Allah is in the bible, it means Curse!

[q_q_]

Daniel 9:11
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/c.pl?book=Dan&chapter=9&verse=11&version=KJV#11

this is a good site, you can see the hebrew of the verse in a picture, followed by a translation of the root of every verse. The translation should be about as good as you can get, because it is from a concordance.

The word is,   Aleph Lamed Heh

I have heard a muslim on youtube claim that the word Elokim (change k for h), - aleph lamed heh yud mem, is allah. in the plural, like a majestic we, like the queen speaking.  But the vowels are different, and the root aleph lamed heh is never used as a singular word to refer to G-d. The singular word, Allah, Aleph Lamed Heh, with vowels Ah Ah, pronounced Allah, means curse!

[q_q_]

here is a muslim claiming that Allah is in the bible and means G-d.

[Ulli]

Some modern scientists believe that the original quran is written in Aramaic. It is closely related to Hebrew.

Aramaic and Hebrew belong to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwest_Semitic_languages!

The Koran is not an easy book to read, for at least one fifth of its content is "dark" or "obscure". This was readily acknowledged by Muslim scholarship, as was the existence of non-Arabic vocabulary, including Aramaic, Persian, and Greek words. On the other hand, the Koran says of itself that is written in pure Arabic, easy to understand, and "clear". These contradictions did not trouble anyone much: They constituted just another mysterious sign of the Koran's divine origin.

During the past centuries, both modern scholarship and theologians have painstakingly scrutinized Christian and Jewish scriptures: Their origin, transmission, collection, historical context and vocabulary were subjected to scientific methods. Nothing comparable happened in the Koranic case, neither in Muslim scholarship, nor (with rare exceptions) in Western universities.

Luxenberg's book applies the toolkit of the historical linguist to the "dark" Koranic passages, working under the historically and linguistically entirely plausible assumption that there's more Aramaic in these passages than the "pure Arabic" doctrine cares to admit. In many cases, rigorous application of philological method sheds light on the "dark" passages, and makes sense of ones that were thought to be obscure. Rarely are these "Syro-Aramaic readings of the Koran" as spectacular as in the by now well-publicized case of the paradise huris that may be mistranslated grapes, but time and again they display the strong kinship between the Koranic text and Christian scripture of its time, not only in subject matter (which has always been obvious), but in semantics, roots, and maybe even intent:

For Luxenberg is not alone in his quest to re-invigorate the academic disciplines that are concerned with Koran studies and early Islamic history. Scholars are starting to demand that these faculties awake from their convenient slumber of the post-war decades and instead continue in the spirit of these disciplines' pioneers. Long-cherished certainties - held more out of inertia than for their inherent strengths - are suddenly in doubt as scholars realize that archeological, numismatical, and other tangible traces have inconspicuously piled up that make it quite plausible that Islam may for centuries have been one of many Christian sects before severing its roots - partly for reasons that are the subject of this book. Even the historicity - the very existence - of the prophet Mohammed is in serious question, and large parts of early Islamic history may very well turn out to have been later fabrications, whose sheer quantity and detail effectively worked as a smokescreen for their prevalent fictitiousness. In short, Islam's origins may be much like those of every other known religion: More complex than the pious myths make them out to be.

For the moment, nobody can say where all this may lead. Luxenberg expresses optimism and hope for more Christian-Muslim dialog in the face of newly discovered common ground. But new bright light on dogma or academic orthodoxy is obviously fit to make lot of people feel very uncomfortable, and starts to put Islam in a position the Christian churches went through long ago.

This book may be a specimen of a "prime mover", its condensed, dry and scholarly tone obscuring the fact that the reader has the rare chance to witness the natal hour of a paradigm shift of potentially enormous proportions

[q_q_]

checking bibleworks, it seems that Allah can mean curse or oath..

Maybe it refers specifically to the curse within the eternal oath  where if we keep the torah we are blessed, and if we disobey it we are cursed.

