Subscribe from £1 per week
25 February 2013
I thought that readers might be interested in this new piece from me on Islam, the Koran and Richard Dawkins’s survival instinct.
More Spectator for less. Subscribe and receive 12 issues delivered for just £12, with full web and app access. Join us now.
l Recently converted to Islam and its the most beautiful religion on earth…This Dawkins looks evil…everyone is talking gibberish about Islam with no education or knowledge..Also, you cant argue with someone THICK’ cus he’s always right….
You must try harder, Doug. You are not on the Al Qaeda “most wanted” list:
Edit: Oops. wrong link.
Try this one:
I don’t know whether God exists or not and I don’t have an especially strong faith beyond hedging my bets. But I do know that all the militant atheists posting here do not seem to be very nice people and if anything their “arguments” (mostly slagging off those with faith) turn me towards Christianity rather than away from it. Also, the fact that most of them seem of the left (including those that profess not to be) tickle my prejudices. I detest the left, its nasty advocates and all its evil works.
First of all, Prof. Dawkins has made it quite clear why he focuses on christianity (and judaism to a lesser extent) over islam: he was raised christian and lives in a country which has been majority christian for the entirety of its modern history. Like most children, even today, he was read bible verses in school and lives in a culture where christian literature, architecture and traditions are still ubiquitous.
But it goes beyond that. Islam, to many, may represent the great ideological and political enemy of the West; but it actually holds very little power within the West. It is evangelical christians who, although supported by islamic scholars, are pushing creationism in schools. It is the C of E who still holds 26 seats in the House of Lords. Beyond the UK, it is christians who now control the US Republican Party who rail against abortion and the “myth” of climate change. Islam may well be a threat to Western liberal values, but it is almost so obvious a threat that Prof. Dawkins and others don’t feel the need to point out the dangers. Regular people don’t need to be told of the dangers of poking lions with sticks; they do need to be told about hidden dangers, those that are insidious and creeping.
Those who criticise him and his contemporaries for being soft on islam seem to do so for two reasons. Firstly, they are fed up with their own religions bearing the brunt of the attacks and are after some respite; and, secondly, they spot a potential ally in Dawkins against a ‘foreign’ religion which they seek to set up as a common enemy.
Please go here and vote:
HASHEM is the One true GOD.
YESHUA IS MESSIAH, OR JESUS.
ALLAH IS NOT THE GOD OF THE BIBLE.
For G-d so loved the world he gave his one and only son that whoever believes in him
shall not perish but have everlasting life. John ch 3 v16.
Jesus is Lord the only way,the truth and the life,nobody comes to the Farther except through me.John ch 14v6.
The first church started in Jerusalem, not Rome. early church were all Jewish.Then the Gentiles were grafted in.from all the nations.Salvation is found in no other name except upon the name of Jesus.
In Israel and around the nations are thousands of Messianic Jews. Jews who know and believe Jesus is messiah.
Israel is waiting for the Messiah many have come to know him in Jesus.
Jesus said,For salvation is from the jews.John ch 4v 22.
Many Arabs have come to know Jesus thus knowing the one true G-d as farther, The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Israel)
Islam is nothing to do with the bible. Allah is their god.
Three people can see the same person and think it was three different people they saw. Three people can see three different people and think they were all the same person. Or three people can see the same person and agree on who the person is, and be right.
Hope that’s of help.
Of course, anyone being asked about whether they disbelieve in Islam can always answer like Francis Urquhart: “You can think whatever you like, but I couldn’t possibly comment.” Nudge nudge wink wink– but the more keen of the suicide-bomb contingent will recognise that old wheeze, and know you’re taking the mickey outta them.
Excellent piece Douglas on Dawkins and Islam.
It does not matter about the religion or if god exists or not. What matters is that Dawkins knows to insult Islam will get him killed. The Muslims can see and smell the fear. It also shows the cowardice of western elites.
The sword is mightier than the pen.
When our elites want to preach to you tell then you will listen after they have preached to the Muslims.
Maybe Prof. Dawkins had a muslim taxi driver waiting for him outside the studio and didn´t feel like walking all the way home.
I have noticed his ducking, diving and self-censoring around the subject of Islam. He is the worst kind of hypocrite and goes after the softer targets. He is scared of Islam, and the terrorists have won with him. This is precisely what militant Islam wants.
