Posted on 12/04/2006 10:22:38 AM PST by SirLinksalot
Which One God? Comparing the Muslim and Christian conceptions of God.
By Bat Yeor
With the passing of time, hidden challenges, which for a long time had been growing unnoticed and unaddressed, can suddenly emerge into the full-blown light of current events with a force which seems quite overwhelming. Today the Western world, or Judeo-Christian civilization, shaken by jihadist terror, is being rudely awakened to theological realities blurred for decades. From clashes of civilizations to the jihad that is declaring to the planet its genocidal intentions, rational discourse concerning faith is becoming increasingly fraught.
It is within this tumult and confusion that Mark Durie, an Anglican minister, has written Revelation? Do We Worship the Same God?, in which he raises a couple of fundamental questions: Who is God? Is God Allah? Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God?
To answer these questions, he analyzes Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and God in Christianity and Islam. The reader is given a concise representation of Muslim and Christian arguments. Such an endeavor needs both solid scholarship and theological training. Mark Durie possesses both, being a theologian and a graduate in the language and culture of the Acehnese, a Muslim people from the north of Sumatra in Indonesia. In addition, the subjects he addresses, in the current context, request much intellectual integrity and courage.
But how to know the identity of “God” in the Koran and in the Bible? The author stresses that this profound and deep question requires engaging with the very essence of God’s identity. With perspicacity and great objectivity, Durie delineates the diverse aspects of his investigations, but he warns that his book should be seen only as guidance, and not the last word.
Durie’s questioning grows from the Koran’s statement that Jesus is a Muslim prophet, named Isa — a prophet whose birth, life, teaching, and death are found to be totally at odds with the testimony of the Gospels and with Biblical theology. The Koran — which for Muslims is the literal word of Allah that cannot be doubted — affirms that Muhammad’s prophetic message is exactly the same as that expressed by the Torah and the Gospels. Since there are many contradictions between the Koran and the Bible, Muslim orthodoxy considers the scriptures of Judaism and Christianity as falsifications of the primal and unique Islamic revelation. It is this accusation that provided the doctrinal justification for the discriminatory legal status of Jews and Christians living under Islam.
In the first section, the author provides information about and reflections upon the Muslim Jesus (Isa). He stresses as fundamental the Koran’s teaching that Islam is the first, primordial religion, preceding Judaism and Christianity, which are dismissed as invalid traditions, being falsified versions of Islam. Because Christianity and Judaism are thought to be a corruption of the pure message of Islam, anything true in these religions comes from their Islamic roots. Consequently, to obey their true religion, Jews and Christians should “revert” to Islam and accept the prophethood of Muhammad.
This implies, writes Durie, that anyone who opposes Muhammad is not a true Christian, nor a true Jew. Seen in this light, the Koranic verses sympathetic to Jews and Christians refer to those who will see the light and find it to be Islam. If Islam recognizes only itself in Judaism and Christianity, one can wonder whether this replacement theology is not the negation of the very principle of recognition of other religions.
Many Christians profess that Christianity is closer to Islam than to Judaism, because of a common reverence of Jesus/Isa and his mother Mary. They will be astonished to learn from Durie that according to hadiths — acts and sayings attributed to Muhammad, and endowed with theological and legislative authority — Isa, the Muslim Jesus, will be the ultimate destroyer of Christianity.
Durie examines the characters of Jesus and Isa, separated by six centuries; he compares their name and biographies and explains the differing understandings of the prophecy in the Bible and the Koran. While Christianity accepts Jewish Scriptures as the foundation of their belief and practice, and as an integral part of Christian ministry, read in churches around the world, Muslims disregard the Bible. They claim that it is Islam that is the common heritage of Jews, Christians, and Muslims, and that Jews and Christians should work to recover this heritage. Durie comments that, in this process, the Islamization of Jesus and the Hebrew patriarchs and prophets destroys both Christianity and Judaism.
The author analyses with great clarity and depth the fundamental principles of the two religions and, in a powerful chapter that raises essential questions, he discusses the concept of “Abrahamic Faith” that has become so fashionable today as a framework for dialogue. This definition, he points out, originates from the Koranic statement that Abraham was a Muslim prophet and from Islam’s core doctrine that Islam was the one revelation given to humanity by Allah through the Biblical figures and through Jesus. For Durie, the many “Abrahamic Faith” conferences throughout the world point to the Islamization of Christian understandings of interfaith dialogue. How should Christians respond to this claim which is a fundamental point of Muslim doctrine? Durie develops several arguments based on a rational analysis of history and the texts.
