debunking the muslim religion & its effect...

The first lie is the name of The Creator, whom he called Allah. Although cited as the God of Abraham, the name Allah is actually a derivation of Al-ilah, which is derived from Lil, the pagan idol of ancient Sumeria. The true name of the God of Abraham is El or El-Elyon contained in the Torah.
I believe to substitute the pagan idol name Allah for El when denoting God the Creator is to blaspheme in a most heinous way. How has this occurred? I believe Satan has insidiously deceived the pagan ancient Arabs to use the name ilah to denote the generic word �god�. Since then, the Arabic language has been tainted with this Satanic stain.
I also believe in 610 AD, in a cave at Hira, Muhammad himself was deceived by a demon into believing the name of God the Creator was Allah. By this deception, Satan has hijacked the worship that was meant for God the Creator who was called El by Abraham.
This deception is so pervasive that even in the Al-Kitab, the Holy Bible in Arabic and in Bahasa Indonesia, the name used to denote God is Allah. Hence I believe all Muslims as well as those Christians who use the Arabic translations of the Holy Bible have been duped by Satan in a most diabolical way.
In order to repair the hedge of protection for Arabic and Bahasa speaking Christians, it is imperative to immediately replace the name, Allah with El.

The second lie is the hijacking of the monotheistic �one god� idea to mean one body called Allah instead of the true triune Godhead of God the Father (Abba), God the Son (Jesus) and God the Holy Spirit.
The third lie is to indicate that Jesus did not say that He was the Son of God when the exact opposite is true. (Matt 26:63-64)
The fourth lie is to indicate that Jesus did not die and resurrect from death, but someone else was placed on the cross instead (Sura 4:157-158).
There is compelling evidence, for the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. (Reference: pp 215-240. The best of Josh McDowell. A ready defence. 1993)
The fifth lie is to indicate that Muhammad is the Comforter (Paraclete) instead of the Holy Spirit.
It is stated very clearly that the Comforter will �reprove the world of righteousness because Jesus goes to His Father� (John 16:7-11). Yet Muhammad denies that God is Jesus� father. This automatically disqualifies Muhammad from being the Comforter.
I believe quotation of Bible verses only when it appears to agree with the Qur�an and ignoring the others and ignoring the context is deceptive.
Deception is the signature of Satan.
The sixth lie is that the Ka�ba, which contained 360 pagan idols is the shrine set up by Abraham to worship Allah.
Abraham was never in the vicinity of Mecca. Abraham migrated from Ur of the Chaldeans up the Euphrates to Syria and then through Canaan south to Egypt and then back to Canaan. The desert of Paran is in the Sinai peninsula and not the Arabian peninsula (Genesis 21:21).
The seventh lie is that Muhammad�s name is mentioned in the Gnostic �Gospel of St. Barnabas�. However, the only version of this is an obvious fake dating from the 18th century, in Italian, and containing passages from Dante�s Divine Comedy written in the 13th century.
The purpose of Satan�s deception is to downplay the truth about Jesus and to exalt the pagan idol, Allah.

excerpt taken from www.peace-of-mind.net...

if this is the case then it would point to the war on terror as the final showdown between good & evil and an apocalyptic ending. would even this be enough for some of you to justify the war? if its all true would you defy Gods word and still oppose our ultimate destiny? sweet dreams because this is all proven in the Holy Bible...although the book was literally raped by the Catholic Church over the years. the Catholics mostly omitted repetitive or contradictory books and added some verses to scare people into joining the church it seems. while the author of revelations is suspect and the apocalyptic ending may have been another scare tactic it still doesnt change the fact that it clearly points at Muhammad as being a false prohet.

[edit on 30-9-2004 by metalmessiah]

hmmm....moved, guess I should have elaborated more on the significane to the war of this theory. last time I give anyone credit for being able to think for themselves and not having to be COMPLETELY led to water! I dont even think enough time had elapsed from the time this was posted until it was moved to read the post AND link!!!

[edit on 30-9-2004 by metalmessiah]

Yes, you made no connections to the War on Terror and how this rant against Islam impacted it, therefore it was moved.

Interesting that you understood immediately WHY it was moved, and then edited in the connections.

Now that you have made such a connection, I see no reason why it shouldn't be moved back by a moderator of this forum. Upon reading it in it's original form, it seemed more suited to the forum to which it was moved.

