• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Ask any questions about Islam!

ashai

Active Member
wmam said:
I guess I wasn't clear in what I meant...........

Elohim being the title of YAH........... Elohim meaning the same, or rather, Allah meaning the same as Elohim. Allah being translated from the Hebrew? I don't think that Islam is older than Judaism so I have to believe that Allah would have been translated from the Hebrew.

Look......... I know that some will take this as b me bashing Islam but it isn't my intent, nor is it mine to bash anyone. I have a point to this and it is that everyone seems to be translating the names of the Most High as well as His Son to their own language. I feel this is a great error for man to do. My Scriptures say that there is only one to call to. One name to praise. If we are all praying and praising to the wrong one then what of them? Wouldn't they come of non-effect? If I was the Most High and I saw my children calling out to a pagan name instead of the true and sacred name I would be mad, hurt or both. I am only trying to come to a consensus for the greater good of my own state of mind.

Shalom
Ushta wman

Well, Eloha and Elohim are used distinctly in the Bible from Yahweh. The Jews did not pronounce Yahweh because they considered the name too holy, that however does not mean that the original name was not eloha, or worse, elohim which would have been polytheistic. then the Christians, specifically, make Jesus the name by which we are supposed to be saved.:jiggy:

As to bashing Islam, by the question Since to them Allah is the both the generic and the personal name of God there is nothing that will bash that in what you say. You believe in Yahwe great it means I am, so literally it was god/allah answering Moses question: Who are you and saying I am. At least that is my opinion but then I am not a muslim some muslims might take offfense to it , but I do not believe they will.:bow:

One more thing , if there is but one God, and if humans, all created by God, have different languages; you should not worry so much about what your children call God, I mean, if they call him by clearly established Monotheistic names there is no chance they will be calling God polytheistic names
 

ashai

Active Member
wmam said:
LOL.......... I guess what you are saying that we all have the power to save ourselves if we do as we are suppose to do there for there would be no reason to be saved from our wrongdoings. Right? LOL .. I don't know........ I do know this though. As I see it, I believe in what the word of YAH states ion Scripture and I need to be and do as much good as to His word as I can before that book is opened that the Spirit has kept record of for all my slips and falls. I need that NAME to be the correct NAME to call on for forgiveness and salvation. Hey ...........But thats just me.
Ushta wman

Well, God is just, right? If God is just, then,if I or any one else lives for goodness and justice, you mean to tell me that god in his righteousness will 'condemn' me for not using a name? I sincerely doubt that, but then that is just me:bow:

I believe that transcendence or salvation, if you prefer that term, is all about right behavior, in thought word and deed, and only for the sake of what is right.

Ushta Te,
Ashai
 

wmam

Active Member
ashai said:
As to bashing Islam, by the question Since to them Allah is the both the generic and the personal name of God there is nothing that will bash that in what you say. You believe in Yahwe great it means I am, so literally it was god/allah answering Moses question: Who are you and saying I am. At least that is my opinion but then I am not a muslim some muslims might take offfense to it , but I do not believe they will.:bow:
I hope not cause it isn't the intent. I believe in YAH, Elohim and Yahshua. Though it is that which I have learned to be the true sacred names. I only worry that so many call on so many different names and wonder why one would translate a name of a person to begin with.

ashai said:
One more thing , if there is but one God, and if humans, all created by God, have different languages; you should not worry so much about what your children call God, I mean, if they call him by clearly established Monotheistic names there is no chance they will be calling God polytheistic names
No offense but I cannot listen to your saying that it is o.k. for one to call on any name just because of language. Scripture tells me that there be only one name that one can be saved. I have to listen to YAH.

Shalom.
 
wmam said:
My Scriptures say that there is only one to call to. One name to praise. If we are all praying and praising to the wrong one then what of them? Wouldn't they come of non-effect? If I was the Most High and I saw my children calling out to a pagan name instead of the true and sacred name I would be mad, hurt or both. I am only trying to come to a consensus for the greater good of my own state of mind.

Shalom
What is the name your scriptures say to praise? In what language was it written? Into what language was it translated? I ask those questions rhetorically because, if there is One True Name, it seems to be lost to history. One could write a doctoral thesis on the original name of God, but it still would be only a theory. Unless I am misunderstanding your question, I believe there is no way to know the One True Name, if there is one.

