back his desire for war and power. That one was Mohammed. He created a religion that appealed to the plundering aspects of 7th century tribesmen in western Arabia.
bump
Precisely enough clearly to differentiate the God of Abraham from any semblance to Allah, as reading the article would have explained.
My notion of separate Gods disappeared once Abraham entered the discussion.
However, as a born again Christian I am aware that not all Christians agree must less all religions. Each religion established their own relationship with their God.
I was amused the other day to discover Paul Harvey's Letters from God.
That may be well for a nation, but an individual must focus and settle the truth of faith within himself.
They worship the same God, but they worship Him differently. A clumsy comparison I can draw is that while two groups may both may drink juice from grapes, one group drinks Welch's and the other drinks wine. But undeniably, both are drinking a grape product.
The Bible goes into great detail about the remnant of Jews that God always leaves to carry on the ancient traditions of the Hebrew people, who are awaiting Messiah. (Their Messiah may well be the Second Coming; however, Jews who follow their religion in faith are not to be mocked for doing so.) Jews are not and should not be an offense or a threat to Christians, but rather brothers.
There can be more than one (small "g") god. Jews and Christians believe there is one Supreme and ultimate God; but who is to say there are not sincerely deluded worshippers of the fallen angel Satan? Could the Hindu and Buddhist dieties also be similar entities -- residing as powers/principalities in a realm beyond our own indicated by the Bible, but certainly not the Very God?
The gist of the article is not trying to debate whether there is one ultimate God or not; but rather to compare the two belief systems, debate which one is more likely to be true, and tell why.
There can be more than one (small "g") god. Jews and Christians believe there is one Supreme and ultimate God; but who is to say there are not sincerely deluded worshippers of the fallen angel Satan? Could the Hindu and Buddhist dieties also be similar entities -- residing as powers/principalities in a realm beyond our own indicated by the Bible, but certainly not the Very God?
The gist of the article is not trying to debate whether there is one ultimate God or not; but rather to compare the two belief systems, debate which one is more likely to be true, and tell why.
Had someone not killed Jesus, mankind could not be saved. So the Roman soldiers, as agents of the existing government in Jerusalem, carried out the execution as directed by their governor. For this apparent contradiction, we may be thankful. Any more questions?
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.