[Zelhar]

The word Allah means The god (Al-Lah) (i.e GOD), "Lah" is a generic word for god in Arabic, just like "El" in Hebrew, both words probably share the same origin (El is a name of a god from the Mesopotamian mythology).

Note that the Islamic proclamation of faith "La Lah Ilah ALLah wamuhammad rasul Allah" - (There is ) No god other than God and Muhammad is his messenger.

[mord]

La Lah Ilah

  SOUND LIKE A SONG A MOTHER SINGSTO AN INFANT AT NIGHT

[Ulli]

I have read that in ancient arab mythology Al ilāh is the idol of the moon. He married the sun and the stars are the children of this marriage. Three of the most important children are Al-Uzza, Menat and A-Lat.

Later the Arabs changed the name from Al ilāh to Allah. But this was in a time, when Mohammed wasn't born.

Even Ibn Ishaq is mentioning that Mohammeds father has the name Abd-Allah with relation to the moongod.



But it is true too, that Al-lah is the Arabic synonym to Gott, G-d, Elohim.

Difficult 

q_q

Is this right?

"The arabic word Allah means in Hebrew oath or curse"

Do you know what Allah means in Aramaic?

[Zelhar]

GP that's correct. And Muhammad at one point offered as a compromise that the three godesses will be worshiped along with their father Allah- These are the "Satanic Verses" as he later called them, because after his offer had been rejected The "Prophet" had discovered that Satan has tricked Nowadays as part of the Haj, Muslims throw stones on four pillars representing the Satan and his 3 daughters. This is the part of the Haj where many times people are trampled to death due to overcrowding.

[AsheDina]

Daniel 9:11
http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/c.pl?book=Dan&chapter=9&verse=11&version=KJV#11

this is a good site, you can see the hebrew of the verse in a picture, followed by a translation of the root of every verse. The translation should be about as good as you can get, because it is from a concordance.

The word is,   Aleph Lamed Heh

I have heard a muslim on youtube claim that the word Elokim (change k for h), - aleph lamed heh yud mem, is allah. in the plural, like a majestic we, like the queen speaking.  But the vowels are different, and the root aleph lamed heh is never used as a singular word to refer to G-d. The singular word, Allah, Aleph Lamed Heh, with vowels Ah Ah, pronounced Allah, means curse!

  WOWOWOWOW!!! Thank YOU- this is good. I will study this, until it is in my heart and completeley memorized.  I have not EVER thought that 'allah' meant G-d- EVER. Thank you VERY much. 

[q_q_]

I have read that in ancient arab mythology Al ilāh is the idol of the moon. He married the sun and the stars are the children of this marriage. Three of the most important children are Al-Uzza, Menat and A-Lat.

Later the Arabs changed the name from Al ilāh to Allah. But this was in a time, when Mohammed wasn't born.

Even Ibn Ishaq is mentioning that Mohammeds father has the name Abd-Allah with relation to the moongod.



But it is true too, that Al-lah is the Arabic synonym to Gott, G-d, Elohim.

Difficult 

I guess,
The arabs were pagan and had no concept of 1 all powerful G-d..

Muslims say it is a general name..

But I don`t see any evidence of Allah or Al-Ilah being a general name for G-d..  Translations are imperfect, and Allah is used in translations of the bible to arabic, and in general conversation, to refer to the one all powerful G-d.  Muslims are happy about that, because the islamized view, that the G-d that gave words to moses and jesus, is the G-d that gave them their Quran. That is probably why it got used. To please muslims, and also, remember that you are limited by the language , so Allah was best fit.  It is not proof that allah is a general name..

More likely, it is not a general name.  One G-d the central one, wth the crescent, was called Al Ilah, and the 2 others were given different names.  And even now, I am sure arab/muslims would object to idols being called Allah. (they object enough to idols, e.g. blowing up the budda in afghanistan, can you imagine if an idol had the word ALLAH written over it!!!   It doesn`t seem like a general term to me). That is probably a good proof that it is not a general name.

The arabic language was used to refer to their new G-d, the all powerful one.
Or their evolved moon G-d, whose name is now Allah a contraction of Al ilah, and whose associated sign is the crescent !

