PDA

View Full Version : Allah - The moon god



Sudarshan
24 September 2006, 10:31 AM
Allah - the Moon God

The Archeology of The Middle East
The religion of Islam has as its focus of worship a deity by the name of "Allah." The Muslims claim that Allah in pre-Islamic times was the biblical God of the Patriarchs, prophets, and apostles. The issue is thus one of continuity. Was "Allah" the biblical God or a pagan god in Arabia during pre-Islamic times? The Muslim's claim of continuity is essential to their attempt to convert Jews and Christians for if "Allah" is part of the flow of divine revelation in Scripture, then it is the next step in biblical religion. Thus we should all become Muslims. But, on the other hand, if Allah was a pre-Islamic pagan deity, then its core claim is refuted. Religious claims often fall before the results of hard sciences such as archeology. We can endlessly speculate about the past or go and dig it up and see what the evidence reveals. This is the only way to find out the truth concerning the origins of Allah. As we shall see, the hard evidence demonstrates that the god Allah was a pagan deity. In fact, he was the Moon-god who was married to the sun goddess and the stars were his daughters.



Archaeologists have uncovered temples to the Moon-god throughout the Middle East. From the mountains of Turkey to the banks of the Nile, the most wide-spread religion of the ancient world was the worship of the Moon-god. In the first literate civilization, the Sumerians have left us thousands of clay tablets in which they described their religious beliefs. As demonstrated by Sjoberg and Hall, the ancient Sumerians worshipped a Moon-god who was called many different names. The most popular names were Nanna, Suen and Asimbabbar. His symbol was the crescent moon. Given the amount of artifacts concerning the worship of this Moon-god, it is clear that this was the dominant religion in Sumeria. The cult of the Moon-god was the most popular religion throughout ancient Mesopotamia. The Assyrians, Babylonians, and the Akkadians took the word Suen and transformed it into the word Sin as their favorite name for the Moon-god. As Prof. Potts pointed out, "Sin is a name essentially Sumerian in origin which had been borrowed by the Semites."

In ancient Syria and Canna, the Moon-god Sin was usually represented by the moon in its crescent phase. At times the full moon was placed inside the crescent moon to emphasize all the phases of the moon. The sun-goddess was the wife of Sin and the stars were their daughters. For example, Istar was a daughter of Sin. Sacrifices to the Moon-god are described in the Pas Shamra texts. In the Ugaritic texts, the Moon-god was sometimes called Kusuh. In Persia, as well as in Egypt, the Moon-god is depicted on wall murals and on the heads of statues. He was the Judge of men and gods. The Old Testament constantly rebuked the worship of the Moon-god (see: Deut. 4:19;17:3; II Kngs. 21:3,5; 23:5; Jer. 8:2; 19:13; Zeph. 1:5, etc.) When Israel fell into idolatry, it was usually the cult of the Moon-god. As a matter of fact, everywhere in the ancient world, the symbol of the crescent moon can be found on seal impressions, steles, pottery, amulets, clay tablets, cylinders, weights, earrings, necklaces, wall murals, etc. In Tell-el-Obeid, a copper calf was found with a crescent moon on its forehead. An idol with the body of a bull and the head of man has a crescent moon inlaid on its forehead with shells. In Ur, the Stela of Ur-Nammu has the crescent symbol placed at the top of the register of gods because the Moon-god was the head of the gods. Even bread was baked in the form of a crescent as an act of devotion to the Moon-god. The Ur of the Chaldees was so devoted to the Moon-god that it was sometimes called Nannar in tablets from that time period.

A temple of the Moon-god has been excavated in Ur by Sir Leonard Woolley. He dug up many examples of moon worship in Ur and these are displayed in the British Museum to this day. Harran was likewise noted for its devotion to the Moon-god. In the 1950's a major temple to the Moon-god was excavated at Hazer in Palestine. Two idols of the moon god were found. Each was a stature of a man sitting upon a throne with a crescent moon carved on his chest . The accompanying inscriptions make it clear that these were idols of the Moon-god. Several smaller statues were also found which were identified by their inscriptions as the "daughters" of the Moon-god. What about Arabia? As pointed out by Prof. Coon, "Muslims are notoriously loath to preserve traditions of earlier paganism and like to garble what pre-Islamic history they permit to survive in anachronistic terms."

During the nineteenth century, Amaud, Halevy and Glaser went to Southern Arabia and dug up thousands of Sabean, Minaean, and Qatabanian inscriptions which were subsequently translated. In the 1940's, the archeologists G. Caton Thompson and Carleton S. Coon made some amazing discoveries in Arabia. During the 1950's, Wendell Phillips, W.F. Albright, Richard Bower and others excavated sites at Qataban, Timna, and Marib (the ancient capital of Sheba). Thousands of inscriptions from walls and rocks in Northern Arabia have also been collected. Reliefs and votive bowls used in worship of the "daughters of Allah" have also been discovered. The three daughters, al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat are sometimes depicted together with Allah the Moon-god represented by a crescent moon above them. The archeological evidence demonstrates that the dominant religion of Arabia was the cult of the Moon-god.

In Old Testament times, Nabonidus (555-539 BC), the last king of Babylon, built Tayma, Arabia as a center of Moon-god worship. Segall stated, "South Arabia's stellar religion has always been dominated by the Moon-god in various variations." Many scholars have also noticed that the Moon-god's name "Sin" is a part of such Arabic words as "Sinai," the "wilderness of Sin," etc. When the popularity of the Moon-god waned elsewhere, the Arabs remained true to their conviction that the Moon-god was the greatest of all gods. While they worshipped 360 gods at the Kabah in Mecca, the Moon-god was the chief deity. Mecca was in fact built as a shrine for the Moon-god.

This is what made it the most sacred site of Arabian paganism. In 1944, G. Caton Thompson revealed in her book, The Tombs and Moon Temple of Hureidha, that she had uncovered a temple of the Moon-god in southern Arabia. The symbols of the crescent moon and no less than twenty-one inscriptions with the name Sin were found in this temple. An idol which may be the Moon-god himself was also discovered. This was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists.

The evidence reveals that the temple of the Moon-god was active even in the Christian era. Evidence gathered from both North and South Arabia demonstrate that Moon-god worship was clearly active even in Muhammad's day and was still the dominant cult. According to numerous inscriptions, while the name of the Moon-god was Sin, his title was al-ilah, i.e. "the deity," meaning that he was the chief or high god among the gods. As Coon pointed out, "The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God." The Moon-god was called al-ilah, i.e. the god, which was shortened to Allah in pre-Islamic times. The pagan Arabs even used Allah in the names they gave to their children. For example, both Muhammad's father and uncle had Allah as part of their names.

The fact that they were given such names by their pagan parents proves that Allah was the title for the Moon-god even in Muhammad's day. Prof. Coon goes on to say, "Similarly, under Mohammed's tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah, became Al-Ilah, The God, or Allah, the Supreme Being."

This fact answers the questions, "Why is Allah never defined in the Qur'an? Why did Muhammad assume that the pagan Arabs already knew who Allah was?" Muhammad was raised in the religion of the Moon-god Allah. But he went one step further than his fellow pagan Arabs. While they believed that Allah, i.e. the Moon-god, was the greatest of all gods and the supreme deity in a pantheon of deities, Muhammad decided that Allah was not only the greatest god but the only god.

In effect he said, "Look, you already believe that the Moon-god Allah is the greatest of all gods. All I want you to do is to accept that the idea that he is the only god. I am not taking away the Allah you already worship. I am only taking away his wife and his daughters and all the other gods." This is seen from the fact that the first point of the Muslim creed is not, "Allah is great" but "Allah is the greatest," i.e., he is the greatest among the gods. Why would Muhammad say that Allah is the "greatest" except in a polytheistic context? The Arabic word is used to contrast the greater from the lesser. That this is true is seen from the fact that the pagan Arabs never accused Muhammad of preaching a different Allah than the one they already worshipped. This "Allah" was the Moon-god according to the archeological evidence. Muhammad thus attempted to have it both ways. To the pagans, he said that he still believed in the Moon-god Allah. To the Jews and the Christians, he said that Allah was their God too. But both the Jews and the Christians knew better and that is why they rejected his god Allah as a false god.

Al-Kindi, one of the early Christian apologists against Islam, pointed out that Islam and its god Allah did not come from the Bible but from the paganism of the Sabeans. They did not worship the God of the Bible but the Moon-god and his daughters al-Uzza, al-Lat and Manat. Dr. Newman concludes his study of the early Christian-Muslim debates by stating, "Islam proved itself to be...a separate and antagonistic religion which had sprung up from idolatry." Islamic scholar Caesar Farah concluded "There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that Allah passed to the Muslims from the Christians and Jews." The Arabs worshipped the Moon-god as a supreme deity. But this was not biblical monotheism. While the Moon-god was greater than all other gods and goddesses, this was still a polytheistic pantheon of deities. Now that we have the actual idols of the Moon-god, it is no longer possible to avoid the fact that Allah was a pagan god in pre-Islamic times. Is it any wonder then that the symbol of Islam is the crescent moon? That a crescent moon sits on top of their mosques and minarets? That a crescent moon is found on the flags of Islamic nations? That the Muslims fast during the month which begins and ends with the appearance of the crescent moon in the sky?

CONCLUSION
The pagan Arabs worshipped the Moon-god Allah by praying toward Mecca several times a day; making a pilgrimage to Mecca; running around the temple of the Moon-god called the Kabah; kissing the black stone; killing an animal in sacrifice to the Moon-god; throwing stones at the devil; fasting for the month which begins and ends with the crescent moon; giving alms to the poor, etc.

The Muslim's claim that Allah is the God of the Bible and that Islam arose from the religion of the prophets and apostles is refuted by solid, overwhelming archeological evidence. Islam is nothing more than a revival of the ancient Moon-god cult. It has taken the symbols, the rites, the ceremonies, and even the name of its god from the ancient pagan religion of the Moon-god. As such, it is sheer idolatry and must be rejected by all those who follow the Torah and Gospel.

This is the perspective of Christians. Hindus need not reject Islam on these grounds, but can accept it, on the basis of idolatory and similarity with both Vaishnavism and Shaivism. Islam without its terrorism in my opinion is even better than Christianity due to emphasis on some spiritual discipline. Christianity, for most Christians remains just a Sunday affair. Muslims are required to perform daily worship,undergo fasts etc which is more in tune with Hinduism.:)

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

Skillganon
24 September 2006, 09:21 PM
Robert Morey's Moon-god Myth
& Other Deceptive Attacks on Islam</B>
by Shabir Ali

CONTENTS
Morey's Deceptive Methods (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#dm)
How Morey Quotes From Professor Goon (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#hmqp)
How Morey Quotes From Caesar Farah (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#hmqc)
Morey Contradicts Himself (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#mch)
Irrelevant Archeological Evidence (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#iae)
How Morey Twists Things (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#hmtt)
Morey's Intended Audience (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#mia)
Fallacy of Equivocation (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#foe)
False Evidence (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#fe)
Optical Delusions (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#od)
What Was the Name of That Moon-god? (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#wwn)
Concealed Evidence (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#ce)
Back to the Real Issue (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#btr)
Morey's Folly (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#mf)
The Crescent Moon in Islam (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#tcm)
Questions Answered (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#qa)
Works Cited (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#wc)
Appendix (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#a)

sarabhanga
24 September 2006, 09:22 PM
I. Deva (the Divinity) <=> GOD <=> Allah <=> Soma

II. Manu (the Human Diviner) <=> DOG <=> Mahamad <=> Homa (cf. Avestan Houma, and Persian Huma).


homa <=> soma or sauma <=> umA <=> iLA or iDA <=> gaÑgA (which implies sarasvatI)


Allah is only Illa or Soma ("the moon"); and Mahamad is only the Kavi (the wise man or priest) who howls his praises.

Skillganon
24 September 2006, 09:28 PM
You might want to read this aswell.


Reply To Robert Morey's Moon-God Allah Myth: A Look At The Archaeological Evidence
M S M Saifullah, Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi & `Abdullah David
© Islamic Awareness, All Rights Reserved.
First Composed: 13th April 2006
Last Modified: 26th June 2006

And from among His Signs are the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. Prostrate not to the sun nor to the moon, but prostrate to Allah Who created them, if you (really) worship Him. (Qur'an 41:37)

1. Introduction
One of the favourite arguments of the Christian missionaries over many years had been that Allah of the Qur'an was in fact a pagan Arab "Moon-god" from pre-Islamic times. The seeds of this argument were sown by the work of the Danish scholar Ditlef Nielsen, who divided the semitic deities into a triad of Father-Moon, Mother-Sun and Son-Venus.[1] His ideas (esp., triadic hypothesis) were used uncritically by later scholars who came to excavate many sites in the Near East and consequently assigned astral significance to the deities that they had found. Since 1991 Ditlef Nielsen's views were given a new and unexpected twist by the Christian polemicist Robert Morey. In a series of pamphlets, books and radio programs, he claimed that "Allah" of the Qur'an was nothing but the pagan Arab "Moon-god". To support his views, he presented evidences from the Near East which can be seen in "Appendix C: The Moon God and Archeology" from his book The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion and it was subsequently reprinted with minor changes as a booklet called The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East.[2] It can justifiably be said that this book lies at the heart of missionary propaganda against Islam today. The popularity of Morey's ideas was given a new breath of life by another Christian polemicist Jack T. Chick, who drew a fictionalised racially stereotyped story entitled (http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0042/0042_01.asp) "Allah Had No Son". Morey's ideas have gained widespread popularity among amenable Christians, and, more often than not, Muslims find themselves challenged to refute the 'archaeological' evidence presented by Morey. Surprisingly, it has also been suggested (http://www.isv.org/about_us/bios/morey.htm) by some Christians that Morey has conducted "groundbreaking research on the pre-Islamic origins of Islam." In this article, we would like to examine the two most prominent evidences postulated by Morey, namely the archaeological site in Hazor, Palestine and the Arabian "Moon temple" at Hureidha in Hadhramaut, Yemen, along with the diagrams presented in Appendix C of his book The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion (and booklet The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East) all of which he uses to claim that Allah of the Qur'an was a pagan "Moon-god".[3]


2. The Statue At Hazor: "Allah" Of The Muslims?
One of the most prominent evidences of Morey for showing that Allah was a "Moon god" comes from Hazor.[4] Morey says:
In the 1950's a major temple to the Moon-god was excavated at Hazor in Palestine. Two idols of the moon god were found. Each was a stature of a man sitting upon a throne with a crescent moon carved on his chest (see Diagram 1). The accompanying inscriptions make it clear that these were idols of the Moon-god (see Diagram 2 and 3). Several smaller statues were also found which were identified by their inscriptions as the "daughters" of the Moon-god.[5]
Hazor was a large Canaanite and Israelite city in Upper Galilee. It was identified by J. L. Porter in 1875 and this view was later endorsed by J. Garstang who conducted trials at the site in 1928. In the years 1955-58, the James A. de Rothschild Expedition, under the direction of Yigael Yadin, conducted excavations on the site.[6] Among other things, they found a shrine furnished with an offering table, a lion orthostat, the statue in question, and stelae, all made from regional black basalt [Figure 1(a)].[7] The central stela shows a pair of hands raised below a crescent plus circle symbol, usually considered to depict the crescent moon and the full moon, respectively [Figure 1(b)]. The raised hands may be understood as a gesture of supplication, although Yadin proposed that this posture should be associated with a goddess known from much later Punic iconography as Tanit, who was the consort of the god Sin.[8] The other stelae are plain. The whole shrine has been interpreted as belonging to a Moon-god cult.
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/hazor1.jpg http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/hazor2.gif
(a)

(b)
Figure 1: (a) A close-up of the stelae temple, showing all the stelae, the statue and the offering table. (b) The central stele with the relief.[9]
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/hazor3.gif
Figure 2: (Right) Front view of the statue, showing the lunar deity emblem on its chest. (Left) Rear view of the statue.[10]
The principal object of interest is the statue [Figure 2] which Morey has labelled as a "Moon-god".[11] The statue, about 40 cm in height, depicts a man with an inverted crescent suspended from his necklace and holding a cup-like object in his right hand, while the other hand rests on his knees.[12] The question now is what exactly this statue represents which Morey labelled as "Moon-god"?
According to Yadin, this statue can represent a deity, a king, or a priest. He says that all the "three alternatives are possible", but he "believes it is a statue of the deity itself".[13] However, it appears that later he had modified his views. Writing in the Encyclopedia Of Archaeological Excavations In The Holy Land, Yadin describes the same statue as

Basalt statue of deity or king from the stelae temple...[14]
Subsequent scholarship has described the same statue either in uncertain or neutral terms. For example, Treasures Of The Holy Land: Ancient Art From The Israel Museum describes the statue of the seated figure as:

It depicts a man, possibly a priest, seated on a cubelike stool. He is beardless with a shaven head; his skirt ends below his knees in an accentuated hen; his feet are bare. He holds a cup in his right hand, while his left hand, clenched into a fist, rests on his left knee. An inverted crescent is suspended from his necklace.[15]
Amnon Ben-Tor in The New Encyclopedia Of Archaeological Excavations In The Holy Land describes the statue as a "seated male figure" without saying what it represented.[16] In a later publication, however, he described the same object as "a small basalt statue of a decapitated deity (or king) whose head was found nearby."[17] Amihai Mazar, in a similar fashion, described the statue as "a sitting male figure (possibly depicting a god or a priest)."[18]
Clearly, there is a difference of opinion among the scholars concerning this statue. It is not too hard to understand why this is the case. It seems illogical that a god should hold offering vessels in his hand; the god is usually the one who receives offerings. Therefore, the statue should, in all probability, depict a priest or a worshipper of a god, who himself is in a way considered present, either invisibly or in the upright stela of the sanctuary. Furthermore, the statue of man holding an offering was seated at the left hand side of the shrine [Figure 1(a)]. This can hardly be a proper position for a revered god, whose position is arranged in the centre of the sanctuary.
Morey claimed that "two idols of the Moon-god were found" and that each of them were "sitting upon a throne with a crescent moon carved on his chest". Apparently, the "accompanying inscriptions made it clear that these were idols of the Moon-god". Regardless of the difference of opinions concerning the nature of statue found at Hazor, however, no scholar has ever identified this statue with a "Moon-god", nor do they say that "accompanying inscriptions" suggest that the statue was that of a "Moon-god". Furthermore, Morey's claimed that "two idols of the Moon-god" were found at Hazor. Contrary to his claims of the discovery of "two idols of the Moon-god", Yadin confirms the discovery of two contemporary temples, dedicated to two different deities - Moon-god and Weather god at Hazor in Area C and Area H, respectively.[19] The temple of the Weather god was represented by a circle-and-rays emblem and the bull which together indicate that it must be Hadad the storm god,[20] whatever his actual name was at Hazor. A likely source of Morey's unsubstantiated claims could be due to the discovery of two beheaded statues, one with an inverted crescent suspended from his necklace that we had discussed earlier and the other representing a king;[21] they look similar to each other. Equally ridiculous is another of Morey's claims that several smaller statues were also found "which were identified by their inscriptions as the "daughters" of the Moon-god." No such statues or inscriptions accompanying them were found in Hazor. Unfortunately for Morey he has been caught red-handed fabricating evidence. Put simply, he is making up stories here.
After Morey's debacle at Hazor, let us now examine his next piece of evidence – that of a "Moon temple" at Hureidha in Southern Arabia and how it proves that Allah of the Qur'an was a pagan "Moon-god" of Arabia.

Skillganon
24 September 2006, 09:33 PM
Part 2.

