Search and find articles and topics quickly and accurately! See different advanced ways to search for articles on this site.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word
was with authority
(same Greek word for
satan's rule 
The Sahih Muslim Hadiths say that Jesus is GOD Almighty's Word and Spirit - Does this mean that Jesus is Allah Almighty?
Does John 1:1 prove Trinity?
Let us look at John 1:1-7,14-17:
The Word Became Flesh
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
Divine (theos also
2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men.
5 The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.
6 There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John.
7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe.
14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, "This was he of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.' "
16 From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another.
17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
1- Prophet Jesus (Isa), peace be upon him, like Adam, peace be upon him, was created from the Word of GOD Almighty.
2- Jesus was not the entire Word of GOD Almighty. He rather was a Word from the Word; meaning that he was created from the Word of GOD Almighty.
Further from Muslim-SA:
220.127.116.11 John 1:1
Another verse quoted in defense of the "Trinity" is the verse of John 1:1 :
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
When I first learned of this verse it appeared to me that I had finally found my
elusive goal. However, after substantial research into Christian theological literature, I
would later come to learn that this verse too can not be interpreted to justify a
"triune" God. My own experience has shown that this verse is the one most
popularly quoted by most Christians in defense of the Trinity. For this reason I shall
spend a little more time in it's analysis than in the analysis of the other verses.
First of all, it is quite obvious from simply reading the above verse that even in the
very best case, this verse speaks only of a "Duality" not a "Trinity."
Even the most resolute conservative Christian will never claim to find in this verse any
mention whatsoever of a "merging" of a Holy Ghost with God and "the
Word." So even if we were to accept this verse at face value and just have faith,
even then, we find ourselves commanded to believe in a "Duality" and not a
"Trinity." But let us see if this verse does in fact even command us to believe
in a "Duality." To do this we need to notice the following points:
1) Mistranslation of the text:
In the "original" Greek manuscripts (Did the disciple John speak Greek?),
"The Word" is only described as being "ton theos"(divine/a god) and
not as being "ho theos" (The Divine/The God). A more faithful and
correct translation of this verse would thus read: "In the beginning was the Word,
and the Word was with God, and the Word was divine" (If you read the New World
Translation of the Bible you will find exactly this wording).
Similarly, in "The New Testament, An American Translation" this verse is honestly presented as
"In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine."
The New Testament, An American Translation, Edgar Goodspeed and J. M. Powis Smith, The
University of Chicago Press, p. 173
And again in the dictionary of the Bible, under the heading of "God" we read
"Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated 'the word was with the God [=the Father], and the word was a divine being.'"
The Dictionary of the Bible by John McKenzie, Collier Books, p. 317
In yet another Bible we read:
"The Logos (word) existed in the very beginning, and the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine"
The Holy Bible, Containing the Old and New Testaments, by Dr. James Moffatt
Please also see "The Authentic New Testament" by Hugh J. Schonfield and many
If we look at a different verse, 2 Corinthians 4:4, we find the exact same word
(ho theos) that was used in John 1:1 to describe God Almighty is now used to describe the
devil, however, now the system of translation has been changed:
"the god of this world (the Devil) hath blinded the minds of them which believe
According to the system of the previous verse and the English language, the translation
of the description of the Devil should also have been written as "The God" with
a capital "G." If Paul was inspired to use the exact same words to
describe the Devil, then why should we change it? Why is "The God" translated as
simply "the god" when referring to the devil, while "divine" is
translated as the almighty "God" when referring to "The Word"?
Are we now starting to get a glimpse of how the "translation" of the Bible took
Well, what is the difference between saying "the word was God,"
and between saying "the word was a god (divine)"? Are they not the same?
Far from it! Let us read the bible:
"I have said, Ye (the Jews) are gods; and all of you are children of the most High"
"And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made you a god to Pharaoh"
"the god of this world (the Devil) hath blinded the minds of them which believe not."
2 Corinthians 4:4
What does all of this mean? Let me explain.
