• 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!

One God

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
Did he say I am God? Do you not think that God knew his creation before they were even gonna be born? Do you not think that He has a plan? He did not say I AM GOD Pilot was not convinced as well but did not want to upset the Jews and he said he was not responsible for him. He even asked Jesus according to the Bible are you the king of the Jews and he said what? "You say that I am" :) If he were God, wouldn't it be claimed throughout the entire Bible "I AM GOD"? Why hide it! Why would God hide from his own creation if he wanted it known to the entire mankind why he came to earth? He never said in the entire Bible, I am God. Just the contrary, he said, The lord thy God is one lord, I have come only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, love the lord God (not himself), Jesus went further ahead and fell on his face and prayed....What does that signify? that he was God? Who was he praying to? Himself? He said he himself could do nothing....which by the way, all prophets of God were given revelation and guidance from THE ONE WHO SENT THEM :) ....Jesus did not utter those words I am God.
In Islam, we believe that all prophets and messengers were sent from God telling their people to believe in the one true God. They all taught one God.
You cannot be a muslim without believing in all the prophets of God. You must believe in His Oneness, all the prophets, the angels, the books, the fate, the hereafter. If you do not believe that God has control of all things, you cannot be a believer.
Of course you can be a believer without believing exactly as you do, your version of belief is not exactly as others, there are levels of belief levels of faith and levels of understanding the belief.
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
UOTE="KenS, post: 7500235, member: 47847"].


Why can't I? I was made in His image and in His likeness.

I'm not confused... maybe confusion comes from lack of knowledge or because we aren't viewing it spiritually?

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Again, you are not saying what Jesus said. Moses didn't even write the first 5 books in the Bible. This is a known fact. There are many contradictions from the first book Genisus onwards...the Bible contains over 4000 contradictions alone.
To claim that God made man in His image cannot be proven. To say that you are like your creator is blasphemous, for human nature is not comparable to God Almighty. Nothing is compared to Him. He is flawless, whereas humans are not. Jesus was human, he said that he himself could do nothing but only by the one who sent him. He didn't send himself. Quote me what Jesus says and stop relying on the books that Jesus himself nor God endorsed.

In the Quran Allah says:
You are correct in many ways but you err on the matter of ‘Image of God’.

‘Image of God’ means things like the ability to know good from bad, to perceive, to love, to forgive, to plan, create, invent, design, destroy, sustain, maintain, to rule…

How many of these things are in the animals at the same time. The animals were not made in the image of God. And that’s why man, Adam, and the holy angels are called, ‘Sons of God’.

Humans and holy angels are ‘Like God’ but not with authority to BE GOD, for there can be ONLY ONE GOD.

Animals do not rule themselves. They operate under a simple closed-loop that changes only over long periods of time and does not react quickly to changing situations. The greater mass of animals only live for short periods of time - until man sinned, his life would have been thousands of years if not eternal.

I know you are speaking about what the Koran says but as Christian’s we cannot agree on the matter of Image of God.

And, as for Jesus, the emphasis that he was the ‘Only’ Son of God made in the image of God, is muddled by those of the trinitarian belief in Christianity. You must understand that there are ones, and yes, the greater mass of believers, who strongly believe in a false ideology of Christianity. I know it is easy to criticise these Trinitarians simply because their ideology IS FALSE… even those of us who are true Christians highly criticise our brethren Trinitarians.

The problem you have is knowing the difference between the fallacies of the Trinitarians - and the truth of the true Christian (note that ‘trinitarian’ is plural since virtually all Trinitarians individually believe their own ideology - they make it up as they go along… Whereas true Christian is singular: it is one only belief among ALL true believers)

So saying, Jesus is ‘ONLY Son of God’ because he, and he alone, as a man, is the ONLY human who follows the spirit of God; who does the works of his Father. All other humans err because of sin in us.
But note that the holy angels are also ‘Sons of God’ and an image of God but not with rulership aspirations. Their whole mindset is to follow the spirit of their creator God: to do his Will. Any Angel who foregoes his leadership knows he is doomed - the glory of the holy Angel is to please his creator.

Angels are immensely powerful and highly intelligent. Trinitarians do not like hearing this truth and hence cannot believe that God would have been speaking to them as a committee when he said, ‘Let us create man in our image’.

God is totally powerful: the angels are immensely powerful.
God is totally intelligent: the angels are highly intelligent.

