When it comes to movie releases, however, I sometimes envy those of you in the New World, specifically in the Great Land of the Reel. Here in Europe, it sometimes takes several months until we get a movie. WALL-E only recently came to a screen near me, and the new documentary on religion—“Religulous”—is still delaying its prophesied coming.

Not having watched it yet, I’m of course ill-qualified to say anything about it. Nevertheless, in order to add my own seasoning to the soup while it’s still being stirred, let me share my initial thoughts on the movie after having watched a few clips on the internet.

First of all, I think Bill Maher will probably succeed in asking adherents to the three great monotheistic religions a bunch of blunt questions that reveal the ridiculousness of many religious ideas. I expect to alternately laugh and cringe, and will ask myself at the end of the movie once more what good there is in faith at all.

But in the clips I’ve seen so far, I’ve also felt that Bill Maher tends to ask straw-man kind of questions at times, meaning he already portrays any possible answer as ridiculous by the way he phrases the questions. And when he does ask real questions, he gives the impression as if he were the first person (or in any case one of a modern, enlightened minority) who has ever asked them.

I wish one of the people whom he interviews would say, “You know, Bill, that is really is a good question, and aside from you, about ten million believers have wrestled with and written about this issue. Here are a few hundred books from the past two to three millennia in which this question is discussed in great detail by some of the intellectual giants of history. Read them. Then come back, and maybe we’ll be able to add our own two pence to the discussion.”

Anyone who has a mere inkling of philosophical literature throughout the ages knows that questions of epistemology, for instance (“How do you know what you claim to know?”), fill whole shelves of libraries—with most books written by religious people.

Which leads me to another point, namely that religion has a long history of stimulating rational thinking. Religion itself is certainly something that transcends rationality (and alas, also often sinks below rationality), but at the same time it is also a great catalyst for the rational mind.

The reason is not hard to find. Most people are not motivated to rationally engage a topic unless they feel that there is an overarching meaningfulness to it. Students at school frequently lack motivation because they feel, “Why on earth should I learn about that? What good does it do? What’s the purpose for that? Who cares? It’s all meaningless data.”

Now reality—the universe, this world—is ultimately just meaningless data to the human brain, unless there is an overarching purpose as religion claims there to be. Sure, even without an overarching purpose, one can find individual meaning in temporary activities, but the feeling of ultimate futility cannot quite be gotten rid of by most people.

Even many atheists testify that their initial interest in engaging the world rationally was religiously or metaphysically motivated. Richard Dawkins says he first became interested in science for “philosophical” reasons, such as questions about a Designer of the universe and then later in evolution as something that, in Dawkins’ eyes, made the existence of the Designer unnecessary.

Whether it is defending or critically examining religious worldviews, then, they remain arguably the greatest stimulus for rational thinking. That is what believers and atheists have in common: They experience religion as a stimulus for rationality.

So, I hope that after watching the movie, I’ll also come away thinking that once again religion has stimulated rational thinking and is therefore more than just ridiculous.

But then again, maybe not. I haven’t watched it yet, and will still have to wait several weeks. Till then, these are my thoughts.

Maybe some who have watched it can help me out with more qualified judgments.

Some groups (including Jehovah's Witnesses) claim that the Holy Trinity comes from paganism; Is there really any truth, or hard evidence in this claim?

My purpose in this article and in the graph which follows it, is to show that this claim is a nonsense because, as a matter of fact, the Trinity is a very distinctively Christian belief. Following this brief article you will find a graph showing how The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit are all biblically revealed to be God. If you do not read the article at least scroll down to the Godhead graph so you will know the Scriptures to quote in any future controversy.

So What is the Trinity?

It is the Christian belief that there are Three Persons in One God. These Three Persons - the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit - are distinct from one another yet they share the same Divine Nature. Thus they are not three distinct gods, but one God; so God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit ALL (according to the Holy Bible) bear the character and attributes of God.

Some cults and sects claim that the early Christians copied the Holy Trinity from surrounding pagan religions. They are a mile from the truth. So just what is the truth? Why did the 'Church Fathers' find it necessary to set out this doctrine? Far from what the sects and cults teach (and they are often woefully ignorant of the facts of church history), the concept actually came from a very careful reading and inspired interpretation of the Bible, which refers to three distinct Persons as "God" yet insists that there is but one God. The 'fathers' were concerned that some early groups were coming to an understanding of God which did not do full justice to ALL the Scriptures about God so they found it necessary to set these things out doctrinally in order to avoid error and heresy. Many of these things were set out in doctrinal, creedal fashion in the 4th century. Much (though not all) of this was in order to refute Arius who was guilty of perverting the Scriptures which refer to God. This man, of course, came to give his name to the well-recognized heresy of Arianism – very much 'alive and kicking' in today's Jehovah's Witnesses.

Evidence of an Egyptian "Trinity"?

Before Christianity, no religion ever believed in a single Deity consisting of three persons. Detractors sometimes say that the Osirus-Isis-Horus family of ancient Egyptian mythology was a "model" for the Christian Trinity. Yet this is clearly a triad of distinct pagan deities, not a trinity in the Christian sense. The Egyptians never considered them to be three persons in one God, but as two separate gods and a goddess - among numerous other divinities such as Hathor, Ptah, Neith, Set, Nut, Geb, and Basht, to name a few. The highest deity in their pantheon was the sun god Ra, so they didn't even consider the Osirus-Isis-Horus triad to be supreme among the gods!

A Triune Goddess Among the Celts?

Some point to "triple goddesses" worshipped by the pagan Celts as forerunners of the Christian Trinity. Yet these were either triads of mother goddesses or a single goddess with three "aspects" or "modes of being". The Holy Trinity isn't one Divine Person with three "aspects" or "modes", for the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit are personally distinct from one another. Thus the "triple goddess" is merely a threefold deity, not a true trinity in the Christian sense, thus could not be the origin of the Holy Trinity.

The problem is that when people go looking for pagan 'divine triads' they might well find them, but so would they find 'divine quartets', 'divine septets' or almost anything else! It depends what the researcher is looking for! We must realize that in India alone it is claimed that over 1,000,000 deities are worshipped (according to the region and the particular strain of religiosity one prefers)!! - in such a huge number we might find almost anything! However, if it could indeed be shown that there are many pagan divine triads (probably highly dubious), is it not possible that Satan himself could have fashioned this on his knowledge of God as the former Lucifer? It would "prove" nothing.

Hindu Trimurti = Trinity?

Other critics within the cults claim that the Hindu "trimurti" - Brahma, Vishnu and Siva - was another model for the Christian Trinity. Yet scholars tell us that this "trimurti" only appears in Hinduism during the 4th-7th centuries AD. By that time the Christian understanding of the Holy Trinity was becoming fairly well-established! If the Holy Trinity concept predates the Hindu trimurti (which certainly appears to be the case), the former could not have been copied from the latter. In fact, given Hinduism's tendency to absorb concepts from other religions, and the fact that Christianity reached India in the first century, it is very likely that the Hindu teachers developed the trimurti along the lines of the Trinity-concept professed by Indian Christians!