3. The "Moon" Deities From Southern Arabia?

Morey's claim that Moon worship was dominant in Arabia, especially in the south, can be summed up with a quote from his book:
During the nineteenth century, Amaud, Halevy and Glaser went to Southern Arabia and dug up thousands of Sabean, Minaean, and Qatabanian inscriptions which were subsequently translated. In the 1940's, the archeologists G. Caton Thompson and Carleton S. Coon made some amazing discoveries in Arabia. During the 1950's, Wendell Phillips, W.F. Albright, Richard Bower and others excavated sites at Qataban, Timna, and Marib (the ancient capital of Sheba)...
The archeological evidence demonstrates that the dominant religion of Arabia was the cult of the Moon-god...
In 1944, G. Caton Thompson revealed in her book, The Tombs and Moon Temple of Hureidha, that she had uncovered a temple of the Moon-god in southern Arabia. The symbols of the crescent moon and no less than twenty-one inscriptions with the name Sin were found in this temple. An idol which may be the Moon-god himself was also discovered. This was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists.[22]

Let us now look into some "amazing discoveries" made in Southern Arabia which led Morey to claim that the archaeological evidence "demonstrates" that the dominant religion in Arabia was the cult of Moon-god.
To begin with, the South-Arabian pantheon is not properly known. Its astral foundation is indisputable. As in most contemporary semitic cults, the southern Arabs worshipped stars and planets, chief among whom were the Sun, Moon and ‘Athtar, the Venus.[23] The relation to the divine was deeply rooted in public and private life. The concept of State was expressed through the "national god, sovereign, people". Each of the South Arabian kingdoms had its own national god, who was the patron of the principal temple in the capital. In Sheba, it was Ilmaqah (also called Ilumquh or Ilmuqah or Almaqah or Almouqah), in the temple of the federation of the Sabaean tribes in Marib. In Hadramaut (or Hadhramaut), Syn (or Sayin) was the national god and his temple was located in the capital Shabwa. In Qataban, the national god was called ‘Amm ("paternal uncle"), who was the patron of the principal temple in the capital Timna‘. ‘Amm was seen as a protector of the Qatabanite dynasty, and it was under his authority that the ruler carried out various projects of the state. In Ma‘in, the national god was Wadd ("love") and it originated most probably from Northern Arabia. He was sometimes invoked as Wadd-Abb ("Wadd is father").[24]
In order to understand the religion and culture of Southern Arabia, it must be borne in mind that the monuments and inscriptions already show a highly developed civilization, whose earlier and more primitive phases we know nothing about. This civilization had links with the Mediterranean region and Mesopotamian areas - which is evidenced by the development and evolutionary trends of its architecture and numismatics. This exchange certainly influenced the religious phenomena of the culture and it is primarily here we should look to illuminate the theological outlook of the Sheba region; certainly not among the nomadic bedouin of the centre and north of the Arabian peninsula. It was the failure to take into account these crucial principles that led Ditlef Nielsen into his extravagant hypothesis that all ancient Arabian religion was a primitive religion of nomads, whose objects of worship were exclusively a triad of the Father-Moon, Mother-Sun and the Son-Venus star envisaged as their child.[25] Not only was this an over-simplified view based on an unproven hypothesis, it is also quite absurd to think that over a millennium-long period during which paganism is known to have flourished, there was not substantial shifts of thinking about the deities. Not surprisingly, Nielsen's triadic hypothesis was handed a devastating refutation by many scholars, albeit some of them still retained his arbitrary assignment of astral significance to the deities.[26] While discussing the pantheon of South Arabian gods and its reduction to a triad by Nielsen, Jacques Ryckmans says:

Many mention of gods are pure appellations, which do not allow defining the nature, or even the sex, of the deities names. This explains why the ancient claim of D. Nielsen to reduce the whole pantheon to a basic triad Moon-father, Sun-mother (sun is feminine in Arabia), and Venus-son, has continued to exert negative influence, in spite of its having been widely contested: it remained tempting to explain an unidentified feminine epithet as relating to the Sun-goddess, etc.[27]
The crude logic of proponents of Nielsen's hypothesis is that since Shams ("Sun") is feminine in epigraphic South Arabian, the other principal deity must be masculine and this was equated with the Moon. The relationship between Father-Moon and Mother-Sun produced Son-Venus star, their child. How did this erroneous interpretation affect the data from Southern Arabia where some "amazing discoveries" were made? We will examine this is the next few sections.

MOON GOD IN MARIB (SHEBA)?
Nielsen's views also influenced the archaeologists who excavated the Mahram Bilqis (also known as the Temple Awwam) near Marib.[28] Mahram Bilqis, an oval-shaped temple, was dedicated to Ilmaqah, the chief god of Sheba.[29] This temple was excavated by the American Foundation for the Study of Man (AFSM) in 1951-52[30] and again more recently in 1998.[31] According to the archaeologist Frank Albright, the Temple Awwam (i.e., Mahram Bilqis) was "dedicated to the moon god Ilumquh, as the large inscription of the temple itself tells us".[32] Albright cited the inscription MaMB 12 (= Ja 557) to support his claim that Temple Awwam was "dedicated to the moon god Ilumquh".[33] However, the inscription Ja 557 in its entirety reads:

Abkarib, son of Nabatkarib, of [the family] Zaltān, servant of Yada‘il Bayyin and of Sumhu‘alay Yanūf and of Yata‘amar Watar and of Yakrubmalik Darih and of Sumuhu‘alay Yanūf, has dedicated to Ilumquh all his children and his slaves and has built and completed the mass of the bastion he has completed and filled up the enclosing wall of Awwām from the line of this inscription and in addition, all its masonry of hewn stones and its woodwork and the two towers Yazil and Dara‘ and their [the two towers] recesses, to the top, and he has raised up the possessions of his ancestors, the descendents of Zaltān. By ‘Attar and by Ilumquh and by Dāt Himyān and by Dāt Ba‘dān. And Abkarib has made known, in submission to Ilumquh and to the king of Mārib, Š[...[34]
Although the dedication to Ilmaqah is mentioned, nowhere does the inscription say that Ilmaqah is called the Moon-god! In fact, none of the inscriptions at the Mahram Bilqis mention Ilmaqah as the Moon-god. Moreover, the collective mentioning of the pantheon of gods by formulae such as "by ‘Athtar", "by Ilumquh", "by Shams", "by Hawbas", "by Dhāt Himyān", "by Dhāt Ba‘dān", "by Dhāt Ba‘dānum", "by Dhāt Zahrān", etc. occur quite frequently in the inscriptions from Mahram Bilqis.[35] As Ryckmans had pointed out, many of these gods are pure appellations, with no defining nature and sex. Following the logic of Nielsen of reducing the Arab pantheon of gods to a triad, Albright and others have considered Ilmaqah as the Moon-god, although no evidence of such a triad exists. Scholars like Alexander Sima have drawn attention to the fact that very little is known about the Sabaean deities. He says that while Shams was most certainly a solar goddess, the lunar nature of Ilmaqah is "speculative" and lacks "any epigraphic evidence".[36]
The nature of the Sabaean chief deity Ilmaqah was studied in considerable detail by J. Pirenne[37] and G. Garbini[38] in the 1970s. They have shown that the motifs associated with Ilmaqah such as the bull's head, the vine, and also the lion's skin on a human statue are solar and dionysiac attributes. Therefore, Ilmaqah was a Sun-god, rather than a Moon-god. Concerning Ilmaqah, J. Ryckmans in The Anchor Bible Dictionary says:

Along with the main god ‘Attar, each of the major kingdoms venerated its own national god. In Saba this was the god named Almaqah (or Ilmuqah), whose principal temple was near Marib, the capital of Saba, a federal shrine of the Sabaean tribes. According to the widely contested old theory of the Danish scholar D. Nielsen, who reduced the whole South Arabian pantheon to a primitive triad: father Moon, mother Sun (sun is feminine in Arabic) and son Venus, Almaqah was until recently considered a moon god, but Garbini and Pirenne have shown that the bull's head and the vine motif associated with him are solar and dionysiac attributes. He was therefore a sun god, the male counterpart of the sun goddess Šams, who was also venerated in Saba, but as a tutelary goddess of the royal dynasty.[39]
Ilmaqah was also discussed by A. F. L. Beeston. Writing in the Encyclopaedia Of Islam, he says:

For the period down to the early 4th century A.D., few would now agree with the excessive reductionism of D. Nielsen, who in the 1920s held that all the many deities in the pagan pantheon were nothing more than varying manifestations of an astral triad of sun, moon and Venus-star; yet it is certainly the case that three deities tend to receive more frequent mention than the rest....
But just as the Greek local patron deities such as Athene in Athens, Artemis in Ephesus, etc., figure more prominently than the remoter and universal Zeus, so in South Arabia the most commonly invoked deity was a national one, who incorporated the sense of national identity. For the Sabaeans this was 'lmkh (with an occasional variant spelling 'lmkhw). A probable analysis of this name is as a compound of the old Semitic word 'l "god" and a derivative of the root khw meaning something like "fertility" (cf. Arabic kahā "flourish"); the h is certainly a root letter, and not, as some mediaeval writers seem to have imagined, a tā marbūta, which in South Arabian is always spelt with t...
Many European scholars still refer to this deity in a simplistic way as "the moon god", a notion stemming from the "triadic" hypothesis mentioned above; yet Garbini has produced cogent arguments to show that the attributes of 'lmkh are rather those of a warrior-deity like Greek Herakles or a vegetation god like Dionysus.[40]
Elsewhere, Beeston writes:

Among the federal deities, the case for Syn being a moon god rests on identifying him with Akkadian Su-en, later Sin; an equation which, attractive though it may seem, is not without problems. At all events, even if this was so with the Hadramite deity, it is unlikely that it tells the whole story. In the case of Ilmqh, ‘Amm and Wadd, there is nothing to indicate lunar qualities. Garbini has presented a devastating critique of such a view in relation to Ilmqh, for whom he claims (much more plausibly) the attributes of a warrior-god and of a Dionysiac vegetation deity, with solar rather than lunar associations. In the case of Wadd, the presence of an altar to him on Apollo's island of Delos points rather to solar than lunar associations. For ‘Amm we have nothing to guide us except his epithets, the interpretation of which is bound to be highly speculative.[41]
While discussing various gods of southern Arabia, and Ilmaqah (or Almaqah) in particular, Jean-François Breton says:

Almaqah was the god of agriculture and irrigation, probably for the most part of the artificial irrigation which was the basis of successful farming in the oasis of Ma'rib. The god's animal attributes were the bull and, in later times, the vine. Almaqah was a masculine sun god; the divinity Shams (Sun), who was invoked as protector of the Sabaean dynasty, was his feminine counterpart.[42]
Such views concerning Ilmaqah can also be seen in the Encyclopaedia Britannica which says:

Next to ‘Athtar, who was worshiped throughout South Arabia, each kingdom had its own national god, of whom the nation called itself the "progeny" (wld). In Saba' the national god was Almaqah (or Ilmuqah), a protector of artificial irrigation, lord of the temple of the Sabaean federation of tribes, near the capital Ma'rib. Until recently Almaqah was considered to be a moon god, under the influence of a now generally rejected conception of a South Arabian pantheon consisting of an exclusive triad: Father Moon, Mother Sun (the word "sun" is feminine in Arabic), and Son Venus. Recent studies underline that the symbols of the bull's head and the vine motif that are associated with him are solar and Dionysiac attributes and are more consistent with a sun god, a male consort of the sun goddess.[43]
While discussing the relationship between the Chaldaeans and the Sabianism, the Encyclopedia Of Astrology says:

From this arose Sabianism, the worship of the host of heaven: Sun, Moon and Stars. It originated with the Arabian kingdom of Saba (Sheba), when came the Queen of Sheba. The chief object of their worship was the Sun, Belus. To him was erected the tower of Belus, and the image of Belus.[44]
It is clear from this discussion that Ilmaqah was the patron deity of the people of Sheba due to the fact they invoke him frequently in their inscriptions, and almost always before other deities if at all featured. From the inscriptions themselves it is not clear what sort of deity Ilmaqah was. He has many epithets, but none which link him explicitly with the sun or moon. The simple linkages between deities and natural phenomena as put forth by Nielsen, have been rejected of late in explaining the nature and function of deities. Instead, the study of the motifs show that Ilmaqah had attributes that are more consistent with a Sun god.[45]

[B]MOON GOD IN HUREIDHA (HADRAMAUT)?
Let us now move to Hadramaut. During excavations in Southern Arabia, G. Caton Thompson found a temple of the Hadramitic patron deity Sin in Hureidha.[46] She claimed that Sin was a Moon-god.[47] Following her footsteps, Morey says:

In 1944, G. Caton Thompson revealed in her book, The Tombs and Moon Temple of Hureidha, that she had uncovered a temple of the Moon-god in southern Arabia (see Map 3). The symbols of the crescent moon and no less than twenty-one inscriptions with the name Sin were found in this temple (see Diagram 5). An idol which may be the Moon-god himself was also discovered (see Diagram 6). This was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists.[48]
There are several serious problems associated with G. Caton Thompson's claim that Sin was a Moon god. Firstly, the name of the Hadramitic patron deity according to the epigraphic evidence is http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/sin.gif and it is transcribed as SYN.[49] The case for SYN being a Moon-god rests on identifying him with the Akkadian Su-en, later Sin: the well-known north semitic Moon deity. This equation which may seem attractive, is beset with problems. Secondly, Pliny reported that in Shabwa, they worshipped the god Sabin.[50] Sabin was pronounced as Savin according to the Latin phonetic rules of the 1st century CE.[51] Christian Robin proposed the reading of Sayīn for SYN which is now widely accepted among scholars.[52] Commenting on the Hadramitic patron god SYN, Alexander Sima says:

The Hadramitic pantheon is the least known in southern Arabia owing to the fact that the number of known Hadramitic inscriptions is - compared to the three other states/languages - still very limited. At the top of the Hadramitic pantheon stood the deity whose name was constantly written SYN. This name was previously thought to be vocalized as Sīn and thus connected with the well-known north Semitic moon deity, Sīn. However, the South Arabian orthography and the testimony of the Natural History of Pliny the Younger points to a vocalization, Sayīn, so the form Sīn should be abandoned. The Hadramitic sources give no hint of his nature and even his connection with the moon is merely speculative.[53]
In other words, the Hadramitic patron deity Sayīn is different from the north semitic deity Sin and the former's connection with the Moon is speculative.

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/coins.jpg
(a)
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/coins_1.jpg
(b)
Figure 3: (a) Couple of Hadramitic coins mentioning the patron deity SYN (obverse) and showing an eagle with open wings (Reverse).[54] (b) The coin 1 is sketched to make the depiction more lucid.[55]
However, the numismatic evidence from Hadramaut suggests something more interesting. In some coins from Hadramaut, Sayīn appears as an eagle [Figure 3(a)],[56] a solar animal, and this clearly points to him as being the Sun god. John Walker, who first published the Hadramitic coins, was perplexed by the presence of an eagle and the mention of SYN, which he assumed to be the deity Sin. Although he was aware that the monuments in North Arabia and Syria regarded the eagle as a solar deity, he insisted on giving a lunar association to the depiction of eagle on Hadramitic coins, which is clearly in contrary to the evidence.[57] Modern scholars regard Sayīn as a solar deity. For example, Jean-François Breton says:

The national god of Hadramawt was known as Sayîn, a Sun god. As in Qataban, the inhabitants of Hadramawt referred to themselves as the "children of Sayîn"; the state itself was described through the formula using two divine names which also referred to a double tribe: "Sayîn and Hawl and [king] Yada'il and Hadramawt." We have only meagre information from classical authors about Sayîn and his cult. Theophrastus reported that frankincense was collected in the temple of the Sun, which he erroneously placed in Saba.[58]
Similarly Jacques Ryckmans points out:

In Hadramawt, the national god Syn, in the temple in the capital Shabwah, has generally been assimilated to the Moon-god. But remarks by Theophrastes and Pliny, and some coins on which he appears as an eagle (a solar animal!) point him out as a Sun-god, a male counterpart of Shams.[59]
Such views are also seen in The Anchor Bible Dictionary[60] and the Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia Of World Religions. The latter says:

In Hadramawt the national god Syn was also a sun god.[61]
Given that Morey claims to have conducted "groundbreaking research on the pre-Islamic origins of Islam", one finds oneself most taken aback by the complete absence of contemporary scholarship in his book. Morey's haphazard consideration of the sources would justifiably prompt one to fear that he was not even aware of the relevant critical literature in the first place! All this leaves the apologist's credibility in serious dispute.
Let us look at his arguments concerning the "Moon temple" in Hureidha. Morey says that "symbols of the crescent moon and no less than twenty-one inscriptions with the name Sin were found in this temple (see Diagram 5)." The presence of crescent moon does not automatically suggest that Sayīn was a Moon-god. Müller had photographed an incense altar from Southern Arabia containing both crescent moon and the Sun. This object was dedicated to the Sun-goddess.[62] Clearly the presence of a crescent moon does not warrant drawing hasty conclusions. Moreover, Morey pointed to the diagram 5 containing the inscriptions to support his viewpoint. This diagram is reproduced with a translation in Figure 4.

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/hureida_2.jpg
(a)
A3.26

Bin'il, son of ‘Ammdamar, the Yarmite, Ka-
bîr of Ramay, renewed the former façade (of the temple) of Madâbum, in the
third (year of the) ‘Adidum, and with the participation of (the tribe) Ramay.
A3.11

... son of Yuhan-
... de]dicated to Hawl.
A3.14

Šamît?
Halsay?

....
Dû-Hahay'il.Šahrum.
Nawfatân.
‘Ayb(?).


A3.16

Ha[lakyati‘ de[dicated ...

A3.16a

... son of T...

A3.12

Yadham, son of[... and ... have
dedicated to Sîn.
(b)
Figure 4: (a) Inscriptions at Temple in Hureidha dedicated to the patron deity Sayīn or SYN. (b). Translation of the inscriptions.[63]
Out of six inscriptions, only one mentions the dedication of the temple at Hureidha to Sayīn. In fact, none of the dedicatory inscriptions (or otherwise) say that Sayīn was a Moon-god.[64] Morey goes on to claim with a picture (i.e., Diagram 6 in his book and see Figure 5 below) that G. Caton Thompson discovered an "idol which may be the Moon-god himself". This uncertainty is mysteriously transformed to certainty by Morey in the figure caption which reads "Arabian Moon Temple - An idol of the Moon-god".[65] There is a clear discrepancy here.

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/hureida_moon.jpg
Figure 5: Limestone statue of unknown significance.[66]
Moreover, what does G. Caton Thompson say about this image? Her description of this statue is as follows:

White limestone brick with impurities. Total height 20.5 cm., width 8.4 cm., depth 4 cm. Head and neck 5.5 cm. high. The brick belongs to a class of smooth chiselled slabs abundant in the Temple masonry... The back of the image, however, though rough to stand hidden against a wall, is not humped for actual engagement. The human features, without ears, are vaguely indicated on a bullet head; and hair, or a hanging head-dress, not infrequent on Yemen statuettes, falls to the shoulders.
Neither of these stones has any near parallel in published material from south Arabia. They are, in their respective ways, more primitive than anything yet found there. The significance of association of the true baetyl - the aniconic representation of the god - with the semi-anthromorphic form of image, more probably representative of the votary, in a similar ritual setting, is perhaps impossible to disentangle without additional evidence from comparable groups in situ.[67]
In the layman terms, the exact nature of this limestone statue is not known although Thompson suggests that "it may be a cult image."[68] Morey's claim that Figure 5 represents "idol of the Moon-god" is now completely sunk. What now becomes unbelievable is what comes next. Morey says that the limestone statue of the non-existing Moon-god at Hureidha "was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists". The well-known archaeologists that are listed by Morey are:

Richard Le Baron Bower Jr. and Frank P. Albright, Archaeological Discoveries in South Arabia, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1958, p.78ff; Ray Cleveland, An Ancient South Arabian Necropolis, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1965; Nelson Gleuck, Deities and Dolphins, New York, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 1965).[69]
Three references are listed but only one is cited with a page number. Page number 78ff. in Archaeological Discoveries In Southern Arabia leads to the article "Irrigation In Ancient Qatabān (Beihān)" by Richard LeBaron Bowen, Jr.[70] On p. 78, Bowen says:

We are indebted to Misses F. Stark, E. W. Gardner, and G. Caton Thompson for the first systematic study of ancient irrigation in South Arabia. Freya Stark visited Hureidha in 1935 and reported that a very big Sabaean ruin-field existed in Wadi ‘Amd, a tributary of Wadi Hadhramaut (Plate 34). On the basis of this, Miss Caton Thompson chose Hureidha as a site for excavation in 1937. The "Sabaean ruin-field" turned out to be merely the rubble ruins of an irrigation system, which Miss E. W. Gardner surveyed (Plate 90).[71]
In the footnote of the page Bowen cites G. Caton Thompson's The Tombs And Moon Temple Of Hureidha (Hadhramaut) where the ruins of the irrigation system are discussed. This does not sound like well-known archaeologists "confirming" the limestone statue as "Moon-god".
Morey's deception gets grander with the next reference he cited, which is Ray Cleveland's An Ancient South Arabian Necropolis. The full title of this book reads An Ancient South Arabian Necropolis: Objects From The Second Campaign (1951) In The Timna‘ Cemetery.[72] The last part of the title of the book which Morey conveniently left-out is more informative. Timna‘ is in Qataban whereas Hureidha is in Hadramaut. Cleveland's book exclusively deals with Timna‘ cemetery in Qataban and as to how he had confirmed that the limestone statue at Hureidha in Hadramaut was a "Moon-god" is a complete mystery. The fact is that there is no such "confirmation" by Cleveland in his book. No wonder Morey did not even cite a page number in his book where the reader can verify his claims.
Morey's deception peaks with the last reference on the list, i.e., Nelson Gleuck's Deities And Dolphins. The full title of this book is Deities And Dolphins: The Story Of The Nabataeans.[73] Again the last part of the title gives the whole game away and no wonder Morey did not mention it at all. In this book Glueck describes the Nabataean hilltop temple of Khirbet Tannur.[74] Khirbet Tannur is about fifty miles north of Petra, on the peak of Jebel Tannur in modern day Jordan. Not surprisingly, this book has nothing to do with the temple in Hureidha in Southern Arabia and it does not even mention it. Consequently, there is no "confirmation" by Glueck that the statue at Hureidha was a "Moon-god".
This completely refutes the "archaeological evidence" presented by Morey for his claim that "Allah" of the Qur'an was in fact a pagan Arab "Moon-god" of pre-Islamic times. To complete the study of the pantheon in Southern Arabia in pre-Islamic times, let us look at the nature of ‘Amm, the patron of the principal temple in the capital Timna‘ in Qataban and Wadd, the national god of Ma‘in.