Thus the angels are an IMAGE of their creator.

And mirror man in regard to God…. and certainly man is ‘God’ above the animals.

Just to define something for your understanding:
“God” just means ‘Ruler / Judge’. We use the TITLE, ‘God’ as if it were a NAME because we, as Christians, like you, believe in ONLY ONE GOD (though the fallacy of the trinitarian confuses this by claiming three PERSONS as this ONE GOD…. Nonsense, I know!!). The truth is that we SHOULD say, ‘The God’ instead of just ‘God’… just as we say ‘The King’ or ‘The Judge’ and not just ‘King’ or ‘Judge’ when referring to a person of reverence in the order of rulership.

We should also say, ‘Our God’, but since we are speaking among ourselves about our only God, we shorten the reference to just ‘God’.

You do right by using the NAME you give this one God. This way you don’t confuse TITLE with NAME.

Unfortunately, because the majority of Christian’s are Trinitarians, the idea that ‘God’ is a name has hardened and come to be normalised. It’s meaning is lost. So saying that ‘God is three persons’ makes sense to a trinitarian but no sense to anyone else. But it us curious that when called to explain what ‘God’ means, the trinitarian cannot say!!!! That is because the trinitarian suddenly realises that it makes no sense what he believes. This way, he MAKES UP a load of nonsense probably copied from what another trinitarian has written …which itself is a load of nonsense (the fool following the fool!).

Point of fact: The Trinitarians says that Jesus is God because he is the Son of God.
Think about that….
Is a Son of a king, King?
No, he is A PRINCE.

The trinitarian premises are false - but he continues to ignore the falseness in order to upkeep the false ideology and remain friends with his equally fallacious friends of unbelief in truth.
 
Last edited:

MyM

Well-Known Member
Of course you can be a believer without believing exactly as you do, your version of belief is not exactly as others, there are levels of belief levels of faith and levels of understanding the belief.

Thank you for your reply. But there still, to me, seems to be lacking of knowledge when it comes to fallacies in the Bible. Especially you do not know who wrote that man is made in the image of God. Who wrote it?

Jesus is like that of Adam. He had no father. As a matter of discussion, it would be more sensible to say Adam is much better than Jesus since he didn't have a mother or father. He had a creator. There are tons of sons in the Bible. Also another begotten one. But they are not "literally" the sons of God. In Islam, Angels are not sons of God. They are created from light.

That is why in Islam, "The God" is known as Allah and He is the ONLY one ever with that name. He said he is Allah. No one is comparable unto Him. English has a way ...actually I should say Christian Theologians have a way of adding and deleting as they see fit in the Bible that is why they have so many VERSIONS around. There are words that have been even translated into the Bible incorrectly...like the name of Mohammad....All together lovely they made it....you would never be able to say that it was Mohammad. They distort, add, delete and change things and that is why God has guarded his last message. Til this day, no one can do it. It's a challenge from God. I know others have their own ways and belief, but why doesn't someone counter what I am saying instead of just say, we believe different. Where are these facts that people base their faith upon ?
 

muhammad_isa

Well-Known Member
..But there still, to me, seems to be lacking of knowledge when it comes to fallacies in the Bible. Especially you do not know who wrote that man is made in the image of God. Who wrote it?
I don't know who wrote it, but I believe it to be true.

As far as I'm aware, Jews believe it refers to the spiritual attributes and not the physical .. as of course do I.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Thank you for your reply. But there still, to me, seems to be lacking of knowledge when it comes to fallacies in the Bible. Especially you do not know who wrote that man is made in the image of God. Who wrote it?

Jesus is like that of Adam. He had no father. As a matter of discussion, it would be more sensible to say Adam is much better than Jesus since he didn't have a mother or father. He had a creator. There are tons of sons in the Bible. Also another begotten one. But they are not "literally" the sons of God. In Islam, Angels are not sons of God. They are created from light.

That is why in Islam, "The God" is known as Allah and He is the ONLY one ever with that name. He said he is Allah. No one is comparable unto Him. English has a way ...actually I should say Christian Theologians have a way of adding and deleting as they see fit in the Bible that is why they have so many VERSIONS around. There are words that have been even translated into the Bible incorrectly...like the name of Mohammad....All together lovely they made it....you would never be able to say that it was Mohammad. They distort, add, delete and change things and that is why God has guarded his last message. Til this day, no one can do it. It's a challenge from God. I know others have their own ways and belief, but why doesn't someone counter what I am saying instead of just say, we believe different. Where are these facts that people base their faith upon ?