This isn't done for any reason other than making it easier for members interested in the topic to find it, and reply to it. To assume otherwise is paranoia...

the only connection I edited in was the justification part. anyone who has seen the news at least once in the last few years wold have understood the connection. anyone who doesnt think religion plays a part in this war is clueless, its the extremists ONLY justification! add that to the fact that Bush references God and "good vs. evil" every time he addresses the war effort & I thought my point was clear to everyone.

edit: maybe the part questioning the qualifications of the mod was uncalled for and unfounded. I respectfully remove it & apologize.

[edit on 30-9-2004 by metalmessiah]

Thanks for the clarifications...and hopefully, with their addition, and now connection to the war on terror, it can be moved back to that forum...

Damn, I knew that not watching the news in the past few years would come back and bite me in the butt!

Seriously though, sorry for the confusion...(and perhaps decaf?)



I think you'd be surprised at how LITTLE religion actually is at play in this war. Sure, it's used as a pretense, by both sides...but the fact of the matter is, war is about what it has always been about....economics.

Osama didn't cause 911 as an attack against infidels. He did it because of the perceived impact of the West in Saudi Arabia. He also did it because of the economic support of Isreal by the US. This isn't a justification...such terrorism cannot be justified, but it is to show that although religion is a stated reason, it's merely to fire up the troops, it is not the end cause...but a tool only. This doesn't change the fact that targetting civilians is a monstrous act of a coward, but don't even let them attempt to wrap up their actions as doing ANY god's work.

NO god worthy of worship would support such an act, to his followers or otherwise...

Yeh it must be true lookin at your 1905 ATS points. Well researched, funny that you found faults when there have been people studying the Qur'an for most of their lives and haven't found any. Well, what do they know.

Originally posted by metalmessiah
The first lie is the name of The Creator, whom he called Allah. Although cited as the God of Abraham, the name Allah is actually a derivation of Al-ilah, which is derived from Lil, the pagan idol of ancient Sumeria. The true name of the God of Abraham is El or El-Elyon contained in the Torah.

I feel quite justified in not even bothering to read the rest of your post, based on this terrible, horribly inaccurate bit of 'research', not to mention that the reasoning that the torahnical name of god is somehow official.

Er, and the very idea of 'debunking' a religion is idiotic in the first place, since religions are a matter of faith.

Gazrok, I dont mean necessarily that it was the pretense to the war but it has played a huge part in the recruitment effort on their side. any insurgent you ask will pledge his allegiance to Allah in his quest to rid the world of the infidel. I find that to be a strong statement. no caffiene, its all natural. probably the reason I stay away from all stimulants

sal88, sorry if you dont agree with a Christian point of view. the apostles wrote about this false prophet over 600 years before the existence of the Qur'an, that fact is not disputed. my interpretation leads me to believe that Muhammad COULD be the prophet they were referring to. I say could because I would never claim to be the definitive source. I think it would be quite arrogant for anyone to claim that they were. I guess I should be more like most others here & spew every thought that passes through my mind. God knows everyone who has tons of points must be pure genius. I have seen MANY lunatics pass through here with tons of points who were eventually banned. add that fact to the fact that I have a life & dont spend 24/7 here claiming to be the smartest man alive & its easy to see why I dont have tons of points.

Nygdan, I used the word "debunking" on purpose to get peoples attention. it may have been a dirty trick used just to get more response but hey, whatever works. blame the evil media for teaching me the art of sensationalism. it is no worse than a muslims view of Christians as the infidel now is it. would you like to tell them they are all idiotic as well? my religion tells me that there is but one truth, that would leave plebty of room to debunk MANY religions. either way it isnt about that but more about the premise of this war, thats why I didnt want it put in here. I really dont think it is fair to comment until you have read the entire post. either way, it would be more intelligent to try to understand my point of view & reasoning & then correct my mistakes than to give up that soon. that is, after all, the point of the whole thread. I come here to learn!

[edit on 30-9-2004 by metalmessiah]

Originally posted by metalmessiah
sal88, sorry if you dont agree with a Christian point of view.

All this guy said was that you haven't done your research, and now you are saying this?

the apostles wrote about this false prophet over 600 years before the existence of the Qur'an, that fact is not disputed.