Yet the former is not an exact copy of the latter. Hindus do not consider Brahma, Vishnu and Siva to be three persons in one God, but three distinct gods who each manifest part of Brahman, the impersonal Absolute. Some even add a fourth god, Ishvara, to this group, and claim that he is the first - antecedent to the other three! This demolishes the threeness which might seem to parallel the Trinity.

Moreover, Brahma, Vishnu and Siva each have a goddess consort - Sarasvati, Lakshmi and Sakti respectively. That would make not three but six. Add Ishvara and his consort, Maheshvari, and you now have eight primary manifestations of Brahman! Yet these are only eight among millions of divinities in the Hindu tradition, all of which are considered various manifestations of the Absolute.

Thus any alleged Hindu parallel with the Trinity quickly dissolves into a modalistic polytheism and finally a monistic pantheism, in which all diversity in the universe merely manifests an underlying spiritual Unity (a concept which has no place at all in orthodox Christianity, although it certainly appears in New Ageism).

CONCLUSION
(But please check out the graph AT THE ARTICLES SITE before you leave this article!)

It is only too clear that those cults and sects which reject the Trinity do not even correctly understand it so it should not surprise us that they think they can find the Trinity in polytheism or modalism when those concepts are absolutely anathema to the doctrine of The Holy Trinity. So the Christian concept of the Trinity is quite unique to world religions, not copied from another faith but progressively revealed by God in Holy Scripture. Undoubtedly some Christians believe that various pagan triads and threefold deities may have originated in a primitive revelation of - or memory of - the Triunity of the One True God. This is also quite possible. Perhaps the memory traces back to our first parents, who walked with God at the dawn of humanity. Or maybe God revealed something of the Divinity to "righteous pagans", Gentiles of centuries past who genuinely sought the Most High God (the Bible certainly appears to suggest that such people have existed). These memories or revelations may have seeped into the legends of the human race, and soon became myths of divine triads and deities with three "aspects". For every religion has an element of truth in it; perhaps this is one such element. This may show that God has not left the human race in complete ignorance of Divine Truth throughout the ages. But many other Christians, including myself, are somewhat sceptical that divine triads can be found in paganism any more than any other shape or number of “divinities”.

Thus if we do locate pagan religious notions which might bear a slight resemblance to biblical truth, they would frankly prove nothing, and most certainly they would not prove that early Christians copied these concepts. Why would the early Christians do such a thing when we have a record which shows how determined they were in their fight against paganism? In fact, we have a very clear record from church history which tells us why 'the fathers' were concerned to outline the Trinity: It was a concern that biblical truth about God should be carefully preserved.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/robin.brace/1THEGODHEAD.html

[vodpod id=ExternalVideo.711103&w=425&h=350&fv=%26rel%3D0%26border%3D0%26]

Bismillaah (In The Name of Allaah)

Dear Reader,

When death approaches, the close family and friends try to support and comfort the dying person through supplication as well as remembrance of Allah and His will.  The loss of a loved one often has a devastating effect on the person who suffered the loss and the negative effects sometimes last for years making it very hard for life to go on for the affected person. To a parent the soul of a child is like a precious diamond in the rough entrusted by Allah as a trust.  Our beloved children are an awesome responsibility as well as a precious gift from Allah.  You can never even begin to understand the love your parent has for you until you have your own children.  Do not wait until a day arrives where you lose one or both of your loving parents to show goodness to them.  All parents must go and meet their end at sometime, so do not wait until after they have departed from the world to think of all the good that they have shown to you.

Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: There are one hundred (parts of) mercy for Allah and He has sent down out of these one part of mercy upon the jinn and human beings and the insects and it is because of this (one part) that they love one another, show kindness to one another and even the beast treats its young one with affection, and Allah has reserved ninetynine parts of mercy with which He would treat His servants on the Day of Resurrection.  
Shaih Muslim

There is so much reward to be gained by Allaah from showing goodness, thanks and patience with the parents.  Thus, kindness toward parents came between two of the most important religious duties that Islam lays on Muslims. The reward for being good and kind toward one's parents was mentioned on several occasions by Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him), emphasizing that those who are obedient to their parents and to God also will be in the highest places in Paradise.

Also, Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) equated kindness toward parents with jihad (striving in the way or God) and often promised people that if they were kind, obedient, and close to their parents — particularly the mother (but this does not include showing animosity to those she is at odds with and aiding her in her disobedience to Allaah and her husband your father) — their reward would be similar to that of someone who strives in the way of God.

Abdullah ibn Umar, a leading scholar among the Prophet’s (Peace be upon him) companions once saw a man from Yemen carrying his mother on his back and going around the Ka’abah in his tawaf. Rather than show any sign of complaint, the man was happy, repeating a line of poetry in which he likened himself to a camel his mother was mounting. The only difference is that a camel may be scared by something and go out of control. He would never go out of her control. He looked at Abdullah ibn Umar and asked him whether by so doing he discharged his debt to his mother. Ibn Umar said: “No. You have not even paid back one twinge of her labour pain when she gave birth to you.”

No one can deny the supreme sacrifice and care that a mother renders to her child. The mother carries him (in her womb) by enduring strain after strain. And subsequently, at the time of birth, she is suspended between life and death. All this she faces with determination as much as patience barring any regret or anger. 

Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon him) has described and explained a mother's feelings for her child in the following hadith (his sayings):

Truly, those feelings are a blessing (rahmah) from Allah, if it were not for these feelings, a mother would not be willing to breast-feed her child, nor would a farmer be willing to work in the fields (under the schorching heat of the sun).

A father’s sacrifice is just as big. It is the father who is the bread winner in the family; he provides money for food, clothing, shelter, education, health and other necessities for the family.

Every day, without wasting time, the father has to earn and provide----- be it by using his mental faculties, or thru physical labour such as working under the scorching heat of the sun , or endangering his life by going out in the stormy seas. He goes through all these with perseverance and determination, solely for the purpose of providing the needs of the family.  The father also harbors hopes for his children similar to that of the mother, which means that his children succeed in becoming useful individuals.

Prophet Muhammad said:

It was narrated by Abu Hurairah (R) that a man came to the Prophet and asked him, 'Who is to be close to my friendship?' The Prophet answered:

Your mother, your mother, your mother, then your father, then the one closest to your kinship, and the one after.

This hadith clearly shows mothers are given particular gratitude and respect in regards to the kind treatment to be shown to them.  Does this mean that they are to be obeyed in matters where they are ordering you to be disobedient?

"Indeed are you not all guardians? And each of you is responsible for your flock: So the leader who is in authority over the people is a guardian, and he is responsible for his flock, and a man is guardian over the members of his house, and he is responsible for his flock, and the woman is a guardian over the members her husband's household and his children, and she is responsible for them, and the man's servant is a guardian over the wealth of his master and he responsible for it. Indeed, you are all guardians, and all of you are responsible for your flocks."

Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim

As this hadith shows each parent is responsible for their flock.  And you must never forget the mother is to obey the husband and she is to carry out his halaal wishes in regards to the children.  Do not obey your mother in being disobedient to your father.  The father, the husband is the leader of his household and deserves to be treated with honor, respect and kindness.