In Quran, it talks about face of God and that to God belongs the highest likeness in heavens and earth.

Angels are not sons of God in Arabic because at that time and place, sons of God had more of a literal meaning. However, Quran says, where he to take a son he would choose from who he created (astafa), so the chosen ones would be sons of God if it was an appropriate expression.

In the time of Torah and Gospels, it was an appropriate expression. In time and place where Rasool (s) was sent, it was not because the normative usage of the word was literal.

Quran uses it non-literally in one place that does apply to chosen ones, it's when Christians and Jews call themselves sons of God, it says why are they under threat of punishment for sins, and since his Prophets and chosen Angels are not under threat of punishment, we can deduce from this sense, they are sons of God.

Gospels are almost all perfect and from God. You should see multi-translations, there is no trinity in there.

The proper expression is Muqarab (drawn close) in Arabic, that's closest expression to sons of God meaning.
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Thank you for your reply. But there still, to me, seems to be lacking of knowledge when it comes to fallacies in the Bible. Especially you do not know who wrote that man is made in the image of God. Who wrote it?

Jesus is like that of Adam. He had no father. As a matter of discussion, it would be more sensible to say Adam is much better than Jesus since he didn't have a mother or father. He had a creator. There are tons of sons in the Bible. Also another begotten one. But they are not "literally" the sons of God. In Islam, Angels are not sons of God. They are created from light.
BOTH Adam and Jesus were born by the power of God’s Holy Spirit.

The dust of the earth and the seed of a woman are the same: inert material. Lifeless until a spirit is put into it.

The dust and the seed are both pure so it is the impregnating that draws the sin: the spirit from the spermicide from the man draws the sin and therefore neither Adam or Jesus were sinful because neither were impregnated by sperm from a man.

Adam is called, ‘Son of God’ (Luke 3:38) and Jesus is called ‘Son of God’. This ‘Son of God’ means someone who does the works of the Father…. and is led by the Spirit of the Father.

It’s easy to understand - it’s not a secret meaning! It’s simple: if a child does exactly as his Father dictates, directs, shows him, tells him, to do and he does so even without being overseen (I.e. he is willful in the execution of his duties) then this is a perfect ‘SON OF THE FATHER’.

However, after being dutiful to his God and Father, after doing all things as God desired him, after being led by the Spirit of his Father, Adam gave in to temptation and allowed himself to be misled by his wife, Eve…. And sinned. Thereafter, Adam ceased to be fully led by the spirit of God and became no longer ‘perfect human Son of God’. This led to sin in Cain and many other offspring (in fact, all) of Adam.

After a given period of time God created a new Adam since no offspring of Adam was found to be pure, unblemished, sinless. This new ‘Adam’ was given the name ‘Joshua’ (which we call ‘Jesus’).

Tue scriptures calls Jesus, ‘the LAST ADAM’ for good reasons: No other human would ever be created that way!

Jesus REMAINS SINLESS and is therefore the ONLY human SON of God.

And as for the word ‘Begotten’. There is no hidden meaning except what Trinitarians put to it: It simple means that God ADOPTED the man Jesus [Christ] as a SPIRITUAL SON, which is documented by scriptures:
  • “You are my Son, this day I have become your Father”
You will agree that this is a statement of Adoption???(yes?)
That is why in Islam, "The God" is known as Allah and He is the ONLY one ever with that name. He said he is Allah. No one is comparable unto Him. English has a way ...actually I should say Christian Theologians have a way of adding and deleting as they see fit in the Bible that is why they have so many VERSIONS around. There are words that have been even translated into the Bible incorrectly...like the name of Mohammad....All together lovely they made it....you would never be able to say that it was Mohammad. They distort, add, delete and change things and that is why God has guarded his last message. Til this day, no one can do it. It's a challenge from God. I know others have their own ways and belief, but why doesn't someone counter what I am saying instead of just say, we believe different. Where are these facts that people base their faith upon ?
No one should disagree with what you just said… it’s the other things you didn’t say that us disagreeable.