Er, yes it is. They didn't say 'a guy named mo will come along and start this islam thing', they may have talked about 'false prophets', but you haven't even demonstrated that Mo was a false prophet, let alone that the apostles were specificallytalking about him, and, really, you haven't even shown that they were 'clearly' talking about him, hence it being 'disputed'. You see, in order for something to not be disputed, well, at least a very very large number of people have to agree with it.

my interpretation leads me to believe that Muhammad COULD be the prophet they were referring to.

I thought it was clear, whats with the hedging and 'interpreting'?

I should be more like most others here & spew every thought that passes through my mind.

Looks like thats what you did with the first post.

it may have been a dirty trick

Well I'm glad I noted that it didn't make sense then.

blame the evil media for teaching me the art of sensationalism.

Or just you for not providing what you claim perhaps? How much of your 'research' is more 'justified sensationalism'?

it is no worse than a muslims view of Christians

Irrelevant. Also, wrong. Its actually worse, since any muslim who had the kind of views you are alluding to would be wrong and not know it, whereas you've basically lied to get more views.

would you like to tell them they are all idiotic as well?

Sure. Infact, when I see that sort of stuff going on, thats pretty much what I do say.

really dont think it is fair to comment until you have read the entire post.

I am not being unfair. The first portion of your post is perhaps the most important, and you showed that you haven't a clue as to what you are talking about there. What portion of the post do you think shows you do have a clue?

either way, it would be more intelligent to try to understand my point of view & reasoning & then correct my mistakes than to give up that soon.

No, not really, it wouldn't. Uneducated bigots are usually a waste of time and more frustrating to talk to than its worth.

that is, after all, the point of the whole thread. I come here to learn!

You came here to learn, but then you tried to analyse a religion you obviously know almost nothing about, and refering to civilizations you don't seem to know much about either, but are pretending you are here to learn? Wouldn't someone who was doing that have, oh, i dunno, asked some sensible questions instead?

NO god worthy of worship would support such an act, to his followers or otherwise...

Not to take a side in this argument, but I dont think there has been a better statment said regarding this whole situation.

Metalmessiah, there's been arguements that the apostle Paul, otherwise known as Saul, is the false prophet spoken of in the Old Testament. I'm sure you could dig up something on the internet, but first try this; read once again the New Testament and take out all that Paul wrote, and perhaps you will recieve a better understanding of what the New Testament is all about.

Originally posted by metalmessiah
the only connection I edited in was the justification part. anyone who has seen the news at least once in the last few years wold have understood the connection. anyone who doesnt think religion plays a part in this war is clueless, its the extremists ONLY justification! add that to the fact that Bush references God and "good vs. evil" every time he addresses the war effort & I thought my point was clear to everyone.

edit: maybe the part questioning the qualifications of the mod was uncalled for and unfounded. I respectfully remove it & apologize.

[edit on 30-9-2004 by metalmessiah]

Muslim extremeists definitely saw this as a war of religion but until Bush no one in the U.S. thought so. He alone has made this a war of religious beliefs and since I feel religion is a load of crap in the first place it makes this war even less worthy than it ever could have been in my eyes.

I think we should set up a preserve in the Mojave desert and invite all Christian and Muslim crazies to have a big fight and settle this once and for all. As long as they kill each other and don't drag the rest of the world into it I'm fine with it.

The human species shouldn't exist if it allows ridiculous concepts like religion cause its ruin. If it does then no one should have sympathy for us.

Weller, thats my point exactly. Bush CLAIMS to be fighting this war from a Christian standpoint, but it's anything but that. he would be, from what I understand, coming from more of a Jewish point of view(no I am not a Jewish scholar so I may be wrong). I do know that the Christian view would be to turn the other cheek when attacked. a good Christian is to fight the good fight spreading the word, not violence right? Bush's idea of the Christian ideal is a load of crap, plain & simple. he is bearing false witness and ultimately will be judged as such.


Nygdan, the Holy Bible is all about interpretation. there are alot of points made literally but I believe many parts are spoken in a metaphorical sense. the only way to say who is right & who isnt would be ask God himself. resorting to name calling doesnt prove anything for sure. if my posts are such a waste of your time then why even respond? I did come to learn from other sensible members who can disagree without name calling. you went to argue my point about when the scripture was written about a false prophet & then went on to put words in my mouth. I never said the fact that Muhammad was the false prophet wasnt disputed, merely the fact of when that was written. nowhere in the Bible does it say the majority of people will agree with the true scripture. in fact I believe it makes it pretty clear that they wont.