In the West, it is common when one wishes to praise someone to say "You are a
prince," or "You are an angel" ..etc. When someone says this do they mean
that that person is the son of the King of England, or a divine spiritual being? There is
a very slight grammatical difference between saying "You are a prince" and
between saying "You are THE prince," however, the difference in meaning
is quite dramatic.
Further, it is necessary when translating a verse to also take into account the meaning
as understood by the people of that age who spoke that language. One of the biggest
problems with the Bible as it stands today is that it forces us to look at ancient Hebrew
and Aramaic scriptures through Greek and Latin glasses as seen by people who are neither
Jews, Greeks, nor Romans. All of the so called "original" manuscripts of the NT
available today are written in Greek or Latin. The Jews had no trouble reading such verses
as Psalms 82:6, and Exodus 7:1, while still affirming that there is only one God in
existence and vehemently denying the divinity of all but God Almighty. It is the
continuous filtration of these manuscripts through different languages and cultures as
well as the Roman Catholic church's extensive efforts to completely destroy all of the
original Hebrew Gospels (see last quarter of this chapter) which has led to this
misunderstanding of the verses.
The Americans have a saying: "Hit the road men." It means "It is time
for you to leave." However, if a non-American were to receive this command without
any explanation then it is quite possible that we would find him beating the road with a
stick. Did he understand the words? Yes! Did he understand the meaning? No!
In the Christian church we would be hard pressed to find a single priest or nun who
does not address their followers as "my children." They would say: "Come
here my children", or "Be wary of evil my children" ... etc. What do they
A fact that many people do not realize is that around 200AD spoken Hebrew had virtually
disappeared from everyday use as a spoken language. It was not until the 1880s that a
conscious effort was made by Eliezer Ben-Yehudah to revive the dead language. Only about a
third of current spoken Hebrew and basic grammatical structures come from biblical and
Mishnaic sources. The rest was introduced in the revival and includes elements of other
languages and cultures including the Greek and Arabic languages.
Even worse than these two examples are cases when translation into a different
languages can result in a reversal of the meaning. For example, in the West, when
someone loves something they say "It warmed my heart." In the Middle
East, the same expression of joy would be conveyed with the words: "It froze my
heart." If an Mideasterner were to greet a Westerner with the words: "It
froze my heart to see you," then obviously this statement would not be greeted
with a whole lot of enthusiasm from that Westerner, and vice versa. This is indeed one of
the major reasons why the Muslims have been so much more successful in the preservation of
their holy text than the Christians or the Jews; because the language of the Qur'an has
remained from the time of Muhammad (pbuh) to the present day a living language, the book
itself has always been in the hands of the people (and not the "elite"), and the
text of the book remains in the original language of Muhammad (pbuh). For this reason, a
translator must not and should not "translate" in a vacuum while disregarding
the culture and traditions of the people who wrote these words. As we have just seen, it
was indeed quite common among the Jews to use the word "god" (divine) to convey
a sense of supreme power or authority to human beings. This system, however, was never
popularly adopted by them to mean that these individuals were in any way omnipotent,
superhuman, or equal to the Almighty.
2) Basic message of John:
Now that we have seen the correct translation of the verse of John 1:1, let us go a
little further in our study of the intended meaning of this verse. This verse was taken
from the "Gospel of John." The very best person to ask to explain what is meant
by a given statement is the author of that statement himself. So let us ask
"John" what is his mental picture of God and Jesus (pbuh) which he wishes to
convey to us:
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him."
So the author of John tells us that God is greater than Jesus. If the author of this
Gospel did indeed wish us to understand that Jesus and God are "one and the
same," then can someone be greater than himself? Similarly,
"Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come [again] unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."
Can someone "go" to himself? Can someone be "greater" than himself?
"These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:"
If John meant to tell us that "Jesus and God are one and the same" then shall
we understand from this verse that God is saying to Himself "Self, glorify me so that
I may glorify myself"? Does this sound like this is the message of John?
"While I (Jesus) was with them in the world, I kept them in thy (God's) name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled."
If the author of John wanted us to believe that Jesus and God are one person then are
we to understand from this verse that God is saying to Himself "Self, while I was in
the world I kept them in your name, self. Those who I gave to myself I have kept
..."? Is this what the author intended us to understand from his writings?
"Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world."
Similarly, did the author intend us to interpret this as "Self, I will that they
also whom I have given myself be with me where I am; that they my behold my glory which I
have given myself, for I loved myself before the foundation of the world"?
So, we begin to see that in order to understand the writings of a given author, it is
necessary to not take a single quotation from him in a vacuum and then interpret his whole
message based upon that one sentence (and a badly mistranslated version of that sentence
3) Who wrote the "Gospel of John"?:
The "Gospel of John" is popularly believed by the majority of regular church-goers to be the work of the apostle John the son of Zebedee. However, when consulting Christianity's more learned scholars of Church history, we find that this is far from the case. These scholars draw our attention to the fact that internal evidence provides serious doubt as to whether the apostle John the son of Zebedee wrote this Gospel himself. In the dictionary of the Bible by John Mckenzie we read
"A. Feuillet notes that authorship here may be taken loosely."
Such claims are based on such verses as 21:24:
"This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things:
and we know that his testimony is true."?
Did the apostle John write this about himself? Also see 21:20, 13:23, 19:26, 20:2,
21:7, and 21:20-23. The "disciple who Jesus loved" according to the Church is
John himself, but the author of this gospel speaks of him as a different person.
Further, The Gospel of John was written at or near Ephesus between the years 110 and
115 (some say 95-100) of the Christian era by this, or these, unknown author(s). According
to R. H. Charles, Alfred Loisy, Robert Eisler, and other scholars of Christian history,
John of Zebedee was beheaded by Agrippa I in the year 44 CE, long before the fourth Gospel
was written. Did the Holy Ghost "inspire" the apostle John's ghost to write this
gospel sixty years after he was killed? . In other words, what we have here is a gospel
which is popularly believed to have been written by the apostle John, but which in fact
was not written by him. In fact no one really knows for certain who wrote this
"Since the beginning of the period of modern critical study, however, there has been much controversy about [the Gospel of John's] authorship, place of origin, theological affiliations and background, and historical value"
The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, Volume 2, Abingdon Press, p. 932
4) Who "inspired" the author of this gospel to write this verse?:
The words of John 1:1 are acknowledged by most reputable Christian scholar of the Bible
as the words of another Jew, Philo of Alexandria (20BC-50AD), who claimed no divine
inspiration for them and who wrote them decades before the "gospel of John" was
ever conceived. Groliers encyclopedia has the following to say under the heading
"Heraclitus was the earliest Greek thinker to make logos a central concept
......In the New Testament, the Gospel According to Saint John gives a central place to
logos; the biblical author describes the Logos as God, the Creative Word, who took on
flesh in the man Jesus Christ. Many have traced John's conception to Greek
origins--perhaps through the intermediacy of eclectic texts like the writings of Philo of
T. W. Doane says:
"The works of Plato were extensively studied by the Church Fathers, one of whom joyfully recognizes in the great teacher, the schoolmaster who, in the fullness of time, was destined to educate the heathen for Christ, as Moses did the Jews. The celebrated passage : "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word Was God" is a fragment of some Pagan treatise on the Platonic philosophy, evidently written by Irenaeus. It is quoted by Amelius, a Pagan philosopher as strictly applicable to the Logos, or Mercury, the Word, apparently as an honorable testimony borne to the Pagan deity by a barbarian........We see then that the title "Word" or "Logos," being applied to Jesus, is another piece of Pagan amalgamation with Christianity. It did not receive its authorized Christian form until the middle of the second century after Christ. The ancient pagan Romans worshipped a Trinity. An oracle is said to have declared that there was 'First God, then the Word, and with them the Spirit'. Here we see the distinctly enumerated, God, the Logos, and the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost, in ancient Rome, where the most celebrated temple of this capital - that of Jupiter Capitolinus - was dedicated to three deities, which three deities were honored with joint worship."
From Bible Myths and their parallels in other religions, pp. 375-376.
6) What was "The Word"?