The Quran teaches that God sent prophets to the various nations to speak to them in various languages. I take that to mean that God has expressed himself in different ways to different people, which raises the idea that there is not just one name of God. The Quran speaks of 99 different "names." The names are not unique identifiers, but noble concepts, such as "Gracious," "Merciful." "Allah" is conjunction of Al-Lah. The definite article, "Al" (The) and "Lah," or (Divine/God/deity).
 

wmam

Active Member
Ibrahim Al-Amin said:
What is the name your scriptures say to praise? In what language was it written? Into what language was it translated? I ask those questions rhetorically because, if there is One True Name, it seems to be lost to history. One could write a doctoral thesis on the original name of God, but it still would be only a theory. Unless I am misunderstanding your question, I believe there is no way to know the One True Name, if there is one.
Mine says YAH through His Son Yahshua. But that is the names I whose when I see the pagan rooted names of god and jesus. I do try my best to go back to either the Hebrew or Aramaic and research the True meanings. I am a student of sorts of the Hebraic culture and that of the Sinatic arts. I mean no disrespect to a fellow brother of Abraham and am only seeking Truth.

Shalom.
 
wmam said:
Then can you give me the condensed version? Do you not have to believe on your Allah? If so can you post those parts of the Koran that shows such please?

.
Salvation implies impending doom without intervention. In most of Christianity, that implies Original Sin. In Islam, there is no Original Sin. You begin your life with no blemishes. Therefore, if you are sinless, you have no need to be "saved."

However...as it's nearly impossible not to sin, so people must seek repentance. In a way, this could be taken as "salvation," but it's different than the Christian sense in which you need both salvation and repentance.

You asked for the condensed version, and that's about as condensed as I can make it. Does that help?
 

wmam

Active Member
Ibrahim Al-Amin said:
Salvation implies impending doom without intervention. In most of Christianity, that implies Original Sin. In Islam, there is no Original Sin. You begin your life with no blemishes. Therefore, if you are sinless, you have no need to be "saved."

However...as it's nearly impossible not to sin, so people must seek repentance. In a way, this could be taken as "salvation," but it's different than the Christian sense in which you need both salvation and repentance.

You asked for the condensed version, and that's about as condensed as I can make it. Does that help?
Some............ but.............. as usual.............. it brings up only about a billion other questions.:D
 
wmam said:
I am a student of sorts of the Hebraic culture and that of the Sinatic arts. I mean no disrespect to a fellow brother of Abraham and am only seeking Truth.

Shalom.
No offense taken. I'm always happy to see someone open and curious.
 

TashaN

Veteran Member
Premium Member
wmam said:
Then can you give me the condensed version? Do you not have to believe on your Allah? If so can you post those parts of the Koran that shows such please?
I guess it's better and more aporpriate to say "God" or "Allah" instead of saying "your Allah" !!!

"The most beautiful names belong to Allah: so call on Him by them; but shun such men as use profanity in His names: for what they do, they will soon be requited". (Quran 7:180)

Allah has 99 names and we can call him by any name as long as it belong to him. It doesn't matter what name you use as long as you know him, Allah Almighty.

Peace .. :)
 

TashaN

Veteran Member
Premium Member
wmam said:
I don't think that Islam is older than Judaism so I have to believe that Allah would have been translated from the Hebrew.
No hard feelings dear wmam, i know what you feel about but believe me, Islam even exist since prophet Noah "peace be upon him".

If I was the Most High and I saw my children calling out to a pagan name instead of the true and sacred name I would be mad, hurt or both. I am only trying to come to a consensus for the greater good of my own state of mind.
Don't worry dear, we are not calling a pagan name :D and we don't need to call him using one name because the most important thing is to know him, more than to know the name. Therefore, God told us to call him "Allah" and any other name of his.
 

Anastasios

Member
Islam is not a new religion. It is, in essence, the same message and guidance which Allah revealed to all prophets before Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. Allah says in the Qur’ân:

"Say, `We believe in ALLAH and that which has been revealed to us, and that which was revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and the tribes, and in that which was given to Moses and Jesus and other Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them and to HIM we submit." (Quran 3:85)

 

Peace

Quran & Sunnah
robtex said:
In the prayer times during the day what is said at the various prayers? Is it true that when you bow for prayers you are facing Mecca?

While we are standing we do recite verses from the Quran, we do always start with the opening chapter then we recite other verses from other chapters. When we bow and prostrate we do praise Allah, we also supplicate God while prostrating.
All the Muslims face Kaaba while praying

Peace
 

Peace

Quran & Sunnah
Orichalcum said:
Is there any rationale explanation for the massacre of the Qurayzah?