Feel free to go on Al Jazeera and tell everybody islam is a hideous ideology
As others have said, it’s not a dodge – he is just more familiar with the actual God of the Old Testament than of the Qu’ran. Which isn’t hard to believe given his upbringing.
The whole premise of your article Murray is a lie. A complete and utter falsehood.
Dawkins is a frequent critic of Islam. Anyone of your readers is free to merely google “Dawkins Islam” – the very first response is a link to Dawkins calling Islam “one of the great evils of the world.”
Why make stuff up?
so, why TF didn’t Dawkins say so when asked, ha?
The man is an overeducated village idiot, a proof that knowledge can never substitute wisdom.
That is always the excuse of the undereducated and rather thick eh?
Because that gets him readers, a position at a neocon think tank and a bunch of paranoid followers foaming at the mouth. Or maybe he’s just a clever cynic.
G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is not the G-D of Islam. In the beginning G-d created the Heavens and the earth.The god of Islam is violent, revengeful and foreign to our way of thinking.Jesus Christ is Messiah the way the truth and the life.Salvation is found in no other name accept upon the name of Jesus. In Hebrew Yeshua another form of Joshua. Right now the Muslims of the middle east mainly are trying to usher in the Twelfth Imam But first Islam must rule all the nations,what they wont tell you, that involves killing all the Jews and Christians. The Radicals are Muslim Brotherhood Egypt, Iran Hezbollah Lebanon, and Hamas in the Gaza strip. Lots of other Countries were the Islamists are, but these are familiar to us. Abraham had two Sons Isaac and Ishmael , The Arabs of the middle east are listed in the book of Genesis, the nations.
Right now the Muslims of the middle east mainly are trying to usher in the Twelfth Imam
Only the shi’ites
Yes that’s right, they are but they believe certain things have to be in place before he comes.Islam ruling the nations through Sharia law, getting rid of Jews and Christians.
Not taken your nutter pills today dear ?
I trust you’ve shared your views on Jesus w/ your rabbi?
I think Dawkins was quite adequate on this one. What he basically said was – you see we Westerners are aware of our Judaeo-Christian roots and the heritage, of different quality and size, including unpleasant and retrograde things. So you Arabs, Muslims – knowing your situation and traditions better, – could you please try thinking for yourself? Like, you are with yours, and we are with ours. It is nice. He wasn’t afraid, just trolling.
I thought that the Prof dodged it a bit too at that interview… (but id never dodge Douglas if he smiled at me Ah I must just live in hope, even if I die in despair !!)
Medhi Hasan irritates me no end!
he thinks you live like an animal (not in the Darwinian way)
Yes yes Murray, we’ve heard this charge before – but it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Richard Dawkins was brought up as an Anglican and so is well versed in the Judeo-Christian God of the Old Testament. It’s true there are some “edgy” comedians who will attack Christianity but stay clear of attacking Islam for obvious reasons – and thus deserve to be called cowards. But, as others on here have already pointed out, Dawkins has gone on record many times to make his views on Islam pretty clear. He has Catholicism as the world’s second worst religion because, the religion he says is the worst in the world is, well you can guess. Dawkins is a man of the centre-left and you are a red-meat conservative – and so this is just a petty little character assassination on someone you are ideologically at odds with.
Would it not be normal to expect a person who wrote “The God Delusion” and who has spent most of he last decade or so campaigning against religion to have any insight or views on the god of Islam?
Very well said.
Dawkins is anything but ‘well versed in ‘the Judeo-Christian God of the Old Testament’.
‘The God Delusion’ shows him to have a literal approach to scripture even where it is clearly mythical. He sets up absurd paradigms of (alleged) Christian belief and then knocks down what he has set up. His approach is essentially that of a cocky, sneering, too-clever-by-half fourteen year old.
His intemperate – frequently almost hysterical – attacks on ‘Christian’ straw men, and the wilful intellectual dishonesty and ignorance that he displays suggest that his neurosis concerning Christianity has its roots in childhood experience. Sad that an otherwise intelligent man should be reduced to making a fool of himself as a result of an untreated neurosis.
I saw that same debate with Mehdi Hasan and I felt that Dawkins dodged the issue, he said he did not know anything about the Koran but got Hasan to state that he believes in flying horses and that Mohammad split the moon in two, showing he had a better idea then he let on about Islam, but Hasan does out and out lie about apostate’s being marked for death when asked about that.