It matters not that you call the only God, Allah, and we call him ‘YHWH’. Different languages can allow for that. Take ‘Jesus’. It is clear that there was no such name as ‘Jesus’ in Hebrew or Judaism. ‘Jesus’ is an anglicised, latinised, name. WE KNOW that the proper translation is “Joshua” and so you are right about this change by western culture. In fact both Joshua and Jesus mean exactly the same thing: the one who brings salvation:
  • ‘You shall call him Jesus, for he shall save his people’ said the Angel to the Virgin Mary!
Mary did not argue: The Jews named their male children after someone in their family line. There was no one in Mary (or Joseph’s) family line with the name ‘Jesus’… yet Mary nor anyone she spoke to gave any surprise.

Now look at the counter example when Zacharias was told to call his son ‘John’. He argued so fiercely with the Angel that there was no one in his bloodline called John. The Angel **** his mouth until he agreed to call the Son, ‘John’.

Who cannot understand the purpose of these two events????

But yet it now matters not that we say ‘Jesus’ instead of ‘Joshua’.

So, whether ‘Allah’ or ‘YHWH’… each to its own! It’s not the point: It’s the attributes and attitude and reverence that matters: it IS the same God…. And do we worship him as he desires to be worshipped?
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
In Quran, it talks about face of God and that to God belongs the highest likeness in heavens and earth.

Angels are not sons of God in Arabic because at that time and place, sons of God had more of a literal meaning. However, Quran says, where he to take a son he would choose from who he created (astafa), so the chosen ones would be sons of God if it was an appropriate expression.

In the time of Torah and Gospels, it was an appropriate expression. In time and place where Rasool (s) was sent, it was not because the normative usage of the word was literal.

Quran uses it non-literally in one place that does apply to chosen ones, it's when Christians and Jews call themselves sons of God, it says why are they under threat of punishment for sins, and since his Prophets and chosen Angels are not under threat of punishment, we can deduce from this sense, they are sons of God.

Gospels are almost all perfect and from God. You should see multi-translations, there is no trinity in there.

Yes, back in the day, sons of God were those closest to God. But in the final message of God now, we have no right to say they are sons of God. As you said it's more literal.
When you say Gospels, am sure you mean the unaltered injeel from Eesa alyahisalam :) the injeel was not brought down in book form. This is what Christians do not understand. Jesus didn't walk about with a book under his arm, nor did he tell anyone to write it down. He did inform them that there will be one coming after him...to tell them the truth, but they translated that into the comforter and yet again deny it would be any other.

The proper expression is Muqarab (drawn close) in Arabic, that's closest expression to sons of God meaning.
 

Soapy

Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
In Quran, it talks about face of God and that to God belongs the highest likeness in heavens and earth.

Angels are not sons of God in Arabic because at that time and place, sons of God had more of a literal meaning. However, Quran says, where he to take a son he would choose from who he created (astafa), so the chosen ones would be sons of God if it was an appropriate expression.

In the time of Torah and Gospels, it was an appropriate expression. In time and place where Rasool (s) was sent, it was not because the normative usage of the word was literal.

Quran uses it non-literally in one place that does apply to chosen ones, it's when Christians and Jews call themselves sons of God, it says why are they under threat of punishment for sins, and since his Prophets and chosen Angels are not under threat of punishment, we can deduce from this sense, they are sons of God.

Gospels are almost all perfect and from God. You should see multi-translations, there is no trinity in there.

The proper expression is Muqarab (drawn close) in Arabic, that's closest expression to sons of God meaning.
Once again the usage of the term ‘Son(s) of God’ is being misinterpreted.

It simply means:
  • ‘One who does the works of the Father’
There are Spirit Sons of God and there are physical human Sons of God.

The spirit sons are the Holy Angels - the physical Sons are Spirits locked in a earthly body.

But due to sin in the human Sons there is only one true Son: Jesus Christ.

The sinful spirit angels are recast as ‘Sons of Satan’. Why? Because they are led by the Spirit of Satan!
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
BOTH Adam and Jesus were born by the power of God’s Holy Spirit.

The dust of the earth and the seed of a woman are the same: inert material. Lifeless until a spirit is put into it.

The dust and the seed are both pure so it is the impregnating that draws the sin: the spirit from the spermicide from the man draws the sin and therefore neither Adam or Jesus were sinful because neither were impregnated by sperm from a man.

Adam is called, ‘Son of God’ (Luke 3:38) and Jesus is called ‘Son of God’. This ‘Son of God’ means someone who does the works of the Father…. and is led by the Spirit of the Father.

