Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "伊斯蘭教與基督教關係" in Chinese language version.
The "Islamic Awareness" team attempts to convince us that Muhammad's ar-Rahman is really no different than the Christian and Jewish uses of similar epithets for God. As Sam Shamoun pointed out in his article on ar-Rahman, it is clear that the people of Mecca did not recognize ar-Rahman as the God of the Christians and the Jews. The Christian inscriptions presented by the "Islamic Awareness" clearly shows that the authors were describing the Triune God – not Muhammad's concept of Allah.
Salafism, which is a largely pietistic, apolitical sect favoring a literal reading of the Quran and Sunnah.
Dr. Robert Morey of http://www.faithdefenders.com is known for his radical views of indorsing Christians to bomb the Muslim city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia (so much for Christianity being peaceful and loving), and of spinning the infamous Moon God Theory which was easily refuted here. Because of his extremist views against Islam, he has been embraced by many fanatical Evangelical Christian groups.
As a side note here, Robert Morey is of the Reformed church background. It is a curious thing then why he chooses to use Bible versions other than the Bibles of the Reformers-- The King James Bible and Luther's Bible. I also note that he has a Crusader's Club. Why choose this imagery when the Roman Catholic Whore used the virtual same title for her mongrel mass of filthy soldiers who attacked the Islamic peoples of the Middle East long ago? Why? The word "crusader" is not a biblical word.
Dr. Robert Morey of http://www.faithdefenders.com is known for his radical views of indorsing Christians to bomb the Muslim city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia (so much for Christianity being peaceful and loving), and of spinning the infamous Moon God Theory which was easily refuted here. Because of his extremist views against Islam, he has been embraced by many fanatical Evangelical Christian groups.
We are reminded at once of Mohammed's "virtue" as he consummated his battlefield "marriage" to a Jewish captive, Safiya, in a sand dune with the gore and filth of battle all over him. Virtuous actions no doubt, though it is today called rape-- virtuous, even though he broke his own Hadith sharia law to wait until after her next monthly!
The standard of Islam is similar. Muslim men would never allow their wives or daughters to go out uncovered, and they make sure they are modest at all times. These same men, when out of town on business, will visit whores and sodomite pimps, and they will always visit restaurants that provide belly dancers. This goes back to Mohammed. He would not permit the women to go uncovered in public, but he married a nine year old girl and consummated the marriage at once. This would be seen today as wicked, but in the prophet, well, it is OK because he was so holy in other areas of his life. ... This is why Osama bin Laden is approved by nearly all Muslims. There is nothing in the teachings of Mohammed and the Koran which approves or disapproves of what Osama did. So, the best Muslim can rejoice at the death and suffering in the World Trade Center. Did not Mohammed exalt Jihad in the Hadith. The number of Hadith on Jihad is greater than any other subject in the Hadith.
Lastly, verses such as Isaiah 24:21 (“In that day the LORD will punish the powers in the heavens above and the kings on the earth below”) clearly distinguish between the divine beings of Yahweh’s host and earthly rulers. What this means is that the Hebrew Bible had a definite way of distinguishing the divine beings (the powers – plural – in heaven) from humans. It makes little sense to make Psalm 82 unclear if such a contrast between gods and humans were the goal. Why confuse people by using elohim if you wanted to refer to humans?
The Judeo-Christian God could be considered a god of gods if you consider the angels and demons as lesser gods, which would make the Archangels as kings of the gods. Early Jewish thought seemed to consider all gods as being real, but all except Yahweh are evil impostors, with Yahweh being the one true god. Later though, in Jeremiah, God only refers to some of the gods as actual creatures that he will punish, like Amon, while most, like Chemosh, are idols based on someone's imagination. Starting in the beginnings of the Medieval Period and continuing into today, this separated into two approaches in most of Europe: many European (and American) Christian church bureaucracies have taken the official view or Sacred Tradition that other (pagan) gods are merely disguises for demons, adding that our (humanity and angels) task is to become gods through an obedience to God and atonement (for humans) by which He will do that; whereas many European (and American) Christian thinkers and philosophers have taken instead the view that the gods of other religions were angelic underlings of God who had been mistaken for deities by "less enlightened" peoples. This latter viewpoint is most familiar to American readers in the Christian cosmologies presented by J.R.R. Tolkien in his famous Legendarium with its Valar, Maiar, and Istari and by C.S. Lewis in his Narnia Chronicles which include appearances by the wine god Bacchus, an untamed river god, the living embodiment of Time, and a Father Christmas praising Aslan!