It reminds me of when there was an Art exhibition in Glasgow where people could write what ever they wanted in a bible on display in a gallery, naturally there was a very peaceful protest outside by Christians and a local priest did raise the issue that If it was a Koran being defaced there would have been a much different situation. e.g Deaths.
the debate on AJ is here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0Xn60Zw03A
Great and telling article in the JC
Some Dawkins quotes on Islam:
from the God Delusion pg 49, speaking about the cartoon contrversey: “if you dom’t take it seriously and accord it respect you are physically threatened , on a scale that no other religion has aspired to since the middle ages”.
“I regard Islam as one of the great evils of the world”- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyNv8kvd2H8
“There’s no God and Islam is evil”- http://www.scotsman.com/news/arts/there-s-no-god-and-islam-is-evil-speech-earns-richard-dawkins-ovation-from-islanders-1-2612951
That’s just three but something to be getting on with. Hardly pulling his punches is he? Yes he probably talks more about christianity and judaism but that’s because he knows more about them.
No no no.
This will not do!
He was given the platform to speak out against the worlds greatest evil.
This man has received your adulation and praise for many years for his “free thinking”. He has been elevated to some sort of God like status amongst the hard-line atheist and possibly rightly so.
Therefore, his pathetic response to a bullseye so easy to hit is just crap.
Don’t you think you deserve more?
I think it will do. If you’ve said all those things, I think you’re entitled to be circumspect when you choose.
Rubbish…he simply could not choose a worse time to be circumspect.
In fact, there is no room for this at all in the arena he plays in.
I like Hawkins mainly because of his fearless approach to such issues.
But there is too big an injustice being served up by this vile ideology Too many people perish under it’s jackboot.
Too many suffer in suppressed agony.
Too many executed in the name of it.
To be circumspect in the face of this, is to hold ALL Muslims to a lower standard of behaviour.
But no, carry on pissing and whining about those pesky Christians.
Don’t ever let facts get between an incendiary argument and D. Murray!
I agree. I have heard Dawkins criticise Islam and its insane belief in creationism on TV and radio.
He should, of course, criticise all religions equally. If he does not, and sidesteps the issue, then that is indeed unfortunate – and it is Islam and its literalists in Britain and The West that need to be taken on by those with the power and the voice to do so. I’d like to hear his reaction to Murray’s piece.
I am constantly annoyed by the BBC and media’s pandering to Islam and Muslims. That attempted assasination in Scandinavia didn’t even make the news – not even on Channel Al-4 with Jon Al-Snow and his newsteam madrassa ready and headscarfed to bash Israel every day at 7pm.
It’s the same in schools, colleges, universities (where there is such promotion of Islamo-hatred going on – and where future bombers are being nurtured), local councils etc. These pc poltroons pander to anyone with a dark skin and a religion – even if they are living lives of such backwardness (antiwomen, antigay) that try and transpose 7th century Aarabia to Bradford, Leicester and Tower Hamlets. If white non-religious people did the same thing, these same useful idiots would call them sexist, homophobic, racist, backwards bigots and dinosaurs.
But if someone is swarthy and Muslims, the reaction is different: instead of condemnation, we apparently have to understand and tolerate these Islamists’ ‘culture and beliefs’ and indeed celebrate their diversity – even if, ironically, they all look the same (the women anyway, what with their wearing one woman tents in comely black, with a little slit for their hateful eyes to look down on the country and culture that feeds, clothes, houses, educates, tolerates and looks after them.
Dawkins “talks more about Christianity and Judaism but that’s because he knows more about them.”
Having read ‘The God Delusion’ I reached the conclusion that Dawkins knowns very little about either faith. His view of Christianity is ill-informed and consists mainly of his own prejudices and ‘evidence’ from ancient history or some of the sillier sects of the USA.
His own ‘Foundation’ is remarkably similar to a religious cult: the ‘great leader’, the ‘book’, the ego-trip.
He tries to sell his ‘philosophy’ as something which produces ‘enlightened minds’ as a result of the working of ‘the Zeitgeist’ before going on to commend the ‘enlightened minds’ which he associates with the Independent newspaper. He then compounds his stupidity by twice citing Johann Hari as a shining example of an ‘enlightened mind’. That, of course, was before Hari was publicly exposed as a liar and plagiarist and dismissed from the Independent.