Skillganon
24 September 2006, 09:34 PM
Part 3.


MOON GODS IN QATABAN AND MA‘IN?
The astral nature of the patron deities of Qataban and Ma‘in is uncertain. Ryckmans says in The Anchor Bible Dictionary:

In Ma‘in, the national god Wadd, "love" originated from North Arabia... is frequently associated with the symbol of the moon crescent and a small disc (the planet Venus?), so that he probably was a moon god... In Qataban, the national god was ‘Amm, "paternal uncle," a well known semitic divine name. There is no reason to consider him moon god.[75]
Elsewhere he states:

In Ma‘in the national god Wadd, "love" originated from North Arabia. The identification with the Moon-god is not established... In Qatabān, the national god was called ‘Amm, "paternal uncle". His identity with the Moon-god is not established.[76]
Ryckmans' views are also shared by Breton. He says that:

In the kingdom of Ma‘in, the national god was known as Wadd, or "love"; this god probably originated in central or northern Arabia and has been attested in several kingdoms in South Arabia. He is a lunar god whose name is sometimes accompanied by the epithet moon...
In Qatabān, the national god was called ‘Amm or "paternal uncle" in reference to his role in the pantheon; but this designation fails to reveal his full identity.[77]
However, Beeston disagrees with the view that Wadd can be considered as a Moon-god. He opines that Wadd is most likely a solar deity. As for ‘Amm he says that there is nothing certain about his astral character. Beeston says:

In the case of Wadd, the presence of an altar to him on Apollo's island of Delos points rather to solar than lunar associations. For ‘Amm we have nothing to guide us except his epithets, the interpretation of which is bound to be highly speculative...[78]
In summary, the scholars are divided over the astral nature of both Wadd, the patron deity of Ma‘in, and ‘Amm, the patron of the principal temple in the capital Timna‘. However, there is complete agreement concerning ‘Amm, the patron deity of Qataban, that his exact nature is unknown.

WHAT DO THE "AMAZING DISCOVERIES" TELL US ABOUT ILĀH?
Morey had mentioned that some "amazing discoveries" were made in Southern Arabia by archaeologists such as G. Caton Thompson, Carleton S. Coon, Wendell Phillips, W.F. Albright, Richard Bower et al. and this has resulted in the "demonstration" that the predominant religion in Arabia was Moon-god worship. We have conclusively demonstrated that this is indeed false. Many of these archaeologists used Nielsen's arbitrary assignment of astral significance to the deities. However, modern studies have proven that the predominant religion was solar worship in the kingdoms of Sheba and Hadramaut. The exact nature of astral significance of the patron deities in the kingdoms of Qataban and Ma‘in is uncertain. Thus Segall's statement that "according to most scholars, South Arabia's stellar religion had always been dominated by the Moon-god in various variations" is incorrect and represents an example of outdated scholarship.[79] Morey also plundered Coon to support his claim that Allah was a pagan Arab "Moon-god" of pre-Islamic times. According to Morey:

As Coon pointed out, "The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God."
The Moon-god was called al-ilah, i.e. the god, which was shortened to Allah in pre-Islamic times. The pagan Arabs even used Allah in the names they gave to their children. For example, both Muhammad's father and uncle had Allah as part of their names. The fact that they were given such names by their pagan parents proves that Allah was the title for the Moon-god even in Muhammad's day.[80]
Morey then adds:

Prof. Coon goes on to say, "Similarly, under Mohammed's tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah, became Al-Ilah, The God, or Allah, the Supreme Being."[81]
There are several problems with Morey's quotes. Firstly, Morey clipped the sentence out of a larger paragraph. He deceptively left out a crucial part, and separated the other two parts as though they were two unrelated quotes. The actual quote from Coon reads:

The god Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God, but early in Arabian history the name became a general term for god, and it was this name that the Hebrews used prominently in their personal names, such as Emanu-el, Israel, etc., rather than the Ba'al of the northern semites proper, which was the Sun. Similarly, under Mohammed's tutelage, the relatively anonymous Ilah became Al-Ilah, The God, or Allah, the Supreme Being.[82]
Coon's claim that "Il or Ilah was originally a phase of the Moon God" comes from the claim that the patron deities of ancient South Arabia such as Wadd, ‘Amm, Sayīn and Ilmaqah were all Moon-gods.[83] A claim similar to that of Coon which says Allah was "originally applied to the moon" can also be seen in Everyman's Dictionary Of Non-Classical Mythology. Concerning "Allah" it says:

Allah. Islamic name for God. Is derived from Semitic El, and originally applied to the moon; he seems to have been preceded by Ilmaqah, the moon god.[84]
This takes us to the second point. The dictionaries of Qatabanian and Sabaean dialect compiled from the "amazing discoveries" of the inscriptions in Southern Arabia do not support Coon's view that il or ilāh was "originally a phase of the Moon god" nor gives credence to the allegation that Allah was "originally applied to the moon". As to what exactly il and ilāh mean in epigraphic South Arabian (i.e., Qatabanian and Sabaean inscriptions) as well as how they are related to their cognates in Arabic and Hebrew is depicted in Figure 6.

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/qatab1.gif
(a)
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/qatab2.gif
(b)
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/sabiac.gif
(c)
Figure 6: Discussion on 'IL and 'ILH in (a, b) Qatabanian[85] and (c) Sabaic dictionaries.[86] Note that the lexicons also mention that ilh in the Qatabanian and Sabaean dialects is similar to Arabic ilāh and Hebrew elōah.
Similar views are also expressed by D. B. Macdonald in the Encyclopaedia of Islam. He says that ilāh simply means deity. Concerning ilāh he says:

... for the Christians and (so far the poetry ascribed to them is authentic) the monotheists, al-ilāh evidently means God; for the poets it means merely "the one who is worshipped", so al-ilāh indicates: "the god already mentioned"... By frequency of usage, al-ilāh was contracted to Allāh, frequently attested in pre-Islamic poetry (where his name cannot in every case have been substituted for another), and then became a proper name (ism ‘alam)...
ilāh is certainly identical with elōah and represents an expanded form of an element -l- (il, el) common to the semitic languages.[87]
From the discussion, it is clear that in Qatabanian and Sabaean il or ilāh was neither "originally a phase of the Moon god" nor "originally applied to the moon". It simply means god/God. Furthermore, ilh in the Qatabanian and Sabaean dialects is similar to the Arabic ilāh and the Hebrew elōah. Moreover, the allegations that il or ilāh was "originally a phase of the Moon god" or that Allah was "originally applied to the moon" stems from the view of the earlier archaeologists and scholars that Moon-worship was predominant in Southern Arabia. This claim has been shown as erroneous and unsupported by any evidence. In fact, the evidence points to a predominance of Sun-worship in Southern Arabia.
Thirdly, Morey's approach left out of Coon's statement what would disprove his most important argument against the God of Islam. Morey is adept at repeating that Allah is not the God of the Bible but the Moon-god of pre-Islamic Arabia. It would have been inconvenient for him to repeat what Coon had said that "it was this name that the Hebrews used prominently in their personal names, such as Emanu-el, Isra-el, etc." Going by Morey's "logic" the Hebrew name Emanu-el which Morey considers a name for Jesus would now mean that "Moon-god is with us".
Fourthly, al-ilāh is not the same as il or ilāh. The words are spelt very differently. Coon says that "Ilah became Al-Ilah" in Muhammad's teachings. Obviously, then, al-ilāh was not the Moon-god according to Coon but only according to Morey.
Now that the case for finding the Moon-god in the "amazing discoveries" of Southern Arabia has come to a naught, let us now turn our attention to Northern Arabia.

4. A Wild Goose Chase In Northern Arabia
For his evidence of a Moon-god cult in Northern Arabia, Morey starts of by saying:
Thousands of inscriptions from walls and rocks in Northern Arabia have also been collected. Reliefs and votive bowls used in worship of the "daughters of Allah" have also been discovered. The three daughters, al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat are sometimes depicted together with Allah the Moon-god represented by a crescent moon above them.[88]

For Southern Arabia Morey told us about alleged Moon-god worship everywhere and he furnished us with names of discoverers, dates of discoveries, names of discovery sites, and lots of pictures to boot. Why is it that when it comes to Northern Arabia he offered not a shred of evidence? The only authorities he quotes to support his statement that the "three daughters, al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat are sometimes depicted together with Allah the Moon-god represented by a crescent moon above them", are Isaac Rabinowitz,[89] Edward Lipinski[90] and H. J. W. Drijvers.[91] To begin with, none of these scholars even mention that Allah was a Moon-god in their works. Rabinowitz's two papers in the Journal Of Near Eastern Studies deal with mention of Han-'Ilat on vessels from Egypt. The pagan goddess Atirat, who was widely worshipped in the Middle East, was discussed by Lipinski. There is no mention of al-‘Uzza and Manat in his paper, let alone they being the daughters of "Moon-god" Allah. As for the work of Drijvers, he discusses extensively the iconography of Allat in Palmyra. If there was something significant in these writings, Morey would have made direct quotation. The fact is that none of these works mention Allah was a Moon-god. Once again, Morey shows himself adept at fabricating evidence.

Skillganon
24 September 2006, 09:36 PM
Part 4.

5. Unquoting The Quotes

The standard of a work can be determined by how accurately the source material is cited. Morey's book The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion can be rated as one of the top-class howlers when it comes to accuracy.[92] Let us take a look at some of the samples.



Morey claims that "Newman concludes his study of the early Christian-Muslim debates by stating":
"Islam proved itself to be...a separate and antagonistic religion which had sprung up from idolatry".[93]



The actual quote on the other hand reads:
The first three centuries of the Christian-Muslim dialogue to a great degree molded the form of the relationship which was to prevail between the two faiths afterward. During this period, Islam proved itself to be less a wayward sect of the "Hagarenes," from a Christian perspective, and more a separate and antagonistic religion which had sprung up from idolatry.[94]



It was not Islam that proved itself to be a separate and antagonistic religion which had sprung up from idolatry; rather it was all from a Christian perspective! Morey conveniently left out the passage highlighted above to show that Islam proved itself to be a separate and antagonistic religion which had sprung up from idolatry.



Right after mentioning Newman's quote, Morey goes on to say that Caesar Farah also concluded:
"There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that Allah passed to the Muslims from the Christians and Jews." The Arabs worshipped the Moon-god as a supreme deity. But this was not biblical monotheism.[95]



Farah, on the other hand, actually states:
Allah, the paramount deity of pagan Arabia, was the target of worship in varying degrees of intensity from the southernmost tip of Arabia to the Mediterranean. To the Babylonians he was "Il" (god); to the Canaanites, and later the Israelites, he was "El'; the South Arabians worshipped him as "Ilah," and the Bedouins as "al-Ilah" (the deity). With Muhammad he becomes Allah, God of the Worlds, of all believers, the one and only who admits no associates or consorts in the worship of Him. Judaic and Christian concepts of God abetted the transformation of Allah from a pagan deity to the God of all monotheists. There is no reason, therefore, to accept the idea that "Allah" passed to the Muslims from Christians and Jews.[96]



The problem with Morey's quote is that he so separated the last sentence from the rest of the paragraph, that he made it say something different from what it used to say in the context of that paragraph. That passage was saying that the God who was called Ilah in South Arabia was called El by the Israelites. This fact would have ruined Morey's entire Moon-god theory, so Morey conveniently concealed it. Moreover, Farah never said that the Arab worshipped the Moon-god as a supreme deity!
Let us now move to Chapter IV ("The Cult Of The Moon God") of Morey's book.



Arthur Jeffery's Islam: Muhammad And His Religion is quoted to introduce the name Allah. Morey says:
The name Allah, as the Qur'an itself is witness, was well known in pre-Islamic Arabia. Indeed, both it and its feminine form, Allat, are found not infrequently among the theophoric names in inscriptions from North Africa.[97]



The actual quotation is:
The name Allah, as the Qur'an itself is witness, was well known in pre-Islamic Arabia. Indeed, both it and its feminine form, Allat, are found not infrequently among the theophoric names in inscriptions from North Arabia.[98]



Morey transforms "North Arabia" to "North Africa", thus increasing the geographical distribution of the name Allah and Allat among the theophoric inscriptions by several fold – conveniently for Morey, a not so insignificant misquotation.



As for Alfred Guillaume, Morey says that he has pointed out that "the moon god was called by various names, one of which was Allah".[99] Guillaume, on the other hand, writes:
The oldest name for God used in the Semitic word consists of but two letters, the consonant 'l' preceded by a smooth breathing, which was pronounced as 'Il' in ancient Babylonia, 'El' in ancient Israel. The relation of this name, which in Babylonia and Assyria became a generic term simply meaning 'god', to the Arabian Ilāh familiar to us in the form Allāh, which is compounded of al, the definite article, and Ilāh by eliding the vowel 'i', is not clear. Some scholars trace the name of the South Arabian Ilāh, a title of the Moon god, but this is a matter of antiquarian interest. In Arabia Allāh was known from Jewish and Christian sources as the one god, and there can be no doubt whatever that he was known to pagan Arabs of Mecca as the supreme being. Were this not so, the Qur'an would have been unintelligible to the Meccans; moreover it is clear from Nabataean and other inscriptions that Allāh means 'the god'.[100]



It is clear that Guillaume did not say that "the moon-god was called by various names, one of which was Allah". He only said that some scholars "trace the name of the South Arabian Ilāh, a title of the Moon god..." We have already seen from the Qatabanian and Sabaean lexicons that Ilāh simply means "god" without any astral connotations.



Many howlers can also be seen in Morey's A Reply To Shabbir Ally's Attack On Dr. Robert Morey: An Analysis Of Shabbir Ally's False Accusation And Unscholarly Research. In this booklet Morey accuses Shabbir Ally of "unscholarly research". How does Morey fare when it comes to "scholarly research"? Let us examine his scholarly credentials by taking just three examples from his booklet. Quoting the book Studies On Islam, Morey says:
"According to D. Nielsen, the starting point of the religion of the Semitic nomads was marked by the astral triad, Sun-Moon-Venus, the moon being more important for the nomads and the sun more important for the settled tribes." Studies on Islam, trans., ed. Merlin L. Swartz, (New York, Oxford, 1981), page 7.[101]



This quote comes from Joseph Henninger's article "Pre-Islamic Bedouin Religion" in this book. What is interesting to note is that Ditlef Nielsen's views on the origins of semitic religion are no longer considered valid by modern scholars. As we have noted earlier, Nielsen's triadic hypothesis was handed a devastating refutation by many scholars. Not surprisingly, Henninger describes Neilsen's theories as "dubious" and "too speculative" which "met with strong opposition".[102] In other words, the reference which Morey used to bolster his case for Allah being a Moon god refutes the same contention!



While discussing the ibex and its religious significance in ancient South Arabian religion, Morey mentioned Wendell Phillips' Qataban And Sheba: Exploring Ancient Kingdoms On The Biblical Spice Routes Of Arabia which allegedly says:
"The ibex (wa'al) still inhabits South Arabia and in Sabean times represented the moon god. Dr. Albert Jamme believes it was of religious significance to the ancient Sabeans that the curved ibex horn held sideways resembled the first quarter of the moon." Qataban and Sheba: Exploring the Ancient Kingdoms on the Biblical Spice Routes of Arabia, Wendell Phillips, (New York, 1955), page 64.[103]



This quote is nowhere to be seen on that page! Checking the index of the book reveals that the only mention of ibex occurs in p. 69 where the text says:
The ibex was an animal of special veneration among the ancient peoples of Arabia, and frequently adorned sacrificial tables of offerings to the gods, such as the one we found.[104]



Another quote from this book, according to Morey, says:
"The first pre-Islamic inscription discovered in Dhofar Province, Oman, this bronze plaque, deciphered by Dr. Albert Jamme, dates from about the second century A.D. and gives the name of the Hadramaut moon god Sin and the name Sumhuram, a long-lost city... The moon was the chief deity of all the early South Arabian kingdoms - particularly fitting in that region where the soft light of the moon brought the rest and cool winds of night as a relief from the blinding sun and scorching heat of day.
In contrast to most of the old religions with which we are familiar, the moon god is male, while the sun god is his consort, a female. The third god of importance is their child, the male morning star, which we know as the planet Venus...
The spice route riches brought them a standard of luxurious living inconceivable to the poverty-stricken South Arabian Bedouins of today. Like nearly all Semitic peoples they worshipped the moon, the sun, and the morning star. The chief god, the moon, was a male deity symbolized by the bull, and we found many carved bulls' heads, with drains for the blood of sacrificed animals." Qataban and Sheba: Exploring the Ancient Kingdoms on the Biblical Spice Routes of Arabia, ibid. page 227.[105]



Not surprisingly, the above quote is not be found on page 227 either! A closer examination of the material reveals that this lengthy quote in Morey's booklet comes from different pages, viz., pages 306, 69 and 64.
Dr. Jamme had deciphered a newly uncovered bronze inscription mentioning the name of the Hadhramaut moon god Sin and giving for the first time the name SMHRM (Sumhuram), a long-lost city.[106]
The moon was the chief deity of all the early South Arabian kingdoms - particularly fitting in that region where the soft light of the moon brought the rest and cool winds of the night as a relief from the blinding sun and scorching heat of day. In contrast to most of the old religions with which we are familiar, the Moon God is male, while the Sun God is his consort, a female. The third god of importance is their child, the male morning star, which we know as the planet Venus.[107]
The spice route riches brought them a standard of luxurious living inconceivable to the poverty-stricken South Arabian Bedouins of today. Like nearly all the Semitic peoples, they worshipped the moon, the sun, and the morning star. The chief god, the moon, was a male deity symbolized by the bull, and we found many carved bull's heads, with drains for the blood of sacrificed animals.[108]



It turns out that Morey mixed up three different quotes from three different pages and ultimately transformed them into a single quote allegedly originating from p. 227 of the book Qataban And Sheba: Exploring Ancient Kingdoms On The Biblical Spice Routes Of Arabia. As for who is involved in "unscholarly research" is quite clear.
These examples from Morey's books are enough to shred whatever remains of his scholarly credentials. A diligent researcher would be able to find more such misquotes in his books.

6. Conclusions

Morey claims to have conducted groundbreaking research on the pre-Islamic origins of Islam. However, on the basis of his poorly edited popular level book, there is a substantial lack of evidence to support this assertion. In fact, there is a considerable amount of evidence to conclude quite the opposite.
Morey claimed that "Allah" of the Qur'an was in fact a pagan Arab "Moon-god" of pre-Islamic times. To support his viewpoint, he presented elaborate evidences from an archaeological site in Hazor, Palestine, and the Arabian "Moon temple" at Hureidha in Hadhramaut, Yemen. An examination of these two evidences confirms that none of them support the view that Allah was the "Moon-god" of pre-Islamic times. The evidence from Hazor suggests that the interpretation of the statue of a man with an inverted crescent suspended from his necklace and holding a cup-like object in his right hand, which Morey labelled as "Moon-god", is disputed among the scholars. This statue could be of a deity, king or priest. None of the scholars, however, say that the statue represents a "Moon-god", let alone the statue representing Allah! As for the "Moon temple" at Hureidha in Hadhramaut, it was a claim of G. Caton Thompson which Morey dutifully repeated. The name of the Hadramitic patron deity according to the epigraphic evidence is http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/sin.gif and it is transcribed as SYN, which Thompson transcribed as Sin. Modern scholarship rejects this view on the basis of South Arabian orthography and the testimony of the Natural History of Pliny which points to a vocalization Sayīn. Furthermore, the numismatic evidence from Hadramaut shows that Sayīn appears as an eagle, a solar animal, and this clearly points to him as being the Sun god. Coupled to this is the fact that none of the inscriptions say that Sayin was a Moon-god. Morey also claimed that G. Caton Thompson discovered an "idol which may be the Moon-god himself" and that this "was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists". We have shown that Thompson did nothing of the sort; as to how "well-known archeologists" can confirm something that Thompson never claimed is a mystery to everyone. Rather Morey concocted the evidence to fit his pre-conceived notion that Allah was a "Moon-god".
Morey's deception is also clearly highlighted by the numerous misquotes. An examination of the actual quotes suggests that none of them say what Morey is claiming they say. Certainly, none of them say that Allah was a "Moon-god". In conclusion, Morey set us up with a case which we could not lose. Instead, he has cast his own credibility into doubt by penning a shoddy piece of pseudo-scholarship.
In spite of no evidence in either the past or present scholarship that Allah was a "Moon-god" of pre-Islamic Arabia, it has not discouraged (http://answering-islam.org.uk/Index/M/moongod.html) other Christian missionaries to loose hope; they have adopted what they term as a "take a scholarly "wait and see" approach" . They had over 10 years to look into the evidences presented by Morey that allegedly claimed that Allah was a "Moon-god" and yet no missionary ever came with a serious refutation from the point of view of archaeology. In the last 10 years, however, the missionary websites promoting Morey's "Moon-god" hypothesis have increased dramatically.
Morey's book will be remembered as one of the worst examples of published Christian missionary polemics and will join those category of books attempting to disparage Islam at the expense of objective cogent scholarship. In general, it will be observed that on numerous occasions Morey has resorted to forgery, deception, suppression of evidence and deliberate misquotation. When these fatal academic flaws are combined with his established inability to consistently cite references in an accurate manner, Morey's argument is left in tatters. Such are the extent of the factual inaccuracies in his book that one would be flabbergasted if it had been read by anyone else prior to publication.



