Islam's God: The Origin of Allah the Moon God

souldevice.org ^ | unknown | anonymous for safety

[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!

[OWK]

Imposing morality, that is.

Imposition (initiated force or coercion) is immoral.

A moral code that needs to be imposed on otherwise peaceful men, is an impossibility.

[Texaggie79]

I do place importance on not murdering people.

What is it about humans that you give worth to every individual? Why do you not share this view on animals? Or do you? How can you set a value on something and not see that that value only applies to YOUR view?

[Belial]

You are certainly putting on a great display of how meaningless rhetoric can sound profound.

In order to claim a moral imperative to act peacefully in accordance with my own will, I must rationally afford others the same ability. Else my own moral claim is invalid.

On one hand, you argue that freedom in society is based in an agreement not to infringe upon the freedom of others. What compels the agreement? Not god apparently. Self-interest?

As such, I recognize good and evil as objective and unambiguous.

What makes good and evil unambiguous? Your posts suggest that "reason" alone is capable of describing an objective moral structure.

If only life were so simple. What profits one man disadvantages another. There is no system in which the progress of all is tenable, because the richest would be required to lose status. Therefore, what is "right" cannot be defined by what grants every individual the greatest freedom...there is no such objective "right"...it is impossible for us to live with each other without the constant presence of infringement.

Anyway, not everyone is "reasonable". In fact, most people in power aren't.

[ThinkDifferent]

What profits one man disadvantages another. There is no system in which the progress of all is tenable, because the richest would be required to lose status.

Um, have you heard of capitalism?

[Belial]

Um, have you heard of capitalism?

Sure. I don't know any objective basis for its morality.

[OWK]

On one hand, you argue that freedom in society is based in an agreement not to infringe upon the freedom of others. What compels the agreement?

Nothing.

Men violate each other's rights routinely.

we speak of what ought.. not what is.

[OWK]

There is no system in which the progress of all is tenable...

There is only one system wherein each is free to pursue progress as he defines it.

That system requires only the rational recognition that each abstain from the initiation of force, thereby leaving him free to otherwise act in accordance with his own will.

The system's politics encompass the notion of rights. It's economics.. laissez faire capitalism.

[OWK]

I don't know any objective basis for its morality.

Perhaps when you have a few hours handy, I can demonstrate it for you.

[Belial]

Men violate each other's rights routinely.

But what is the basis of these "rights"?

[OWK]

Your posts suggest that "reason" alone is capable of describing an objective moral structure.

It is.

Objectively and unambiguously.

If only life were so simple. What profits one man disadvantages another.

According to Marx.. yes.

According to reason.. no.

Anyway, not everyone is "reasonable". In fact, most people in power aren't.

The fact that some people (or even most people) are irrational, is not an endorsement of irrationality.

[Belial]

It's economics.. laissez faire capitalism.

It was given a try in the 19th century. It produced unprecedented pollution and exploitation, notably of children.

[OWK]

But what is the basis of these "rights"?

They are rationally demonstrable objects of self-interest.

[OWK]

It was given a try in the 19th century.

In point of fact, it has never truly been tried on any sustained basis.

It produced unprecedented pollution and exploitation, notably of children.

You sound like Ralph Nader.

[Belial]

They are rationally demonstrable objects of self-interest.

Well, therein lies the disagreement. You idealistically believe that one set of rights leads to the advancement of all.

A nice idea, but it's contradicted by historical experience. It has the undertones of a believer-turned-atheist looking for a new moral compass.

[OWK]

What is it about humans that you give worth to every individual?

Human beings as a species (by nature) are rational animals, capable of restraining impulse and governing their behavior in accordance with reason.

[Quix]

THANKS.

Congruent with my friend's research.

[Belial]

Do you deny that the Industrial Revolution resulted in all new sorts of abuses?

I'm no Luddite...I like my computer. But I don't need to delude myself that my clothes are woven lovingly by the Capitalism Elves of the North Pole singing merrily as they work.

[Quix]

Ahhhhh, OWK again . . .

HI.

The Scripture declares from God Almighty

THOSE THAT SEEK ME, SHALL FIND ME.

I don't have trouble believing that earnest folks deeply sincere in worshiping ALMIGHTY GOD

will--perhaps even on their death beds, have some revelation of The Risen Christ and an introduction to The Father.

Certainly 100's of Moslems in the last several years have had dreams and visions leading them to a Saving knowledge of and intimate relationship with Jesus Christ.

Those really intent on worshipping Abraham's God ought logically, pay more attention to what Abraham said--particularly about His God.

Also, particularly about what God said about Abraham and THE SON OF PROMISE.

But then, that would mess up their whole party.

[OWK]

You idealistically believe that one set of rights leads to the advancement of all.

Not at all.

"the advancement of all" is Marxist drivel.

This is what I believe (in fact know).... That only one system of human interaction affords every single human being the opportunity to act in accordance with his own will (which is human purpose).

A system in which every man abstains from initiated force or fraud, leaving him otherwise free to act in accordance with his will.

In order to claim the moral imperative to act in accordance with one's own will, he must be willing to afford others the same autonomy.

This is the foundation of rights, and of LZF capitalism.

[Quix]

Mohammad is in a tomb.

Moses body was hidden by God Almighty.

More than 500 witnesses talked with Jesus after HIS RESURRECTION.

NO OTHER religion can match the theology nor the evidence.

NONE.