The Judeo-Christian God could be considered a god of gods if you consider the angels and demons as lesser gods, which would make the Archangels as kings of the gods. Early Jewish thought seemed to consider all gods as being real, but all except Yahweh are evil impostors, with Yahweh being the one true god. Later though, in Jeremiah, God only refers to some of the gods as actual creatures that he will punish, like Amon, while most, like Chemosh, are idols based on someone's imagination. Starting in the beginnings of the Medieval Period and continuing into today, this separated into two approaches in most of Europe: many European (and American) Christian church bureaucracies have taken the official view or Sacred Tradition that other (pagan) gods are merely disguises for demons, adding that our (humanity and angels) task is to become gods through an obedience to God and atonement (for humans) by which He will do that; whereas many European (and American) Christian thinkers and philosophers have taken instead the view that the gods of other religions were angelic underlings of God who had been mistaken for deities by "less enlightened" peoples. This latter viewpoint is most familiar to American readers in the Christian cosmologies presented by J.R.R. Tolkien in his famous Legendarium with its Valar, Maiar, and Istari and by C.S. Lewis in his Narnia Chronicles which include appearances by the wine god Bacchus, an untamed river god, the living embodiment of Time, and a Father Christmas praising Aslan!
Lastly, verses such as Isaiah 24:21 (“In that day the LORD will punish the powers in the heavens above and the kings on the earth below”) clearly distinguish between the divine beings of Yahweh’s host and earthly rulers. What this means is that the Hebrew Bible had a definite way of distinguishing the divine beings (the powers – plural – in heaven) from humans. It makes little sense to make Psalm 82 unclear if such a contrast between gods and humans were the goal. Why confuse people by using elohim if you wanted to refer to humans?
The "Islamic Awareness" team attempts to convince us that Muhammad's ar-Rahman is really no different than the Christian and Jewish uses of similar epithets for God. As Sam Shamoun pointed out in his article on ar-Rahman, it is clear that the people of Mecca did not recognize ar-Rahman as the God of the Christians and the Jews. The Christian inscriptions presented by the "Islamic Awareness" clearly shows that the authors were describing the Triune God – not Muhammad's concept of Allah.
As a side note here, Robert Morey is of the Reformed church background. It is a curious thing then why he chooses to use Bible versions other than the Bibles of the Reformers-- The King James Bible and Luther's Bible. I also note that he has a Crusader's Club. Why choose this imagery when the Roman Catholic Whore used the virtual same title for her mongrel mass of filthy soldiers who attacked the Islamic peoples of the Middle East long ago? Why? The word "crusader" is not a biblical word.
Dr. Robert Morey of http://www.faithdefenders.com is known for his radical views of indorsing Christians to bomb the Muslim city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia (so much for Christianity being peaceful and loving), and of spinning the infamous Moon God Theory which was easily refuted here. Because of his extremist views against Islam, he has been embraced by many fanatical Evangelical Christian groups.
We are reminded at once of Mohammed's "virtue" as he consummated his battlefield "marriage" to a Jewish captive, Safiya, in a sand dune with the gore and filth of battle all over him. Virtuous actions no doubt, though it is today called rape-- virtuous, even though he broke his own Hadith sharia law to wait until after her next monthly!
The standard of Islam is similar. Muslim men would never allow their wives or daughters to go out uncovered, and they make sure they are modest at all times. These same men, when out of town on business, will visit whores and sodomite pimps, and they will always visit restaurants that provide belly dancers. This goes back to Mohammed. He would not permit the women to go uncovered in public, but he married a nine year old girl and consummated the marriage at once. This would be seen today as wicked, but in the prophet, well, it is OK because he was so holy in other areas of his life. ... This is why Osama bin Laden is approved by nearly all Muslims. There is nothing in the teachings of Mohammed and the Koran which approves or disapproves of what Osama did. So, the best Muslim can rejoice at the death and suffering in the World Trade Center. Did not Mohammed exalt Jihad in the Hadith. The number of Hadith on Jihad is greater than any other subject in the Hadith.