In relation to truth and falsehood, and, in particular, the enduring nature of these two concepts, we are bound to be reminded of a very appropriate Qur'anic maxim:
And say: Truth hath come and falsehood hath vanished away. Lo! falsehood is ever bound to vanish. [Qur'an 17:81]



And Allah knows best!

References & Notes
[1] D. Nielsen, Handbuch Der Altarabischen Altertumskunde, 1927, Volume I (Die Alterarabische Kultur), Nyt Nordisk Forlag: Kopenhagen, pp. 177-250. For the discussion on the triad of moon, sun and the Venus star in semitic pantheon see pp. 213-234.
[2] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, Harvest House Publishers, pp. 211-218; R. Morey, The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, Research And Education Foundation: Newport (PA).
[3] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., for diagrams see p. 214 and p. 216; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., for diagrams see p. 6 and pp. 9-10.
[4] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 214; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., p. 6.
[5] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 213; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., p. 5 and p. 7. Using the services of Morey similar claims concerning the statues discovered at Hazor were made by B. M. Stortroen (Ed. G. J. Buitrago), Mecca And Muhammad: A Judaic Christian Documentation Of The Islamic Faith, 2000, Church Of Philadelphia Of The Majority Text (Magna), Inc.: Queen Creek (AZ), p. 91.
[6] This expedition has been recounted in Y. Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery Of A Great Citadel Of The Bible, 1975, Weidenfield and Nicolson: London & Jerusalem.
[7] ibid., pp. 44-47.
[8] Y. Yadin, "Symbols Of Deities At Zinjirli, Carthage And Hazor" in J. A. Sanders (Ed.), Essays In Honor Of Nelson Glueck: Near Eastern Archaeology In The Twentieth Century, 1970, Doubleday & Company, Inc.: Garden City (NY), pp. 216-224.
[9] Y. Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery Of A Great Citadel Of The Bible, 1975, op. cit., p. 46.
[10] ibid., pp. 44-45.
[11] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., Diagram 1 in p. 214; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., Diagram 1 in p. 6.
[12] Y. Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery Of A Great Citadel Of The Bible, 1975, op. cit., p. 44.
[13] ibid. Also see Y. Yadin, Hazor: With A Chapter On Israelite Megiddo, 1972, The Schweich Lectures Of The British Academy - 1970, Oxford University Press: London, p. 73 note 1; For similar views see M. Magnusson, BC: The Archaeology Of The Bible Lands, 1977, The Bodley Head and British Broadcasting Corporation, p. 84. Here is the statue is described as "a seated deity which was originally found decapitated"; G. Cornfeld, Archaeology Of The Bible: Book By Book, 1976, Adam & Charles Black: London, p. 76. Cornfeld's description is a "statuette of a seated god and an offering bowl are seen on the left".
[14] Y. Yadin, "Hazor" in M. Avi-Yonah (Ed.), Encyclopedia Of Archaeological Excavations In The Holy Land, 1976, Volume 2, Oxford University Press: London, p. 476.
[15] J. P. O'Neill (Ed.), Treasures Of The Holy Land: Ancient Art From The Israel Museum, 1986, The Metropolitan Museum Of Art, p. 107.
[16] A. Ben-Torr, "Hazor" in E. Stern (Ed.), The New Encyclopedia Of Archaeological Excavations In The Holy Land, 1993, Volume 2, Simon & Schuster, p. 596; For a similar description see W. Keller, The Bible As History In Pictures, 1964, Hodder And Stoughton, p. 128. He described the statue as a "seated stone figure" and that "libations were poured into the hollow between its open arms".
[17] A. Ben-Torr, "Hazor" in E. M. Meyers (Ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia Of Archaeology In The Near East, 1997, Volume 3, Oxford University Press: Oxford & New York, p. 3.
[18] A. Mazar, Archaeology Of The Land Of The Bible 10,000 - 586 B.C.E., 1990, The Lutterworth Press: Cambridge (UK), p. 254.
[19] Y. Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery Of A Great Citadel Of The Bible, 1975, op. cit., pp. 43-47 for the statue at Area C and pp. 84-85 for the statue at Area H; Also see Y. Yadin, Hazor: With A Chapter On Israelite Megiddo, 1972, op. cit., pp. 67-74 for the statue at Area C and pp. 87-95 for the statue at Area H.
[20] Y. Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery Of A Great Citadel Of The Bible, 1975, op. cit., p. 85; Y. Yadin, Hazor: With A Chapter On Israelite Megiddo, 1972, op. cit., p. 95.
[21] Y. Yadin, Hazor: The Rediscovery Of A Great Citadel Of The Bible, 1975, op. cit., pp. 94-95; Y. Yadin, Hazor: With A Chapter On Israelite Megiddo, 1972, op. cit., p. 94.
[22] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., pp. 213-215; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., pp. 7-10.
[23] J. Ryckmans, "South Arabia, Religion Of", in D. N. Freedman (Editor-in-Chief), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1992, Volume 6, Doubleday: New York, p. 172; J. Ryckmans, "The Old South Arabian Religion", in W. Daum (ed.), Yemen: 3000 Years Of Art And Civilization In Arabia Felix, 1987?, Pinguin-Verlag (Innsbruck) and Umschau-Verlag (Frankfurt/Main), p. 107.
[24] J. Ryckmans, "The Old South Arabian Religion", in W. Daum (ed.), Yemen: 3000 Years Of Art And Civilization In Arabia Felix, 1987?, op. cit., p. 107.
[25] See ref. 1.
[26] G. Furlani, "Triadi Semitiche E Trinità Cristiana", Bulletin De L'Institut D'Égypte, 1924, Volume 6, pp. 115-133; É. Dhorme, "La Religion Primtive Des Sémites: A Propos D'un Ouvrage Récent ", Revue De L'Histoire Des Religions, 1944, Volume 128, pp. 5-27; A. Jamme, "Le Panthéon Sud-Arabe Préislamique D'Après Les Sources Épigraphiques", Le Muséon, 1947, Volume 60, pp. 57-147; A. Jamme, "D. Nielsen Et Le Pantheon Sub-Arabe Préislamique", Revue Biblique, 1948, Volume 55, pp. 227-244.
Joseph Henninger has written a series of articles discussing and refuting Nielsen's thesis. See J. Henninger, "Das Opfer In Den Altsüdarabischen Hochkulturen", Anthropos, 1942-1945, Volume 37-40, pp. 802-805; idem., "Über Sternkunde Und Sternkult In Nord- Und Zentralarabien", Zeitschrift Für Ethnologie, 1954, Volume 79, pp. 107-10; idem., "Menschenopfer Bei Den Araben", Anthropos, 1958, Volume 53, p. 743. More recently J. Henninger, "Pre-Islamic Bedouin Religion" in M. L. Swartz (Trans. & Ed.), Studies In Islam, 1981, Oxford University Press: Oxford & New York, pp. 3-22. He describes Neilsen's theories "dubious" and "too speculative" which "met with strong opposition" (p. 4).
[27] J. Ryckmans, "The Old South Arabian Religion", in W. Daum (ed.), Yemen: 3000 Years Of Art And Civilization In Arabia Felix, 1987?, op. cit., p. 107.



[28] The best example of it can be seen in W. Phillips, Qataban And Sheba: Exploring Ancient Kingdoms On The Biblical Spice Routes Of Arabia, 1955, Victor Gollancz Ltd.: London. This book deals with the story of the expedition to Qataban and Sheba and is eminently readable. Like Nielsen, Wendell Phillips also clubbed the Arab pantheon of gods into a triad. Thus Phillips had lifted the hypothesis of Nielsen without giving any serious critical thought and resorted to conjectures. For example, he says [p. 69]:
The moon was the chief deity of all the early South Arabian kingdoms - particularly fitting in that region where the soft light of the moon brought the rest and cool winds of the night as a relief from the blinding sun and scorching heat of day. In contrast to most of the old religions with which we are familiar, the Moon God is male, while the Sun God is his consort, a female. The third god of importance is their child, the male morning star, which we know as the planet Venus.



A similar claim concerning the South Arabians worshipping a triad is repeated in p. 204:
Like nearly all the Semitic peoples, they worshipped the moon, the sun, and the morning star. The chief god, the moon, was a male deity symbolized by the bull, and we found many carved bull's heads, with drains for the blood of sacrificed animals.



For more unsubstantiated claims of Ilmaqah being the Moon god also see p. 256 and p. 262



[29] A. Jamme, Sabaean Inscriptions From Mahram Bilqīs (Mārib), 1962, American Foundation for the Study of Man - Volume 3, The Johns Hopkins Press: Baltimore, pp. 9-23. There are several dedicatory inscriptions - the earliest ones are from the 6th century BCE. For example the inscription Ja 556 says [p. 21]:
... both administrators for Hawbas and Ilumquh, have dedicated to Ilumquh the mass of the enclosing wall from the line of this inscription to the top of the tower and the two recesses. By Ilumquh.



[30] For the preliminary report see F. P. Albright, "The Excavation Of The Temple Of The Moon At Mārib", Bulletin Of The American Schools Of Oriental Research, 1952, No. 128, pp. 25-38. A detailed study is in F. P. Albright, "Excavations At Marib In Yemen" in R. L. Bowen, Jr., F. P. Albright (Eds.), Archaeological Discoveries In Southern Arabia, 1958, American Foundation for the Study of Man - Volume 2, The Johns Hopkins Press: Baltimore, pp. 215-235. For the expedition in general see W. Phillips, Qataban And Sheba: Exploring Ancient Kingdoms On The Biblical Spice Routes Of Arabia, 1955, Victor Gollancz Ltd.: London.
[31] For reports on this excavation see W. D. Glanzman, "Digging Deeper: The Results Of The First Season Of Activities Of The AFSM On The Mahram Bilqīs, Mārib", Proceedings Of The Seminar For Arabian Studies, 1998, Volume 28, pp. 89-104; W. D. Glanzman, "Clarifying The Record: The Bayt Awwām Revisited", Proceedings Of The Seminar For Arabian Studies, 1999, Volume 29, pp. 73-88; B. J. Moorman, W. D. Glanzman, J-M. Maillol & A. L. Lyttle, "Imaging Beneath The Surface At Mahram Bilqīs", Proceedings Of The Seminar For Arabian Studies, 2001, Volume 31, pp. 179-187.
[32] F. P. Albright, "The Excavation Of The Temple Of The Moon At Mārib", Bulletin Of The American Schools Of Oriental Research, 1952, op. cit., p. 26.
[33] ibid., p. 26, note 1.
[34] A. Jamme, Sabaean Inscriptions From Mahram Bilqīs (Mārib), 1962, op. cit., p. 22.
[35] ibid., for example see inscriptions Ja 552 (p. 16), Ja 555 (p. 19), Ja 557 (p. 22), Ja 558 (p. 24), Ja 559 (p. 28), Ja 560 (p. 32), etc. See pp. 403-405 for various deities mentioned in the inscriptions at the Mahram Bilqis.
[36] A. Sima, "Religion" in St. J. Simpson (Ed.), Queen Of Sheba: Treasures From Ancient Yemen, 2002, The British Museum Press: London, pp. 162-163.
[37] J. Pirenne, "Notes D'Archéologie Sud-Arabe", Syria, 1972, Volume 49, pp. 193-217.
[38] G. Garbini, "Il Dio Sabeo Almaqah", Rivista Degli Studi Orientali, 1973-1974, Volume 48, pp. 15-22.
[39] J. Ryckmans, "South Arabia, Religion Of", in D. N. Freedman (Editor-in-Chief), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1992, Volume 6, op. cit., p. 172; J. Ryckmans, "Le Panthéon De L'Arabie Du Sud Préislamique: Etat Des Problèmes Et Brève Synthèse", Revue De L'Histoire Des Religions, 1989, Volume 206, No. 2, p. 163; For similar comments also see J. Ryckmans, "The Old South Arabian Religion", in W. Daum (ed.), Yemen: 3000 Years Of Art And Civilization In Arabia Felix, 1987?, op. cit., p. 107. It is strange that Jürgen Schmidt in the same book mentions Almaqah as a Moon god of the triad, sun, moon and Venus! J. Schmidt, "Ancient South Arabian Sacred Buildings", in W. Daum (ed.), Yemen: 3000 Years Of Art And Civilization In Arabia Felix, 1987?, op. cit., p. 78.
[40] A. F. L. Beeston, "Saba'" in C. E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, W. P. Heinrichs & G. Lecomte, The Encyclopaedia Of Islam (New Edition), 1995, Volume VIII, E. J. Brill: Leiden, pp. 664-665.
[41] A. F. L. Beeston, "The Religions Of Pre-Islamic Yemen" in J. Chelhod (Ed.), L'Arabie Du Sud Histoire Et Civilisation (Le Peuple Yemenite Et Ses Racines), 1984, Volume I, Islam D'Hier Et D'Aujourd'Hui: 21, Editions G. -P. Maisonneuve et Larose: Paris, p. 263.
[42] J. F. Breton (Trans. Albert LaFarge), Arabia Felix From The Time Of The Queen Of Sheba, Eighth Century B.C. To First Century A.D., 1998, University of Notre Dame Press: Notre Dame (IN), pp. 119-120.
[43] "Pre-Islamic Deities (From Arabian Religion)", Encyclopaedia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite 2004 DVD, © 1994 - 2004 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.
[44] "Chaldaeans" in N. de Vore, Encyclopedia Of Astrology, 2005 (Repub.), American Classics Publishing, p. 52.
[45] Unfortunately, in the popular as well as in the scholarly literature Ilmaqah is still erroneously considered as the Moon god, a result of the legacy of Nielsen and the scholars who uncritically accepted his views. For example see, I. Shahid, "Pre-Islamic Arabia" in P. M. Holt, A. K. S. Lambtom & B. Lewis (Eds.), The Cambridge History of Islam, 1977, Volume 1A, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge (UK), p. 9; A. Allouche, "Arabian Religions" in M. Eliade (Ed.), The Encyclopedia Of Religion, 1987, Volume 1, Macmillan Publishing Company: New York, p. 364; B. Davidson, Africa In History, 1991, Touchstone: New York (USA), p. 45; G. W. van Beek, "Marib" in E. M. Meyers (Editor in Chief), The Oxford Encyclopedia Of Archaeology In The Near East, 1997, Volume 3, Oxford University Press: New York & Oxford, p. 417; R. Pankhurst, The Ethiopians: A History, 1998, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., p. 21; "Ilumquh" in W. Doniger (Consulting Editor), Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia Of World Religions, 1999, Merriam-Webster Inc. (MA), p. 500. Strangely in the same reference Ilumquh is also considered to be a solar deity, see "Arabian Religions" in W. Doniger (consulting editor), Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia Of World Religions, 1999, op cit., p. 70; "Addi Galamo" in I. Shaw & R. Jameson (Eds.), A Dictionary Of Archaeology, 1999, Blackwell Publishers Ltd., p. 6; P. B. Henze, Layers Of Time: A History Of Ethiopia, 2000, C. Hurst & Co. (Publishers) Ltd,. London, p. 28; G. Connah, African Civilizations: An Archaeological Perspective, 2001, Second Edition, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge (UK), p. 77; "Almaqah" and "Ilmaqah" in E. Sykes (Revised by A. Kendall), Who's Who In Non-Classical Mythology, 2002, Routledge: London, p. 8 and p. 94, respectively; P. Garlake, Early Art And Architecture Of Africa, 2002, Oxford History Of Art Series, Oxford University Press: Oxford (UK), p. 75; H. G. Marcus, A History of Ethiopia, 2002, Updated Edition, University of California Press: Berkeley (CA), p. 5; A. Rippin, Muslims: Their Religious Beliefs And Practices, 2003, Second Edition, Routledge: London, p. 10; P. K. Hitti (Revised by Walid Khalidi), History Of The Arabs, 2002, Revised Tenth Edition, Palgrave MacMillan: Hampshire (UK) & New York, p. 60.
[46] The excavations are described in detail in G. C. Thompson, The Tombs And Moon Temple Of Hureidha (Hadhramaut), 1944, Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London No. XIII, Oxford at the University Press.
[47] ibid., pp. 19-20.
[48] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 215; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., pp. 9-10.
A similar boast about G. Caton Thompson's "amazing" discovery of the temple of Moon god at Hureidha is also found in R. Morey's A Reply To Shabbir Ally's Attack On Dr. Robert Morey: An Analysis Of Shabbir Ally's False Accusation And Unscholarly Research, n.d., Faith Defenders: Orange (CA), p. 27. It was repeated again in R. A. Morey's Winning The War Against Radical Islam, 2002, Christian Scholars Press: Las Vegas (NV), Appendix, p. xxxiv.
[49] This was also pointed out by G. Caton Thompson. See G. C. Thompson, The Tombs And Moon Temple Of Hureidha (Hadhramaut), 1944, op. cit., p. 19.



[50] Pliny (Trans. H. Rackham), Natural History: In Ten Volumes, 1968, Volume 4, William Heinemann Ltd.: Cambridge (MA) and Harvard University Press, Book XII, xxxii.63, p. 46. The Latin text says:
ibi decumas deo quem vocant Sabin mensura, non pondere, sacerdotes capiunt, nec ante mercari licet;



[51] S. A. Frantsouzoff, "Regulation Of Conjugal Relations In Ancient Raybūn", Proceedings Of The Seminar For Arabian Studies, 1997, Volume 27, pp. 123-124, note 2.
[52] C. J. Robin, "Yashhur'il Yuhar‘ish, Fils D'Abiyasa‘, Mukarrib Du Hadramawt", Raydan, 1994, Volume 6, p. 102, note 4.
[53] A. Sima, "Religion" in St. J. Simpson (Ed.), Queen Of Sheba: Treasures From Ancient Yemen, 2002, op. cit., p. 163.
[54] J. Walker, "A New Type Of South Arabian Coinage", The Numismatic Chronicle And Journal Of The Numismatic Society, 1937, Volume 17, Fifth Series, Plate XXXIII.
[55] J. Walker, "The Moon-God On Coins Of The Hadramaut", Bulletin Of The School Of Oriental And African Studies, 1952, Volume 14, p. 623.
[56] J. Walker, "A New Type Of South Arabian Coinage", The Numismatic Chronicle And Journal Of The Numismatic Society, 1937, op. cit., pp. 260-279 and Plate XXXIII; J. Walker, "The Moon-God On Coins Of The Hadramaut", Bulletin Of The School Of Oriental And African Studies, 1952, op. cit., pp. 623-626.



[57] J. Walker, "A New Type Of South Arabian Coinage", The Numismatic Chronicle And Journal Of The Numismatic Society, 1937, op. cit., 274-275; Also see "Coins" in St. J. Simpson (Ed.), Queen Of Sheba: Treasures From Ancient Yemen, 2002, op. cit., p. 78. Describing the Hadramitic coins with eagle on them, it says:
It is the well-known series with the male head facing right (most probably the portrait of the mukarrib) the name of the federal deity Sayīn (SYN) on the obverse, and an eagle with open wings (undoubtedly the manifestation of Sayīn),..



[58] J. F. Breton (Trans. Albert LaFarge), Arabia Felix From The Time Of The Queen Of Sheba, Eighth Century B.C. To First Century A.D., 1998, op. cit., p. 122.
[59] J. Ryckmans, "The Old South Arabian Religion", in W. Daum (ed.), Yemen: 3000 Years Of Art And Civilization In Arabia Felix, 1987?, op. cit., p. 107; Also see J. Ryckmans, "Le Panthéon De L'Arabie Du Sud Préislamique: Etat Des Problèmes Et Brève Synthèse", Revue De L'Histoire Des Religions, 1989, op. cit., p. 165.



[60] J. Ryckmans, "South Arabia, Religion Of", in D. N. Freedman (Editor-in-Chief), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1992, Volume 6, op. cit., p. 172.
In the Hadramawt the national god, lord of the main temple of the capital city Shabwa , was Syn (Sīn?), probably a sun god; his symbol animal figured on coins, was the eagle - a solar animal.



[61] "Arabian Religions" in W. Doniger (consulting editor), Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia Of World Religions, 1999, op. cit., p. 70.
[62] W. M. Müller, "Outline Of The History Of Ancient Southern Arabia", in W. Daum (ed.), Yemen: 3000 Years Of Art And Civilization In Arabia Felix, 1987?, op. cit., p. 50.
[63] G. C. Thompson, The Tombs And Moon Temple Of Hureidha (Hadhramaut), 1944, op. cit., Plate LXIV for the picture and pp. 162-165 for the text. Since ours is not an official translation, we produce the original text below.