"O people of the book! commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah, and His Word, which he bestowed upon Mary, and a spirit preceding from him so believe in Allah and his messengers. Say not "Three," desist! It will be better for you, for Allah is one God. Glory be to him. Far exalted is he above having a son. To him belong all things in the heavens and the earth. And enough is Allah as a disposer of affairs."
The noble Qur'an, Al-Nissa(4):171
In the Qur'an we are told that when God Almighty wills something he merely says to it
"Be" and it is.
"Verily! Our (Allah's) Word unto a thing when We intend it, is only that We say unto it "Be!" - and it is"
The noble Qur'an, Al-Nahil(16):40 (please also read chapter 14)
This is the Islamic viewpoint of "The Word." "The Word" is
literally God's utterance "Be." This is held out by the Bible where thirteen
verses later in John 1:14 we read:
"And the Word was made flesh".
In the Qur'an, we read:
"The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: 'Be.' And he was."
The noble Qur'an, Aal-Umran(3):59.
Regarding what is meant by Allah by "a spirit preceding from him" I
shall simply let Allah Himself explain:
"And [remember] when Allah said to the angles: 'I shall create a human (Adam) from sounding clay, from altered mud. So when I have fashioned him and have breathed into him of my spirit, then fall down in prostration before him'"
The noble Qur'an, Al-Hijr(15):29
Last modified: Sun Nov 17 01:47:14 EST 1996
in the above article, from our Greek
brother and author on this site, brother
(Emphesis below is mine)
Back to Answering Trinity section.
The Sahih Muslim Hadiths say that Jesus is GOD Almighty's Word and Spirit - Does this mean that Jesus is Allah Almighty?
Does Muhammad exist in the Bible?
Is Jesus the GOD-Man?
Also visit: Answering Trinity section.
What parts of the Bible and Hadiths do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth, and Why?  
Note to Muslims:
As Muslims, we must be very careful when we comment on the previous Scriptures, because there is always a possibility that there might be Divine Revelations parts in the verses that we might be objecting to. I know that the many of the disbelievers constantly insult and mock Islam all the time, and even lie on their own Scriptures with their "End of Times Prophecies" lies, -where they hijacked even the Bible with their bigotry, hate and lies, - but still dear brothers and sisters in Islam, we must always be very careful when we deal with previous Scriptures, because as Muslims we do believe that they do contain remnants of Divine Revelations in them. May Allah Almighty forgive me, and forgive all sincere Muslims, for any and all mistakes and errors that we may have fell into. Ameen.
See also: The Islamic Prophecies section.
Zionist Israel will rule the earth with Mighty Evil! (Islamic Prophecy)
The Glorious Quran declared 1,400 years ago that the Israeli Zionist machine will rule the entire earth with mighty evil and power. They will reach "Mighty Heights" علوا كبيرا of evil power and might on earth. See Noble Verses 17:4-8:
Also, Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, made a stunning prophecy about the one-eyed anti-Christ who will rule the infidels and the world:
Narrated Ibn Umar: "Once Allah's Apostle stood amongst the people, glorified and praised Allah as He deserved and then mentioned the Dajjal (anti-Christ) saying, "l warn you against him (i.e. the Dajjal) and there was no prophet but warned his nation against him. No doubt, Noah warned his nation against him but I tell you about him something of which no prophet told his nation before me. You should know that he is one-eyed, and Allah is not one-eyed." (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 55, Number 553)"
Prophet Muhammad had many visions about the dajjal, and gave many signs about him. Some of the things the Prophet said about the dajjal were literal, and some were vision-metaphors. The most prominent one is that he will be one-eyed. This is both literal and metaphoric. It is literal today because the zionist anti-Christ system is indeed represented by the ONE-EYE symbol as seen in the following images. The metaphors here are Allah Almighty not being ONE-EYED, because nothing can describe Allah Almighty. There is "none like unto Him" (Quran, 12:4). For ample more details and proofs, please visit link below.
Was the Islamic ONE-EYE Prophecy foretold before Islam in the Bible's Zechariah 11:17? I demonstrated using ample Biblical verses that the ONE-EYED DAJJAL (anti-Christ) was never prophesied in the Bible to be ONE-EYED, nor was this Sign ever given in the Bible to any being.