Muslims consider it one of G-d`s holy names
http://www.faizani.com/articles/names.html
Not just an arabic word to refer to the all powerful G-d.  Or an arabic word to refer to any G-d.

So if you want an argument against them, it may be that it could be problematic for them, if one of G-d`s holy names was originally the name of a moon G-d.
They would probably claim - without evidence - that before then it was the one all powerful G-d.. but it got corrupted!

 
q_q

Is this right?

"The arabic word Allah means in Hebrew oath or curse"

Do you know what Allah means in Aramaic?

Regarding the aramaic

Don`t know


According to google, I don`t think it is Allah, some sites are saying it is Elaw
I don`t know what letters and vowels that involves.  But the vowels are not Ah Ah like Allah.
It could involve an aleph and lamed, like in the bible, Aleph Lamed, is a name of G-d.
Maybe in aramaic, aleph lamed heh, maybe. But with different vowels.

If they want to play with vowels.. the fact is, sometimes a word can be related when you change the vowels, other times it can be quite different.. And if you are saying words in one language and expecting the meaning in another language to be the true meaning, then you could run into trouble. Especially if you change vowels.. Like muslims are doing.

I don`t know much hebrew, but it seems to me
If challal is spelt with a Chet, then if you say it in hebrew, it means slay. And if you change the vowels, Chilayl,  it means profane.    

I don`t think any of that is relevant..
I think it`s nitpicking.

I am sure if there is evidence that the quran was originally aramaic, it would be better than that.

BUT..
if they want to play games, and say that Allah is in the bible... then yeah, he is, letter for letter, vowel for vowel, perfectly. But it means curse. 

[Ulli]

I understand 

[Ultra Requete]

Watch this:

[underthesun]

Some modern scientists believe that the original quran is written in Aramaic. It is closely related to Hebrew.

I believe that that the Qu'ran was created in arabic.

The Koran is not an easy book to read, for at least one fifth of its content is "dark" or "obscure". This was readily acknowledged by Muslim scholarship, as was the existence of non-Arabic vocabulary, including Aramaic, Persian, and Greek words. On the other hand, the Koran says of itself that is written in pure Arabic, easy to understand, and "clear". These contradictions did not trouble anyone much: They constituted just another mysterious sign of the Koran's divine origin.

I have read that the Qu'ran verses rime in arabic.
That is what I remember:
Because the founder of Islam and his gang could not write, it was important that the Qu'ran was easy to memorize. Therefore Muhammed made it like rap music. (Maybe that is why it so violent )
The actual meaning of the Qu'ran was of lesser precedence. You can see that nowadays. The Suras are so incoherent and jump from one topic to the next and back again.

Those translations that looked at, didn't say that the Qu'ran is easy to understand - at least as far as I rememeber. They said that allah has made the Qu'ran easy for you. (Which I interpret as "easy to memorize")

[q_q_]

Allah means "the g-d" because he was the most important of the many pagan gods in Pre-Islamic Arabia. Lah is the generic real word for G-d in Arabic. I think G-d is called Jalil in Judeo-Arabic. My grandfather would sing a song that ended in "Jalil Ya'akob", "G-d of Jacob". In Hebrew it's Elokei Ya'akov.

If one looks for the hebrew word "Allah",  you find it exists, and means Curse.

Allah is not a hebrew word, but if you play the game of looking for Allah in the bible, it comes up with curse.

Letter for letter, Vowel for Vowel

seems to be letter for letter, vowel for vowel,  though I am not familiar with arabic.  from what I remember from that stupid video he did that showed the arabic.

And if you play the game of changing vowels, then you can get totally different words..  You can guess at roots, and change vowels somewhat.  But when the meaning changes completely, then maybe it was not a root, maybe you have 2 different roots.   Here's another one .. Funny that Challal in arabic, is te exact same letters. as Chillul - hebrew word for desecration.  Just different vowels.
The fact is.. rather than get into an abstract discussion about methological flaws..