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means."
Quran 4:34

"But men, have a degree (of responsibility) over them (women)."
Quran 2:228

"Your Lord had decreed, that you worship none save Him, and (that you show) kindness to parents. If one of them or both of them attain old age with you, say not "Fie" unto them nor repulse them, but speak unto them a gracious word. And lower unto them the wing of submission through mercy, and say: My Lord! Have mercy on them both, as they did care for me when I was young."   [Quran 17:23-24]

The recognition and respect of parents is mentioned in the Quran eleven times; in every instance, Allah reminds children to recognize and to appreciate the care and love they have received from their parents. In the following verse, Allah demands that children recognize their parents:

"We have enjoined on humankind kindness to parents."  [Quran 29:8 and 46:15]

1.   The demand for recognizing parents is made more emphaticly when Allah says in the Quran:

"And (remember) when We made a covenant with the children of Israel, (saying): worship none save Allah (only), and be good to parents..." [Quran 2:83]

2.   In Surah Al-Nisaa' (The Women) Allah emphasizes again that children should be kind to their parents.

"And serve Allah. Ascribe nothing as partner unto Him. (Show) Kindness unto parents... " [Quran 4:36]

3.   The same directive is repeated again In Surah Al An'Am (The Cattle), where Allah says:

"Say: Come, I will recite unto you that which your Lord has made a sacred duty for you; that you ascribe nothing as partner unto Him and that you do good to parents..." [Quran 6:151] 

When was the last time you thanked your parents for all the good they did for you out of their love for you?  When was the last last time you went out of your way to care for and please your parents? Have you apologised to your parents for the hardships you have afflicted on them?  It is not easy to be a good parent we all have our errors.  Forgive your parents for their mistakes.  Would you not like Allaah to forgive you of your errors?  Grant your parents seventy excuses or more, and if you cannot think of one excuse for them, then realize they may have an excuse that you are unaware of.

ACTION LIST:

-Forgive your parent their mistakes and ask them to forgive you for yours

-Thank your parents for the kindness they have shown and the hardships they have taken on to care for you

-Shower your parents with halaal presents they will love and enjoy

-Keep regular contact with your parents and ask if there is anything you can do for them\

-Respect your parents wishes even when they go against your own and argue with them in a way that is better by respectfully and humbly asking and pleading your case to them

-Pray for the forgiveness and guiding to the truth for your parents

-Send thank you cards, poetry, loving islamic reminders and admiration to your parents when they achive something they have worked hard for

And I pray that Allaah blesses you to reap benefit from this post and accept this advise.  I invite you to be good to your parents and to practise Islamic Monotheism as no one, thing or deity has the right to be worshipped but Allaah alone.  Allah (swt) deserves and holds all glory, honor and respect and Muhammad peace be upon him, is the last and final Messenger simply showing that which has been shown before (The Abrahamic faiths).

Thank You so much for your time. All the truth in here is from Allaah and mistakes are from satan the accursed and myself.  Please forward this blog to your relatives & friends and may Allah (SWT) reward you.  This post has been brought to you by: SurvivorsAreUs.com, TnT Islamic Books and SurvivorsAreUs Online Halaal Store!

Sincerely & Gratefully
Halimah bint David

For more videos like this visit http://thedeenshow.com/

In the last blog I extended the possibility of deity to just about anything. So how many gods are there and why don’t we have more? Even when we think we have a choice there pretty much all the same. Jew god, Catholic God, Baptist god, Jehovah’s Witness god. No wonder so many are now turning to Islam since their god has an exotic name and wears a turban so he probably grants wishes. [1]

  When you look at so called monotheistic religion what you see is a little bit of hair splitting about who gets to be a god and who has to use a different name like angel (messenger) or asura. As I mentioned in the last blog some branches of Judaism never acknowledged that there were any angels or spirits of the dead. YHWH got to be the only intangible being in existence. Historically this has been an unpopular idea. He who tries to do everything does nothing. The more popular concept was the God as emperor of the intangible world. I think the coming of this idea may have been influenced by the emergence of great empires in the Middle East. Kings were no longer a first among equals but absolute lords over all the Earth. Beings who before would have been viewed as the gods family, were now his mere servants. They had no authority beyond what they were given. In the past El might be the most powerful god but he couldn’t ever completely overcome Mot, the lord of death, or even his wife the mother of life. They shared responsibility over creation. The new God had power over all forces in nature. Other beings, at best, were his deputies carrying out orders.It turns out to be a catchy idea in one form or another. Many so called polytheist religions are as monotheistic as the so called monotheisms are polytheistic. The idea of one Supreme Being who controls the whole universe allows for the idea that justice and goodness rule the cosmos. Old nature gods have personalities like natural phenomenon. A god of death doesn’t seem to loving, and death is a very powerful force. For the supreme god, death is just one of his ministers, and must have a place in some master plan.

Our culture in the west (of the Indus) dominates our thinking and these all come from a very limited source. Both Christianity and Islam are based on Judaism. It’s from Judaism that the odd belief that there is only one God developed. For whatever reasons it developed it was a pretty powerful idea in that faith. For Jews worship of any other being as god was a crime against his community punishable by death. [2] It became such a mark of being Jewish that even as the faith spread it didn’t abandon that concept. When Christianity began there were elements that wanted to adopt additional gods, including a deified Jesus. In the end Christianity stuck to its monotheist roots and invented a complicated scheme to be able to have both Jesus and God as divinities but still are one person. Islam to was influenced by Judaism to be monotheistic but didn’t by into Christianities tortured formula. Still they believe in angels, Jinns, and Satans, who once again are just gods by different names.

In other cultures the need to make their faith conform to a strict monotheistic guideline doesn’t apply. Even if the feel that Shiva or Vishnu are supreme gods and that all other gods are just aspects of them. There’s just no need to go and reclassify all these things. I think we’ve taken God out of our world because we insisted that it become what we want Him to be. When we have knowledge about something then we wrest it out of gods domain. God finds himself with less to do, and creation has less to do with god. But I don’t think we should forget that Existence is wonderful and powerful and divine.

[1] Actually Allah means the Lah. Lah is the Arabic variation of the Semitic El or Lil, meaning the God El. it’s the same word/name for God in the Bible. So technically Muslims and Jews worship the same god.

[2](Exodus 22:20 “Whoever sacrifices to any god other than Yahweh must be destroyed.”)

 

 

 

I was having my daily debrief with my best friend and we were discussing my blog. I shared a recent comment that a fellow ex-Mormon left for me about loosing sight of why I left the LDS church in the first place. She shared with me that my blog used to be about what God was doing in my life, how He was shaping and changing me, and now it was more about the things going on in my life.

She might very well understand why I have been more and more hesitant to blog about religion lately (unless pissed off as of recent), what God is specifically doing, what I feel moved in, etc etc - but others might not because they are not my daily confidants like she is. So I thought, without going to an uncomfortable place - I would share what God has been doing in my life as of late.