A3.26

Bin'il, fils de ‘Ammdamar, le Yarmite, Ka-
bîr de Ramay, a renouvelé la façade antérieure (du temple) de Madâbum, la
troisième (année de l'éponymat de) ‘Adidum, et avec la participation de (la tribu) Ramay.
A3.11

... fils de Yuhan-
... a dé]dié à Hawl.
A3.14
Šamît?
Halsay?

....
Dû-Hahay'il.Šahrum.
Nawfatân.
‘Ayb(?).





A3.16

Ha[lakyati‘ a dé[dié ...




A3.16a

... fils de T...




A3.12


Yadham, fils de[... et ... ont
dédié à Sîn.

[64] ibid., pp. 157-184. The translation of the inscriptions was done by G. Ryckmans.



[65] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 216; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., p. 10.
[66] G. C. Thompson, The Tombs And Moon Temple Of Hureidha (Hadhramaut), 1944, op. cit., Plate XIV.
[67] ibid., p. 49.
[68] ibid., p. 49, footnote 1.
[69] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 226; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., p. 19.
[70] R. L. Bowen, "Irrigation In Ancient Qatabān (Beihān)" in R. L. Bowen, Jr., F. P. Albright (Eds.), Archaeological Discoveries In Southern Arabia, 1958, op. cit., pp. 215-235.
[71] ibid., p. 78.
[72] R. Cleveland, An Ancient South Arabian Necropolis: Objects From The Second Campaign (1951) In The Timna‘ Cemetery, 1965, American Foundation for the Study of Man - Volume 4, The Johns Hopkins Press: Baltimore.
[73] N. Glueck, Deities And Dolphins: The Story Of The Nabataeans, 1966, Cassell & Company Ltd.: London.
[74] ibid., p. ix.
[75] J. Ryckmans, "South Arabia, Religion Of", in D. N. Freedman (Editor-in-Chief), The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 1992, Volume 6, op. cit., p. 172.
[76] J. Ryckmans, "The Old South Arabian Religion", in W. Daum (ed.), Yemen: 3000 Years Of Art And Civilization In Arabia Felix, 1987?, op. cit., p. 107.
[77] J. F. Breton (Trans. Albert LaFarge), Arabia Felix From The Time Of The Queen Of Sheba, Eighth Century B.C. To First Century A.D., 1998, op. cit., p. 121.
[78] A. F. L. Beeston, "The Religions Of Pre-Islamic Yemen" in J. Chelhod (Ed.), L'Arabie Du Sud Histoire Et Civilisation (Le Peuple Yemenite Et Ses Racines), 1984, Volume I, op. cit., p. 263.
[79] B. Segall, "Notes On The Iconography Of Cosmic Kingship", The Art Bulletin, 1956, Volume 38, p. 77.
[80] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., pp. 215-217; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., p. 11.
[81] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 217; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., p. 11.
[82] C. S. Coon, "Southern Arabia, A Problem For The Future", Papers Of The Peabody Museum Of American Archaeology And Ethnology, 1943, Volume 20, p. 195; It was reprinted in C. S. Coon, "Southern Arabia, A Problem For The Future", Annual Report Of The Board Of Regents Of The Smithsonian Institution, 1944, Publication 3776, p. 399.



[83] ibid. Coon says:

The state god of the Minaeans was Wadd, that of Katabanians ‘Amm, that of Hadramis Sin, and of the Sabaeans Il Mukah. All were the moon.







[84] "Allah" in E. Sykes, Everyman's Dictionary Of Non-Classical Mythology, 1961, J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd: London, E. P. Dutton & Co. Inc.: New York, p. 7. Not surprising, this quote was also used by Robert Morey but in a truncated form without the mention of Semitic El used in the Old Testament. See R. Morey, A Reply To Shabbir Ally's Attack On Dr. Robert Morey: An Analysis Of Shabbir Ally's False Accusation And Unscholarly Research, n.d., op. cit., p. 5; The truncated quote is again repeated twice in R. A. Morey's Winning The War Against Radical Islam, 2002, op. cit., Appendix, pp. vii and p. 17.


[85] S. D. Ricks, Lexicon Of Inscriptional Qatabanian, 1989, Studia Pohl No. 14, Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico: Roma, pp. 10-11.

[86] J. C. Biella, Dictionary Of Old South Arabic: Sabaean Dialect, 1982, Harvard Semitic Studies No. 25, Scholars Press: Chico (CA), p. 15; Also see A. F. L. Beeston, M. A. Ghul, W. W. Müller & J. Ryckmans, Sabaic Dictionary (English-French-Arabic), 1982, Publication Of The University Of Sanaa (Yar), Editions Peeters: Louvain-la-Neuve and Librairie du Liban: Beirut, p. 5.
[87] D. B. Macdonald, "Ilāh" in B. Lewis, V. L. Ménage, Ch. Pellat and J. Schacht (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of Islam (New Edition), 1971, Volume III, E. J. Brill (Leiden) & Luzac & Co. (London), p. 1093.
[88] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 215.
R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 215; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., pp. 7-8.
[89] I. Rabinowitz, "Aramaic Inscriptions Of The Fifth Century B.C.E. From A North-Arab Shrine In Egypt", Journal Of Near Eastern Studies, 1956, Volume 15, pp. 1-9; idem., "Another Aramaic Record Of The North-Arabian Goddess Han-'Ilat", Journal Of Near Eastern Studies, 1959, Volume 18, pp. 154-155.
[90] E. Lipinski, "The Goddess Atirat In Ancient Arabia, In Babylon, And In Ugarit: Her Relation To The Moon-God And The Sun-Goddess", Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica , 1972, Volume 3, pp. 101-119.
[91] H. J. W. Drijvers, "De Matre Inter Leones Sedente: Iconography And Character Of The Arab Goddess Allāt" in M. B. de Boer & T. A. Edridge (Eds.), Hommages À Maarten J. Vermaseren, 1978, Volume 1, E. J. Brill: Leiden, pp. 331-351 and Plates LXIII-LXXV.
[92] Morey seems to think his accuracy of citation is undoubted. In his radio show (http://www.faithdefenders.com/bmlarchives/03/12/18.zip) "Bob Morey Live", dated 18th December 2003, after being introduced as "the incredible, the intelligent, the incomparable, the in your face", the self-styled "Dr Bob" states that "If I say its there, its there, unless somebody has removed the there…".
[93] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 217; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., p. 13.
[94] N. A. Newman (Ed.), The Early Christian-Muslim Dialogue: A Collection Of Documents From The First Three Islamic Centuries (632 - 900 A.D.) Translations With Commentary, 1993, Interdisciplinary Biblical Research Institute: Hatfield (PA), p. 719.
[95] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 217; idem., The Moon-God Allah In The Archeology Of The Middle East, 1994, op. cit., p. 13.
[96] C. E. Farah, Islam: Beliefs And Observances, 1970, Barron's Educational Series, Inc.: Woodbury (NY), p. 28.
[97] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 47. An identical mistake is repeated by Morey in his booklet A Reply To Shabbir Ally's Attack On Dr. Robert Morey: An Analysis Of Shabbir Ally's False Accusation And Unscholarly Research, n.d., op. cit., p. 7. And again repeated twice in R. A. Morey's Winning The War Against Radical Islam, 2002, op. cit., Appendix, p. ix and p. 15.
[98] A. Jeffery (Ed.), Islam: Muhammad And His Religion, 1958, The Library of Liberal Arts - Volume 137, The Bobbs-Merrill Company: New York, p. 85.
[99] R. Morey, The Islamic Invasion: Confronting The World's Fastest-Growing Religion, 1992, op. cit., p. 50.
[100] A. Guillaume, Islam, 1956, Penguin Books: London, p. 7.
[101] R. Morey, A Reply To Shabbir Ally's Attack On Dr. Robert Morey: An Analysis Of Shabbir Ally's False Accusation And Unscholarly Research, n.d., op. cit., p. 18; R. A. Morey, Winning The War Against Radical Islam, 2002, op. cit., Appendix, p. xxiii and p. 31.
[102] J. Henninger, "Pre-Islamic Bedouin Religion" in M. L. Swartz (Trans. & Ed.), Studies In Islam, 1981, op. cit., p. 4.
[103] R. Morey, A Reply To Shabbir Ally's Attack On Dr. Robert Morey: An Analysis Of Shabbir Ally's False Accusation And Unscholarly Research, n.d., op. cit., p. 19; The same statement is repeated twice in R. A. Morey's Winning The War Against Radical Islam, 2002, op. cit., Appendix, p. xxiv and p. 32.
[104] W. Phillips, Qataban And Sheba: Exploring Ancient Kingdoms On The Biblical Spice Routes Of Arabia, 1955, op. cit., p. 69.
[105] R. Morey, A Reply To Shabbir Ally's Attack On Dr. Robert Morey: An Analysis Of Shabbir Ally's False Accusation And Unscholarly Research, n.d., op. cit., pp. 19-20; The is again repeated twice in R. A. Morey's Winning The War Against Radical Islam, 2002, op. cit., Appendix, pp. xxiv-xxv and pp. 32-33.
[106] W. Phillips, Qataban And Sheba: Exploring Ancient Kingdoms On The Biblical Spice Routes Of Arabia, 1955, op. cit., p. 306.
[107] ibid., p. 69.
[108] ibid., p. 204.

sarabhanga
24 September 2006, 10:40 PM
I. Deva (the Divinity) <=> GOD <=> Allah <=> Soma

II. Manu (the Human Diviner) <=> DOG <=> Mahamad <=> Homa (cf. Avestan Houma, and Persian Huma).


homa <=> soma or sauma <=> umA <=> iLA or iDA <=> gaÑgA (which implies sarasvatI)


Allah is only Illa or Soma ("the moon"); and Mahamad is only the Kavi (the wise man or priest) who howls his praises.

In ultimate truth, Soma (“the Moon”) is NOT the physically manifest Moon.

The Moon is the prime indication (sign, mark, or linga) of that unseen essence which exists beyond (but can only be grasped by reason of) its own manifestation or Being.

And those who, in ignorance, condemn all images or idols (graciously revealed ideals, however imperfect), are largely condemned to long suffering separation from the very Deity they are seeking!

sarabhanga
25 September 2006, 02:23 AM
In ultimate truth, Soma (“the Moon”) is NOT the physically manifest Moon.

The Moon is the prime indication (sign, mark, or linga) of that unseen essence which exists beyond (but can only be grasped by reason of) its own manifestation or Being.

And likewise, the unimaginable Yaweh is revealed in subtle reflexion by the winds (i.e. as Vayu).

Allah is "the Waters" (i.e. Apah or Jala), and Jehovah is "Wind" or "the Airs" (i.e. Prana).

Apah and Prana are both synonymous with Atman, and Atman is well known as Brahman !

Sudarshan
25 September 2006, 04:20 AM
Robert Morey's Moon-god Myth
& Other Deceptive Attacks on Islam</B>
by Shabir Ali

CONTENTS
Morey's Deceptive Methods (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#dm)
How Morey Quotes From Professor Goon (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#hmqp)
How Morey Quotes From Caesar Farah (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#hmqc)
Morey Contradicts Himself (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#mch)
Irrelevant Archeological Evidence (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#iae)
How Morey Twists Things (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#hmtt)
Morey's Intended Audience (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#mia)
Fallacy of Equivocation (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#foe)
False Evidence (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#fe)
Optical Delusions (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#od)
What Was the Name of That Moon-god? (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#wwn)
Concealed Evidence (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#ce)
Back to the Real Issue (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#btr)
Morey's Folly (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#mf)
The Crescent Moon in Islam (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#tcm)
Questions Answered (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#qa)
Works Cited (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#wc)
Appendix (http://www.beautifulislam.net/christianity/robert_moreys_moon_god_myth.htm#a)

Yeah, the debates between christians and muslims throwing stones at each other is funny. These arguments dont matter to Hindus - after all your arguments are mainly pointing out that Allah is found in the Arabic bible too? How does it matter to Hindus - the entire Abrahamic religion was a copy of other religions, including many pagan traditions( which have their roots in Sanatana Dharma). Moon God is not meant to belittle you, but Moon stands for the miind ( and sometimes Atma), while the sun stands for Atma.

Start from fundamentals:

Abraham - Brahma
Sara, consort of Abraham= Saraswati, consort of Brahma. Similarly every name that follows like Issac etc are imports from the Hindu scripture. So the very foundation of the abrahamic religions is directly from the heart of Hindu scripture, and twisted, and presented back to Hindus as the "only" truth. Kids will buy your stories....;)


Christian version:
Jesus = son of God; Paul = apostle; Muhammed=Satan;

Muslim Version:
Jesus = apostle; Paul= devil; Muhammed= final prophet;

Little kids would be impressed with your assesment of other religions and self glorification - not grown up Hindus. Nevertheless, as I mentioned earlier, this copying from Hindu scripture makes us brothers in faith and not enemies, as long as you agree with this assesment. We are happy to find that Abrahamic religions were founded by some Hindus in the past.;)

jaggin
27 September 2006, 07:03 AM
"The issue is thus one of continuity. Was "Allah" the biblical God or a pagan god in Arabia during pre-Islamic times?"

The reality is that the Quaran may speak of things of the past, particularly in reference to the Bible but it was a definite departure from the Paganism of Mohammed's time.

The Islamic concept of tieing in to Abraham through Ishmael doesn't hold much water spiritually since Paganism seemed to be the predominant religion of Mohammed's time.

"Islam without its terrorism in my opinion is even better than Christianity due to emphasis on some spiritual discipline."

Islam was not given as a progression of faith from Christianity but was given to catch up Arabs out of Paganism into a legalistic society similar to Judaism. Christianity is still superior not due to spiritual discipline but because of the gift of the spirit of God who works through believers. Better stated, a Christian does not have to work hard to be holy since God is working holiness within.

Sudarshan
27 September 2006, 07:40 AM
[COLOR=black]Islam was not given as a progression of faith from Christianity but was given to catch up Arabs out of Paganism into a legalistic society similar to Judaism. Christianity is still superior not due to spiritual discipline but because of the gift of the spirit of God who works through believers. Better stated, a Christian does not have to work hard to be holy since God is working holiness within.

So it was God's holiness that was working through Christians when they colonized the whole world? What about the atrocities in Europe under the orders of the Vatican? They are sure enough good evidences for the holiness of God working through Christians.

The spirit of God is common to the whole universe, and cannot be copyrighted by some person or religion. Every individual has to work equally hard to attain the level of perfection that makes you closer to God. Beleiving otherwise ( that there is some easier option for me and that the rest of the world is struggling for it) is the first sign of ignorance.

jaggin
20 October 2006, 07:17 AM
So it was God's holiness that was working through Christians when they colonized the whole world? What about the atrocities in Europe under the orders of the Vatican? They are sure enough good evidences for the holiness of God working through Christians.

The spirit of God is common to the whole universe, and cannot be copyrighted by some person or religion. Every individual has to work equally hard to attain the level of perfection that makes you closer to God. Beleiving otherwise ( that there is some easier option for me and that the rest of the world is struggling for it) is the first sign of ignorance.

Just because people call themselves Christians or are called Christians doesn't guarantee that the spirit of God is working in them. However, God does work to destroy pagan societies in favor of those who worship Him especially if those pagan societies resist conversion. For instance the indians of Mexico worshipped pagan gods and persformed human sacrifice. The conquerors might not have been that altruistic but they did eliminate pagan religion in Mexico.

The spirit of God is available to everyone but that does not mean that everyone receives the spirit the way a Christian does. We receive Him as Lord and Savior, actively working in our lives to make us holy.

It can't be two ways. Either you believe that God is doing the work or you believe that you have to do the work. I believe that God is working in me. Jesus said you can tell when this happens by the fruit of His efforts. You can work as hard as you want but you can never be as good as God. The Bible says that there is only one who is good and that is God.

atanu
20 October 2006, 11:07 AM
Just because people call themselves Christians or are called Christians doesn't guarantee that the spirit of God is working in them. ----

The spirit of God is available to everyone but that does not mean that everyone receives the spirit the way a Christian does. .


Are you a christian? How do you know? And if you are indeed a christian then what proof that a christian only receives special favour?

If you wish to show some proof then be short please.

Om Namah Jehovayya

sarabhanga
20 October 2006, 05:47 PM
God does work to destroy pagan societies in favor of those who worship Him especially if those pagan societies resist conversion.

And who exactly are the pagans who will be destroyed of they resist conversion?

Is your post actually threatening all devoted Hindus with destruction if they do not become Christians?

:eek:

atanu
21 October 2006, 03:54 AM
----The Bible says that there is only one who is good and that is God.


The Bible has not said it for the first time.

God is good is known eternally from Vedas, as Vedas have named that un-nameable as Shiva -- the Good, The Best, The auspicious.

Om.

atanu
21 October 2006, 04:05 AM
Part 4.

5. Unquoting The Quotes ----------



Dear Skill,

Salam,

Your massive answer is as uninformed as the critique itself, as there is no need to counter ignorance. God is not moon god or sun god. God is that in whom the mind (moon), prana-life (sun), and will (agni-fire) abide.

The icon that moslems use is very similar to the hindu icon and there is no reason to feel defensive about that. Christians use Jesus and cross as icon. Mind requires an icon. What is negative about that? Those who do not understand that God is Vishnu (all pervasive) only create such ruccus.

And moreover, majority of christians having forgotten about the indwelling god, are greatest idolators since most of them worship their own bodies and not the temple of god that the body is.


Om Namah Shivayya

Sudarshan
22 October 2006, 02:21 PM
Just because people call themselves Christians or are called Christians doesn't guarantee that the spirit of God is working in them. However, God does work to destroy pagan societies in favor of those who worship Him especially if those pagan societies resist conversion. For instance the indians of Mexico worshipped pagan gods and persformed human sacrifice. The conquerors might not have been that altruistic but they did eliminate pagan religion in Mexico.


Why is the pagan inside me feeling uneasy with your reply? But your Christian God was unable to make any dent into the Hindu pagan society even with 400 years of official and military support. Perhaps all Hindus were considered to be true Christians?

Now these statements are alarming to say the least and is a warning to the all embracing Hindus to be wary of Christianity.




The spirit of God is available to everyone but that does not mean that everyone receives the spirit the way a Christian does. We receive Him as Lord and Savior, actively working in our lives to make us holy.


The spirit of God is available to everyone but that does not mean that everyone receives the spirit the way a Hindu does. We receive Him as Lord and Savior, actively working in our lives to make us holy. And we have proved it in the past. Hindus have never raided foreign lands and held captives or forced people into religion, all guided by the spirit of God. Christianity does not have historical evidence to support your claim. I can certainly see that God is more active in Hindus than he is with materialstic Christian societies.



It can't be two ways. Either you believe that God is doing the work or you believe that you have to do the work. I believe that God is working in me. Jesus said you can tell when this happens by the fruit of His efforts. You can work as hard as you want but you can never be as good as God. The Bible says that there is only one who is good and that is God.

Yes, God alone is good. But I do not know of the existance of anything external to God either. God alone exists. In his intrinsic nature he is pure unalloyed bliss. Evil and Good arise from his characteristics, but are not apart from him. What you call as evil is evil only to you, not to God. Had he thought so, it would have ceased to exist long ago.

Sudarshan
22 October 2006, 04:50 PM
Dear Skill,

Salam,

Your massive answer is as uninformed as the critique itself, as there is no need to counter ignorance. God is not moon god or sun god. God is that in whom the mind (moon), prana-life (sun), and will (agni-fire) abide.

The icon that moslems use is very similar to the hindu icon and there is no reason to feel defensive about that. Christians use Jesus and cross as icon. Mind requires an icon. What is negative about that? Those who do not understand that God is Vishnu (all pervasive) only create such ruccus.

And moreover, majority of christians having forgotten about the indwelling god, are greatest idolators since most of them worship their own bodies and not the temple of god that the body is.


Om Namah Shivayya

Christians and Muslims are good examples of shUnyavAdins, or nihilists because they are afraid of giving the unimaginable God a symbolic representation. They literally worship "void" in their temples while condemning the devout flower offerings made to an idol of the Lord by a Hindu out of his love.

jaggin
08 November 2006, 06:43 AM
Are you a christian? How do you know? And if you are indeed a christian then what proof that a christian only receives special favour?

If you wish to show some proof then be short please.

Om Namah Jehovayya

I am a Christian. I know because I have asked Jesus to be my Lord and Savior.

God favours whomever He wishes but usually those who please Him.

jaggin
08 November 2006, 06:57 AM
And who exactly are the pagans who will be destroyed of they resist conversion?

Is your post actually threatening all devoted Hindus with destruction if they do not become Christians?

:eek:

Pagans are people who worship some other god in preference to the one true God. Often times those people also practice wickedness as part of their religion such as offering up women or children to their gods. Sometimes those religions practice sexual immorality as well which will earn them God's wrath.