For ample Noble Verses and Hadiths (Sayings of the Prophet), and proofs, please visit:
Many references of this Hadith (Saying) exist throughout our Islamic Texts. This is one of the most popular Hadiths and Prophecies of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. And indeed, we are seeing it come to pass before our very eyes. Please also visit:
The Gospel Christ:
So, what was the Gospel of Jesus Christ then, i.e., the Injil of Jesus Christ? Even among Christians, this remains a mystery. But the Didache; a Gospel which existed even before the current Bible-Gospels (or canonized Gospels), contains a great deal of teachings of Jesus Christ. The following points are important to always keep in mind: (1)- No single Scripture, the Didache or any other Scripture, is 100% pure and accurate. There are always forgeries and alterations. This is the same with every single book and gospel. (2)- The Original Teachings of Christ exist in Scriptures that are in the Bible and outside the Bible.
For ample proofs, watch the debate-video above.
Note: The (*) links below are html backups of the website's blog topic threads, in case the blog and its database are down.
1 John 2:22-23 are discussed further down in details in this table.
Father and Son Definitions:
1- What does "The Father" really mean in the Bible? How is it defined in Islam? (see point #5 below) How does the Bible really define it?
2- What does "Son of GOD" really mean in the Bible?
(a)- GOD Almighty, who is not seen by anyone or anything, nor is like unto anyone or anything.
(b)- The World of Command, which is the invisible world of the Beings that were made by the Word and the Spirit.
(c)- The World of Creation, the flush and blood, dust and water physical world and Universes (plural).
Also visit: Is the Noble Quran a Creator or Creation?
Christians often quote the following verses to prove that Islam is the Anti-Christ:
1 John 2
5- What does the Glorious Quran say about the “Father” and “Son” titles:
So, is Islam the anti-Christ system according to 1john 2:22? No it isn't. Here are some Quran and Bible facts regarding "FATHER" and "SON" in more details:
(a)- Allah Almighty is the Believers' only Guardian (المولى):
(b)- FRIENDS = SONS in the Bible and Quran (ولي , وليهما and خليلا):
We further read the following in the Bible:
So being GOD Almighty's "SON" in the Bible is equal to being GOD Almighty's "FRIEND". Now compare this to the following from the Holy Quran:
[002:257] Allah is the friend (ولي) and patron of those who believe. He brings them out of the depths of darkness into light. While those who do not believe, have the forces of evil as their friends; they lead them out of light, into the very depths of darkness. Such ones shall be the inmates of the fire. They will stay there forever.
[003:122] (And remember) when the two groups among you lost heart (and almost fell out), even though Allah was their Friend and Protector (وليهما)? In Allah (alone), should the believers place their trust!
[004:125] Who can be better in religion than one who submits his whole self to God, does good, and follows the way of Abraham the true in Faith? For God did take Abraham for a friend (خليلا).
So the Bible's "FATHER" & "SON" for GOD Almighty and the Believers is clearly metaphoric, and it only means that GOD Almighty:
Is the Protector.
Please visit the following link to further see what Words the Glorious Quran uses for these words and definitions:
Regarding the following verse, and many others like it:
Let us look at Noble Verses 27:59, 3:33, 3:42, 7:144, 22:75, 35:32, 38:47, 39:4 from the Glorious Quran:
[027:059] Say: Praise be to God, and Peace on his servants whom He has chosen اصطفى (for his Message). (Who) is better?- God or the false gods they associate (with Him)?
27:59 قل الحمد لله وسلام على عباده الذين اصطفى ءالله خير اما يشركون
[003:033] God did choose اصطفى Adam and Noah, the family of Abraham, and the family of 'Imran above all people,-
3:33 ان الله اصطفى ادم ونوحا وال ابراهيم وال عمران على العالمين
[003:042] Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! God hath chosen thee اصطفاك and purified thee- chosen thee above the women of all nations.