It’s easy to understand - it’s not a secret meaning! It’s simple: if a child does exactly as his Father dictates, directs, shows him, tells him, to do and he does so even without being overseen (I.e. he is willful in the execution of his duties) then this is a perfect ‘SON OF THE FATHER’.

However, after being dutiful to his God and Father, after doing all things as God desired him, after being led by the Spirit of his Father, Adam gave in to temptation and allowed himself to be misled by his wife, Eve…. And sinned. Thereafter, Adam ceased to be fully led by the spirit of God and became no longer ‘perfect human Son of God’. This led to sin in Cain and many other offspring (in fact, all) of Adam.

After a given period of time God created a new Adam since no offspring of Adam was found to be pure, unblemished, sinless. This new ‘Adam’ was given the name ‘Joshua’ (which we call ‘Jesus’).

Tue scriptures calls Jesus, ‘the LAST ADAM’ for good reasons: No other human would ever be created that way!

Jesus REMAINS SINLESS and is therefore the ONLY human SON of God.

And as for the word ‘Begotten’. There is no hidden meaning except what Trinitarians put to it: It simple means that God ADOPTED the man Jesus [Christ] as a SPIRITUAL SON, which is documented by scriptures:
  • “You are my Son, this day I have become your Father”
You will agree that this is a statement of Adoption???(yes?)
No one should disagree with what you just said… it’s the other things you didn’t say that us disagreeable.

It matters not that you call the only God, Allah, and we call him ‘YHWH’. Different languages can allow for that. Take ‘Jesus’. It is clear that there was no such name as ‘Jesus’ in Hebrew or Judaism. ‘Jesus’ is an anglicised, latinised, name. WE KNOW that the proper translation is “Joshua” and so you are right about this change by western culture. In fact both Joshua and Jesus mean exactly the same thing: the one who brings salvation:
  • ‘You shall call him Jesus, for he shall save his people’ said the Angel to the Virgin Mary!
Mary did not argue: The Jews named their male children after someone in their family line. There was no one in Mary (or Joseph’s) family line with the name ‘Jesus’… yet Mary nor anyone she spoke to gave any surprise.

Now look at the counter example when Zacharias was told to call his son ‘John’. He argued so fiercely with the Angel that there was no one in his bloodline called John. The Angel **** his mouth until he agreed to call the Son, ‘John’.

Who cannot understand the purpose of these two events????

But yet it now matters not that we say ‘Jesus’ instead of ‘Joshua’.

So, whether ‘Allah’ or ‘YHWH’… each to its own! It’s not the point: It’s the attributes and attitude and reverence that matters: it IS the same God…. And do we worship him as he desires to be worshipped?

well, Adam wasn't born, he was created. Jesus was miraculously born from the virgin Mary.

Jesus real name is called EESA. we say Jesus here simply for terms of acknowledgement.
But I was askin why leave out the vowels in the name?
Even in the English language we type how it sounds like Allah is exactly how you sound it out in the Arabic language.
But in saying that, if it is indeed the name of Allah in Arabic, we are not to throw it down, put it in the trash, etc. Respect of Allah's name is just that. :)
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
Once again the usage of the term ‘Son(s) of God’ is being misinterpreted.

It simply means:
  • ‘One who does the works of the Father’
There are Spirit Sons of God and there are physical human Sons of God.

The spirit sons are the Holy Angels - the physical Sons are Spirits locked in a earthly body.

But due to sin in the human Sons there is only one true Son: Jesus Christ.

The sinful spirit angels are recast as ‘Sons of Satan’. Why? Because they are led by the Spirit of Satan!


Doesn't make any sense. Why do not the preachers and teachers of Christianity explain these to the ordinary people? Why do you never hear of this? To me it's the hidden scarcity of not being able to explain and upset their own teachings. That and flat out denial and scared of the unknown. Allah knows best

Psalms 2:7-----talking about David Not Jesus.
I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee

In Psalms 89:26–28, David calls God his father. God in turn tells David that he will make David his first-born and highest king of the earth.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
You believe you are comparable to Allah?

Image of God doesn't mean comparable. It means somehow he has mapped his light to us, although he is infinite and absolute, and we limited.

Believers struggle, some armies of darkness they take on, but are mostly of the armies of light in their souls.

Disbelievers, mostly armies of darkness they take on, and little of the army of light overpowers the army of darkness in their souls.


Intelligence has armies as does ignorance. The only reason he allowed ignorant armies in us and of the darkness, is sometimes we have to repel evil by evil.