Surely a prophet of God would not need to stoop to such barbarity?

No intention of insult is meant by this post by the way, I am just curious to hear it from you the believers, thanks in advance.

Read about the battle of Trench on the following link in order to know the truth about the end of Banu Qurayzah.
http://www.islamanswers.net/moreAbout/Trench.htm

Peace
 

Maxist

Active Member
Very good, most do not properly understand it. I applaud you. I would have done it a while ago if I knew enough about it to. I wish they had a thread like this for every religion. Saddly they have twelve for Christianity and now one for Mulsims.
 

Ody

Well-Known Member
Maxist said:
Very good, most do not properly understand it. I applaud you. I would have done it a while ago if I knew enough about it to. I wish they had a thread like this for every religion. Saddly they have twelve for Christianity and now one for Mulsims.


Ya, I have to brush up on my talmud so i can start a similar thread for Judaism.
 

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
Peace said:
Read about the battle of Trench on the following link in order to know the truth about the end of Banu Qurayzah.
http://www.islamanswers.net/moreAbout/Trench.htm

Peace

Some material from Muhammad and the Course of Islam by H. M. Balyuzi:

"In the pilgrim season of A.D. 620 Muhammad focused His attention on visitors from Yathrib. This was the town where His father had died in the prime of manhood and near which he was buried. In His childhood, Aminah, His mother, had taken Him to Yathrib where she had relatives. Conditions in this town differed from those at Mecca. The existence of three strong Jewish colonies -- the Banu-Qaynuqa', the Banu'n-Nadir and the Banu-Qurayzah -- enriched the life and widened the outlook of the people, who were mostly tillers of the soil and keepers of orchards, unlike Meccans who were men of the mart and trade. They belonged in the main to two tribes, the Aws and the Khazraj, each with its own subdivisions and clans. Civil war in or around 615 had disturbed the calm of Yathrib. At the battle of Bu'ath, the Aws, with the aid of the Jewish Banu-Qurayzah and Banu'n-Nadir, had defeated the Khazraj."
(H.M. Balyuzi, Muhammad and the Course of Islam, p. 42)

"Muhammad found that the Banu-Qurayzah were justified in their complaint and gave His verdict accordingly. But the Banu'n-Nadir were resentful and considered it a deliberate affront. Huyy Ibn Akhtab, a vindictive opponent of the Prophet, dwelt with the Banu'n-Nadir and persuaded them to attempt the life of Muhammad. One day, Muhammad had gone to the settlement of this Jewish clan to carry out certain transactions. Finding Him resting against their wall, they were about to hurl down a piece of rock to crush Him, when He suddenly got up and walked away. Traditionalists say that the Angel Gabriel informed Him of their evil intent. In any case, the Banu'n-Nadir were foiled."
(H.M. Balyuzi, Muhammad and the Course of Islam, p. 87)

"Despite vigorous protests by such men as Zuhayr Ibn Bata and Yasin Ibn Qays, leading figures among the Jews of the Banu-Qurayzah, Ka'b Ibn Asad yielded to the blandishments of Huyy, decided to repudiate his pact with Muhammad, and threw in his lot with the idolaters. When Muhammad was apprised of Huyy's visit to the stronghold of the Banu-Qurayzah, He sent the two Sa'ds, one the son of Mu'adh, the head of the Aws, and the other the son of 'Ubadah, the head of the Khazraj, to warn Ka'b and counsel him not to break his word. They were accompanied by three other prominent men of the Ansar, but returned to say that the Banu-Qurayzah had gone the way of the 'Adal and the Qarih. Those clans, it will be recalled, betrayed the Muslims at ar-Raji'. The defection of the Banu-Qurayzah was not a light 97 matter. Relying on their loyalty, Muhammad had left that side of the city totally undefended. He had to find a way -- some way -- to counter whatever evil designs their chief had in mind. Would Ka'b give the besiegers a passage into Medina through his settlement? Would he mount an attack on the Muslims? These were imponderables, but for the time being it seemed that Ka'b was doing no more than seeing to his own defences.
A man of the Ghatafan, named Nu'aym Ibn Mas'ud, had been converted to Islam only a few days before the arrival of the confederate army outside Medina. Neither the Jews nor the idolaters knew this, and the Prophet accepted Nu'aym's offer to make use of this fact to cause a rift between them. Nu'aym went first to the Banu-Qurayzah; winning their confidence, he suggested that to obtain continued support from the idolaters, particularly the Meccans, and to ensure their own safety, they should ask for hostages from the Quraysh, who would not then abandon them to their fate. Then Nu'aym went to the confederate camp and warned them to be on guard against the trickery of the Jews. They would ask the Quraysh for hostages, he said, but would hand them over to Muhammad in order to ingratiate themselves with Him and avert His vengeance. In due course the Banu-Qurayzah were told to attack the Muslims on the south side of the oasis; they asked first for hostages and their demand was rejected. Mutual suspicion, engendered by Nu'aym, kept the Quraysh and the Banu-Qurayzah apart and the latter out of the war."
(H.M. Balyuzi, Muhammad and the Course of Islam, p. 96)