In his conclusion, Durie writes that profound contrasts exist in Islam and Christianity in their understanding of the identity of God. These have far-reaching implications, affecting attitudes, ethics, and politics. The clarification of misunderstandings and false assumptions, masterly exposed by Durie, is a condition to open the way for more constructive dialogue.
Durie’s book could not have been more timely. He offers a well-balanced analysis, acknowledging the important similarities of the two faiths, without ever misrepresenting the real disagreements or ignoring the hard issues. In this time of globalization, when crucial challenges are emerging for the West’s post-Christian societies, Durie’s reflections provide essential and fundamental guidance that will enable Christians to engage in a dialogue based on truth.
This is all the more urgent now that the cultural jihad in the West is preventing the free expression of thought and belief, and is subverting the whole ethical foundation of Judeo-Christianity.
— Bat Yeor is the author of studies on the conditions of Jews and Christians in the context of the jihad ideology and the sharia law. Recent books include: Islam and Dhimmitude: Where Civilizations Collide and Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis, both at Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.
You missed my point, though. It isn't about whether we are sinners or not, we are. It is a question of God turning His back and forsaking sinners as some suggest He did to Christ when He took our sins on Himself. If God is one to turn His back on Christ due to the sins He personified, then, if God is consistent, Christ should never have come to begin with. If God forsakes sinners, we were forsaken, not forgiven.
However, God does not forsake sinners and we were saved from our sins by a loving God. Christ wasn't forsaken on the Cross, He was teaching His followers to look to Psalm 22 for the answers on what they were witnessing.
With that, I will go home. Good night and God bless.
Now think about how many chapters there are in the Koran. Hint: it's a certain three-digit number.
And you as well.
Nice homepage, great quotes.
So if it could be proved that Jesus was a Jewish Messiah, the Jews would not consider him as Christians do to be the son of God. - tom
From the Abrahamic to Davidic covenants, God promised an everlasting Kingship. There is only one who is an everlasting King and Son of David and only one in Whom this could be accomplished.
It is not that the Jews worship a different God, they just don't recognize Jesus as the perfect fulfillment of God's promises.
Okay, NOW I'm going home...
Thank You! Allah is a generic word for a divinity just like the English word God. Show me ANYWHERE in the pislamic "holy" books (koran or hadith or the sira) that the arabic name for Yahweh is mentioned. In syriac it's Mariah (MAAR YA). If we can translate it so could they, but they don't. What further proof do we need that they do not worship the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob/Israel?
Why is 114 significant?
Hehe yes I'm aware of the unfortunate situation those terrorists for allah are in. My people have said all along that the bulk of the koran (piss be upon it) was nothing more than an Arian tool used to convert pagan Arabs. Arius,you son of a bitch, I pray to God that you're roasting in hellfire as I type this.
"Allah" is the word for a single monotheistic God, just like the English word "God."
If we can translate it so could they, but they don't.
It's translated to "Allah", also many of the lesser Hebrew and Aramaic names of God ("The Truth" "The First and the Last") have direct cognates in Qur'anic Arabic.
allah is not the word for a single monotheistic God. If that was the case, how would muhammed's PAGAN FATHER have a last name - abdallah which means slave of god? Pagan Arabs used that word long before there was even a muhammed. There is no way in hell that allah is a translation of the word Yahweh, no way. check out wikipedia -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah
It's a generic word meaning "the god". One of allah's daughters was named "allat" which means "the goddess". Allah = Alaha = Elaha = Eloah. A generic title for a deity. To this day I have yet to see the name Yahweh translated into Arabic.
There is no way in hell that allah is a translation of the word Yahweh, no way. check out wikipedia -
"Yahweh" is not the Name of God, it is an approximation thereof based on the unvocalized Tetragrammaton YHVH. Since "Yahweh" appears nowhere in the Hebrew text of the Bible, the vocalization marks of Adonai were added later to remind the readers to refrain from attempting to pronounce The Name, which hasn't been pronounced since the destruction of the Second Temple.
It's a generic word meaning "the god".
Then it would be two words: the definite article al- and the word for "god" ilah.
Allah = Alaha = Elaha = Eloah. A generic title for a deity.
And on the Cross, when Jesus said Eloi Eloi Lama Sabachthani?, He was invoking a generic god as well? He certainly didn't say "Yahweh" or the complete 72-syllable name of God.
To this day I have yet to see the name Yahweh translated into Arabic.
Proper nouns, especially personal names, rarely require translation.
1) Allah didn't exist in written form before muhammed's time?
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/a/allah.html
This link says otherwise.
