Horace Heffner replied
At 11:14 AM 3/24/5, thomas malloy wrote:
>The idea that Yehovah, and Allah are the same entity is pure
>nonsense. Ditto for the idea that Shariah is a substitute for Torah.
>I thought I'd made the case adequately, but apparently I didn't.
You completely failed to address the issue and you seem to not even
understand the point.
Jews and Christians worship the god of Abraham. Islamists worship the god
of Abraham. If it is the same Abraham it is the same god.
You believe what you want to believe. I've pointed out that the
two entities have; different names, different legal systems, and the
train of human thought that they produced bore different fruit. If you
still believe that they are the same entity, you have blinded yourself
to what is obvious.
>So
>I'll try again.
You might try addressing the premises or the logic which derives the
conclusion.
>>The difference lies in the words and thus opinions of men, not in the two
>>gods. Peace between these world factions must finally be won in the hearts
>>of humanity, not in the interpretation of scripture.
>
>More nonsense, why are there two world views? Two gods perhaps?
If you seek differences you always find them. If you seek peace the road
lies through what we share in common.
Jews and Christians worship the god of Abraham. Islamists worship the god
of Abraham. If it is the same Abraham it is the same god.
There is only one way in which peace can be achieved when one
system, or group of people, is sworn to destroy the other. One of us
has to destroy the other. "When civilized men are unwilling to do
what needs to be done in order to maintain their existence, they will
be replaced by uncivilized men, who are willing to do what needs to be
done." I believe that this quote is from Victor Davis Hanson,
frequent guest on the Hugh Hewitt Show.
If you doubt that Islam is sworn to destroy us, I'm happy to
document this assertion. I have previously mentioned Prophet of Doom,
and there are others, including Whallet Shumblot, a Moslem convert who
will tell you the same thing.
Terry Blanton posted;
>I think you might find this of interest:
>"There are certain striking similarities between the
Hindu god Brahma and his >consort Saraisvati, and the
Jewish Abraham and Sarai, that are more than mere
>coincidences."
>There is a general solution. If G-d is Omnipresent,
there is but One by exclusion; >and, all monotheistic
religions are worshiping the same G-d by definition.
The story tells about two super human entities who are in a life
and death struggle. One is bent on destroying as many humans as he
can. He uses counterfeits in order to deceive men. I don't understand
how you can conclude what you have in the above paragraph, you have to
blind yourself to what is obvious.
This in no way detracts from their being an omnipresent G-d. It's
just that he has given us free will, to either serve him, or go our
own way. like sheep.
Steven Lawrence posted;
>was, was "Abraham". He existed.
(Whether he called himself Abraham or the >name was altered in a
scribal error is, of course, not determinable, and also >somewhat
irrelevant IMHO.) "Abraham"'s God was, by definition
and scribal >errors notwithstanding, Yhwh.
I would refer to by previous postings about the Bible Code. I'm
reading Cracking the Bible Code by Jeffery Satinover. He mentions that
the Israeli's used Code to predict future events. The book was written
before the Helitical (Legal) degree forbidding them (religious Jews)
from saying so. If you question the statistical anomaly that the
existence of the Codes represents, I have an ebook that addresses the
subject. The existence of the Codes, and their making accurate
predictions, is, IMHO, evidence of the Book's divine authorship.
In addition, and far more subjectively, I would assert that the very strange incident of Melchizidek provides strong internal evidence for the historical authenticity of at least some of the stories of Abraham.
Melshizidek means something like prince of righteousness, He had
no physical lineage, and lived in what is now Jerusalem. In our
opinion, (Rabbi, and mine) he is a picture of the coming Messiah. G-d
in human form.
>The name of Bethel, which has some significance in Jewish
history, is also >interesting:
It means house of G-d.
>which included Baal.
which means the master. YHVH doesn't want to be our master, he
wants to be our father, and husband. We submit to him because we love
him.
>Is it possible that Yhwh was connected in some way with the
same pantheon?
The word Elohiem is plural and it is clear from both the Torah,
and the Book of Enoch, and the holy Zohar that the G-d head has a
plurality, kind of like multiple personality.
Furthermore, entities called called the sons of the elohim had
sex with the daughters of men. This is where the Nepthilim came from.
They were polluted by sin, and had at least some of the powers of G-d,
the Hebrew word shum is translated in the KJV of the Book, as men of
renown, the Tanach (Jewish Bible) uses the word devastation. While the
plain text isn't clear, the Midrash (Teaching) goes into detail about
their barbarous activities, which is why JHVH killed them
all.