I find it difficult to judge Hinduism because often it is confusing to me but I will say what seems to be the case as far as I know now. Hinduism appears to be a God fearing religion with a sense of right and wrong (Dharma?). I see it as less informed about God than Christianity or Islam and the worship of ancient deities as possibly dangerous. I agree with the Quaran that people can't be forced to observe a religion. One must grow into an understanding and that usually does not take place in an adversarial atmosphere.

saidevo
08 November 2006, 07:46 PM
And who exactly are the pagans who will be destroyed of they resist conversion?
Is your post actually threatening all devoted Hindus with destruction if they do not become Christians?


For a modern-day sample of how paganism will be abused/destroyed by Islam, check this news item and lodge your protest:

Shiv temple turns into slaughterhouse in Pakistan
http://www.hindujagruti.org/temple/index.php?id=10

Also read this article by Francois Gautier to get an insight of what is in store for Islam:

Will Islam convert itself?
http://www.haindavakeralam.org/PageModule.aspx?PageID=2228&SKIN=B

So long as there are not enough liberal Muslims who can force their opinion of peaceful coexistence on their religious authorities, condemn the atrocities done in the name of Islam to their own followers and to others, and demand real spiritual freedom for themselves, Islam will continue to be a dark force, be it the fastest growing or not.

It is most likely that Gautier might be right in concluding, "...Islam will surely disappear in the alleys of history and what look now like menacing, dangerous, foreboding force will be looked upon as just another religion that came and passed away….. Unless Islam converts itself."

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
08 November 2006, 08:44 PM
post deleted by Bhakti Yoga Seeker

jaggin
09 November 2006, 06:31 AM
The Bible has not said it for the first time.

God is good is known eternally from Vedas, as Vedas have named that un-nameable as Shiva -- the Good, The Best, The auspicious.

Om.

I can remember from reading the vedas that Shiva claimed to be God but I don't remember the "good" reference . Do you have a verse you can quote?

jaggin
09 November 2006, 06:57 AM
Dear Skill,

Salam,

Your massive answer is as uninformed as the critique itself, as there is no need to counter ignorance. God is not moon god or sun god. God is that in whom the mind (moon), prana-life (sun), and will (agni-fire) abide.

The icon that moslems use is very similar to the hindu icon and there is no reason to feel defensive about that. Christians use Jesus and cross as icon. Mind requires an icon. What is negative about that? Those who do not understand that God is Vishnu (all pervasive) only create such ruccus.

And moreover, majority of christians having forgotten about the indwelling god, are greatest idolators since most of them worship their own bodies and not the temple of god that the body is.


Om Namah Shivayya

I see that as a pretty good summarization of the fundamental characteristics of God but the reference to created bodies is not something that God would approve of. Muslims would probably consider it blasphemy. I think it is possible for the creation to reflect its creator but as a poor reflection as the moon is a poor reflection of the sun's light. Babylonian astrology attributes the heavenly objects differently. The moon is seen as emotion and mind shared by Mercury and Jupiter. There are two aspects to mind, thought and expression (Word). Mercury rules expression and Jupiter thought. Fire is an element represented in Mars and Pluto. Probably the reason for the difference between referential systems can be attributed to the fact that the references are not inherent in the planets but are based upon observation.

Of course this is a generalization. There is no doubt that materialism is very powerful in the USA but I doubt that it can be attributed to an act of worship. It isn't a guarantee that being a Christian guarantees correct action and attitudes but it is a leg up on trying to do it yourself.

satay
09 November 2006, 07:55 AM
I can remember from reading the vedas

namaste,
What do you mean by 'Reading the vedas'? I ask because 'reading the vedas' are not reading like a story book or even your bible for that matter. A proper study of the vedas involves a direct instruction from a quialified guru and several years of commitment.

Merely 'reading a translation' of the vedas is going to leave you with the questions you have and the type of comments you are making here and on other threads.

How many years did you study the vedas and who is your guru?

sarabhanga
10 November 2006, 05:24 AM
I can remember from reading the vedas that Shiva claimed to be God but I don't remember the "good" reference . Do you have a verse you can quote?

The Vedas are in Sanskrit, so you will not find the English words “god” or “good” anywhere!

शिव = shiva

As an adjective, shiva means “good”; and as a noun, shiva means “the Good” or simply “God”.

The very name of Shiva is sufficient reference in itself!

oM namaH shivAya ;)

jaggin
10 November 2006, 07:23 AM
Why is the pagan inside me feeling uneasy with your reply? But your Christian God was unable to make any dent into the Hindu pagan society even with 400 years of official and military support. Perhaps all Hindus were considered to be true Christians?

Now these statements are alarming to say the least and is a warning to the all embracing Hindus to be wary of Christianity.




The spirit of God is available to everyone but that does not mean that everyone receives the spirit the way a Hindu does. We receive Him as Lord and Savior, actively working in our lives to make us holy. And we have proved it in the past. Hindus have never raided foreign lands and held captives or forced people into religion, all guided by the spirit of God. Christianity does not have historical evidence to support your claim. I can certainly see that God is more active in Hindus than he is with materialstic Christian societies.



Yes, God alone is good. But I do not know of the existance of anything external to God either. God alone exists. In his intrinsic nature he is pure unalloyed bliss. Evil and Good arise from his characteristics, but are not apart from him. What you call as evil is evil only to you, not to God. Had he thought so, it would have ceased to exist long ago.

I haven't seen anything in Hinduism that even intimates a proximity to Chistianity. The Muslims who viewed Hinduism as Pagan more than likely did so because of statuary which they would have considered idols. I think this is a result of cultural ignorance. The English who colonized India probably viewed Hinduism as Pagan out of ignorance as well. If Christianity hasn't had much success, it is probably because for years it did not operate in cultural relevance making it more difficult to convey the gospel message. I tend to think that God left Hinduism intact because it isn't Pagan because He definitely destroyed idolatry mostly through the efforts of Islamic conquest.

I accept your testimony but I am not sure that you understand what a Christian means by it when He says that He has accepted God as Lord and Savior. It means that we give the spirit of God permission to control our lives. We in effect step aside and observe while God controls the body.

This is an exact opposite teaching of the Bible which recognizes that God is not His creation and should not be confused with it.

In any Abrahamic religion that statement would be considered blasphemy against God. Evil is a rebellion against and a negation of God's goodness.

jaggin
10 November 2006, 07:39 AM
Christians and Muslims are good examples of shUnyavAdins, or nihilists because they are afraid of giving the unimaginable God a symbolic representation. They literally worship "void" in their temples while condemning the devout flower offerings made to an idol of the Lord by a Hindu out of his love.

Since Christians and Muslims worship God to say that we worship nothing or a void is a blasphemy against God. We do not worship God's creation because the creation is not God.

Idol worship is condemned by God in the Bible.

Love of God is a good thing but when an idol is present there is the temptation to love the idol instead of what the idol is supposed to represent. The problem is that no idol can represent God but only represents some creation of man.

jaggin
10 November 2006, 08:08 AM
Most of your statements here are incorrect. About pagans, the most common form of paganism practiced in the United States is Wicca. Wicca forbids the use of black or dark magick and requires its adherents to only practice good magick. http://www.wicca.com is a resource on this religion. Please educate yourself before speaking on a subject that you don't know anything about. As to paganism in other countries, I honestly don't know anything about it. Regardless, I would like to see some evidence that "often times" pagans are engaging in human sacrifice. I would think such occurances would show up in the newspapers and I've never seen it. As to "sexual immorality" I don't know how you define it but I know that Wicca is opposed to abusing or harming other people or the environment. So rape, sexual abuse, and cheating on spouses would not be something Wiccans at least would condone. Not sure about other pagans but I don't know why any religion or spiritual path would support harming others.

As to your opinions on Hinduism, it doesn't hurt to keep learning about it. Hinduism (Sanatana Dharma) may be confusing because it is extremely complex and can go very deep philosophically. There are many different schools of Hindu philosophy, many scriptures, many concepts, and a long history. That is in part why I find Hinduism very interesting and valuable. Just because something is difficult to understand and learn doesn't mean it isn't valuable or worthwhile.


As to your comment about Islam, their book is spelled "Qu'ran" not "Quaran." Please educate yourself. ~BYS~

I confess that I don't know much about Wicca. It may be that it is just heathen not Pagan. I'm not sure that it matters much to God because if you place some other God above Him He is not pleased (1st commandment). On the other hand if you have escaped idolatry and evil practices you are escaping the wrath of God.

Only God is good. Any practice outside the will of God is not good.

I did find much philosophy in Hinduism which means that it came from men not neccessarily inspired by God. One can possibly benefit from it as one could benefit from studying Aristotle or Plato but Philosophy can have incorrect concepts as often as it has correct concepts.

Everything is relevant. Whatever the translation, it will not neccessarily be an exact representation of the Arabic. On the Islamic groups that I belong to they like to use this spelling: Quran. This isn't good English because "qu" is always followed by a vowel. Therefore I anglicized Quran into Quaran. Qu'ran with the glossal stop may more closely reflect the actual spoken word and I don't have any problem with it because it recognizes that the pronunciation, foreign to the English tongue, has to be presented some way.

satay
10 November 2006, 08:50 AM
I did find much philosophy in Hinduism which means that it came from men not neccessarily inspired by God. One can possibly benefit from it as one could benefit from studying Aristotle or Plato but Philosophy can have incorrect concepts as often as it has correct concepts.


When I first read the bible, I almost fell asleep reading genesis due to its illogical nonsensical content. To me personally and to the hindus I know, bible is a piece of junk completely fabricated by men who had been sitting in the sun too long perhaps.

To a hindu like me, the whole christian concept of GOD seems like a childish concept without any logic and relevance to man. Aside from "obey me or I will throw you in the hell fire pit for eternity" there is nothing that your concept of GOD has to offer. If that's the 'true' GOD then I reject him as an illogical, nonsensical fool that he is as I have seen most men with more intelligence than he seems to have.

As you tout 'no idol' most christians that i know wear the cross around their necks, essentially a picture of a dead man albeit their guru! Your 'church' itself is an idol if you feel anykind of spirituality going there then it is a idol. If you don't agree with me on this, I challenge you to spit on or kick the altar next time you visit the church. If something inside you doesn't allow you to do it then in your mind that altar is an 'idol' already.

To most hindus, chrisitianity is a religion of "peasants" suited for the limited capacity people since they can not grasp the higher concepts of GOD's nature revealed first in the East. This is evident by the only true guru the west had in the past who you guys yourselves hung on the cross, tortured and murdered due to the "peasant" limited capacity you guys have. Obviously the peasants around this guru didn't understand his true message and started fabricating illogical nonsense known today as the bible.

jaggin
11 November 2006, 10:01 AM
When I first read the bible, I almost fell asleep reading genesis due to its illogical nonsensical content. To me personally and to the hindus I know, bible is a piece of junk completely fabricated by men who had been sitting in the sun too long perhaps.

To a hindu like me, the whole christian concept of GOD seems like a childish concept without any logic and relevance to man. Aside from "obey me or I will throw you in the hell fire pit for eternity" there is nothing that your concept of GOD has to offer. If that's the 'true' GOD then I reject him as an illogical, nonsensical fool that he is as I have seen most men with more intelligence than he seems to have.

As you tout 'no idol' most christians that i know wear the cross around their necks, essentially a picture of a dead man albeit their guru! Your 'church' itself is an idol if you feel anykind of spirituality going there then it is a idol. If you don't agree with me on this, I challenge you to spit on or kick the altar next time you visit the church. If something inside you doesn't allow you to do it then in your mind that altar is an 'idol' already.

To most hindus, chrisitianity is a religion of "peasants" suited for the limited capacity people since they can not grasp the higher concepts of GOD's nature revealed first in the East. This is evident by the only true guru the west had in the past who you guys yourselves hung on the cross, tortured and murdered due to the "peasant" limited capacity you guys have. Obviously the peasants around this guru didn't understand his true message and started fabricating illogical nonsense known today as the bible.

:D I can identify with that but not Genesis which has some good stories. I got bogged down in Leviticus with all its religious rigamarole.

I never approach historical documents with the idea that it has to make sense to me today. Life often is stranger than fiction. The people who laughed at Louis Pasteur for saying that illness was caused by microbes that they couldn't see, because it sounded like nonsense to them, were speaking out of ignorance.

That would be the last thing that I would say about anyone's scripture. God has said that He inspired all of the Bible. You can listen to what God says or not listen at your own peril. I listen to the testimony of the scripture itself. When the authors say that they went and meditated and wrote down their meditations, they are not claiming that their message was divinely transmitted.

Anyone who thinks it is a good idea not to obey the commands of the most powerful being in the universe is asking for trouble. If a policeman ordered you to get out of the middle of the street you would be wise to obey him else you might find yourself in jail. So then who is the fool? And God can decide the day of your death which might come a lot sooner if you continuously rail against Him.

It would be interesting to hear what you think that is. You claim to be first and the Muslims last as though order implies importance. God reveals himself as He wishes but I would agree that He does not reveal pearls of wisdom to base and foolish people. However exalting your own great concept of yourself is pride and God hates it. So the saying is that pride precedes a fall.

I love the word obvious because it is used by people who can't prove what they say. The reality is that they did not have to understand or even remember because the spirit of God was given to them allowing them to write an accurate account. For a more scholarly approach to Christianity you have to look to the apostle Paul who studied under one of the greatest Jewish rabbis ever, Gamaliel.

jaggin
11 November 2006, 10:18 AM
namaste,
What do you mean by 'Reading the vedas'? I ask because 'reading the vedas' are not reading like a story book or even your bible for that matter. A proper study of the vedas involves a direct instruction from a quialified guru and several years of commitment.

Merely 'reading a translation' of the vedas is going to leave you with the questions you have and the type of comments you are making here and on other threads.

How many years did you study the vedas and who is your guru?

For years Christianity was saddled with the concept that only preists could understand scripture. The problem is that with all their years of study they were often wrong.
I also get that kind of nonsense from Muslims, who having found that their arguments don't hold water hide behind the concept that the Qu'ran is written in Arabic. Since the vedas were written in Sanskrit which is so old a language that hardly anyone knows its meaning for sure, you might have something to argue about such as conflicting translations but I doubt that I would need to get to that depth of understanding.

Jehovah is my guru and there is none better since He knows all things.

jaggin
11 November 2006, 10:26 AM
The Vedas are in Sanskrit, so you will not find the English words “god” or “good” anywhere!

शिव = shiva

As an adjective, shiva means “good”; and as a noun, shiva means “the Good” or simply “God”.

The very name of Shiva is sufficient reference in itself!

oM namaH shivAya ;)

Thank you. That is a very informative answer. That would be like if Jesus never called himself savior because his name means savior. However the angel Gabriel explained to Mary that Jesus should be his name because He will save the world.

satay
11 November 2006, 04:44 PM
namaste,
Though you quoted my post, you avoided addressing any the points I raised.



I never approach historical documents with the idea that it has to make sense to me today.


What do you mean historical document? You don't really believe in the nonsense that bible is a 'historic document' do you?

If you really believe that then please present 'historic evidence'.

The rest of your comments were irrelevant so I am commenting.



That would be the last thing that I would say about anyone's scripture. God has said that He inspired all of the Bible.


All scriptures claim that they are inspired by GOD. Bible authors are no different in making that claim.

By the way, "all" my posts are 'inspired by GOD'. :)



You can listen to what God says or not listen at your own peril. I listen to the testimony of the scripture itself. When the authors say that they went and meditated and wrote down their meditations, they are not claiming that their message was divinely transmitted.



which authors are you taking about? bible authors? Yes, I already know that they were sitting in the sun too long.




Anyone who thinks it is a good idea not to obey the commands of the most powerful being in the universe is asking for trouble.


This is all rubbish. you haven't seen this most powerful being yourself yet. When you do, then we will talk.



If a policeman ordered you to get out of the middle of the street you would be wise to obey him else you might find yourself in jail. So then who is the fool? And God can decide the day of your death which might come a lot sooner if you continuously rail against Him.



Oh boy, This is the most idiotic thing I have ever read. First, since 'men' are in fallen state whatever a policman does is not 'good' and can not be compared to what GOD would do. Secondly, the scare of 'death' doesn't work with hindus. :) We don't believe in the nonsense that GOD created us to live only once and then he will throw us in the fire pit for eternity if we didn't listen to your missionary nonsense.

Nice try though...




It would be interesting to hear what you think that is. You claim to be first and the Muslims last as though order implies importance. God reveals himself as He wishes but I would agree that He does not reveal pearls of wisdom to base and foolish people. However exalting your own great concept of yourself is pride and God hates it. So the saying is that pride precedes a fall.



I have no idea what you are talking about. GOD doesn't 'hate' anything!!! GOD is pure love my friend.

You sound like a scientologist saleman...



I love the word obvious because it is used by people who can't prove what they say. The reality is that they did not have to understand or even remember because the spirit of God was given to them allowing them to write an accurate account. For a more scholarly approach to Christianity you have to look to the apostle Paul who studied under one of the greatest Jewish rabbis ever, Gamaliel.

You write more rubbish here again...On the one hand in another post you don't think that you need to study hinduism deeply and on the other hand you tell me study christianity with a scholary approach.

I am saying to you that there is no schorlary approach needed since christianity doesn't answer even the most simple, logical questions of man. All it says is bible is true because it is written in the bible! that kind of logic only works with "peasants".

If you think you are a christian scholar and have studied Paul with a scholary approach, let's see your rebuttal (scholary mind you) of this article http://www.comparative-religion.com/articles/pauline_conspiracy/

satay
11 November 2006, 04:50 PM
For years Christianity was saddled with the concept that only preists could understand scripture. The problem is that with all their years of study they were often wrong.
I also get that kind of nonsense from Muslims, who having found that their arguments don't hold water hide behind the concept that the Qu'ran is written in Arabic. Since the vedas were written in Sanskrit which is so old a language that hardly anyone knows its meaning for sure, you might have something to argue about such as conflicting translations but I doubt that I would need to get to that depth of understanding.


Obviously, you didn't understand what I asked you. When I said have you studied the vedas, for how many years and who is your guru, I meant just that. Please read my questions again.

No where, I mention 'preists' or anything like that.

In fact, preists have nothing to do with the study of the vedas. I know christians don't have any respect for their preists and even their own guru. That much is obvious because you guys murdered your only one guru by yourselves!!



Jehovah is my guru and there is none better since He knows all things.
[/quote]

my apologies for earlier comment...

sarabhanga
11 November 2006, 04:57 PM
Namaste Jaggin,

PAGAN is a much-abused word. The Latin PAGANUS meant only ‘Villager’ or ‘Rustic’, and in Christian Church Latin it came to mean ‘Civilian’ (i.e. not a member of the divine ‘Army’ of Christ).

In Christian parlance, a Pagan is a non-Christian ~ which you equate with devotion to “some other god in preference to the one true God.”

All truly monistic religions understand that there is ultimately only one eternal God ~ the Godhead, the God of all gods, or “the one true God”.

If one truly believes that there is ONLY ONE GOD, how can ANY devotion to God be considered as being directed to “some other god” without first abandoning one’s own monotheism and adopting the same divided perspective of the polytheists who are being condemned as “pagans” ? :confused:

sarabhanga
11 November 2006, 08:16 PM
I did find much philosophy in Hinduism which means that it came from men not necessarily inspired by God.

Philosophy is “love of wisdom” ~ i.e. “love of true knowledge” or simply “seeking the Truth” ~ and is that not the same aim of all true Religion?

God is the ultimate Truth, and Sanatana Dharma is the perfect God-inspired Philosophy!

sarabhanga
11 November 2006, 10:16 PM
Genesis is certainly not without logic or sense, and any learned Hindu should have no trouble understanding (and indeed appreciating) most of the Bible ~ perhaps not the modern “Good News” translation, but the King James version is an excellent text. The Latin Vulgate text, and (especially) the Greek NT and the original Aramaic texts, and (perhaps best of all) the Hebrew Tanakh, are surely inspired sacred scriptures that are very similar (at times almost identical) to various well know Hindu texts.

Bhakti Yoga Seeker
11 November 2006, 10:38 PM
post deleted by Bhakti Yoga Seeker

sarabhanga
12 November 2006, 03:42 AM
For years Christianity was saddled with the concept that only priests could understand scripture. The problem is that with all their years of study they were often wrong.

For years Medicine has considered that only trained surgeons can safely perform operations. Despite all their years of study, however, qualified doctors sometimes make mistakes (and a few are even found to be frauds). So, following your logic, Medical Science would be improved by discarding any requirement of special training or accepted qualifications!! In Protestant Christianity, the lunatics have surely taken over the asylum!

sarabhanga
12 November 2006, 04:43 AM
I bet my pet dog knows more tricks than your jehovah.

This kind of spiteful rubbish has no place in Dharma! :(

I am traveling for the next couple of weeks and will have little chance to post.

jaggin
12 November 2006, 07:06 AM
I am not interested in your preaching or proselytizing here and neither are other Hindu board members. If you want to learn about other faiths, then you need to do unbiased research on it and ask reasonable questions. You are making assumptions and trying to talk intelligently on something that you clearly know nothing about. Virtually every religion including polytheistic ones believes in a Supreme Power of some sort so your comment about "placing some other God above Him" has no place in this discussion and it is a form of preaching because you are essentially saying that only the Christian God is the "real" God. Most pagans and polytheists believe that God is one but that God can represented in many different forms, personalities, names, etc., and will also be seen as formless, nameless, and limitless at the same time. I have yet to meet a pagan that believes in a "my God can beat up your God" mentality.

As to idolatry, those who worship idols don't actually worship the idol itself. Instead, they use the idol as a medium for meditation on God or as a symbolic representation of God depending on the adherent. Be aware that before you start pointing out faults in other religions, make sure that the same don't apply to your faith. Almost every Christian church features one or more crosses, one or more paintings of Jesus, and prayers often are directed toward Jesus instead of "God." These examples can also be seen as idolatry since the cross is being used as a representation of God taking the form of a human and sacrificing himself. Referring to Jesus as God or "son of God" is placing God in the form of a human and creating a distinction between a formless God and a God with a form. So your criticisms of our religion putting a name or face on God are hypocritical when your religion does the exact same thing.



True but naturally you will follow such a statement with something along the lines that "the will of God" is defined in the Christian Bible yet there is no way of proving that the Bible is actually God's word other than what people say. Of course I wouldn't quite agree that "only God is good" because people can also be "good" but will show saintly qualities to a much lesser degree than God.



That is simply your opinion and is not really appropriate for this forum. If you don't approve of Hinduism, why are you here on this forum? Why don't you take your criticisms elsewhere? I also don't see how you could know much about the philosophy of Hinduism because it isn't something that can be easily and instantly understood. The greatest Hindu sages still have spent years studying dharmic philosophy. Hinduism cannot just be grasped in a couple of hours of reading. It is recommended that Hindus keep studying philosophy and associating with other devotees in worship so that the learning and growth can continue. I would be curious to hear just how much philosophy you think you know about Hinduism at least if you do have something positive to contribute on the subject.



Qu'ran is Arabic transliterated into English and Koran is English. I don't see how this is "foreign to the English tongue." Learning basic vocabulary and cultural facts such as what pertains to the second largest religion in the world is simply having the minimal level of education and literacy that one would expect anyone at least by the age of adulthood to have. I don't know what country you are from but regardless knowing how to spell and say such a basic word is elementary education. Of course if it is the United States which I also live in, I am not surprised. Schools here don't seem to teach much about anything multicultural or what goes on in the world outside of Western society. ~BYS~

That is similar to what God gave me to say about this except that those idol worshippers who really did worship the idols are no longer around so I think you must be referring specifically to Hindusim. There are representations of God in the Christian church but they are not usually worshipped. THe Catholics may come a little bit closer to that with their approach to the crucifix. Muslims and Jews follow a more stringent legal system where any representation would be forbidden and I found none when I worshipped with Muslims.

I have seen people get close to idolatry with their view of the Bible, and religion. The problem with representations is that they provide a temptation to worship the creation in place of the creator.

My main interest is not in pointing out faults of a religion but simply to convey what God expects of people. If your religious beliefs lead you to do something different, then you are in danger of incurring the wrath of God. Neither I nor God wish to see that happen.

Jesus claims to be God just as Krishna does. I believe this is so 1. because the prohet Isaiah foretold it 2. because God on the outside of Jesus proclaimed himself to be inside Jesus. This can occur only because of God's omnipresence.

You are in error on this. It is a crucifix which is a representation of God. The cross itself is a symbol of shame, torment and death, not something that anyone is likely to worship. It is a simple reminder of an event that happened on the cross that is important to Christians.

That is true of any scripture.

I don't think in terms of approbation or non-approbation. My object is to seek truth where it may be found and the spirit of God leads me into a recognition of it when I see it. In speaking of Philosophy in Hinduism, I was referring to the Uphannishads (I hope I spelled that right). The Vedas have more of a sound of authority to them. I love valid criticism myself because it helps me learn what is valuable in my own beliefs. If you don't like criticism does that mean that you don't believe your beliefs have value? In the crucible of criticism what is dross will be burned away and what remains is gold.

I will reiterate that my understanding doesn't come from being taught by a guru or study but from God himself who knows all things. This puts me ahead of the most learned Hindu philosopher in some ways. However God doesn't inform me about everything so there is still much I can learn.

jaggin
12 November 2006, 07:21 AM
As you tout 'no idol' most christians that i know wear the cross around their necks, essentially a picture of a dead man albeit their guru! Your 'church' itself is an idol if you feel anykind of spirituality going there then it is a idol. If you don't agree with me on this, I challenge you to spit on or kick the altar next time you visit the church. If something inside you doesn't allow you to do it then in your mind that altar is an 'idol' already.



What you are talking about is not worship but respect or disrespect. I give respect where it is due and disrespect where it is due. I would not hesitate to spit on an idol of Moloch which was responsible for children being offered. I would not spit on a statue of the god Venus even though that god might have been subject to sinful ways because that god was not dedicated to wickedness. I wouldn't disrespect a statue of Shiva.
And most of all I do not mean any disrespect to you. As a Christian I recognize from the words of Jesus that I need to see Jesus in you and have the same respect for you as I would for Him.

saidevo
12 November 2006, 08:52 AM
I have seen people get close to idolatry with their view of the Bible, and religion. The problem with representations is that they provide a temptation to worship the creation in place of the creator.


The propensity of identifying the creation with the creator may be real for a non-Hindu, because he/she is conditioned by his/her religion that way. Such problems never exist in Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism) where even an illiterate farmer knows that he worships God in many forms but the worship is meant for the One God. Hindu Dharma has taught such wisdom right from his childhood. A personal God is the greatest spiritual boon of this age of Kali Yuga that has come right from the One God.



My main interest is not in pointing out faults of a religion but simply to convey what God expects of people. If your religious beliefs lead you to do something different, then you are in danger of incurring the wrath of God. Neither I nor God wish to see that happen.


How do you know what God expects of his children? Who are you to judge the different paths to God? 'Neither I nor God' -- You seem to be of the Zakir Naik type. Does your religion approve of your equating you with your God and say 'Neither I nor God'? Hinduism allows it and says that you and God are the same because God is immanent in you.



I will reiterate that my understanding doesn't come from being taught by a guru or study but from God himself who knows all things. This puts me ahead of the most learned Hindu philosopher in some ways. However God doesn't inform me about everything so there is still much I can learn.


Wow, here we have a 21st century Christ! May be the Second Coming! You would surely know that there are strong evidences that your Jesus Christ himself learnt spiritual sadhana from Indian yogis, and yet you are sure you don't need a guru. That's really marvelous and makes you even an inch taller than Christ!

There is a saying 'those who have seen won't talk and those who talk haven't seen'. An abstract God is the last leg of the spiritual journey. Human mind needs a concrete representation to fix itself in worship. This applies to followers of all faiths. Jesus spoke of himself as the Son, and of God as his Father. As an incarnation, Jesus becomes a representation of God, a symbol of God that may be identified with the One God. Suppose there is no Jesus, no Krishna (and other Gods of Hinduism) and no Black Stone at the Kabah. Can you and I ever think of God, let alone talk about Him?

satay
12 November 2006, 10:42 AM
This kind of spiteful rubbish has no place in Dharma! I am too appalled to comment further. :(

I am traveling for the next couple of weeks and will have little chance to post. And I am sorry that I have wasted any time on this particular “discussion”.

namaste,

You are right in saying that the type of comment I made has no place in Dharma however, my comment is not a 'spiteful rubbish'. My comment is in the context of another post made by our christian friend in "I am Shiva" forum where he gave the christian prespective on "Agni" calling Agni deva a devil.

Have a good and safe travel...see you soon.

satay
12 November 2006, 12:38 PM
And most of all I do not mean any disrespect to you. As a Christian I recognize from the words of Jesus that I need to see Jesus in you and have the same respect for you as I would for Him.

namaste,
This is nothing new. Most christian missionaries employ this technique in frustration when nothing seems to work and when all missionary nonsense gets slapped back in their faces by hindus (sometimes at the expense of going out of the dharmic fold in the heat of the moment).

If you truly see Jesus in non-believers then you should let them be and not interfere and past judgments about their concept of GOD, philosophies and gurus. You should mind your own business like the hindus do and stop supplying money to your church to support missions in the poor, uneducated countries of africa and asia.

I challenge you, if you truly see jesus in all beings then have full faith in jesus and not take it upon yourself to show the 'pagans' the true GOD. Most importantly, the next time the basket of money comes your way in the sunday church asking for money for 'mission activities of the church' leave everything to jesus and do not contribute.

Can you truly take on this challenge or are you going to put your foot in your mouth now?

satay
12 November 2006, 12:57 PM
That is similar to what God gave me to say about this except that those idol worshippers who really did worship the idols are no longer around so I think you must be referring specifically to Hindusim. There are representations of God in the Christian church but they are not usually worshipped. THe Catholics may come a little bit closer to that with their approach to the crucifix. Muslims and Jews follow a more stringent legal system where any representation would be forbidden and I found none when I worshipped with Muslims.


Hindus do not have "idols". You use the word "idol" due to your limited understanding of anything outside of the sphere of christianity. Hindus have 'murthis'; the best translation or closest translation could be 'statue', essentially, a representation of GOD and his nature.

Even a farmer working in cow dung all day in India knows that when he bows his head to the murthi of any representation of GOD that he is bowing his head to the divine that the murthi represents.

However, most christian 'scholars' don't seem to comprehend this simple act of worship.

My wife is a catholic christian and our 'temple' in our house has both jesus 'idols as well as hindu murthis. So this rubbish of christians don't use idols for worship is simply that, a rubbish.






I have seen people get close to idolatry with their view of the Bible, and religion. The problem with representations is that they provide a temptation to worship the creation in place of the creator.



So you are saying that christians are more like Buddhists, worshipping the 'void' that is shunyavada!




My main interest is not in pointing out faults of a religion but simply to convey what God expects of people. If your religious beliefs lead you to do something different, then you are in danger of incurring the wrath of God. Neither I nor God wish to see that happen.


GOD doesn't have any wrath to 'show'.




Jesus claims to be God just as Krishna does. I believe this is so 1. because the prohet Isaiah foretold it 2. because God on the outside of Jesus proclaimed himself to be inside Jesus. This can occur only because of God's omnipresence.


Jesus claimed to be god just like any vadanti would in samadhi; that's the final stage of meditation.

Please do not compare Krishna to jesus. Krishna is GOD, essentially the 'father' jesus referred to.




You are in error on this. It is a crucifix which is a representation of God. The cross itself is a symbol of shame, torment and death, not something that anyone is likely to worship. It is a simple reminder of an event that happened on the cross that is important to Christians.


This kind of statement is absurd and doesn't make any sense to any student of Vedanta or Hinduism. Even a small hindu child knows that 'any single event in time' can not affect the 'real' soul or atma. So this obsession of christians to get stuck to a bunch of events in 'time' are nonsense to most hindus.




That is true of any scripture.

I don't think in terms of approbation or non-approbation. My object is to seek truth where it may be found and the spirit of God leads me into a recognition of it when I see it. In speaking of Philosophy in Hinduism, I was referring to the Uphannishads (I hope I spelled that right). The Vedas have more of a sound of authority to them. I love valid criticism myself because it helps me learn what is valuable in my own beliefs. If you don't like criticism does that mean that you don't believe your beliefs have value? In the crucible of criticism what is dross will be burned away and what remains is gold.

I will reiterate that my understanding doesn't come from being taught by a guru or study but from God himself who knows all things. This puts me ahead of the most learned Hindu philosopher in some ways. However God doesn't inform me about everything so there is still much I can learn.

Are you alright... I am beginning to wonder if you are on some kind of medication and if you are not, perhaps a visit to a doctor is in order.

sarabhanga
12 November 2006, 05:01 PM
Namaste Satay,

Thanks for editing recent inflammatory comments. :)

Personal insults are not good, and insulting someone's Guru (just as their respected parents) is worse, and insulting God (by whatever name, and for whatever reason) is extremely foolish!

Best wishes to you and your family (and to all members of HDF)!

jaggin
14 November 2006, 07:09 AM
namaste,
This is nothing new. Most christian missionaries employ this technique in frustration when nothing seems to work and when all missionary nonsense gets slapped back in their faces by hindus (sometimes at the expense of going out of the dharmic fold in the heat of the moment).

If you truly see Jesus in non-believers then you should let them be and not interfere and past judgments about their concept of GOD, philosophies and gurus. You should mind your own business like the hindus do and stop supplying money to your church to support missions in the poor, uneducated countries of africa and asia.

I challenge you, if you truly see jesus in all beings then have full faith in jesus and not take it upon yourself to show the 'pagans' the true GOD. Most importantly, the next time the basket of money comes your way in the sunday church asking for money for 'mission activities of the church' leave everything to jesus and do not contribute.

Can you truly take on this challenge or are you going to put your foot in your mouth now?

You doubt my sincerity? On what basis do you doubt it? If I reach out with the Gospel at times it is because I and all Christians are under command from God to preach it. Are you going to recommend that we disobey God?

satay
14 November 2006, 11:21 AM
namaste,

I see that you have evaded all of my post and didn't address anything as usual when a missionary gets slapped back with logical questions that he/she can not answer.


You doubt my sincerity? On what basis do you doubt it? If I reach out with the Gospel at times it is because I and all Christians are under command from God to preach it.

You doubt my faith in GOD? On what basis do you doubt it?

Out of courtesy, I am allowing you to preach your gospel to me but you haven't answered even the simplest of my questions about life, man or nature of GOD. Why not start by answering a couple of my questions posted in the 'Christianity' forum.



Are you going to recommend that we disobey God?


What other "commands" are you following? I thought that christians suggest that man is in a "fallen" state so how can you even begin to think that you can follow any commands!

Specifically, I am asking you...Are you following these commands?

Honor your father and your mother
You shall not murder
You shall not commit adultery
You shall not steal

You don't have to convince me of your answer to my question just convince your-self.

Why preaching to others is on the top of your list? Why every Tom, dick and harry becomes a saleman of GOD when they convert to christianity? Why not focus on the basic commands first and try to make yourself better?

Why salesmanship is the first command on your list?

Also, with your post now you have contradicted yourself once again...earlier you said that you need to see jesus in me and now you want to preach to me. That means that you don't really see jesus in me and you are lying to yourself and to all the forum readers!

A better way to 'preach' would be to be christ like in your "acts" and "behaviour", just a simple recommendation from you a hindu...Be like your guru!

Sudarshan
16 November 2006, 01:42 PM
I haven't seen anything in Hinduism that even intimates a proximity to Chistianity. The Muslims who viewed Hinduism as Pagan more than likely did so because of statuary which they would have considered idols. I think this is a result of cultural ignorance. The English who colonized India probably viewed Hinduism as Pagan out of ignorance as well. If Christianity hasn't had much success, it is probably because for years it did not operate in cultural relevance making it more difficult to convey the gospel message. I tend to think that God left Hinduism intact because it isn't Pagan because He definitely destroyed idolatry mostly through the efforts of Islamic conquest.


I dont know what you mean by a broad brushed term like Hinduism and saying "I haven't seen anything in Hinduism that even intimates a proximity to Chistianity". Have you heard of Srivaishnavism?



I accept your testimony but I am not sure that you understand what a Christian means by it when He says that He has accepted God as Lord and Savior. It means that we give the spirit of God permission to control our lives. We in effect step aside and observe while God controls the body.


I am not sure you understand what a Srivaishnav means by it when He says that He has accepted God as Lord and Savior. It means that we give the spirit of God permission to control our lives, in accordance with the past karma. But, We in effect do not step aside and observe while God controls the body. We instead do a lot of introspection, and purify ourselves through various means so that we may become fit to behold the Lord. That removes a lot of myth and lazybone attitude. We do not let God do all the worship and meditation for our sake, we do it ourselves because such activity is the only thing worth doing in the world. We do not feel holier than others by just professing some blind beleifs. Consequently, we cannot think we are superior to others just by virtue of some beleifs brought on by birth circumstances and traditions. The one truly holy is he who meditates on God all the while caring least about others, One does not become holy by merely beleiving in some personalities and by idling away the time in material pursuits.

God is the contoller of destiny and fruits of your labour. But you are the controller of your own actions.

I am reminded of this story:

I went to a discourse of Ramayana last year where a scholar was extolling the glory of the name of Rama and added that three repetitions of this name was equal to chanting the 1000 names of Saharsranama. We all know this is called artavAda ( highlighting one above the other just to promote the concept). There was another person who added that even three reps were too high and the name of the Lord must not be wasted, and only one was sufficient. People who attented the program left convinced that chanting Rama once was equivalent to chanting the Sahasranama. This is what Christianity does too. When Hinduism mentions that all available time must be utilized for realizing God there are some people who are fooled into beleiving in simpler ways just because they are favourites of God. Only a lazy person will choose so. One who is committed and dedicated to God will not find pleasure in anything else - if you are allowing God to control your life and doing nothing yourself, you will be left with too much idle time- idle mind is devil's workshop.



In any Abrahamic religion that statement would be considered blasphemy against God. Evil is a rebellion against and a negation of God's goodness.


I consider it blasphemous to posit a second principle to God - the very word rebellion I consider as blasphemy.

Sudarshan
16 November 2006, 01:52 PM
Since Christians and Muslims worship God to say that we worship nothing or a void is a blasphemy against God. We do not worship God's creation because the creation is not God.

Idol worship is condemned by God in the Bible.

Love of God is a good thing but when an idol is present there is the temptation to love the idol instead of what the idol is supposed to represent. The problem is that no idol can represent God but only represents some creation of man.

Who cares for your bible? I prefer to worship through some beautiful images instead of staring into empty space. Lord is present everywhere. Can you access Absolute form of God? No. Can you access his manifested(vyUha) forms? No. Can you access his avataras? No. Can you access the indweller God in you? No God is available only through statues or images - all worship without these is only nihilism.

Sudarshan
17 November 2006, 01:30 AM
That would be the last thing that I would say about anyone's scripture. God has said that He inspired all of the Bible. You can listen to what God says or not listen at your own peril. I listen to the testimony of the scripture itself. When the authors say that they went and meditated and wrote down their meditations, they are not claiming that their message was divinely transmitted.


That means any scripture that claims that it is divine is so? So why do you choose bible over quran?




Anyone who thinks it is a good idea not to obey the commands of the most powerful being in the universe is asking for trouble. If a policeman ordered you to get out of the middle of the street you would be wise to obey him else you might find yourself in jail. So then who is the fool? And God can decide the day of your death which might come a lot sooner if you continuously rail against Him.



Threat eh? A few months ago I found a booklet by missionaries in my house that threatened the big way. I expect the most powerful being to be much more forgiving and kinder( and wiser) than the average policemen. Do you worship God just because he is powerful and demands it? Smells a Hitler to me. God is worshipped because of his infinite divine qualities~there is no equal to him in any respect, unless he comes down and shares his greatness with you and elevates you to such exalted position. Magnanimity is the TM of God.

He is a sure fool who disobeys God, but God cannot have mood swings and throw temper tantrums. God is always in his cosmic trance (yoga nidra) but yet all knowing and all loving.

Sudarshan
17 November 2006, 01:48 AM
If one truly believes that there is ONLY ONE GOD, how can ANY devotion to God be considered as being directed to “some other god” without first abandoning one’s own monotheism and adopting the same divided perspective of the polytheists who are being condemned as “pagans” ? :confused:


"sarva deva namaskarah kesavam prathigachathi"

Like the waters of rivers ultimately reach its final destination, the ocean, the obeisance one pays to any devata would ultimately reach Kesava.

Sudarshan
17 November 2006, 02:32 AM
The propensity of identifying the creation with the creator may be real for a non-Hindu, because he/she is conditioned by his/her religion that way. Such problems never exist in Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism) where even an illiterate farmer knows that he worships God in many forms but the worship is meant for the One God. Hindu Dharma has taught such wisdom right from his childhood. A personal God is the greatest spiritual boon of this age of Kali Yuga that has come right from the One God.


Hindus should not start disregarding their own practices just because missionaries condemn it. The religion of Hinduism survived brutal attacks of muslims due to the temple culture of which murtis are the basis. Texts like viSvaksena saMhita have extolled how Bhagavan resides in an active form (caitanya) in properly installed murtis as opposed to dormant form in other stones. God is everywhere - why not in a stone? Why should Hindus please others in this respect?

The mUrti in a temple is NOT an ordinary stone you pick on the road. It is sacred because

1. It was installed in a temple which was built by a virtuos Hindu.
2. Most likely, a spiritually advanced swami installed the murti in the temple using formal rituals and mantras and have his blessings.
3. The temple atmosphere of God seeking people give the murti an additional spiritual vibrance.

Though worship is offered to God alone, and mUrti is only a medium - we do not do the worship to anything we find on the road. We do hold the mUrtis to be sacred. This holds true until we reach a certain stage of spiritual developement where we are able to see an active God everywhere. Would any Hindu dare to take some stone lying in the gutter, wash and carve it and install it in his puja room? Bhagavan's mUtrtis are special and they must be treated as more than ordinary stones - as a symbolic medium to realization.

Dont ever call or think Lord's mUrtis as stones - they carry as much life as God himself. The Lord is active every moment in everything known an unknown to us - but then he is dormant to our limited senses. He becomes active only under certain circumstances - temples are one such.