2) Where then is the muslim equivalent of the word Yahweh? If middle eastern Christians can do it, why not muslims? To this day, does ANYONE know what Yahweh translates into in arabic?
3) If that's the case then how do you explain allah's daughter's name "Allat" which literally means "The Goddess"? or his other daughter's name "Aluzzah" which means "The invincible"? allah means "the god". What muslims say now means nothing to me. It originally meant "the god", nothing more, nothing less.
4) Jesus didn't call out "Yahweh" because Jews (believing Jews) never used that word because it was considered so holy. Eloi means "my God", Jesus being Jewish was addressing it to Yahweh. When a Christian says "Thank God" we rigthly assume he's referring to the Judeo-Christian deity Yahweh. When a Hindu says "Thank God" we would rightly assume he's addressing a deity in his pantheon of Gods. God is not a proper name like : Jesus, Vishnu, Yahweh, Zeus, etc....
5) Find, show me how the word Yahweh is in any way connected with the word "allah".
This was His spiritual death. While being judged in our place, His humanity was separated from God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. It was His substitutionary spiritual death that was efficacious for our salvation.
We know that he was physically alive while being judged because He kept screaming, "My God (the Father), my God (the Holy Spirit), why hast thou forsaken me?" He was quoting Psalm 22:1 where the verb in the imperfect tense indicates that He shouted this over and over again. Christ was forsaken because " ...he(the Father)hath made him(Christ)to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him"
When His spiritual death was complete, Jesus Christ shouted, "Tetelestai!" - the perfect tense meaning, "it is finished in the pasty with results that go on forever!"
Note that our Lord was still speaking after salvation was completed. Obviously He could not have spoken if He were physically dead! And certainly if He was still physically alive on the Cross after salvation was complete, His physical death could have nothing whatever to do with the payment for sin!
He died physically by His own volition- no one took His life! His work on the earth was finished, the Father's Plan called for Him to depart and He dismissed His own spirit.
source: The Blood of Christ by R.B.Thieme Pastor of Barachah church in Texas. Dallas Theological Seminary Summa Cum Laude. Nine years of Greek and five years of Hebrew. Now teaching isagogical,categorical and exegetical teaching of the Word of God.
I said a God who would do so, not a God who did.
The Jews fully expect a Messiah to come from our God, the gentiles believe he already did.
The muslims piously assure us they worship the same God, but wriggle out of the question of whether they believe "the prophet Jesus" to have been a liar, a con man, or mentally ill.
The link does not actually say that. Although I find it interesting that the same site claims that Yahweh was a Canaanite rain god with a bull-horned helmet.
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/e/el.html
Where then is the muslim equivalent of the word Yahweh? What is the Muslim equivalent of Milwaukee? YHVH is that YHVH is. If any name is untranslatable, it is The Name. The Tetragrammatron can be represented in Arabic by four letters, just as it is represented by four letters in the Roman alphabet. Ya`-ha`-waw-ya` is much closer to yod-he-vav-he than Y-H-V-H is.
It originally meant "the god", nothing more, nothing less.
And "I am that I am" originally meant a affirmative statement of existence. God's revelation changed that.
More importantly, "al-ilah" is two words meaning "the god" and "Allah" is a single word meaning "God".
Eloi means "my God", Jesus being Jewish was addressing it to Yahweh.
Specifically, it means, "my El", referring to the Levantine sky god El, the husband of the goddess Ashera and the father of the gods Hadad, Yam, and Mot. According to the pantheon.org source you quoted, El is traditionally (as well as Biblically) associated with YHVH.
Find, show me how the word Yahweh is in any way connected with the word "allah". [sic]
They are both Names of God in the Abrahamic tradition, and the names used in Jewish Hebrew and Muslim Arabic scriptures, respectively.
I was startled the first time I attended a Mass in Turkish to hear the Creed open with profession of belief in Allah. However, that's not the name of a god, it's simply the Turkish word for God.
It is the Arabic (and Turkish, apparently) word for God. For Muslims, it is a Name of God, just as Jesus is a Name of God for Christians.
Show me where "Yahweh" is in the Torah.
You know damn well what I mean. "YHWH" who many believe is pronounced "Yahweh" is in the Torah. And according the the Jewish Encyclopedia it's found all over the Torah :
http://jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=165&letter=T&search=yahweh
And in the Syriac bibles it's found all over the Torah too, but TRANSLATED INTO SYRIAC as "Mariah". A feat muhammed, his followers, and his demon never managed to accomplish. So again what is "Yahweh" translated into arabic?
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.