Well his view it based on what’s written in the bible and taught by leading like the Pope and ABC. One of the things that make religion that makes it so intellectually bankrupt is that every member has their own special interpretation. He can’t address every single a la carte view of every single religion,
As for him starting a cult of his own. Absurd, obviously he’s the leader because he founded it!
Sorry, but if you read ‘The God Delusion’ you will find that Dawkins’ ‘reading’ of the Bible (even where it is accurate) demonstrates an appalling ignorance of basic theology.
For example, the chapter where he sets up and tests ‘the God hypothesis’ shows a truly astounding ignorance of theology that wouldn’t fool a 14 year old.
Unfortunately for Dawkins (and his cult book and self serving ‘foundation’ – nice little earners, both of them) his expertise in his own subject – biology – does not mean that he has the first idea about the subject (theology) on which he has chosen to pontificate.
What is very apparent from his choice of examples and his intemperate language (all theists are ‘faith heads’, for example) is that Dawkins has some real psychiatric problems with Christianity with their roots in his childhood. Counselling for his problems would be more appropriate than publishing nonsense but would not, of course, be nearly as profitable.
“For example, the chapter where he sets up and tests ‘the God hypothesis’ shows a truly astounding ignorance of theology that wouldn’t fool a 14 year old.”
This is precisley what i’m talking about when I say people take an a la carte view of religion. He’s basing his arguments on the primary source i.e the scriptures, not a half baked excuse of an interpretation by a theologian deperately trying to salvage something laudable from these primitive, barbaric texts.
As for the stuff about him making money, who cares? That’s pure ad hominen. An argument stands or falls on its own merits, irrespective of the motive of the one making it.
It is not ad hominem at all. Dawkins’ ‘God hypothesis’ which he ‘tests’ to his own satisfaction is simply invalid. Mainstream Christian belief is not in a God who ‘exists’ as a subset of his own creation. Try reading, for example, Rabbi Sacks to see why this is so.
Dawkins, like most of the militant atheists, sets up a series of caricatures of Christian belief, then knocks them down. Foolish, wilfully ignorant and stuck in the previous century. Dawkins and those whom he has fooled (mainly the half educated, including a couple of silly comedians) will find adjustment to the emerging post-secular age a bit difficult. But the Church will be there to help them if they wish.
It was your attacks on him making money that were ad hominem.
They’re not caricatures. Like I said he’s going back to the source text and criticising what the religion in its true form actually teaches!
Like most people i’m glad that christians have grown past the torture and burning of heretics, witches, homosexuals, etc. Dawkins says this himself, but when the religious make the claim that our morality is derived from the teaching of Jesus and the other prophets, the ORIGINAL teachings as laid out in the old and new testaments are obviously absolutely crucial to the discussion.
Sorry, but you are simply wrong. Dawkins sets up caricatures and then knocks them down – just read the nonsense that he trots out in ‘The God Delusion’. One only has to look at his primitive literalist views of (say) Genesis to see that he is completely out of his depth and wholly ignorant of the fact that the creation myths have been accepted as myths by both Jewish scholars and Christian theologians from at least the time of St Augustine. However, he does not allow mere scholarship to get in the way of his ill informed rants.
There’s nothing ad hominem in observing how much money he makes from the enterprise. He is downright abusive about some of the more outlandish and exploitative cults in the USA, but uses the same methods to promote his own ideology which, as far as I can see, is little more than an updated Godless Pelagianism which provides a religion mainly for champagne socialists.
Argh! I give up.
Live long and prosper.
And I give up too!
I give up too!
I’m with WillyTheFish. It’s simple:
1. The Bible is the Word of God
2. But don’t take God’s Word for it, you’re going to need scholars and theologians to explain it all to you
3. My Mum is a primitive literalist, although she doesn’t know it yet
The bible must be correct because god wrote it, god must exist because the bible tells us he does.
Dawkins doesn’t need to understand theology. Theology only exists because there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that a god exsis so people trie themselves in knots with theology to get around that.
If Dawkins wants to write a book on theology (such as ‘The God Delusion’) then he really needs to understand the subject on which he writes. The very idea of what is meant by God ‘existing’ is a theological one – ontology in the jargon – and is plainly beyond Dawkins’ understanding of the subject. His ‘God hypothesis’ which he ‘disproves’ merely indicates the level of his naivete.