God has been providing for us. I was totally fed up with being overweight and unhealthy - and then we went and Steve picked out a dog (yes Steve) that was high energy that needed to be run, not walked twice a day. Guess who got stuck with that responsibility? Me. That was such a blessing. It gave me time with God every morning and evening. Three months later - I am 30 lbs less. I am healthier (even though I'm sick right now). And I've been able to work through a fear of large breed dogs that I've carried around for years. God provided.

I was ready to go back to work, but with one car and the economy what it is - it looked like I'd be stuck working one day a week at my parents' store forever. Then, we were given a minivan (wow) totally and completly free the weekend before I started working full time - 40 hours - at their store. I get to work early enough that I come home early afternoons and have the entire afternoon and evenings with the kids. It's awesome. God provided.

I am entering a period in my life when I am fed up with all talk and study of religion (a rare for me considering how much I LOVE it). But just honestly want and need to distance myself and focus less on doctrine and more on just one on one time with God. I frankly and honestly do not give a rat's behind on if the Godhead or Trinity are correct. I do not give a rat's behind if it's right to be monotheistic or polytheistic. Want to know where I am with God? I'm not into semantics which is where I think so many religions are. If Jesus lead by spirit and heart of the Law and not by letter of the Law, what the heck are we doing? If the spirit behind His teachings are to follow Him and not be wishy washy or to deny Him in front of others - then I think we are taking the letter of the Law and not the Spirit of the teaching when we condemn others for not reading into the Bible what we are reading into the Bible. I am reaching a place of longing for unity and peace within the Christian body - meaning all Christians - all who profess Christ as their Lord and Savior. Does that mean He will look the same to all Christians? No. And that's okay by me because I am not their Lord and Savior. And I am okay with this.

I am conservative in my own understanding of the scriptures but liberal in my application because in the end, I am no one's White Throne Judge. My friend reminds me that the Catholic church may say who is in heaven - but they never say who is in hell. Many Protestants could take a lesson in this wisdom.

What is God doing in my life? He is leading me to an intense desire for unity and not dissention which is why my dealbreakers are what they are. He is leading me to a place of longing for peace - peace that I felt in the extreme as a Latter Day Saint and He is leading me to a place of not wanting labels (polytheism, monotheism, Godhead, Trinity, etc etc) but just initimacy with Him and His presence. All else falls away and nothing else matters. He provides because His grace is endless and I am forever grateful.

Much like Maya learns the command, "leave it" - I too must learn humilty and to simply leave those things that are not unifying.

So, who is the true God according to Islam? What is His attributes? We know little about God. Yet, in the Quran, God explains His characteristics as follow:

God, the All Wise Creator

According to Islam, God is the Creator of All:

“The Originator of the heavens and the earth! When He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is.” [Quran 2:117]

Lo! the likeness of Jesus with Allah is as the likeness of Adam. He created him of dust, then He said unto him: Be! and he is.” [Quran 3:59]

“Say : Is there of your partners (whom ye ascribe unto Allah) one that produceth Creation and then reproduceth it? Say: Allah produceth creation, then reproduceth it. How then, are ye misled!” [Quran 10:34]

God the Owner of Heaven, Earth, and Their Contents

God owns everything in Earth, Heaven, and in between:

They indeed have disbelieved who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. Say : Who then can do aught against Allah, if He had willed to destroy the Messiah son of Mary, and his mother and everyone on earth? Allah's is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them. He createth what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things” [Quran 5:17]

God is the First and the Last

God already exists before anything exist. God also will keep exist when everything is dead or destroyed.

”He is the First and the Last, and the Outward and the Inward; and He is Knower of all things.” [Quran 57:3]

Therefore it would be inappropriate if God was born when other creatures already exist and died when “His” creatures still exist. If there is a “God” like that, then he is not God at all. But only a creature of the true God!

God is one, namely: Allah

There is only one God: Allah

“They surely disbelieve who say: Lo! Allah is the third of three; when there is no God save the One God. If they desist not from so saying a painful doom will fall on those of them who disbelieve.” [Quran 5:73]

Allah has no Partner

“Say (O Muhammad): Who is Lord of the heaven and the earth?

Say: Allah! Say: Take ye then (others) beside Him for protectors, which, even for themselves, have neither benefit nor hurt?

Say: Is the blind man equal to the seer, or is darkness equal to light? Or assign they unto Allah partners Who created the like of His creation so that the creation (which they made and His creation) seemed alike to them? Say: Allah is the Creator of all things, and He is the One, the Almighty.” [Quran 13:16]

“And say: Praise be to Allah, Who hath not taken unto Himself a son, and Who hath no partner in the Sovereignty, nor hath He any protecting friend through dependence. And magnify Him with all magnificence.” [Quran 17:111]

Allah has no Child nor Partner

“Allah hath not chosen any son, nor is there any God along with Him; else would each God have assuredly championed that which he created, and some of them would assuredly have overcome others. Glorified be Allah above all that they allege.” [Quran 23:91]

“And nothing compares to Him.” [Quran 112:4]

Allah Knows All

Allah knows all even the invisible, a falling leaf, or a grain in the darkness.

And with Him are the keys of the invisible. None but He knoweth them. And He knoweth what is in the land and the sea. Not a leaf falleth but He knoweth it, not a grain amid the darkness of the earth, naught of wet or dry but (it is noted) in a clear record.” [Quran 6:59]

Allah the Most Powerful

Allah is the Almighty. Sometimes we are amaze of the greatness of some people. Yet their power is not everlasting. The great people such as Genghis Khan, Hitler, and Roosevelt were dead in the hand of Allah, the Creator, the Most Powerful, and the executioner.

If He will, He can remove you, O people, and produce others in your stead. Allah is Able to do that.” [Quran 4:133]

“Yet they choose beside Him other gods who create naught but are themselves created, and possess not hurt nor profit for themselves, and possess not the dead nor life, nor power to raise the dead.” [Quran 25:3]

In a hadeeth told that when all creatures such as human, genie, and angels are put to death, Allah says “I am King of the Kings. Where are arrogant people who used to claim themselves a God? Where are arrogant people who used to claim themselves a King?” At that time, only Allah lives and the Most Powerful.

Allah the Great Controller

Sometimes we see the bridges that were designed by experts and built by hundreds of workers with strong pillars fall down instantly. Or the air traffic that controlled by radar, air controller, pilot, and co-pilot, yet the accidents happen every year.

But we never see the sky which is pillar-less fall down into the Earth. The Sun never bump into the Moon or the Earth though they revolve for billions of years.

That is the proof that the order happens because there is a Great Controller: Allah!

“Allah it is who raised up the heavens without visible supports, then mounted the Throne, and compelled the sun and the moon to be of service, each runneth unto an appointed term; He ordereth the course; He detaileth the revelations, that haply ye may be certain of the meeting with your Lord.” [Quran 13:2]

Allah the Giver Gives All to Mankind

Who gives you your body, life, parent, friends, air to breath, water to drink, the Earth, etc?

People who sick will know how expensive is the heart, kidney, eyes, etc. Millions of dollar could be spend to by those things and the operation.

We have to buy drinking water. If we want to do the diving, we have to buy air to breath expensively. Yet, Allah gives those things and many others to us for free!