"Professor Montgomery Watt comments thus on the fate of the Banu-Qurayzah:
'Some European writers have criticized this sentence for what they call its savage and inhuman character . . .
'In the case of the Muslims involved in the execution what was uppermost in their minds was whether allegiance to the Islamic community was to be set above and before all other alliances and attachments... Those of the Aws who wanted leniency for Qurayzah seem to have regarded them as having been unfaithful only tb Muhammad and not to the Aws. This attitude implies that these men regarded themselves as being primarily members of the Aws (or of some clan of it) and not of the Islamic community. There is no need to suppose that Muhammad brought pressure to bear on Sa'd ibn-Mu'adh to punish Qurayzah as he did. A farsighted man like Sa'd must have realized that to allow tribal or clan allegiance to come before Islamic allegiance would lead to a renewal of the fratricidal strife from which they hoped the coming of Muhammad had delivered Medina. As he was being led into Muhammad's presence to pronounce his sentence, Sa'd is said to have made a remark to the effect that, with death not far from him, he must consider above all doing his duty to God and the Islamic community, even at the expense of former alliances.'[1]
[1 Muhammad, Prophet and Statesman, pp. 173-4.]
Professor Montgomery Watt further remarks:
'After the elimination of the Qurayzah no important clan of Jews was left in Medina, though there were probably several small groups. One Jewish merchant is named who purchased some of the women and children of Qurayzah! . . .
'The continuing presence of at least a few Jews in Medina is an argument against the view sometimes put forward by European scholars that in the second year after the Hijrah Muhammad adopted a policy of clearing all Jews out of Medina just because they were Jews, and that he carried out this policy with ever-increasing severity. It was not Muhammad's way to have policies of this 101 kind. He had a balanced view of the fundamentals of the contemporary situation and of his long-term aims, and in the light of this he moulded his day-to-day plans in accordance with the changing factors in current events. The occasions of his attacks on the first two Jewish clans were no more than occasions; but there were also deep underlying reasons. The Jews in general by their verbal criticisms of the Qur'ánic revelation were trying to undermine the foundation of the whole Islamic community; and they were also giving political support to Muhammad's enemies and to opponents such as the Hypocrites. In so far as the Jews abandoned these forms of hostile activity Muhammad allowed them to live in Medina unmolested.'[1]"
[1 ibid, pp.174-5.] 102
(H.M. Balyuzi, Muhammad and the Course of Islam, p. 100)
 

DakotaGypsy

Active Member
jamaesi said:
tlcmel, That's sort of a big question. I recommend going to either Religious Tolerance or Submission and poking around a bit. If you have anything a bit more specific or anything you want cleared up do ask!

But to me, the base principals are submission to the one G-d and love and helping others.


I must admit I follow only the Qur'an, so I'm not much help on hadiths or the like, I find them interesting to read but consider them very flawed.
What's a hadith?
 

DakotaGypsy

Active Member
EiNsTeiN said:
This is true to some extent...i do agree that some countries helped terrorists some times...But i dont think they are anymore...

We muslim countries suffered too much cuz of them...Specially Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia...We were living in horour cuz of them....this is shame on Muslims...
Geeze!

If you had said, "Shame! Shame! on Muslims!" maybe I'd have noticed it and I wouldn't have had to do my rant!
 

Popeyesays

Well-Known Member
DakotaGypsy said:
What's a hadith?

al-Hadith are "traditions" of the Prophet. Kind of like the Talmud to a Reform Jew. Its even more like the Talmud when you consider that many conservative Muslims take them at face value as Orthodox Jews take the Talmud.

Supposedly they are remembrances of the Prophets actions and words that were observed by at least TWO of the companions of Muhammad. To a Muslim God wrote the Qur'an, but people remembered the Hadith, just like the Gospels are remembered.

Regards,
Scott
 
Top