If you want to play the game he is doing, and look for words of one language in another. Then his word -Allah - comes out as Curse. 

Only when he changes the vowels, does he get close to what he wants. The same 3 letters, as are contained in the hebrew word Elo"k"im.  Another flaw in his methodology, is it presumes - and we cannot really know this - that it is a plural word.. Elokim may have a hint at G-d's plurality of attributes, but it's not really plural, it doesn't mean Gods. Yerushalayim also ends in im, but is there a singular Yerushal with a root?    Fact is.. The word Elokim, prob has a 2 letter root, "K"el.    Allah might do too, so there you go.. The first 2 letters of Allah match the first 2 letters of another name for G-d, as found in the bible - when changing vowels too!

Fact is.. Rather than an abstract discussion.. THe fact that Allah comes out as curse without changing the vowels, totally ruins his methodology. And even changing the vowels to what he wants Eh Oh, the word doesn't exist (only if you pretend that elokim has a root, and a 3 letter root,  and you change its vowels , then you could say "look, same root"). Of course,  as I said.. Even if that were the case.. Challal Chillul. And those words do exist, no presuming something is the root.   

It wouldn't have suprised me if a hebrew word  Allah was there exactly, and meant G-d. Since it is a similar language, a semitic language. But funny that it is there exactly and means curse.   

[Zelhar]

אלה alah is a course in hebrew and also has another meaning- covenant. But it is not linguistically equivalent to the arab allah- the first part - al, is the arab form of 'the', and so the arab word for a god is 'lah'.

[q_q_]

אלה alah is a course in hebrew and also has another meaning- covenant. But it is not linguistically equivalent to the arab allah- the first part - al, is the arab form of 'the', and so the arab word for a G-d is 'lah'.

regarding the covenant meaning.. does it mean covenant generally, or the curse aspect of the covenant..

'cos it could refer to that covenant which had a blessing and a curse, in which case could refer to the curse aspect of it.

so the 2 meanings could be related or actually be one (more general) meaning.

[Zelhar]

from: http://www.worldwithoutend.info/start/books/k-d/01-gen/kd-genesis-26.htm

Gen 26:26-33 -

Abimelech's Treaty with Isaac. - The conclusion of this alliance was substantially only a repetition of renewal of the alliance entered into with Abraham; but the renewal itself arose so completely out of the circumstances, that there is no ground whatever for denying that it occurred, or for the hypothesis that our account is merely another form of the earlier alliance; to say nothing of the fact, that besides the agreement in the leading event itself, the attendant circumstances are altogether peculiar, and correspond to the events which preceded. Abimelech not only brought his chief captain Phicol (supposed to be the same as in Gen_21:22, if Phicol is not also an official name), but his מֵרֵעַ “friend,” i.e., his privy councillor, Ahuzzath. Isaac referred to the hostility they had shown; to which Abimelech replied, that they (he and his people) did not smite him (נָגַע), i.e., drive him away by force, but let him depart in peace, and expressed a wish that there might be an oath between them. אָלָה the oath, as an act of self-imprecation, was to form the basis of the covenant to be made. From this אָלָה came also to be used for a covenant sanctioned by an oath (Deu_29:11, Deu_29:13). תַּעֲשֶׂה אִם “that thou do not:” אִם a particle of negation used in an oath (Gen_14:23, etc.). (On the verb with zere, see Ges. §75, Anm. 17; Ewald, §224.) - The same day Isaac's servants informed him of the well which they had dug; and Isaac gave it the name Shebah (שִׁבְעָה, oath), in commemoration of the treaty made on oath. “Therefore the city was called Beersheba.” This derivation of the name does not shut the other (Gen_21:31) out, but seems to confirm it. As the treaty made on oath between Abimelech and Isaac was only a renewal of his covenant concluded before with Abraham, so the name Beersheba was also renewed by the well Shebah. The reality of the occurrence is supported by the fact that the two wells are in existence still (vid., Gen_21:31).