“Who hath appointed the earth a resting-place for you, and the sky a canopy; and causeth water to pour down from the sky, thereby producing fruits as food for you. And do not set up rivals to Allah when ye know (better).” [Quran 2:22]

“Lo! in the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the difference of night and day, and the ships which run upon the sea with that which is of use to men, and the water which Allah sendeth down from the sky, thereby reviving the earth after its death, and dispersing all kinds of beasts

therein, and (in) the ordinance of the winds, and the clouds obedient between heaven and earth: are signs (of Allah's sovereignty) for people who have sense.” [Quran 2:164

If you try to count what Allah gives you, you will not be able to do it.

”If ye would count the favor of Allah ye cannot reckon it. Lo! Allah is indeed Forgiving, Merciful.” [Quran 16:18]

So, thank God, and worship Him.

Those are some characteristics of God in Islam. We hope we could understand who is the real God better.

http://islammyreligion.wordpress.com

One of the most beautiful verses in the Quran about Monotheism that Allah, or God in English, has no partners, nor sons, but is to be worshiped alone.

One of The Leiden Hymns attempts to answer, in poetry, that most perplexing of questions: If God created the universe, then who created God?

Here's the hymn, as translated by John Foster in the Norton Anthology of World Literature (2002):

God is a master craftsman;

               yet none can draw the lines of his Person.

Fair features first came into being

               in the hushed dark where he mused alone;

He forged his own figure there,

               hammered his likeness out of himself---

All powerful one (yet kindly,

               whose heart would lie open to men).

He mingled his heavenly god-seed

               with the inmost depths of his mystery.

Planting his image there

               in the unknown depths of his mystery.

He cared, and the sacred form

               took shape and contour, splendid at birth!

God, skilled in the intricate ways of the craftsman,

               first fashioned Himself to perfection.

This is a kind of "intelligent design" argument from 3300 years ago, in which the universe, being apparently exquisitely crafted, must have a master craftsman who was created by---well, who?

The poem answers: God himself.

In other words, God created himself. The buck stopped there.

He was, the writer suggests, alone in the dark, musing, cogitating, thinking.

He was, if you will, without form and void, without boundary to his person.

And when he got to work, he engaged in self-fashioning, forging "his own figure," hammering his own "likeness out of himself," mingling his seed with himself, and though without apparent ground, "planting his image there / in the unknown depths of his being."

This is an almost frightening, fearsome depiction of God forging himself, with fire and sparks flying---and recalls William Blake's tiger being forged "in the forests of the night."

Western theology and mysticism, it seems, despite three millenia of speculation about what might be the nature of God, has not made all that much progress beyond the paradoxical poetry of this hymn.

(Nor has science, if God does not exist, made much progress in the question of why there should be anything at all.)

In this hymn, the author depicts God as a kind of ouroboros---the snake that bites its tail; the Zen koan at the edge of time; a recursive iteration, akin to this definition of what an "endless loop" is, as cited in Stephen Pinker's The Stuff of Thought (2008, p.12):

endless loop, n. See loop, endless.

loop, endless, n. See endless loop. 

And who cannot hear, at the beginning of this hymn, an emerging Moses-like resistence to the idea that God can be, or even should be, depicted as a physical form or in human terms?

In this sense, the poem is in tension with itself, and even deconstructing itself, for God forges an idol of himself even as it is also true that:

[N]one can draw the lines of his Person.

Thus the paradoxes and confusions inherent in this poem are also its strengths, and resist closure.

As Emerson once wrote (and with apologies to hobgoblins):

Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

An interesting thing I've begun to note more recently is that even those Mormons in the know about these issues don't seem to see what the big deal is.  Why does it matter if you say there is One God or three, or four, or more?  Isn't 'being a Christian' and hence 'being saved' or 'being born again' or however else you might put 'being on God's team' all about following Christ?  Aren't Christians, Jews, whoever might make a big deal of this issue being rather narrow?  For those of you who were raised in the Judeo-Christian tradition (the historic tradition, excluding Mormonism) this question may strike you as completely asinine.  You may respond to Mormons with this attitude with honest disbelief.

Here's the thing: Mormons are taught to believe that theological training is an elitist privilege at best, and a tool of contention, and therefore of the devil, at worst.  This teaching used to be most explicitly represented by the minister who used to be a part of the endowment ceremony, a caricature of a priest or minister trying to convince the noble, simple Adam of an absurdity through sophisticated learning.  Hence, deep thinking about God's nature is discouraged as 'speculation', 'mere speculation', things to be played with but not taken seriously.  This is the only way Mormons can make sense of the former President Hinckley's declaration when asked about men becoming gods and god having been a man that he wasn't sure those things were taught (even though they are most clearly included in the Gospel Principles manual used to teach new converts in the "Exaltation" chapter).

On the other hand, thoughts about God's nature constitute the cornerstone of the Judeo-Christian tradition historically, making the clash between Mormonism and the historic Christianity it so longs to be accepted by inevitable.  This rift is at the heart of why I could not be a Mormon- thinking about what deity means is intimately connected with figuring out why we are here, why anything exists at all (see my post "Why Does Anything Exist") and really the whole point of religion at all.  A religion that views those questions as useless speculation is a limp one.  Here is what I ask: if The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true and living church on the face of the planet, wouldn't theological thinking, sophisticated theological thinking, only illuminate its brilliant truth? 

The alternative is that missionaries knock on the door of new converts in order to get answers to questions that they should have been experts at:  are we monotheists?  Imagine me, as a new convert, sitting in my apartment explaining to wide eyed sisters that they are not monotheists since the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are separate Gods (see the LDS Bible Dictionary).  That to be a god in Mormonism means to be a perfected human, that gods and humans are of the same species, subject to the same rules of the cosmos.

This is not a nit picking argument.  This is huge.  This is the whole point.  This changes everything- God, if He is to be actually God, that is a being of a separate kind than we humans are, is not subject to the same rules of the cosmos as everybody else.  God is the creator of the rules.  He is a different kind of Being because unlike the rest of us He is not limited and He has no cause.  The implications of this differentiation are so thoroughly enormous that it's impossible to convey the weight in one post.  Let me say this, it is enough to claim that Mormonism and historical Christianity are separate religions because they refer to completely different theological systems. 

The fact that Mormons will read this and say "eh, this is all speculation anyway!  What matters is that we are good people/we 'follow Christ' (i.e. try to be ethical)" only proves my point.  Mormons don't get it because they are operating from a completely different place, a different religious system altogether.

FOLLOW THE ONE MONOTHEISTIC RELIGION

TONIGHT--ON YOUR KNEES, ASK GOD THE TRUTH

The difference between the two perspectives is the idea that you can see one intelligence as being "in charge" of the whole. I believe there is, but even that "in charge" being is not as we presume. We think being in charge means that everything that happens on your shift is your responsibility. In which case, everything from the greatest good to the darkest evil can be "pinned" onto God's robes and we can get all sorts of "mad" at God for allowing bad things to happen.