Originally posted by cloud
Metalmessiah, there's been arguements that the apostle Paul, otherwise known as Saul, is the false prophet spoken of in the Old Testament. I'm sure you could dig up something on the internet, but first try this; read once again the New Testament and take out all that Paul wrote, and perhaps you will recieve a better understanding of what the New Testament is all about.

to fully understand the true scripture you would have to know exactly what was added by the Catholic church. also you would have to know what they omitted, the Book of Enoch to name one. they were in control of what got cannonized and it is my belief that they corrupted the scriptures to fit their objectives. I dont think omitting Paul will get you completely there but it very well may be a start.

I'm sorry, but i too believe that muhammod was the false prophet. What exactly did he prophesies? I'm really asking that, because from what i have heard he really prophesised nothing, therefore, anyone claiming to be a prophet and not prophesising anything should then be considered a False Prophet. However, in all honesty, i kind of believe that Paul, NOT the holy spirit is the one who is going to be the comforter. Why do i think this? Because he basically founded the catholic religion, which in turn showed the truth, with some lies in the middle ages. This became the followers of Jesus' strong hold, thus comforting them. You see how that works out? But i fail to see how someone who preaches the EXACT OPPOSITE of the savior is considered the comforter. To the person who claims, take out what Paul says in the new testament, why dont we take out what Mohommad says in the Koran? Basically, we know that, and i mean as christians, we follow the truth because the Jews followed The Torah, which is the same as the beginning of the Koran, until the schpeel about Abraham's sons. That is where Muslims and Judaism/Christianity divide. However, Jesus came and preached as a JEW, and stated that the JEWS were right, and the beliefs were right. Thus, you can't believe in Jesus' word without totally denying Mohommad because it just doesn't make sense. Now, im not proving Christianity over Islam, im just stating that as Christians there is no middle ground here. One simple fact, Jesus is God. I fail to see how one can deny that Jesus was crucified, regardless if he rose from the dead. That is just plain stupid, as even the Jews believe he was crucified, or so i have been told. What man do you know that can raise from the dead just as he predicted, and just as Isaih said? Basically by throwing Mohommad into the picture with Christianity you are saying that everything Jesus stands for is wrong. The Roman Catholic Church is the comforter, it is the refuge, it is where all of us, us being christians, have come from. And essentially it was created by Paul through his word. That is all im gonna say about that for now, except the Roman Catholic Church in no way is the Anti-Christ!

Originally posted by Ryanp5555
I'm sorry, but i too believe that muhammod was the false prophet. What exactly did he prophesies? I'm really asking that, because from what i have heard he really prophesised nothing, therefore, anyone claiming to be a prophet and not prophesising anything should then be considered a False Prophet.

i was always under the impression that prophet meant you were a messenger of God, i didn't think it meant you had to actually predict stuff. Besides which, Muhammad did prophecise a lot of things. and brought a lot of things as well, the Qur'an

Originally posted by metalmessiah
if my posts are such a waste of your time then why even respond?

I don't think I said it was a waste.

I did come to learn from other sensible members who can disagree without name calling.

Boo hoo, I was mean to you. You've been slandering an entire religion and saying that their high holy man was tricked into thinking satan was god.

merely the fact of when that was written.

Ah, yes, you are correct, I made a mistake in my reading of that portion of your post.

they [the rcc] were in control of what got cannonized

Untrue. The books of the bible were made canonical before the existence of the seperate RCC. That council excluded some books usually becuase they were thought to be false, like the Gospel of St. Thomas.

the gospel of saint thomas was disregarded becuase it is untrue. In the gospel Jesus says don't pray, don't give to the needy... yet Jesus himself prays. In the other gospels, Jesus teaches his disciples how to pray. In the gospel of St. Thomas he says don't give to the poor or else you shall be condemned, then goes on to say it is better to give your money to someone you will never get that money back from. It is a hypocritical gospel, and was left out for a reason!

Originally posted by Ryanp5555
the gospel of saint thomas was disregarded becuase it is untrue.

I don't know if it was rejected because its teachings were in discord or because it was recognized as not having been written by the Apostle Thomas. Also, I think that there have been a few different supposed 'G of S T".

i may raise some hell with posting these links, 'cuz she's notorious for her views, but she does raise some valid arguements...

www.justgivemethetruth.com...