‘The God Delusion’ is not entirely without merit – his explanation of basic evolutionary theory is excellent because he writes of what he knows. However, as soon as he tries his hand at theology his intemperate language and his invalid arguments rather show him up as an ill tempered, rude and ignorant man who is motivated by neurotic malice that (by his own account) springs from childhood experiences.
Why should he bother understanding theology, it is a pointless discipline
The very idea of what is meant by God ‘existing’ is a theological one
Only because there is no proof a god exists so people who want a god to exist have made up some ridiculous pseudo academic horse crap to explain away the complete absence of proof a god exists.
“… ridiculous pseudo academic horse crap…”
Ah the calm voice of the educated reasonable man.
If you can’t manage reasoned discourse you could (surely?) manage basic good manners.
Odd how a lack of basic social skills so often characterises the atheist personality.
My post is perfectly reasonable. I see you have chosen to attack me and not my argument – religious people often do that given they are arguing for something for which no proof exists.
What argument? The argument that there is no argument? That is kind of hard to argue. I see your philosophy is equal to your grammar and your spelling.
So you regard it as ‘perfectly reasonable’ to refer to an academic discipline which you don’t understand as “… ridiculous pseudo academic horse crap…”?
I have tried to explain why the ‘existence’ of God is a rather more complex matter than you (or Dawkins) seem able to understand because both of you fail to appreciate the basics of theology.
If (like Dawkins) you are too lazy or timid to learn the basics of theology then you are destined to continue to look foolish when you comment on matters of which you boast of knowing nothing.
I have not attacked you; I have ‘attacked’ your ignorance and ill mannered naivete.
It is a made up discipline – one designed to get around the fact there is no proof for the existence of a god.
So where is the proof that God does not exist?
And there is absolutely no evidence that Fasdunkle, (“exsis, trie”) did not sleep through his English classes at school. If you want to prove your intellect, an understanding of your language might be a start.
He does need to understand theology if he wants to write a convincing book to expand on a point you’ve just about managed to articulate in one sentence.
Why? If people want to waste their lives thinking up new ways to explain away the complete lack of proof a god exists that’s up to them. Nobody has to take them seriously.
I am not defending Islam in any way but if Dawkins states, that there is no God and Islam is evil he has just contradicted himself. To state something as evil
there must be a standard of good to which all agree. If all do not agree to
that point of view then Dawkins view of evil is purely subjective because Islam
to the Islamist is not evil. For anything to be classified as evil there must be a transcendent point of reference but that is the very person Dawkins states
does not exist, therefore again, as stated Islam cannot be evil for or to
everyone. If Dawkins is saying it is, now he is trying to be God to dictate to
everyone what he thinks is evil. So in essence, Dawkins wants the right to call
what he wants to call evil but at the same time he wants to deny the Islamist
the same right to call what he wants to call evil, in their case, the atheist
Richard Dawkins. With no absolute point of reference for morality ie: God, who
according to Dawkins does not exist, places him in a situation as to where he
has no right to make any moral pronouncements himself on anything because evil becomes just purely subjective, therefore he ultimately undermines his own argument.In fact he contradicts himself again, for in his book the God Delusion he actual denies the existence of evil for he knows based on the laws of logic to posit moral absolutes, is to say God actual exist, so in his book and not a direct
quote, he states, that there are those who are lucky and those who are unlucky
in this life. We all ultimately dance to our own DNA. That statement begs the
question “what of justice”, for if we are dancing to our own DNA then no one can be held accountable for their actions for they are only playing out the part their
DNA programmed for them. But that is another discussion.
Good article, not sure why you didn’t re-print the whole thing here. I’m a bit suprised by Mr Dawkin’s reply, since it’s the same God whether it’s Judaism, Islam or Christianity. To be fair, he has been a vocal critic of Islamic cultural practices. That said, his reply to the question of whether the God of the Koran is as bad as the God of the Old Testament is equivocating, to say the least.
Is it the same god? If three religions believe in a made up god is it necessarily the same made up god?
Since this God is referred to as the “God of Abraham”, presumably it must be the same God, whether or not it is a made-up God.
If it was a real god we would have three groups of people worshiping the same god, while having totally different believes as to what that god wanted them to do and how that god has done in the past.