Perhaps. But what about the idea that God may "create" simply because that is the nature of God's "being", and then, when it is created, God releases it into the universe having already endowed it with the ability to make choices on it's own, and hopes for the best. With the ability to make choices comes an insidious little thing creeping into the works called an ego. This ego then, has the choice to "obey" the "Prime Directive" to Love, or to go it's own way, wanting what it wants and not giving a d*mn about any other entity's rights or feelings.

Since that latter seems, indeed, to be the way things are, in backtracking the clues, it would seem to me that this GOD is inclined to create and release. But, why? Well, this theory has been around for a long while, as have most of the things I have put together on this blog, but, perhaps the Creator desires to be loved freely, not by command. In that case, the Creator would have to give the created the choice to love or not to love.

Now, lets go back to the question of pantheism v. monotheism. If we understand that there is but one actual God, then we begin to at least look for the primary reasons for our having been created. If we leave it that the spirits are as we are, and unguided, or perhaps guided by one as faulty as Zeus, each a being unto himself, then there really is no reason to look for motive beyond the existence of life itself. That's almost good enough, after all, there is simply a sacredness about life that is so profound that Moshe wrote into the laws the idea that if a man wasted his seed he had sinned, (this would, indeed be the idea behind the gay lifestyle being sinful, one was created to procreate, never mind that there are already too many of us on the planet {or that that is the precursor to a proliferation of same gender relations throughout all of nature.})

¿Do you ever wonder if God can change his/her mind? After all, the command to go forth and multiply has been obeyed to the point of overflowing, can God command us to close the tap down to a trickle? And are we so foolish that we need God to even make such a command?

Yet, all over the planet there are indications that compassion is the paradigm toward which we are to grow. Is this built into us? That implication is there, both scientifically and philosophically. Or is it the response of mankind to One who has been guiding us toward compassion? And even here, I have wondered for some time if compassion is so profound a need (I'd agree) that it matters not whether the students follow monotheism or pantheism?

Witness Taoism and Judaism; the teachings are similar, the core almost identical, yet the approach is mirrored, and so (almost) justifies wars. Just remember, war in any disguise makes compassion more difficult! *The painting is by Dina Dargo, and links to where it may be purchased, but so beautifully makes the point of the dichotomy which I am addressing! The vine in Buddhism seems to signify living in the moment looking neither to past nor future, and for me it signifies Spirit as the vine taking me from gentle human form into something greater, (oops, maybe they are the same perspective?)

I have seen in dreams Hashem as a many faceted jewel, when we look in any one of the faces, things look right and complete from that point of view, yet, a complete understanding of Hashem can only be had when all the faces are put together and one can see the complete and glowing gem.

And it was revealed to Akhenaten that the one true God, Aten, had one son, and one son only---and I bet that you can guess who that son was. 

That's right, Akhenaten himself.

Akhenaten, under inspiration of his newfound monotheism (or proto-monotheism)---and if we would be mean, narcissism---quickly acted in honor of his God, and commanded that the people of Egypt turn on their pantheon of gods in gestures of iconoclasm (destroying the statues and temples to the other gods, save Aten). This, the people did on behalf of Akhenaten, but with only partial enthusiasm (as archeology attests).

Akhenaten also moved the capital of Egypt from Thebes to a brand new city, built from scratch---the Brazilia, as it were, of his day.

The name of the new city was Heliopolis (sun city).

And he presented himself to the people as the one that they must go through to get to Aten himself.

In other words, Akhenaten acted as both the chief priest, king, and interpreter between God and man.

And in Heliopolis the people built a huge open-air temple to Aten---and Akhenaten was frequently paraded, along with his family, along the main thoroughfare of Heliopolus. Akhenaten's family was treated, as it were, with all the deference that the pantheon of Egyptian gods once received.

What's not to like?---at least if you're Akhenaten.

And, predictably, Akhenaten wrote hymns of praise to such a wonderful arrangement (for himself), and they were written inside a tomb, and we now know of this "poem" as Akhenaten's "Hymn to the Sun," which has been broken by scholars into twelve stanzas, the first of which reads thus:

When in splendor you first took your throne

          high in the precinct of heaven,

     O living God,

          life truly began!

Now from eastern horizon risen and streaming,

     you have flooded the world with your beauty.

You are majestic, awesome, bedazzling, exalted,

     overlord over all earth,

yet your rays, they touch lightly, compass the lands

          to the limit of your creation.

There in the Sun, you reach to the farthest of those

     you would gather in for your Son [Akhenaten],

          whom you love;

Though you are far, your light is wide upon earth;

     and you shine in the faces of all

          who turn to follow your journeying.

Reading Akhenaten's "Hymn to the Sun," we might debate its merits as a poem---most scholars think its pretty good, and in places moving---but it's also hard not to think of Akhenaten as a kind of North Korean Kim Jung Ill---a totalitarian generating around his god---and himself---a cult of perfect personality.

The first stanza of the "Hymn to the Sun," for example, locates all life as dependent upon a monarch who takes his throne "high in the precinct of heaven." And this God does not confine himself to national boundaries, but incorporates into his project the whole world. Akhenaten says of Aten: "You . . . compass the lands / to the limits of all your creation" and "gather" them in "for your Son, / whom you love."

In other words, with the first monotheist apparently comes religiously sanctioned imperialism.

And who cannot visualize a 1930s propaganda poster in these lines:

Though you are far, your light is wide upon earth;

     and you shine in the faces of all

          who turn to follow your journeying.

In our age of ever more strident religious monotheism, Akhenaten seems to be a prototypical emobodiment of totalist impulses---and deserves study and reflection.

Here's a book on Akhenaten, put out by the Museum of Fine Arts Boston, that I recommend: http://www.amazon.com/Pharoahs-Sun-Akhenaten-Nefertiti-Tutankhamen/dp/0878464700/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219416031&sr=8-1

I was struck throughout these 9 verses by the flurry of ways that Allah, as He's portrayed here in the Quran, reflects issues that the biblical reader will notice immediately. Then suddenly, at the end, there's a huge difference (a difference that a biblical reader, though not necessarily a religious Christian or Jew, might notice).

In verse 29 of the Cow, we learn that God is omniscient; that is, he has knowledge of everything. Though predictable that the Quran would make sure to let us know this seemingly obvious fact, it is noteworthy that the Bible doesn't actually tell us this about God.

Jews and Christians will insist that God is omniscient - after all, how could He not be? - but show me where it says that in the Bible. It doesn't. The Jewish and Christian conception of God that developed in the centuries surrounding the year 0 was one of an omniscient and omnipotent deity, but God was not always thought of like this. In fact, there are instances in the Bible where we see that God just doesn't know certain things (in Gen. 3 He has to look for Adam and Eve and calls to them because He doesn't know where they are).

My point is that by the seventh century and the development of Islam, the concept of God in monotheistic traditions had developed in such a way that God was quite obviously omniscient, as the Quran states outright. God, we learn in these verses, is also the creator and the controller of nature.

Covenant?

One point I would love to understand better in these verses is from 27, when God's "covenant" is spoken of. A covenant was a two-party agreement in the Ancient Near Eastern world, and either the word is being used generally or I'm having some trouble with it. Can anyone tell me what the Arabic word is?

