The Nature of God
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-10-2013, 09:36 AM (This post was last modified: 03-10-2013 09:46 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The Nature of God
(02-10-2013 02:41 AM)Chippy Wrote:  That is what you are arguing. The statement "Islam is Abrahamic" means that Islam (or part thereof) was revealed to Abraham by God and also that Arabs are descendants of Abraham, and that is the claim of Muslims.


It means nothing of the sort. You flunk your little religion quiz.
Saying "Islam is Abrahamic", means that Muslims claim (or anyone repeating that claim assents/refers to), that Judaism was a precursor, initiated by Abraham's deity, which was CONTINUED in a more complete way in Islam, and that YAHWEH is the same deity as Allah. The issue is "claimed continuity", where none in fact exists.
You really need to stay away from any discussion of religions until you take World Religions 101.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2013, 04:19 PM
RE: The Nature of God
Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Bahá'í Faith, Samaritanism, Yazidi, Druzes, Mandeans, and Rastafari.

Fullerene, have you studied Bahá'í or any of these other minor Abrahamic religions? I know Rastafari considers weed a sacrament, so they got that going for them at least. Big Grin

Breathing - it's more art than science.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
03-10-2013, 04:41 PM
RE: The Nature of God
(03-10-2013 04:19 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Bahá'í Faith, Samaritanism, Yazidi, Druzes, Mandeans, and Rastafari.

Fullerene, have you studied Bahá'í or any of these other minor Abrahamic religions? I know Rastafari considers weed a sacrament, so they got that going for them at least. Big Grin

Not yet. I think I have to pick one or two and research them. One of my friends is a Bahai, so I may do that. That's a good reason to take part in the "liturgy" of the Rastafarians. Tongue

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2013, 11:22 PM
RE: The Nature of God
(03-10-2013 09:36 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  It means nothing of the sort. You flunk your little religion quiz.
Saying "Islam is Abrahamic", means that Muslims claim (or anyone repeating that claim assents/refers to), that Judaism was a precursor, initiated by Abraham's deity, which was CONTINUED in a more complete way in Islam, and that YAHWEH is the same deity as Allah. The issue is "claimed continuity", where none in fact exists.
You really need to stay away from any discussion of religions until you take World Religions 101.

Firstly, that idea is not consistent with Islamic tradition nor with mainstream scholarship on the subject. Muslims regard Abraham as the first Muslim and the phrase "Our father Abraham" (ابونا ابرهيم) is common to Arab Christians and Arab Muslims.

Surat An-Naĥl 16:120:

Indeed, Abraham was a [comprehensive] leader, devoutly obedient to Allah , inclining toward truth, and he was not of those who associate others with Allah .


Surat 'Āli `Imrān 3:33:

Indeed, Allah chose Adam and Noah and the family of Abraham and the family of 'Imran over the worlds -

According to mainline Islamic tradition and scholarship the Quran is the actual unblemished revelation of God which had been revealed earlier in languages other than Arabic but distorted. That idea is express in the Surrah 42:

Surat Ash-Shūraá 42:13-16:

He has ordained for you of religion what He enjoined upon Noah and that which We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], and what We enjoined upon Abraham and Moses and Jesus - to establish the religion and not be divided therein. Difficult for those who associate others with Allah is that to which you invite them. Allah chooses for Himself whom He wills and guides to Himself whoever turns back [to Him].

And they did not become divided until after knowledge had come to them - out of jealous animosity between themselves. And if not for a word that preceded from your Lord [postponing the penalty] until a specified time, it would have been concluded between them. And indeed, those who were granted inheritance of the Scripture after them are, concerning it, in disquieting doubt.

So to that [religion of Allah ] invite, [O Muhammad], and remain on a right course as you are commanded and do not follow their inclinations but say, "I have believed in what Allah has revealed of the Qur'an, and I have been commanded to do justice among you. Allah is our Lord and your Lord. For us are our deeds, and for you your deeds. There is no [need for] argument between us and you. Allah will bring us together, and to Him is the [final] destination."

And those who argue concerning Allah after He has been responded to - their argument is invalid with their Lord, and upon them is [His] wrath, and for them is a severe punishment.

It is Allah who has sent down the Book in truth and [also] the balance. And what will make you perceive? Perhaps the Hour is near.

From Ridgeon:

The Quran, therefore, declares unequivocally that God has sent his messages to all peoples throughout history and has left none without guidance (35:24, 13:7). These messages have been essentially the same...All messages have emanated from a single source, the “Mother of All Books” (13:39) or the “Hidden Book” (56:78) or the “Preserved Tablet” (85:22), and although every prophet has initially come to his people and addressed them “in their tongue” (14:4), the import of all messages is universal; hence it is incumbent on all people to believe in all prophets, without “separating some from the others”...The Quran protects, consummates, and transcends earlier revelations, and Muhammad is declared to be the “seal of the prophets” (33:40). (Ridegeon 2003, pp.4654-4655)

From the Encyclopedia of Religion (Volume 7):