Ron: And you know this how?
Is their any doubt that Jews Muslims and Christians believe different things?
The question was simple, Ron. Your response didn’t attempt to answer it.
How do I know christians jews and muslims believe different things. Christians are waiting for the second comming Jews are waiting for the first Muslims think there is no need for any comming as Mohammed has it covered.
The muslims are waiting for their messiah,the twelfth Imam, a young man who went missing down a well centuries ago,they are waiting so in the meantime Islam strives to dominate through Sharia Law, and to kill all Jews and Christians that’s what motivates the Iranian President .
Those would be just the Shiites. But you know that already.
No, Ron, how do you know that “If it was a real god we would have three groups of people worshiping the same god”?
If it was a real god and jews muslims and christians all worshiped it then we would have three groups of people worshiping it. Unless you think it is likely there was a real all powerfull god in the sky that was worshiped by some people while other people worshiped a made up pretend all powerfull god in the sky. And the real all powerfull god in the sky let them.
Ron: Do you actually think that is an argument? Do you actually think that the “god in the sky” trope deals with the actual beliefs of theists? Dawkins can carry that type of thing off (at least in front of friendly audiences) because he is actually a highly intelligent and quite learned man. It wears less well from someone without those attributes. My advice is to do quite a bit of reading on the subject (and not just Dawkins and the others–you have the mocking tone down pat already) and you might start gaining an understanding of what you are missing now.
I have read a lot from Augustine to Aquinas as well as Darwin and Dawkins. And the religious stuff as far as it made sense largely comes down to some varient of the god of the gaps type argument or an argument from faith.
That is an intelligent and thoughtful comment. While I come to different conclusions, I can understand your reactions, which I think are reasonable even if I personally disagree with them.
But I do have a hard time getting over the difference between that comment and the ones above, which not only use what I believe is inappropriate mockery (having read Augustine and Aquinas you know that all theists are not unintelligent idiots and I am sure that you have seen your share of not very bright people who proclaim themselves as “atheists” because they think it is trendy) but fails to engage with the real arguments of those with which you disagree.
Anyway, I urge you to continue your reading. Although I am a big advocate of reason, I do not think these are issues that can be solved either way by reason alone.
Muslims beleive in Jesus’s return (Though not as a prophet)(. You should know that really.
Muzzies believe Jesus is returning to fight on their behalf, Truth is that’s to discredit him as the Son of G-D and Messiah, notice they don’t deny him altogether but put forward a lot of half truths,thats from the pit.
Muslims believe in Jesus’s return before the end of days (Though not as a prophet). You should know that really
Blimey! I’ve started a theological minefield! Look it’s very simple. This God is referred to as the God of Abraham by all the 3 religions, ergo it’s the same God. How they subsequently interpret in their own theological way is up to them. They’re all very fond of accusing each other’s interpretation as “blasphemy”. As to the names, Allah is most likely the Arabic version of the Hebrew Elohim (meaning “God”).
It really is something of an epistemological question isn’t it? I would say that the three faiths believe in the same God–but have very distinct views about what they believe about him. One could make a reasonable argument to the contrary also.
As for the name “Allah,” it certainly is the word used by modern Arabic-speaking Christians for “God.” But the original meaning is less clear. It specifically means “the God,” which could be taken to mean “the only God.” But there is an argument that Mohammed was actually referring to the moon god of Mecca, which was represented by the black rock in the Kaaba, which at the time was (supposedly) known as “the God” because it was the most important of the Meccan gods. Personally I think all the historical/linguistic explanations outrun the actual information available. Certainly today’s Moslems believe in a concept of God that has nothing to do with Meccan idols of 1400 years ago.
Abraham had two sons,his wife Sarah gave birth to Isaac the Son of Promise,Sarah though she was barren was visited by the Angel of the Lord to tell her she would have a Son,Sarah laughed for she was well on in years.The Angel said why did you laugh,she said I didn’t he said you did So they named him Isaac , that means laughter. While Abraham waited Sarah said take my maid Hagar and have a son with him, so hagar had a son called Ishmael,that means like a wild donkey. Ishmael is the farther of the Arabs of the middle east today.G-d told Abraham to cast out the bond woman, Hagar for he had no share in G-ds promises. Isaac became the Farther of Jacob (Israel) and he had twelve Sons the Twelve tribes of Israel.Hebrew and Arabic are not the same,Allah is not the God of the bible,God said to Abraham I will make you a farther of many nations.The world was full of false gods as today. But Allah is the god of Islam,so work that out.