Usually a covenant is not God's, per se, but God's covenant with person x. Is it implied that this is God's covenant with mankind or individuals? Is this common language and should we understand what is being said?

Man as Creation's Culmination

It seems a bit unfair of me to compare everything in the Quran to the Bible but as one who has studied that text and since the Bible is known to the Quran, I feel justified making such comparisons. Verse 29, that God made all that lies within the earth for you, is an interesting combination of the two creation stories in the Bible.

In Genesis 1, everything is created and human beings (not Adam and Eve) are the final creations: they are the culmination of creation. In Genesis 2, a different creation story (just read them and you'll see that they are two different tales) tells us that man is created, and then everything else is created for him to enjoy.

These two different ideas - man as culmination of creation and as the catalyst for additional creation - seem to be harmonized in the Quranic verse, "God made for you all that lies within the earth."

What do these verses make you think about? The notion of resurrection is also present in these verses? What is the Muslim understanding of resurrection? Are there any notions here about God that you find are the same as or different from those expressed in the Bible?

To read about the cow, 1-10, click HERE and about the Cow 8-20, click HERE. To read about whether or not Moses wrote the Bible, click HERE.

The Cow 21-29

21. So, O you people, adore your Lord who created you, as He did those before you, that you could take heed for yourself and fear Him. 22. Who made the earth a bed for you, the sky a canopy, and sends forth rain from the skies that fruits may grow - your good and sustenance. So do not make another the equal of God knowingly. 23. If you are in doubt of what We have revealed to Our votary, then bring a Surah like this, and call any witness, apart from God, you like, if you are truthful. 24. But if you cannot as indeed you cannot, then guard yourslves against the Fire whose fuel is men and rocks, which has been prepared for the infidels. 25. Announce to those who believe and have done good deeds, glad tidings of gardens under which rivers flow, and where, when they eat the fruits that grow, they will say: "Indeed they are the same as we were given before," so like in semblance the food would be. And they shall have fair spouses there, and live there abidingly. 26. God is not loath to advance the similitude of a gnat or a being more contemptible; and those who believe know whatever is from the Lord is true. But those who disbelieve say: "What does God mean by this parable?" He causes some to err this way and some He guides; yet He turns away none but those who trangress, 27. Who, having sealed it, break God's covenant, dividing what He ordained cohered; and those who spread discord in the land will suffer assuredly. 28. Then how can you disbelieve in God? He gave you life when you were dead. He will make you die again then bring you back to life: To Him then you will return. 29. He made for you all that lies within the earth, then turning to the firmament He proportioned several skies; He has knowledge of every thing.

INTRO| ARTICLES| GOODIES

Allah - A Moon God?

From Christian Ph.D. Robert Morey

Quran proves - "Allah" is NOT a 'moon god':

"And from among His Signs are the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. Do not bow down (prostrate) to the sun nor to the moon, but only bow down (prostrate) to "Allah" Who created them, if you (really) worship Him."

[Holy Quran 41:37]

The Christian acquaintance who sent me a copy of Morey's booklet also sent me five questions related to this subject. I will attempt to answer them below:

Question 1:
What is the significance of the crescent moon in Islam?

Answer:
The Quran answers this question before you asked it. Read this verse:

"They ask you about the new moons. Say: These are signs to mark fixed periods of time for mankind and for the pilgrimage."

[Holy Quran 2:189]

Question 2:
Why does Islam follow a lunar calendar?

Answer:
In both the Bible and the Quran religious festivals are regulated by the lunar calendar. Jews and Muslims have kept to these regulations which they believe to be from God. Why does Christianity follow a solar calendar?

Question 3:
Why is the feast of Ramadan marked by the appearance of the crescent moon?

Answer:
I think you mean the fast of Ramadan. God commanded Muslims in the Quran to fast from dawn to sunset during the month called Ramadan (see Quran 2:185, 187). The beginning and end of the month is determined by the crescent (2:189) based on the instruction of God's Messenger, on whom be peace.

Why this method and not another is not for us to say but for God and His Messenger to prescribe. However, I find it an efficient method. It is a universally applicable method, and it allows for Ramadan to move through all the seasons. This allows believers to have the pleasure of worshipping God by fasting in all the various seasons: one year in the summer, some years later in the winter.

Question 4:
Why does the Quran place the Sabeans on the same level with Jews and Christians when scholars have clearly proven that the Sabeans were involved in the moon cult?

Answer:
I am not aware that the Quran has placed the Sabeans on the same level with Jews and Christians. Perhaps you have in mind the following verse:

"Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians and Sabians, whoever believes in "Allah" and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord. On them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve."

[Holy Quran 2:62; also 5:69]

This verse, however, does not place the Sabeans on the same level as the Jews and Christians except in a particular context. The verse speaks of four distinct communities, and offers all four the opportunity to fear not nor grieve if only they would believe in "Allah" and the Last Day and do right. The four communities are:

the Believers (i.e., the Muslims)
the Jews
the Christians
the Sabeans

While they are all offered the same opportunity for improvement, nothing, is said in this verse about the validity of the existing faiths of these four communities. Otherwise the Jews and Christians who are criticized in the Quran for their deviations will not be placed on the same level with the believers. The matter becomes clear when you realise that believers here does not mean saved persons but those who ostensibly belong to the community of Muslims. They, as well as the other three groups, must do the following to be saved: believe in "Allah" , believe in the Last Day, and do right. Doing right, according to the Quran, includes following every teaching of Muhammad.

Question 5:
Did the Meccans worship the true God since they recognized "Allah" ? Was "Allah" one of the gods of the Ka'bah?
And if so, where did the Meccans derive the recognition and the name of "Allah" from?

Answer:
First, "Allah" was not one of the 360 idols which were in the Ka'bah, although Morey has claimed this without evidence. When the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) entered Makkah victorious he went into the Ka'bah and broke the idols therein.

Second, the word "Allah" has been used all along for the name of "God" in the Arabic Bible for Jews and Christians alike. The proof is easy to verify; simple go to any hotel or motel on the earth and look in the drawer next to the bed and take out the complimentary Bible, placed there by the Giddeons and then look on page 5 or 6 where they list the examples of translations they have made into other languages. The second example given is for Arabic speakers. The verse is from the Gospel of John, chapter 3, verse 16. Everyone knows this one; "For God so loved the world..." and the word in Arabic for "God" is "Allah." Then if you have a Bible in Arabic, look on page one in Genesis, and you will find the word "Allah" 17 times.

Next, the word for "God" to the Arabs, ever since the time of Abraham, peace be upon him, has been "Allah" and He is to them, the Lord of the Ka'bah (the black box in the center of the Holy Sanctuary in Makkah). He was the unseen God whom they would call upon when in distress. Yes, they worshipped the true God but their worship was not purely for Him. They also worshipped other gods thinking that they would act as intermediaries between them and the true God Allah.

The Arabs know of Allah because Abraham visited Makkah and together with his son Ishmael laid the foundation of the Ka'bah. The descendants of Ishmael retained some of the worship rites and beliefs from Abraham. This included their knowledge of the true God Allah.