Skillganon
12 February 2007, 04:35 PM
Dear Skill,

Salam,

Your massive answer is as uninformed as the critique itself, as there is no need to counter ignorance. God is not moon god or sun god. God is that in whom the mind (moon), prana-life (sun), and will (agni-fire) abide.

The icon that moslems use is very similar to the hindu icon and there is no reason to feel defensive about that. Christians use Jesus and cross as icon. Mind requires an icon. What is negative about that? Those who do not understand that God is Vishnu (all pervasive) only create such ruccus.

And moreover, majority of christians having forgotten about the indwelling god, are greatest idolators since most of them worship their own bodies and not the temple of god that the body is.


Om Namah Shivayya

Hello Atanu

No need to ascibe thing to another religion that is falsehood.

So let me answer the ignorance that pervade in this forum.

The Moon is not the Icon of Islam.

The crescent and the star flag is a flag taken later by the Otamman empire. Nothing got to do with the religion.

Islam affirms the Moon and the Sun are creation of Allah(swt).

Now going back to the important aspect. I invite you accept Allah(swt),

Their is no deity but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger.

This iclude not associating any partners(men, moon, idols e.t.c) with him in worship.

Not to make Allah(swt) into idols and images e.t.c and be subservient to them.

saidevo
12 February 2007, 07:37 PM
Hello Atanu
Now going back to the important aspect. I invite you accept Allah(swt),

Their is no deity but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger.

This iclude not associating any partners(men, moon, idols e.t.c) with him in worship.

Not to make Allah(swt) into idols and images e.t.c and be subservient to them.

Do you smell the stench of proselytism in these words, and that towards to a staunch Advaitin?!

Does it amount to an improvement, trying with words instead of swords? Is the pen mightier than the sword really? Can the Muslims who believe in this saying, persuade the others to drop their weapons and come to the discussion table? Can they set their house in order?

But alas, words are only issues of the mind; the pictures they create are a far cry from buddhi or wisdom, and vidya or knowledge! And above everything, is the personal freedom; only that ensures liberation.

satay
12 February 2007, 09:17 PM
Hello Atanu

No need to ascibe thing to another religion that is falsehood.
So let me answer the ignorance that pervade in this forum.


namaste skillganon,

Why is that those who follow the adharmic maleccha religions get frustrated when they start loosing an argument. You don't have to answer this, we all know why. It's a rehotrical question.




Now going back to the important aspect. I invite you accept Allah(swt),


please note that this type of 'invitation' is against the rules of the forum but as you said, you are ignorant prevading this forum so I will ignore this one attempt to convert others just this once. This as a sign of tolerance of dharma.

Now, back to the important aspect, we reject your maleccha, foolish god named allah. Hindus get 72 or more virgins right here, we don't need to suck up to your allah or blow ourselves up to get them. ;)

Now, the bigger question to you is what are you going to do about it? Please don't tell us that you are going to blow yourself up or blow us up in frustration.



Their is no deity but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger.


Since we don't believe in your allah we couldn't care less about his messengers.



This iclude not associating any partners(men, moon, idols e.t.c) with him in worship.


Then stop worshipping the stone in kabba and become a buddhist since you and buddhists are praying to the 'void'.



Not to make Allah(swt) into idols and images e.t.c and be subservient to them.

Good, then you should smash the stone and the wall that you guys kneel before in kabba or better yet get one of your jihadis to blow it up.

sm78
13 February 2007, 04:08 AM
Hello Atanu

No need to ascibe thing to another religion that is falsehood.

So let me answer the ignorance that pervade in this forum.

The Moon is not the Icon of Islam.

The crescent and the star flag is a flag taken later by the Otamman empire. Nothing got to do with the religion.

Islam affirms the Moon and the Sun are creation of Allah(swt).

Now going back to the important aspect. I invite you accept Allah(swt),

Their is no deity but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger.

This iclude not associating any partners(men, moon, idols e.t.c) with him in worship.

Not to make Allah(swt) into idols and images e.t.c and be subservient to them.

Thanks Skillganon for summarizing your belief in Gist to Hindu's. We need more of persons like you to voice up your faith before the Hindu's who refuse to understand the koranic belief that u hold so dear. There are many who think Koran is a like Veda and Muslims are no different in beliefs than a Hindu. Good job for your effort to correct that misunderstanding. I don't know however how many of skillganon's and real world terrorists are needed, for intellectual hallucinations that some hindu's suffer present a more hopeless picture than your belief.

atanu
18 February 2007, 07:59 AM
Hello Atanu

No need to ascibe thing to another religion that is falsehood.

So let me answer the ignorance that pervade in this forum.

The Moon is not the Icon of Islam.

The crescent and the star flag is a flag taken later by the Otamman empire. Nothing got to do with the religion.

Islam affirms the Moon and the Sun are creation of Allah(swt).

Now going back to the important aspect. I invite you accept Allah(swt),





Namaskar and Salam,

Do you take my soft stance as an indication that I may hop? Foolish, since, for me there is no boundary to hop. However, if you invite me to accept Allah, I gladly accept, since there is only ONE BRAHMAN.

But forms are many. I love you for loving Allah so much but can you love me for loving my beloved Shiva?

If the answer is yes, then only I will accept that you love the absolute. Please understand that Allah is post development of a vocabulary whereas the absolute is the creator of that vocabulary.

Are You not stuck with your mental preference and are you not ready to hate others for that mental preference? even with violence etc.?




Their is no deity but Allah, and Muhammad is his messenger.

This iclude not associating any partners(men, moon, idols e.t.c) with him in worship.

Not to make Allah(swt) into idols and images e.t.c and be subservient to them.



Be sensible. A man born in Siberia may not know the particular name Allah. To say that He does not know God or to declare jihad against him is the most ungodly thing to do. And such intolerance is indeed very prevalent among the muslims, possibly since teachers do not tell you that god himself animates all His creation.

Your position is foolish, if you say you love God but still hate variety of scriptural injunctions only because they seem to differ from yours.


Note: Except for a few misguided ones, Hindus do not make any partner to Param Atma. Though we are also encouraged by our scriptures to love the multiplicity of forms of God to appreciate Him fully -- both the transcendental and the immanent aspects -- and in the process develop universal love.

And since nothing like Mandukya Upanishad exists anywhere else except in Vedanta, I would not even dream of hopping.

Understand?


Om Namah Shivayya

saidevo
20 February 2007, 07:44 AM
Do you take my soft stance as an indication that I may hop? Foolish, since, for me there is no boundary to hop. However, if you invite me to accept Allah, I gladly accept, since there is only ONE BRAHMAN.


Here is a quote from Kanchi Paramacharya on the forms of Brahman:


We study Vedanta. But no one has brought it into experience. No one takes the least efforts in this direction. The Brahman of Advaita shAstram is of two kinds: nirguNa, saguNa. NirguNa Brahman is without attributes. We meditate on the same NirguNa Brahman by bringing him into saguNa. In the form we meditate on, he appears in that form. The same Brahman remains anugata (inherent) in all the forms of the thirty-three crores of devas. If looked at in this manner, the Muslim-worshipped Allah and the Christian-worshipped Jesus are all our Brahman only! If this opinion arrives in all the religions, there will be no fights in the world in the name of religion.

Znanna
20 February 2007, 09:20 PM
Yeah. What is it about "One" that is so hard to get, anyways?


ZN

atanu
21 February 2007, 01:09 AM
Yeah. What is it about "One" that is so hard to get, anyways?


ZN

The mind of the ONE, I suppose.

Om Namah Shivayya

nomar
21 March 2007, 07:06 PM
Allah - the Moon God


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

I looked in to the moon god theory and it seems valid. Arabic paganism fit's in exactly with Islam. It's were mo got his influence for his fairy tale.




http://members.tripod.com/scripture_keywords/Allah_moon-god.html


Was Allah the moon god of Ancient Arab Paganism?
http://israpundit.com/archives/2005/08/was_allah_the_m.php (http://israpundit.com/archives/2005/08/was_allah_the_m.php) 2005-08-22
by Syed Kamran Mirza <Sye_mirza@hotmail.com>

Historical evidence, impartial logic, well versed references and all available circumstantial judgments can very well prove that,
(a) Allah name of deity was pre-existed much before the arrival of Islam,
(b) Pre-Islamic Pagan peoples worshipped Allah as their supreme deity (moon-god).

Allah’s name existed in pre-Islamic Arab [history]. In ancient Arab the Allah was considered to be the supreme god/deity (as moon-god) and Arab Pagans worshipped Allah before Islam arrived.
Let us examine below some valid questions and answers: Did the Pagan Arabs in pre-Islamic times worship 360 gods? Yes Did the pagans Arabs worship the sun, moon and the stars? Yes Did the Arabs built temples to the Moon-god? Yes Did different Arab tribes give the Moon-god different names/titles? Yes What were some of the names/titles? Sin, Hubul, Ilumquh, Al-ilah. Yes Was the title “al-ilah” (the god) used as the Moon-god? Yes Was the word “Allah” derived from “al-ilah?” Yes Was the pagan “Allah” a high god in a pantheon of deities?YesWas he worshipped at the Kabah? YesWas Allah only one of many Meccan gods? YesDid they place a statue of Hubul on top of the Kabah? YesAt that time was Hubul considered the Moon-god? YesWas the Kabah thus the “house of the Moon-god”? YesDid the name “Allah” eventually replace that of Hubul as the name of the Moon god? YesDid they call the Kabah the “house of Allah”? YesWere al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat called “the daughters of Allah”?
(Lat, Uzza and Manat were known as “the daughters of god [Allah]”)YesDid the Qur’an at one point tell Muslims to worship al-Lat, al-Uzza and Manat?
(In Surah 53:19-20)Yes Have those verses been “abrogated” out of the present Qur’an? Yes
Why were they called “The Satanic Verses” ?
The variable names (Sin, Hubul, llumquh, Al-ilah) of moon god were used by various tribes of pagan Arabs. Pagan god SIN was the name of the Moon-god.
Who is Allah really ?
According to Islamic Theologians (Mullahs, Maulana, Moulavis, etc.), or Islamic teachings-- Allah is the supreme god or creator who (suddenly one day?) talked or introduced Himself with Prophet Muhammad through an Angel named Gabriel, disclosing the truth that it is the Allah who created everything in the universe. Surprisingly, Qur’an never defines the word “Allah” as to who actually Allah was or what was the relation of Allah with pagans. I believe, 99% percent of Muslims do believe that—Allah’s name was invented or started right from the time when Gabriel disclosed the truth (?) to Prophet Muhammad in the cave of Hira Parvat (Mountain) and gave Muhammad the Quran. They believe that before this truth was revealed—pagan Arabs were in the total darkness (Andhakar Zuug) and they used to worship various puppet gods and that the pagans were very evil people. I can bet on this fact that no mullahs ever told us the real truth, neither they believe this clean truth that “Allah” was in fact a pre-existing deity in pagan Arabia. What a hypocrisy?
Some important factors which will suggest that the name“Allah” was already in use by Pagans as their chief God/deity: (A) In pre-Islamic days, that Muslims call the Days of ignorance, the religious background of the Arabs was pagan, and basically animistic. Through Moon, Sun, Stars, Planets, Animals, wells, trees, stones, caves, springs, and other natural objects man could make contact with the deity. At Mekka, “Allah” was the chief of the gods and the special deity of the Quraish, the prophet’s tribe. Allah had three daughters: Al Uzzah (Venus) most revered of all and pleased with human sacrifice; Manah, the goddess of destiny, and Al Lat, the goddess of vegetable life. These three daughters of Allah (there is a Quranic verse about them) were considered very powerful over all things. Therefore, their intercessions on behalf of their worshippers were of great significance.
(B) Arabs used to give their children names such as—Abdullah (slave of Allah). Clean proof was the fact that, Muhammad’s father’s name was “Abdullah”. Logical analogy here is—had there been no “Allah” in pre-Islamic Arab, there could be no Abdullah or slave of Allah in Arabia.
(C) Even today, in the entire Arab World, not only Muslims but all other non-Muslim (Jews, Christians, Sabians, Bahai, an atheist etc.) Arabs says—“Ya Allah” as the expression of surprise or unhappiness/sorrow. (D)Albert Hourani’s statement: “The Islamic name used for God was “Allah”, which was already in use for one of the local gods (it now used by Arabic-speaking Jews and Christians as the name of God (A history Of Arab people by Albert Hourani, 1991, page-16, Belknap press of Harvard University, USA)
History tells us two theories of Allah’s existence in and around the Kaba Sharif: (1) Pagans used to call the largest Statue amongst the 360 deities as ALLAH—whom they used to consider the chief/supreme deity (god). Or, (2) Pagan Arabs used to worship 360 deities inside Kaba Sharif, and they used to consider them different smaller deities under the total control of a single most powerful chief deity called “ALLAH” who was invisible (Nirakar) and was the all-powerful, all-knowing, and totally unknowable.
Amazing Similarities with Hindu Religion:
In India’s Hindu religion is quite similar to the number two theory (above) of pagan belief. Although, Hindus worship many different gods—they invariably have faith upon a single supreme invisible deity called “Bhagaban” (some call it “Ischhaar”) whom they call “Nirakar”. And, surprisingly there is no sculptural image/figure for this Bhagaban. But all Hindus worship Him along with other numerous deities. This Bhagaban is considered as the lord of all other deities. What would happen—if some intelligent prophet would have asked Hindus to give up worshipping other gods and keeping only Bhagaban as their only deity making it a monotheist religion just like Islam? Could it not be another religion like Islam?
Now some factors which will suggest “Allah” was the Moon-god of Arab pagans:
In Qura’n there are at least a dozen verses in which Allah repeatedly swears by the names such as moon, sun, stars, planets, night, wind etc. It is a mystery why the creator Allah (?) should swear by his creations. Normally, we swear by the name of something much superior to us, such as we swear by God or by the name of our father (who is considered senior or superior to us). But we never swear by the name of something inferior to us. Here in the Quran swearing fashions of Allah (God) by moon or stars hinting us that Allah considered these things superior to himself. And this makes us to think (otherwise) as to who actually acted as Allah in Quran? However, in his explanation of why the Qur’an swears by the moon in Surah 74:32, “Nay, verily by the Moon,” Yusuf Alli comments, “The moon was worshipped as a deity in times of darkness” (fn. 5798, pg. 1644). Perhaps, this swearing of Allah was due to the usual/cultural habits of worshipping moon as their God in pagan customs.

Yousuf Ali stated (Page-1921-1623 of his English Translation of Holy Quran):
“Moon-worship was equally popular in various forms, viz. Apollo and Diana—the twin brother and sister, representing the sun and moon. …in the Vedic religion of India the moon god was Soma, the lord of the planets…….moon was male divinity in ancient India. Moon was also male divinity in ancient Semitic religion, and the Arabic word for the moon “qamar’ is of the masculine gender, on the other hand, the Arabic word for sun “shams” is feminine gender. The pagan Arabs evidently looked upon the sun as a goddess and the moon as a god.

The Pagan deities best known in the Ka’ba and round about Mecca were Lat, Uzza, and Manat.…the 360 idols established by the Pagans in the Ka’ba probably represented the 360 days of an inaccurate solar year. This was the actual modern pagan worship as known to the Quraish contemporary with our prophet”

Influence of Moon in Islam:
Who can deny the paramount influences of moon in Muslim’s life? In Islam, moon is considered holiest astronomical object, and moon is the guiding light of all Islamic rituals/festivals. Contradictions and conflicts are very common with the dates of Eids and Ramadan and obviously it is a chronic problem and moon is the nucleus of this problem. Crescent moon and stars are the symbolic sign in the national flags of many Muslim countries, and it is present over the Mosques, in the Muslim graveyard etc.

Prophet Muhammad compromised to Pagans to establish Islam in Arabia:
Prophet Muhammad did his clever tactics of adapting many rites of paganism into Islam, in order to accommodate Islam among the pagan Arabs. He made lots of political pacts with the Pagan Leaders such as Abu Suffian to accommodate his new idea of religion and he agreed to incorporate many of the Pagan rituals in Islam. Prophet Muhammad asked the pagans to worship only the “Allah” the largest god,
And destroy the idols of all other gods and goddesses that existed in Kabah. To establish oneness (monotheist) of God, he repeatedly asked them not to make any partners to Allah (That is why we can find hundreds of Quranic verses “asking not to make any partners to Allah). Finally, the Prophet was able to convince (by force of course) the pagans to destroy all idols, and on return (he) agreed (perhaps) to keep the “Names” of the goddess of most famous Pagan tribes as the alternative names of Allah—hence Islam has 99 NAMES of Allah.
Prophet Muhammad did command his followers to participate in these pagan ceremonies while the pagans were still in control of Mecca. (Please See Yusuf Ali, fn. 214, pg. 78). ... “the whole of the [pagan] pilgrimage was spiritualized in Islam...” (Yusuf Ali: fn. 223 pg. 80). In the Tafsir (of Quran-2:200) maoulana Yousuf Ali stated: “After Pilgrimage, in Pagan times, the pilgrims used to gather in assemblies in which the praises of ancestors were sung. As the whole of the pilgrimage rites were spiritualized in Islam, so this aftermath of the Pilgrimage was also spiritualized. It was recommended for pilgrims to stay on two or three days after the pilgrimage, but they must use them in prayer and praise to God.(#223 of Shane’nazul by Maoulana Yousuf Ali, page-81)
In Islam many rituals performed (today) by devoted Muslims in the name of Allah are connected to the pagan worship that existed before Islam. Pagans practices of the Pilgrimage of Kabah once a year--the Fast of Ramadan, running around the Kabah seven times, kissing the black stone, shaving the head, animal sacrifices, running up and down two hills, throwing stones at the devil, snorting water in and out the nose, praying several times a day toward Mecca, giving alms, Friday prayers, etc. are strictly followed by Muslims today. Nobody can deny the fact that, all the above rituals of Muslim’s hajj today—existed well before the arrival of Islam.
It is highly plausible to consider the fact that by incorporating much of the Pagan’s rituals in new religion Islam—Prophet successfully reduced the pagan-risk and it was perhaps one of the most important milestone-attempts to conquer the minds of Pagans resulting in massive breakdown of the Pagans’ moral and support to oppose Islam.
The central shrine at Mekka was the Pagan’s Kaaba (called House of Allah), a cube like stone structure which still stands though many times rebuilt. Imbedded in one corner is the black stone, probably a meteorite, the kissing of which is now an essential part of the Muslim’s pilgrimage.
It is the historical fact that the Ka’aba, the sacred shrine which contains the Black Stone, in Mecca was used for pagan idol worship before Islam and even called the House of Allah at that time. The name of the god whom the Arabs worshipped was the god of pantheon—Ali-ilah the god, the supreme, the predeterminer of everybody’s life or destiny—the chief god “Allah”
Who did not read the story of BLACK STONE which was very sacred (povitra) to all various tribes of Quraish. When one day this sacred stone was needed to transfer from one place to another, there was a quarrel amongst the various tribes, as to who will carry that sacred stone? Then most intelligent and righteous young boy Muhammad (was not a prophet then) invented the solution of this serious problem. He (Muhammad) put this sacred stone over a Chaddor (piece of cloth) and asked one representative from each tribe to hold the Chaddor and carry the stone. I narrated this story briefly just to prove that—black stone did exist long before Islam was invented. In summary, it has been truthfully and logically proven with all possible available circumstantial evidences/rational that, Islam was not a new religion but it is a reformed paganism. I believe that all these monotheistic religions have more or less similar origins. This idea of monotheistic religion was not a brand new invention. Monotheistic thought was declared by Ancient Pharaoh Kings, Mesopotamia’s king Hamarubi (3000 B.C.), and Alexander the Great (300 B.C.). Differences were, these kings demanded that they themselves were the god whom everybody should worship.

Khadgar
07 September 2007, 08:29 PM
Yeah, the debates between christians and muslims throwing stones at each other is funny. These arguments dont matter to Hindus - after all your arguments are mainly pointing out that Allah is found in the Arabic bible too? How does it matter to Hindus - the entire Abrahamic religion was a copy of other religions, including many pagan traditions( which have their roots in Sanatana Dharma). Moon God is not meant to belittle you, but Moon stands for the miind ( and sometimes Atma), while the sun stands for Atma.

Start from fundamentals:

Abraham - Brahma
Sara, consort of Abraham= Saraswati, consort of Brahma. Similarly every name that follows like Issac etc are imports from the Hindu scripture. So the very foundation of the abrahamic religions is directly from the heart of Hindu scripture, and twisted, and presented back to Hindus as the "only" truth. Kids will buy your stories....;)


Christian version:
Jesus = son of God; Paul = apostle; Muhammed=Satan;

Muslim Version:
Jesus = apostle; Paul= devil; Muhammed= final prophet;

Little kids would be impressed with your assesment of other religions and self glorification - not grown up Hindus. Nevertheless, as I mentioned earlier, this copying from Hindu scripture makes us brothers in faith and not enemies, as long as you agree with this assesment. We are happy to find that Abrahamic religions were founded by some Hindus in the past.;)

Well said!