3:42 واذ قالت الملائكة يامريم ان الله اصطفاك وطهرك واصطفاك على نساء العالمين
Moses! I have chosen thee
اصطفيتك above (other) men, by the mission I
(have given thee) and the words I (have spoken to thee): take then
the (revelation) which I give thee, and be of those who give
[022:075] God chooses يصطفي messengers from angels and from men for God is He Who hears and sees (all things).
22:75 الله يصطفي من الملائكة رسلا ومن الناس ان الله سميع بصير
[035:032] Then We have given the Book for inheritance to such of Our Servants as We have chosen اصطفينا: but there are among them some who wrong their own souls; some who follow a middle course; and some who are, by God's leave, foremost in good deeds; that is the highest Grace.
35:32 ثم اورثنا الكتاب الذين اصطفينا من عبادنا فمنهم ظالم لنفسه ومنهم مقتصد ومنهم سابق بالخيرات باذن الله ذلك هو الفضل الكبير
[038:047] They were, in Our sight, truly, of the company of the Elect المصطفين and the Good.
38:47 وانهم عندنا لمن المصطفين الاخيار
[039:004] Had God wished to take to Himself an (actual) son, He could have chosen لاصطفى whom He pleased out of those whom He doth create: but Glory be to Him! (He is above such things.) He is God, the One, the Irresistible.
39:4 لو اراد الله ان يتخذ ولدا لاصطفى مما يخلق مايشاء سبحانه هو الله الواحد القهار
Furthermore, when Jesus was asked about when the Hour will come, he replied by saying that only GOD Almighty Knows, and that no one knows, and that Jesus himself also didn't know. Please visit:
Jesus spelled it out clearly that he knew NOT. And as to calling GOD Almighty "Father", and that Islam denies that GOD Almighty is an ACTUAL FATHER to anyone, in Islam GOD Almighty is called:
1- Rab - Lord, Father (you are the Rab of your home for being the husband and the father).
2- Wali - Guardian.
In the old Aramaic and Hebrew, GOD Almighty was called what-is-equivalent-to-Islam our Rab and Wali. But that doesn't make GOD Almighty our actual Father. This is exactly as Judaism metaphors such as idolatry is equivalent to spiritual adultery. No Jew is actually married to GOD Almighty to actually commit a personal marriage-adultery against GOD Almighty! Yet, the Jews use metaphors like these. Islam came to straighten all of this out and to set the record straight that GOD Almighty has no son and no daughter. Otherwise, why would GOD Almighty torture us to Hell if we were His perfect sons and daughters?? No imperfect being could be an actual son of GOD Almighty (and no being is the son or daughter of GOD Almighty, period!):
[005:018] (Both) the Jews and the Christians say: "We are sons of God, and his beloved." Say: "Why then doth He punish you for your sins? Nay, ye are but men,- of the men he hath created: He forgiveth whom He pleaseth, and He punisheth whom He pleaseth: and to God belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between: and unto Him is the final goal (of all)"
Again, please visit: http://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php/topic,1368.msg5203.html#msg5203 (backup).
The Logical Fallacy and Corruption of 1 John 2:22:
(d)- Let's thoroughly look at the logical fallacy of this verse and its corruption:
1- " Who is the liar"?? Or should the text say who is the one who disbelieves?
6- Did you know that Elohim is Allah [1, *] . The "im" in Hebrew is a majestic plural for GOD Almighty. The root Word is "Eloh". And the more original Jews such as Yemenites and others say Alohim or Alah-im. And when you yourself pronounce it, you do naturally pronounce it with a double "l": Allah. Jews do call Him: Allah-im. Aramaic-speaking people also call GOD Almighty Allah. See the following videos for Biblical references and proofs. Also, pre-Islamic Biblical archeological findings have GOD Almighty as "Allah". So the Original Holy Name for GOD Almighty is not Eloh. It is Allah! Eloh is a Hebrew dialect, which not all Hebrew speakers use anyway. Allah had always been the Original and Universal GOD Almighty even before birth of Judaism, and the existence Hebrew. And Hebrew is a developed language from Phoenician. See the following links:
Send your comments.
Back to Main Page.