Elsewhere we have shown conclusively that the true god, "El" of the Bible is the same as "Allah" of the Quran.

Please refer to: "Yahweh, Jehovah, or Allah - What Is God's Real Name?" by Sheikh Shabir Ally.

from: http://www.godallah.com/moon_god.php

Elke ding wat ons nodig het,

Is in God se stoor weggepak –

Alles is verniet en alles is op die onderste rak

Waar kindertjies dit maklik kan bykom.

Grootmense kan dit ook bykom –

Hulle moet net op hulle knieë staan.

This poem in my view represents everything that is wrong with religion. It illustrates the choice believers make to rather use their knees than their brains, to absolutely neglect the most important part of the human body, their grey matter.

I recently bought Michel Onfray’s book In Defence of Atheism. Onfray is sometimes called the French Richard Dawkins, and this book shows why. Its subtitle, The Case Against Christianity, Judaism and Islam, illustrates the route he follows.

Onfray clearly illustrates the basic characteristics of the three monotheistc religions, Christianity, Judaism and Islam. One can apply all these characteristics to those 71 000 plus swooning adherents of Angus Buchan at Loftus Versfeld.

1.      Down with intelligence! Monotheism loathes intelligence. It does not want you to ask questions that clearly contradict their religious dogma.

2.      Litany of taboos. God was not content with that one prohibition on the forbidden fruit. Ever since, he has revealed himself to us only through taboos, writes Onfray. “The monotheistic religions live exclusively by prescriptions and constraints: things to do and things not to do, say and not to say, think and not to think, perform and not to perform. Forbidden and authorized, licit and illicit, agreed and not agreed: the religious texts abound in existential, dietary, behavioural, ritual and other codifications.”

3.      Obsession with purity. Whether its food, sex, sight, touch, seminal fluid, gas, urine, feces, menstrual blood, you name it, the monotheists abhor anything they call impure, Onfray emphasises.  And beware the one who steps over that boundary. Death by stoning is still a very real option. (One wonders how quickly that crowd of 71 000 could be swept up to stone someone their prophet Angus Buchan might declare impure!).

4.      Hatred of science. “This law of the one book, total and all-inclusive, coupled with the unfortunate habit that ‘everything’ can be contained within a single text, means that there is no recourse to nonreligious (which is not to say atheistic) books such as scientific works. Monotheism does not really like the rational work of scientists … Refusal of the Enlightenment characterizes the monotheistic religions: they cherish nights of the mind propitious for the nurturing of their fables,” writes Onfray.

5.      Negation of matter. When the church/mosque/synagogue faces epistemological truths, it automatically persecutes the discoverer. “The history of science’s relationship with Christianity yields a prodigious abundance of blunders and stupidity,” Onfray argues. “Between the church’s rejection of the heliocentric hypothesis of antiquity and its contemporary condemnations of genetic laws, twenty-five centuries of wasted opportunities for humankind accumulate. We scarcely dare imagine how swiftly the West would have advanced without such sustained brutalization of science!”

The debate on this blog shows a frightening naivety by those defending Angus Buchan’s modern day crusade to annihilate intelligent and rational thinking. Even more frightening is their ignorance and willingness to stay ignorant, to distort the findings of science, all to try and defend a mythical figure.

As far back as the 13^th century the Dominican priest Thomas Aquinas warned “Beware of the man of one book.” This is a warning the Angus Buchan Mutual Amiration Society should really take to heart.

Ministry Finds Fault with Yale Christian-Muslim Declaration

A ministry that works with the persecuted church found parts of a declaration recently adopted by Christian and Muslim leaders troubling because it did not emphasize the differences between the two religions enough and gave too much credit to Islam.

Wed, Aug. 13, 2008 Posted: 04:15 PM EDT

A ministry that works with the persecuted church found parts of a declaration recently adopted by Christian and Muslim leaders troubling because it did not emphasize the differences between the two religions enough and gave too much credit to Islam.

Barnabas Fund’s international director, Dr. Peter Sookhdeo, a former Muslim, says the inclusion of the Qur’anic commandment to speak to Christian and Jews (Q 3:64) in the opening passage of the “Final Declaration of the Yale Common Word Conference, July 2008” actually calls for the conversion of Christians and Jews to Islam .

The opening passage also includes the “ascribe no partner” phrase, which is a Muslim critique of the Christian doctrines of the Trinity and the deity of Jesus, according to the U.K.-based Barnabas Fund.

“It seems that the implications of this verse were not realized or discussed,” commented Barnabas Fund in a reflection on the declaration published Tuesday.

The declaration was made at the conclusion of an eight-day conference at Yale University that was in direct response to a letter signed by 138 Muslim leaders last fall that called for peace between Muslims and Christians for the sake of world peace. Over 140 conference participants unanimously approved on July 31 a cooperative statement that signaled a new beginning of collaboration between Christians and Muslims where stronger assertions of faith would not just be allowed but required.

Barnabas Fund raised several concerns with the final declaration. The document raises Islam, Muhammad and the Qur’an to the same level as Christianity through the language “our common Abrahamic heritage” and “Judeo-Christian-Islamic monotheistic heritage,” the ministry pointed out.

“This is a step towards affirming that Muhammad is a prophet and the Qur’an a word of God,” the ministry said. “As Christians we affirm that the promises of Abraham are fulfilled in Christ.”

Other unclear parts in the declaration state that “no Muslim or Christian … should tolerate the denigration or desecration of one another’s sacred symbols, founding figures, or places of worship.”

Drafters should clarify what this means because for orthodox Muslims, the ministry explained, saying Muhammad is not a prophet, that the Qur’an is not divinely inspired, or to invite a Muslim to acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God are all considered blasphemy.

The ministry further argues that the declaration was also unclear in what it meant with freedom of religion. It did not assert that individuals have the right to choose, change and proclaim their religion without fear of punishment, nor did it effectively address the full reciprocity of Christians freely sharing Christianity and building churches on Muslim lands – a freedom followers of Islam are given in western countries, Barnabas Fund pointed out.

“We raise these issues because of our concern for the Biblical Christian faith and for the implications of the ‘Common Word’ process for Christian minorities in Muslim lands, Christian mission in Muslim lands, and converts from Islam to Christianity around the world,” Barnabas Fund concluded.

“Although we respect and love Muslims, Christians cannot accept Islam as an equal and valid revelation from God. The denial of the deity of Christ and His redemptive work as well as of the Trinity will always stand in the way of interfaith dialogue and co-operation,” the ministry argues. “Just as Muslims cannot accept the Christian denial of Muhammad’s prophethood and the Qur’an’s status as the word of God, so Christians must take a clear stand on the central doctrines of their faith.”

Despite the list of critiques, Barnabas Fund emphasized at the beginning of its reflection that it “fully affirm[s] and support[s] all endeavors to work for peace in this torn world,” and welcomes the “sincerity and goodwill of all involved in the process.”

The ministry also said cooperation on social and economic issues should be based upon the groups’ common humanity, rather than a “supposed” common theology as proposed in the declaration.

Ethan Cole
Christian Post Reporter