What a discussion.
I assume that it is mostly Christians replying that it is the same God, or Muslims, or people who just don’t know what the heck they’re talking about.
I guarantee you that if you ask an orthodox Jew if Jesus is the same God as his own Yahweh, his answer will be “No way, and you’re an idiot for thinking so.”
If you ask a Christian, of course they’ll say yes. The reason should be clear.
If you ask a Christian if they worship the same god as the Muslim, they’ll usually say “No.” – if they have any idea of what they’re talking about. If you ask a Jew if his god is the same as Allah, you’re likely to get a very strange and insulting look or, at the very least, a suggestion that you might want to read the books before you start asking stupid questions.
If you ask the Muslim, of course they’ll say yes.
Generally, it tends to be the Muslims who try to emphasize that it’s the same god worshipped by all three – that or unitarian-types who really throw all tradition to the wind and go with “feeling” instead of what the stories say. Christians generally don’t go around saying that they worship the same god as Muslims do. They make a point about how different it is. And Jews don’t go around saying their god is the same as Jesus and Allah. They rejected them each in turn, remember? That’s why they’ve been persecuted over the centuries. If they went around “accepting” that it’s the same god, you probably would have had a lot less friction over the ensuing two thousand years.
People who go around claiming that it’s the same god really just have a political agenda or are completely ignorant.
Yes, technically, the god “Yahweh” is successively adopted in each ensuing religion of Christianity and Islam and changed to fit their motivations. But to say that and then to state that they’re all the same god is to completely ignore the viewpoints of the people still worshipping him the way that he is before somebody else came in and decided to change him. To do so is completely insulting and simplistic.
And this is critique from an atheist who thinks it’s all made up anyway. But at least I can recognize the reality of people’s points of view.
I have no political agenda and it doesn’t matter if Jews and Muslims feel insulted about having the same God or not, the fact remains.
The jewish god didn’t have a son
Neither did the muslim god
The christian god had a son
The muslim god considers believing he had a son to be the worst sin possible
They can’t be the same god
It is the same god. Muslims only believe jesus was a prophet whereas christians believe he was more than a prophet.
It’s not the same god – one has son and one says the greatest evil is to say he has a son.
Repeating yourself doesn’t make it so. Simon is right.
So one god but three incompatible versions of it? Simon is not right.
It is the same god, the differences in religion mainly stem from the son and who he was. Remember it was the jews that didn’t accept jesus as the one, and as a result are still waiting.
If its the same god are you saying christians and jews are wrong and only muslims have it right? Maybe the ahmadis are now the only people to be doing it right.
I’m not saying anyone is wrong or anyone is right. I’m just announcing that all three have the same god and it’s the small differences that separate them.
The jewish god didn’t send jesus, the christian god didn’t send mohammed. None of them believe in the same god
Dropped on your head as a child.
The G-d of the bible Judaism & Christianity are the same G-d. Islam is a middle eastern religion, the only similarities Abraham was the Farther. after that they don’t have any as the Jews follow the Law and the prophets,Moses, the people of the book. Arab Muslims Islam that is nothing to do with the other.The new Testament is an extension of the old,the law of Moses,the prophets,then going into the four Gospels ect.
Hate to point out to you that if Judaism is NOT a middle eastern religion as you imply above, then your cousins in Tel Aviv had better exit to Europe post haste. Ah the irony of the traps you fall into.
Almost certainly not the same god. Given that the Jewish and Islamic gods are both typical tribal gods, with a love of the smoke from burnt offerings, having a capricious lack of any morality, as well as having an insane jealousy of some other un-named greater god, shows that they are the same entity. We can still hope that the other god of whom Yahweh/Allah is so jealous might be the kinder god of the Christians. (Though I’m not holding my breath on this).
The Lords’ terrace was transformed into a theatre yesterday evening to stage an adaptation of Blair Babe Oona King’s House…
The downfall of Cardinal Keith O’Brien could not have been more complete if it had been orchestrated by Stonewall, which,…
The Lord Rennard scandal is spreading, not least because of Nick Clegg’s willingness to bring in other characters. He even…
Already a subscriber with a Web ID? Login here.