[q_q_]

אלה alah is a course in hebrew and also has another meaning- covenant. But it is not linguistically equivalent to the arab allah- the first part - al, is the arab form of 'the', and so the arab word for a G-d is 'lah'.

Yeah, there are 2 lameds in Allah and is probably spelled like the end of Ramallah, which has 2 lameds in it.

so the muslim even lied - very intentionally 'cos he can read arabic, so he knows. In the most basic assumption of his argument!

That along with the other flaws, and the fact that his argument backfires on him really heavily anyway!

[q_q_]

from: http://www.worldwithoutend.info/start/books/k-d/01-gen/kd-genesis-26.htm

Gen 26:26-33 -

Abimelech's Treaty with Isaac. - The conclusion of this alliance was substantially only a repetition of renewal of the alliance entered into with Abraham; but the renewal itself arose so completely out of the circumstances, that there is no ground whatever for denying that it occurred, or for the hypothesis that our account is merely another form of the earlier alliance; to say nothing of the fact, that besides the agreement in the leading event itself, the attendant circumstances are altogether peculiar, and correspond to the events which preceded. Abimelech not only brought his chief captain Phicol (supposed to be the same as in Gen_21:22, if Phicol is not also an official name), but his מֵרֵעַ “friend,” i.e., his privy councillor, Ahuzzath. Isaac referred to the hostility they had shown; to which Abimelech replied, that they (he and his people) did not smite him (נָגַע), i.e., drive him away by force, but let him depart in peace, and expressed a wish that there might be an oath between them. אָלָה the oath, as an act of self-imprecation, was to form the basis of the covenant to be made. From this אָלָה came also to be used for a covenant sanctioned by an oath (Deu_29:11, Deu_29:13). תַּעֲשֶׂה אִם “that thou do not:” אִם a particle of negation used in an oath (Gen_14:23, etc.). (On the verb with zere, see Ges. §75, Anm. 17; Ewald, §224.) - The same day Isaac's servants informed him of the well which they had dug; and Isaac gave it the name Shebah (שִׁבְעָה, oath), in commemoration of the treaty made on oath. “Therefore the city was called Beersheba.” This derivation of the name does not shut the other (Gen_21:31) out, but seems to confirm it. As the treaty made on oath between Abimelech and Isaac was only a renewal of his covenant concluded before with Abraham, so the name Beersheba was also renewed by the well Shebah. The reality of the occurrence is supported by the fact that the two wells are in existence still (vid., Gen_21:31).

really useful, thanks

[Christian Zionist]

mohammed claimed that he got a revelation that Allah the true god.  But his father's name was Abdullah meaning Allah's slave.  Therefore the name Allah already existed even during the pre-islamic days.  Why would god "reveal" something that had been in existence for centuries before islam to mohammed?.  This proves that mohammed was a confused moron.

Please see this site for interesting info:

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm

[q_q_]

mohammed claimed that he got a revelation that Allah the true G-d.  But his father's name was Abdullah meaning Allah's slave.  Therefore the name Allah already existed even during the pre-islamic days.  Why would G-d "reveal" something that had been in existence for centuries before islam to mohammed?.  This proves that mohammed was a confused moron.

Please see this site for interesting info:

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm

That link aside. Regarding your comment.

I think you can write G o d, it is only jews that cannot.  (and even for jews, some scholars say we can).
Saying the Y/J words would be offensive though.
Infact, if you write G-d, it  suggests that you are jewish / a believing orthodox jew, and that is misleading.. At least in your case it says christian-zionist, but if others do it it may not be so obvious.

And also, regarding your comment.
They would say that Allah is an arabic word that means "The G-d", and hence it predated mohammed.   I think your argument is really non-existant. So what if the word existed before mohammed. You assume that every single "fact" stated in the quran or a religious book has to be new.  Nobody says a revelation cannot repeat anything that has already been said"/"believed"/"known by all or some.  It is inevitable in any religion that comes to replace a previous one.

[Mstislav]

Hamas is also in The Bible and it means evil.

[shimon]

chamas means stealing in the tanach

[Zelhar]

Actually it means robbery.