But those are exceptions and to be subjugated to the armies of light.
 

muhammad_isa

Well-Known Member
You believe you are comparable to Allah?
No, of course not.

However, can you comprehend the 99 Names of Allah?
If so, it would only be because you compare these attributes with something that is known.
That does not imply that Allah's attributes are identical in nature to ours.

For example .. G-d is Holy .. we can understand what it means, but that does not imply that we are Holy.
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
No, of course not.

However, can you comprehend the 99 Names of Allah?
If so, it would only be because you compare these attributes with something that is known.
That does not imply that Allah's attributes are identical in nature to ours.

For example .. G-d is Holy .. we can understand what it means, but that does not imply that we are Holy.

Some titles we apply to God and some titles of God he can't manifest but through a vulnerable human. God can't manifest his beautiful patience except by the suffering of patient servants of his.

He is invulnerable so can't manifest courage of his which is from his light except through vulnerable creatures.

This is part of why Adam (a) was chosen for Caliphate and not from Angels/Jinn.
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
Image of God doesn't mean comparable. It means somehow he has mapped his light to us, although he is infinite and absolute, and we limited.

Believers struggle, some armies of darkness they take on, but are mostly of the armies of light in their souls.

Disbelievers, mostly armies of darkness they take on, and little of the army of light overpowers the army of darkness in their souls.


Intelligence has armies as does ignorance. The only reason he allowed ignorant armies in us and of the darkness, is sometimes we have to repel evil by evil.

But those are exceptions and to be subjugated to the armies of light.


Whether they believe in their moral, spiritual, and intellectual nature, by no means man can be relatable to the intellectual, moral or spiritual level of Allah. Impossible. We know this to be true for Allah has said. Actually adding our assumption to what Allah is is forbidden. All we know is what he tells us in Quran and ahadith.
Allah created mankind in the best of forms as he says in sura AtTeen : ) and he did say in surat Iklas that No one is comparable to Him : )
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
We aren't talking about levels, but mapping of light. God has infinite positive traits and is absolute higher in all of them in oneness and perfect simplicity, nothing is like him or near his level, he has no equal. Creation we can't hold all attributes in unity, and so we are of diverse aspects, but somehow Quran teaches Adam was taught all the titles and that all titles were presented to the Angels in some forms "and presented them to the Angels saying give the titles of these if you are truthful". We have to believe in this - it's part of believing in the unseen nature of the journey to God and the purpose of life and it's trials.

The fact Adam (a) was able to inform them of their titles, showed he was specially chosen for representing and ruling on behalf of God.
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
No, of course not.

However, can you comprehend the 99 Names of Allah?
If so, it would only be because you compare these attributes with something that is known.
That does not imply that Allah's attributes are identical in nature to ours.

For example .. G-d is Holy .. we can understand what it means, but that does not imply that we are Holy.

Understandable but I understand where and why they are saying that. I was a born again Christian.

Can I ask you a question? Why leave out the "o" in God? Am just curious :)
 

MyM

Well-Known Member
We aren't talking about levels, but mapping of light. God has infinite positive traits and is absolute higher in all of them in oneness and perfect simplicity, nothing is like him or near his level, he has no equal. Creation we can't hold all attributes in unity, and so we are of diverse aspects, but somehow Quran teaches Adam was taught all the titles and that all titles were presented to the Angels in some forms "and presented them to the Angels saying give the titles of these if you are truthful". We have to believe in this - it's part of believing in the unseen nature of the journey to God and the purpose of life and it's trials.


Knowledge is knowledge though and that benefits us and of course I believe in it :) it's from Allah but trust me, when Christians say in God's image, they are on an entirely different platform

Also, Adam was a prophet of Allah and he was given revelation
 

Link

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Knowledge is knowledge though and that benefits us and of course I believe in it :) it's from Allah but trust me, when Christians say in God's image, they are on an entirely different platform

I am not familiar with their works on it. So I can't comment on that.
 

muhammad_isa

Well-Known Member
Why leave out the "o" in God?
It is a type of shorthand.
I had been typing out God, the Most High, and sometimes just God in reply to atheists who were saying god this, or god that, or what god etc.

I know that G-d is understood to be the monotheistic God in the OT, and I don't seem to be told Allah is a different god etc. There is only One god. He has many names :)

G-d is short for "God, the Most High" and is a bit like Allah SWT for me, but in a universal forum.
 
Top