Islamic links with Judaism are many, ranging from similarity in rituals to belief in the same prophets. It has been noted by Western scholars such as Wensinck (1982) that those ayas of the Qur’an which explain certain laws pertaining to ritual occur in the Medinan period when Muhammad was in close proximity with Jewish tribes, and when he was hoping that they would accept him as a prophet. However, the ayas of the Qur’an reflect an increasing hostility towards the Jews after the refusal of Jewish tribes to accept Muhammad as prophet. In 3.64–6, the Qur’an criticizes the exclusivity of the Jews and claims that Abraham should be considered an Islamic prophet. After all, how could Abraham be a Jew when the Torah was sent down by God after he had died? Also, during the Medinan period, the Qur’an in aya 2.149 instructed Muhammad and his followers not to bow down in worship to God facing Jerusalem, but instead towards Mecca, more particularly to the Ka‘ba. In addition, greater emphasis is placed upon the Arab nature of the revelation, perhaps to make it distinct from the revelations given to the Jews (43.1–3). This has been seen as the ‘nationalization’ or ‘Arabification’ of Islam by some, and has been rejected by others (Rahman 1980: 133). The frequent mention of the Arabic revelation supports the Qur’anic argument that God sends messengers to all communities, including the Arabs. The Arab connection with Judaism appears with Abraham and his son, who in 2.126 are the builders of the Ka‘ba, and in 2.127 pray that their posterity be Muslim. (Lindsey 2005, p.269)

See also this and this.

Secondly, the idea that Muslims worship a moon-god is not consistent with mainline secular religious scholarship. It is a fringe idea that appears to have originated from Christian pastor Robert Morey's book The Moon-god Allah In the Archeology of the Middle East. Morey's work is not scholarly and neither are the derivative books that you have referenced. The moon-god idea is detailed on loonwatch.com and in the Wikipedia article Allah as Moon-god. I can't find a secular scholarly source that pays credence to the idea that Allah is the moon-god Baal/Sin; it is an idea that is confined to loonie Evangelical Christians and you (and other hapless victims of your idiocy on this forum).

Thirdly, the motivation of the idea that Allah is not Yahweh is proselytization. That is why when you search "Allah is the moon god" you get nutty Evangelical Cristian websites rather than sites with an edu domain. There is even a Chick tract the matter: Allah Had No Son. Other Chick tracts include: Are Roman Catholics Christians?, Big Daddy?, and Uninvited. So you've taken pseudo-history from the lunatic fringe and passed it off as scholarship on this forum. Why is a proselytization tactic based on pseudo-history of significance to atheology? It isn't intrinsically and because it is is unfounded.

Fourthly, even if the idea that Allah is moon-god had merit--and it doesn't appear to have any--it has no bearing on atheology. To the atheist/atheologist all such god-talk is nothing beyond a language game.


(Book) References

Jones, Lindsay (Ed.) (2005) Encyclopedia of Religion 2nd Ed. Volume 7 Thomson Gale ISBN 0-02-865740-3

Ridgeon, Lloyd Major (Ed.) (2003) World Religiona: From their origins to the present Taylor & Francis e-Library ISBN 0-203-42313-5
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2013, 11:48 PM
RE: The Nature of God
(03-10-2013 09:27 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  And what you quoted doesn't make your point. It's a bit from proverbs that admonishes parents to beat their children to instill discipline, all the while calling it 'love'. Okay, so according to this passage in proverbs, raising your children well required one to not 'spare the rod'. Right. How do you get from that to 'parents aren't held accountable for the actions of their children'?

There is no passage in the OT that I am aware of that holds parents accountable for the actions of their adult children. Neither Jewish tradition nor practice hold parents accountable for the actions of their adult children. The reference to proverbs is an example of many demands relating to "correct" child rearing practices in the OT.

Quote: My point was that Yahweh didn't seem to put a lot of emphasis on moral accountability being tied to one person. If it was acceptable to punish a child for their parent's transgressions (shifting moral accountability), why would it not be okay to blame a parent's for the actions of their children (shifting the accountability the other directions)? It's a move of accountability. Your passage in proverbs does nothing to answer why the accountability cannot be shifted in the other direction.

Why is it an abomination to wear blends? You are looking for reason in the wrong place. That's just Yahweh's way. He doesn't like poofs and composite textiles and he apparently doesn't hold parents accountable (presumably if they have obeyed all of his rules regarding how they should be raised).

I can look the issue up in the Talmud but given the absence of any reference to punishing parents for the (adult) children's crimes in the Torah (and other books of the OT) I don't think I'm likely to find anything.

This is why I suggest that the relationship between Yahweh and angels is akin to a parent-child relationship and why Jews and Christians alike don't view Yahweh as having created Satan as such. Isn't that part of the message of the myth, namely that a parents can do everything "correctly" and still produce a deviant child? That certainly is a universal human experience and much of mythology reflects these human universals. And it is clear from the Torah that Yahweh is a paternal figure, he is like a strict disciplinarian father that loves his children but will punish them harshly if they deviate.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-10-2013, 11:51 PM
RE: The Nature of God
(03-10-2013 09:12 AM)Paranoidsam Wrote:  But clearly God thinks the children are to blame for the parents sins.

Yep. If you are looking for symmetry, fairness and rationality in the Torah you are looking in the wrong place.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: