# Lifestyles & Discussion > Peace Through Religion >  Yahweh, Elohim, God or Allah.  Which is which?

## Jamesiv1

I embrace the idea that Christianity, Judaism and Islam all look to Abraham as their patriarch.

And let me say up front that I view skeptically everything "mainstream" - whether it's media, politics or religion.  Why?  because the same people (and wannabes) run all three.  The "main stream" is deeply and seductively incestuous, and you can't have one without the other, in my opinion.

That said, what I'm hoping for is someone who knows or can accurately translate Hebrew to English.  And could review some of the earliest references (El, Elohim, Yahweh, Ba'al, etc) and compare them to the story of Moses and the covenant with the Israelites.

My premise until shown otherwise is that the god Moses was hanging with on Mount Sinai is not the god of Abraham.

Yeah, I know.... anathema and all that.

_I'm not interested in english translations used as sources.  I don't trust english translations much. Too mainstream_

----------


## torchbearer

I was under the impression that Yahweh, Elohim, God, Allah were all descriptors and not proper names.
Sorta like sayings, which is it? father, pop, dad, pappy?

----------


## pcosmar

> I was under the impression that Yahweh, Elohim, God, Allah were all descriptors and not proper names.
> Sorta like sayings, which is it? father, pop, dad, pappy?


And then saying those in different languages.

----------


## erowe1

> My premise until shown otherwise is that the god Moses was hanging with on Mount Sinai is not the god of Abraham.


Here you go:



> Exodus 3
> 
> Now Moses was tending the flock of Jethro his father-in-law, the priest of Midian. And he led the flock to the back of the desert, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. 2 And the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush. So he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, but the bush was not consumed. 3 Then Moses said, “I will now turn aside and see this great sight, why the bush does not burn.”
> 
> 4 So when the Lord saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, “Moses, Moses!”
> 
> And he said, “Here I am.”
> 
> 5 Then He said, “Do not draw near this place. Take your sandals off your feet, for the place where you stand is holy ground.” 6 Moreover He said, “*I am the God of your father—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob*.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look upon God.
> ...

----------


## fisharmor

> Here you go:


Yeah, if you're going to toss out the Torah as authoritative - which you would need to do if you are eschewing "main stream" viewpoints - them I'm not sure what the point of this exercise is here.

If the Torah is authoritative, then erowe1 answered authoritatively.  Nobody doesn't translate those bolded verses that way.

If it's not, then why bother trying to translate it at all?

----------


## fisharmor

I should add that I shouldn't have said "nobody".  I'm not at all sure what Mormons and Muslims claim those verses to say (both groups claim those books are translated incorrectly IIRC).  It would be interesting to hear their viewpoints on the matter.

But then again, they're mainstream, so I'm sure it's not what is being asked for, either.

----------


## Ronin Truth

*THE MANY NAMES OF GOD
*http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/docum...20of%20god.htm

----------


## Jamesiv1

> Yeah, if you're going to toss out the Torah as authoritative - which you would need to do if you are eschewing "main stream" viewpoints - them I'm not sure what the point of this exercise is here.
> 
> If the Torah is authoritative, then erowe1 answered authoritatively.  Nobody doesn't translate those bolded verses that way.
> 
> If it's not, then why bother trying to translate it at all?


Yeah.... you're probably right.  I'm going to have to dig into this one myself. Thinking about taking some "Hebrew studies" type classes - maybe even a Torah class if they let non-jews attend.

I don't know much about Mormon writings, or their theology for that matter.  But I do like the fact that the Qur'an is the same as it was first written.  Personally, I trust it more (for accuracy).

----------


## Jamesiv1

What would be fun is to get as close as possible to the original written Torah.

Or buddy-up to some learned Hebrew scholars.

My gut tells me that my premise is close, though.  Yahweh of the Old Testament was a war god - brutal wars and annihalation throughout.  Somewhere along the line that was changed and he was given a persona of love and mercy, like he's portrayed in the New Testament.

Doesn't make sense....

----------


## Jamesiv1

> *THE MANY NAMES OF GOD
> *http://www.agapebiblestudy.com/docum...20of%20god.htm


Pretty good, Ronin. Thank you.

----------


## Nang

> What would be fun is to get as close as possible to the original written Torah.
> 
> Or buddy-up to some learned Hebrew scholars.
> 
> My gut tells me that my premise is close, though.  Yahweh of the Old Testament was a war god - brutal wars and annihalation throughout.  Somewhere along the line that was changed and he was given a persona of love and mercy, like he's portrayed in the New Testament.
> 
> Doesn't make sense....


You might consider investing in "The Ready Research Bible Exegeses" that translates from the Hebrew and provides transliterations, by Herb Jahn, available on Amazon.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> You might consider investing in "The Ready Research Bible Exegeses" that translates from the Hebrew and provides transliterations, by Herb Jahn, available on Amazon.


Sounds good, Nang. Thank you.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> I was under the impression that Yahweh, Elohim, God, Allah were all descriptors and not proper names.
> Sorta like sayings, which is it? father, pop, dad, pappy?


I'm somewhat sure this is true.  God identifies himself to Moses in Exodus as "I AM" or "I AM the Existing One", depending on the translation you use.

----------


## eduardo89

Depends on what language you speak.

God is English.
Allah is Arabic
Yahweh and Elohim are used in Hebrew.

----------


## Miss Annie

I know this is going to be a very controversial statement, but I do not believe that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the same as "Allah" the God of Islam.  
The one thing that we know from the Bible is that God does not change.  The Koran and the Bible testify of Gods with different characters.

----------


## Sola_Fide

> Depends on what language you speak.
> 
> God is English.
> Allah is Arabic
> Yahweh and Elohim are used in Hebrew.


So it's just a semantics thing?  Figures.  Rome promotes the same unbelievably anti Christian idea: 



> The Church regards with esteem also the Muslims. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even his inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. (Nostra Aetate*3)

----------


## Sola_Fide

> I know this is going to be a very controversial statement, but I do not believe that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the same as "Allah" the God of Islam.  
> The one thing that we know from the Bible is that God does not change.  The Koran and the Bible testify of God's with different characters.


That's "controversial"?

----------


## eduardo89

> So it's just a semantics thing?  Figures.  The Rome promotes the same unbelievably anti Christian idea:


No, what I'm saying is that Arabic speaking people will use the word "Allah" for whatever god they worship. Arabic speaking Christians use the word Allah to refer to God, while Muslims use the word Allah to refer to their god.

----------


## Miss Annie

> That's "controversial"?


LOL..... Just wait........

----------


## Sola_Fide

> No, what I'm saying is that Arabic speaking people will use the word "Allah" for whatever god they worship. Arabic speaking Christians use the word Allah to refer to God, while Muslims use the word Allah to refer to their god.


That's not what the Second Vatican Council said.  It said that Muslims worship the one true God:




> The Church regards with esteem also the Muslims. They adore the one God, living and subsisting in himself; merciful and all-powerful, the Creator of heaven and earth, who has spoken to men; they take pains to submit wholeheartedly to even his inscrutable decrees, just as Abraham, with whom the faith of Islam takes pleasure in linking itself, submitted to God. (Nostra Aetate 3)


That is positively evil.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> Yeah, if you're going to toss out the Torah as authoritative - which you would need to do if you are eschewing "main stream" viewpoints - them I'm not sure what the point of this exercise is here.
> 
> If the Torah is authoritative, then erowe1 answered authoritatively.  Nobody doesn't translate those bolded verses that way.
> 
> If it's not, then why bother trying to translate it at all?


No need to translate, I read Hebrew, and it's there in both my BHS and Masorite texts.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> No need to translate, I read Hebrew, and it's there in both my BHS and Masorite texts.


hi Gunny. What is BHS and Masorite texts?

most of what I have been pointed to so far has been Christians interpreting Hebrew, which to my way of thinking would be somewhat biased.  What I think I want to find is a purely academic study - by orthodox Jews, preferably.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> hi Gunny. What is BHS and Masorite texts?
> 
> most of what I have been pointed to so far has been Christians interpreting Hebrew, which to my way of thinking would be somewhat biased.  What I think I want to find is a purely academic study - by orthodox Jews, preferably.


Biblia Hebraica Stuttgart, and the Masoretic text of the Tanakh.  These are the primary kinds of Hebrew scriptures that exist today, and they make up about 98% of Jewish Tanakhs; as well they have demonstrated perfect witness with passages of scripture found in such places as Qumran with the Dead Sea Scrolls.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

Note that the verse numbering in the Jewish Bible is a little different than the Christian Bible.  In this case, it is Exodus 3:6 and 3:15

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...OTpdf/exo3.pdf

Look at the Hebrew where you see the proper name "Abraham" aleph bet resh he mem אברהם with the long "a" vowels for Abraham (rather than Abram).

The above linked interlinear is a bit warped...first the Hebrew is rendered backwards to make the English flow, and second the transliteration only covers the letters and not the vowels, however you likely need the interlinear to follow along where I don't, so I linked this one.

Look at the Hebrew in Exodus 3:6 and 3:15 in the Hebrew bible.  Where the interlinear says "Abraham" (in green) the Hebrew indeed reads "Abraham."

----------


## Jamesiv1

> http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...OTpdf/exo3.pdf


I'm getting a "403 Forbidden" on this link

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> I'm getting a "403 Forbidden" on this link


Probably doesn't like direct linking.  Go hhere:

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...brew_Index.htm

and then click Exodus 3

----------


## Jamesiv1

> Probably doesn't like direct linking.  Go hhere:
> 
> http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...brew_Index.htm
> 
> and then click Exodus 3


that works. thank you!

----------


## VIDEODROME

> I'm getting a "403 Forbidden"


OMG what verse is that?

----------


## robert68

.
.
If “God” created you, you’re as much a prophet as “Abraham” was.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> OMG what verse is that?


Interwebz 4:03 "Behold, the seed of your fathers was cursed among the bytes of old, therefore thou shalt not access this file"

----------


## acptulsa

> I know this is going to be a very controversial statement, but I do not believe that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is the same as "Allah" the God of Islam.  
> The one thing that we know from the Bible is that God does not change.  The Koran and the Bible testify of Gods with different characters.


So you disagree with Jamesiv1 that God seems to change character between the Old and New Testaments?

----------


## Miss Annie

> So you disagree with Jamesiv1 that God seems to change character between the Old and New Testaments?


Mal 3:6 *For I am the LORD, I change not*; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

----------


## ClydeCoulter

> Mal 3:6 *For I am the LORD, I change not*; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.


I think that is kind of like saying, "Because I keep my word, I haven't broken my promise of you to your forefathers and wiped your stubborn ass off the planet".

----------


## erowe1

> So you disagree with Jamesiv1 that God seems to change character between the Old and New Testaments?


Jamesiv1 said that the God of Moses was different than the God of Abraham. That's all just in the Old Testament.

----------


## acptulsa

> I think that is kind of like saying, "Because I keep my word, I haven't broken my promise of you to your forefathers and wiped your stubborn ass off the planet".


Are you trying to keep a Bible verse in context?

That takes all the fun out of fundamentalism.  What good is damentalism?

Killjoy.




> Mal 3:6 *For I am the LORD, I change not*; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.


Perhaps not.  But we change.  No one was raised a Christian three thousand years ago.

And as we change, can not the nature of the way God relates to us change?  Does not the nature of the relationship between father and child always change as the child matures?

And if so, who are we to say that the descendants of Ishmael may be different from us, but God has no right to maintain a characteristically different relationship with them?  Who are we to say that?

----------


## Miss Annie

> Are you trying to keep a Bible verse in context?
> 
> That takes all the fun out of fundamentalism.  What good is damentalism?
> 
> Killjoy.


Even in context,........ it still says. "I change not".   Context does not change the meaning.

----------


## Terry1

> Jamesiv1 said that the God of Moses was different than the God of Abraham. That's all just in the Old Testament.


Gods decree is who He is---that is what "changes not", but God can and does change His mind and has attributes with the ability to change, just the same as He created in us, as in His foreknowledge where He can choose to remember your sin no more.  The same as God can be angry, jealous, loving or you can really piss Him off and He'll just stake ya like a vampire and reduce you to dust.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> Jamesiv1 said that the God of Moses was different than the God of Abraham. That's all just in the Old Testament.


That's partly correct.

Yes, I'm saying that the God of Abraham is not Yahweh, (the god that Moses spent 40 days with on Mount Sinai).

From Mount Sinai on, the God of the Israelites is a brutal god of war, annihalating their enemies over and over again. Then somewhere along the line, and especially in the New Testament, his character changes to love and mercy and grace.

That's the disconnect - for me at least.

----------


## acptulsa

> Even in context,........ it still says. "I change not".   Context does not change the meaning.


When the character of the relationship between a father and a child changes as the child matures, does that mean the father's character changes?  If the character of the relationship between a father and his oldest son is different from the character of the relationship between a father and his youngest son, does that mean the father has two characters?

----------


## Jamesiv1

A large part of the disconnect is the whole "covenant" thing - God "choosing" the Israelites over all the other folks in that part of the world and saying "I will give you the promised land".  And then annihalate all those people to make it happen. What did the Israelites do to deserve it? What was their part of the covenant?  Worship him? That's all?

Doesn't make sense.  That's not the type of thing the God that I believe in would do. I don't think the God of Abraham would do it either.

There's got to be more to the story.......................

----------


## Miss Annie

> When the character of the relationship between a father and a child changes as the child matures, does that mean the father's character changes?  If the character of the relationship between a father and his oldest son is different from the character of the relationship between a father and his youngest son, does that mean the father has two characters?


The character of the relationship is different, but not the character of the parent.   But, what does this have to do with my original statement?   There are HUGE character differences between the God of the Bible and the God of Islam.  For one example, how they are instructed to treat enemies.  Jesus says we are to love our enemies.  The god of Islam says much to the contrary.

----------


## Terry1

> A large part of the disconnect is the whole "covenant" thing - God "choosing" the Israelites over all the other folks in that part of the world and saying "I will give you the promised land".  And then annihalate all those people to make it happen. What did the Israelites do to deserve it? What was their part of the covenant?  Worship him? That's all?
> 
> Doesn't make sense.  That's not the type of thing the God that I believe in would do. I don't think the God of Abraham would do it either.
> 
> There's got to be more to the story.......................


There is more to the story James and it's not complicated.  Some people like to over-complicate the word of God because they believe it makes them appear smarter than the average sheep.

God is an awesome God who loves and wanted every single one of His children.  As a result of satan and sin, mankind became corrupted and just plain stupid-blind because of it.  Everything God has done in the Old Testament was to show mankind where they failed to live up to the standards of God on their own being corrupted by sin and that they needed a savior to do that for them.  All else is fairly irrelevant and truly doesn't matter.  Now we place our trust in the Lord Christ who died to save us from what we couldn't save ourselves from.

It takes years to get into and study the details and figure out what exactly happened and why.  Spiritual character takes a lifetime to build upon and none of us are ever done building upon that until the day we die.

No one has to be smart, handsome, successful or a participant of Mensa to understand that God loves His children---all of them---every single one, but not all will choose to follow Him, which is sad, but it's the way things are since God did give us a choice in the matter. 

God gave us a choice because He wants us to freely want Him understanding who He is and how much He loves us.  What kind of a loving God would cause sin and death simply for the purpose of curing it.  People who believe such doctrines must be miserable souls thinking their Heavenly Father some sadistic tyrant bored to death with eternity or something.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> There is more to the story James and it's not complicated.  Some people like to over-complicate the word of God because they believe it makes them appear smarter than the average sheep.
> 
> God is an awesome God who loves and wanted every single one of His children.  As a result of satan and sin, mankind became corrupted and just plain stupid-blind because of it.  Everything God has done in the Old Testament was to show mankind where they failed to live up to the standards of God on their own being corrupted by sin and that they needed a savior to do that for them.  All else is fairly irrelevant and truly doesn't matter.  Now we place our trust in the Lord Christ who died to save us from what we couldn't save ourselves from.
> 
> It takes years to get into and study the details and figure out what exactly happened and why.  Spiritual character takes a lifetime to build upon and none of us are ever done building upon that until the day we die.
> 
> No one has to be smart, handsome, successful or a participant of Mensa to understand that God loves His children---all of them---every single one, but not all will choose to follow Him, which is sad, but it's the way things are since God did give us a choice in the matter.


Hi Terry1,

I appreciate your reply and understand where your coming from - I really do.  I grew up in the Methodist church and feel like I am pretty well-versed in the foundations of Christianity.

But your looking at from a totally Christian perspective, a New Testament perspective.

Try setting aside the Christian glasses, and look at it as a non-christian would.

That's usually a pretty tall order for Christians.  I sincerely do not mean to offend, and I *do* believe you are a good and faithful servant.

All I'm saying is that if you take it at face value, read the Old Testament like a history book rather than the reason we needed a savior - it just doesn't make sense if you believe in a loving God.

----------


## GunnyFreedom

> That's partly correct.
> 
> Yes, I'm saying that the God of Abraham is not Yahweh, (the god that Moses spent 40 days with on Mount Sinai).
> 
> From Mount Sinai on, the God of the Israelites is a brutal god of war, annihalating their enemies over and over again. Then somewhere along the line, and especially in the New Testament, his character changes to love and mercy and grace.
> 
> That's the disconnect - for me at least.


Not to me. I think with the proper perspective the apparent conflict vanishes.  I will try and set it up as efficiently as I can.

To me, the doctrine of the trinity as an explanation of God's nature is a bit more detailed and logically reconcilable than most who hold the doctrine.  I assert that man was made in the image of God, therefore man is also a being of trinitarian nature.  Mind, Body, and Soul.  Man is a creature, God is uncreated.  In the same way as man is a creature of mind, body, and soul, so also is God a being of Source, Expression, and Spirit.  Father Son and Holy Spirit.

So, we can see all 3 of these aspects in God's interaction with Moshe (Moses).  The "Source" (Father) in the midst of the burning bush, and which passed through the valley where Moshe could not look at Him lest he die.  The the "Expression" (Son) who dined with the elders in the mountain, and this 'cloud' that hung over everything holy is the Holy Spirit, and particularly Exodus 33:14.  The Father that none could look upon; the Son that all the elders of Israel physically dined with, and the Spirit that unifies them and which Presence goes with us.

Now, finally, to your specific point, and I think you will see that the above-given background is critical here.

As human beings, what we want to do and what we actually do are very often different.  Without cognitive dissonance, our nature is very often in a different place than our actions.  This is a standard human interaction between mind and body.

In the same manner, the Father and the Son, (or the Genesis and the Expression if you prefer) can appear to be in different places even when described by a common Spirit.  The "nature" (Origin, Source, Genesis, Father) of God is extreme creation-destroying purity, while the "expression" of God (the Son, Jesus Christ) is love, forgiveness, salvation, and reconciliation.

So you examine the context to see whether the temporal creature is interacting with YHVH, Yeshua, or Ruach; and that perspective will show the framework of that interaction.  Moshe could not look at YHVH lest he die; and YHVH could not abide in Israel without destroying the heathen.  Yeshua ate with the elders, and went before Israel in the Desert to guard their way.

So consider YHVH as the 'Genesis' or the fundamental nature of God, Yeshua as the expression or actions of God, and the Spirit as the Spirit that unifies them and a great deal of what without that perspective appears to be in conflict, having gained this perspective the conflict vanishes within the operational working of the Godhead.

----------


## acptulsa

> Jesus says we are to love our enemies.  The god of Islam says much to the contrary.


I'm interested in this.  Could I talk you into quoting a Koran passage that says much to the contrary?  I'd be interested to see if I'm unable to find a similar Bible verse.

----------


## Miss Annie

> I'm interested in this.  Could I talk you into quoting a Koran passage that says much to the contrary?  I'd be interested to see if I'm unable to find a similar Bible verse.


Sure...... I can look them up.  I would also note that the "names of Allah (the god of Islam)" are contrary to God's nature as well.

----------


## Miss Annie

> I'm interested in this.  Could I talk you into quoting a Koran passage that says much to the contrary?  I'd be interested to see if I'm unable to find a similar Bible verse.


Names of "Allah" - 
*Khayrul Makireen (Arabic)*
The Greatest Schemer / Deceiver / Conniver 
S. 3:54 ; 8:30
All four main interpreters of the Quran, Ibn Katheer, Al-Tabari, Al-Jalalyn, Al-Qurtubi, interpret this as "Allah the great deceiver, deceived everyone by making observers believe that he was crucified, yet a likeness of Christ was crucified, and not Christ himself."  From a Christian perspective "Allah" removes the path of salvation since Christ, according to Muslims, never died for the sins of mankind. 
*
Al-Mumeet (Arabic)*
The Creator of Death, The Slayer, The Lifetaker 
http://wahiduddin.net/words/99_pages/mumit_61.htm
http://www.islam-fyi.com/islamic-words/mumeet

Here on this Islamic website, find the definition of Kafir and how to become one.   Easy read, but read carefully.  
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Kafir

Here are a few verses out of the Koran about the Kafir (unbeliever)
The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful.   And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone.  But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)"  The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries.  In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did).  The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse).  The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation.  Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.

 Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."

 Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not."  Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time.  From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.

 Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

 Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority".  This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').

 Quran (4:74) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."  The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, led meekly to the slaughter.  These Muslims are killed in battle, as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah.  Here is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.

 Quran (4:76) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"

 Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."

 Quran (4:95) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-"  This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes.  It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle.  Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption.  (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).

 Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..."  Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?

 Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"

 Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"  No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.

 Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."

 Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah"  Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for  2:293, also).  The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj.  Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction.  The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did).  Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition.  According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."

 Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."  

 Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape.  Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

 Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."

 Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them."  According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars).  This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack.  Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months).  The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat.  Once the Muslims had the power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.

 Quran (9:14) - "Fight them, Allah will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace..."

 Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant."  The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad".  The context is obviously holy war.

 Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."  "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews.  According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status.  This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years.  Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.

Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

 Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place."  This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

 Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew."  See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them"  This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).

Quran (9:73) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination."  Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter.  It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.

 Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."

Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme."

 Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."

 Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction."  Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction."  (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam). 

 Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion.  The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation.  One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74).  However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude."  He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son.  (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia.  Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)

 Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"

 Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..."   "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context.  It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.

 Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while.  Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter."   This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers.  It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do.  If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.

 Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord.  Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similitude.  Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners,"  Those who reject Allah are to be subdued in battle.  The verse goes on to say the only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is in order to to test the faithfulness of Muslims.  Those who kill pass the test. "But if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost."

 Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand") for Allah is with you,"   

 Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom."  Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.'  Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted?  This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.

 Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves"  Islam is not about treating everyone equally.  There are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status.  Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' in verse 16.

 Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way"  Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "battle array" meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict.  This is followed by (61:9): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist."  (See next verse, below).  Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.

 Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn - Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success."  This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above).  It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.

 Quran (66:9) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end."  The root word of "Jihad" is used again here.  The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.

From the Hadith:

Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

 Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)."  In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy.  This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.

 Bukhari (52:65) - The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause.  Muhammad's words are the basis for offensive Jihad - spreading Islam by force.  This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today.  

 Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'

 Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)

 Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious

 Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah

 Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'.  And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."

 Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."

 Bukhari (11:626) - [Muhammad said:] "I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes."

 Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause..."

 Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"

 Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'"

 Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers.  His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)."

 Muslim (19:4294) - "When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him... He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war...  When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them."

 Bukhari 1:35  "The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty ( if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise ( if he is killed)." 

 Tabari 7:97  The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power."  Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad's men because he insulted Islam.  Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill.  An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.

 Tabari 9:69  "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us"  The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.

 Tabari 17:187  "'By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.' And they returned to their former religion."  The words of a group of Christians who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the violence and looting committed in the name of Allah.  The price of their decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.

 Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 327: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”

 Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: - Lest anyone think that cutting off someone's head while screaming 'Allah Akbar!' is a modern creation, here is an account of that very practice under Muhammad, who seems to approve.

 Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah."  Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid.

 Saifur Rahman, The Sealed Nectar p.227-228 - "Embrace Islam... If you two accept Islam, you will remain in command of your country; but if your refuse my Call, you’ve got to remember that all of your possessions are perishable. My horsemen will appropriate your land, and my Prophethood will assume preponderance over your kingship."  One of several letters from Muhammad to rulers of other countries.  The significance is that the recipients were not making war or threatening Muslims.  Their subsequent defeat and subjugation by Muhammad's armies was justified merely on the basis of their unbelief.

----------


## erowe1

> That's partly correct.
> 
> Yes, I'm saying that the God of Abraham is not Yahweh, (the god that Moses spent 40 days with on Mount Sinai).
> 
> From Mount Sinai on, the God of the Israelites is a brutal god of war, annihalating their enemies over and over again. Then somewhere along the line, and especially in the New Testament, his character changes to love and mercy and grace.
> 
> That's the disconnect - for me at least.


Let's say the God of Moses was what you say he was. Why do you believe the God of Abraham wasn't?

For that matter, why do you believe Abraham existed at all?

----------


## Jamesiv1

> Let's say the God of Moses was what you say he was. Why do you believe the God of Abraham wasn't?


Because Abraham is the patriarch of Islam. Islam considers Allah the God of Gods, so I'm thinking Abraham was also worshiping the God of Gods.

My underlying premise is that there were a *lot* of gods back in the day - all over the planet. And I don't see any reason not to take that at face value. Egyptians had a slew of them, the Canaanites, Babylonians, Sumerians, Greek gods, Hindu gods.... gods all over the place.  Could some of them have been *good* and some of them *bad*?  I'm thinking... sure, why not?

But I think Abraham worshiped the God of Gods (I want to call him Elohim, but some authors say that's an honorific title). And I don't think Islam would look to Father Ibrahim unless they were on the same page, god-wise.

I've done a good bit of reading about Yahweh also.  Granted, most of it has been via the internet, so a lot of it is garbage. But my modus operandi on the internet is to read as much as possible from both sides, try to discern the scholarly from the not-so-scholarly, and avoid the name-callers.  I usually discount the so-called "conspiracy theories" by about 50% and evaluate what's left.

Yahweh has a long history prior to the Israelites, and the general consensus seems to be that he was a brutal god of war - a lesser god.

Where did all the gods come from?  Probably a whole 'nuther thread... But the universe has been around a long time. There are a whole bunch of suns, and a whole bunch of warm planets.  I give 'modern' humanity about 10,000 years give or take. That's not very long in the grand scheme. Could all these gods have come from elsewhere? Might they have been around a lot longer than 10,000 years? Might they have learned how to do stuff that we couldn't do, and that we would consider miraculous?  Seems reasonable, if you take ancient history at face value, including the Old Testament. Did they just make all that stuff up?




> For that matter, why do you believe Abraham existed at all?


Can't say I have any reason not to... I view the Old Testament largely as a history of the Jews.  And one thing they do really well is keep good family records - all those big long genealogies, for example.  Doesn't seem reasonable that they made all that stuff up, either.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> And as we change, can not the nature of the way God relates to us change?  Does not the nature of the relationship between father and child always change as the child matures?
> 
> And if so, who are we to say that the descendants of Ishmael may be different from us, but God has no right to maintain a characteristically different relationship with them?  Who are we to say that?


Nice, acptulsa. I lean along these lines as well.

The God that I believe in is big enough for everybody.

----------


## Terry1

> Hi Terry1,
> 
> I appreciate your reply and understand where your coming from - I really do.  I grew up in the Methodist church and feel like I am pretty well-versed in the foundations of Christianity.
> 
> But your looking at from a totally Christian perspective, a New Testament perspective.
> 
> Try setting aside the Christian glasses, and look at it as a non-christian would.
> 
> That's usually a pretty tall order for Christians.  I sincerely do not mean to offend, and I *do* believe you are a good and faithful servant.
> ...


Yes James, I can see what you're saying.  From an unbelievers standpoint, they wouldn't understand why God did some of the things He did in the Old Testament, but what people sometimes forget, is that there is also the war with darkness and satan in this world---that spiritual battle here still rages over the souls of men.

The most important thing to remember is that God is not the author of sin, evil or corruptness and didn't cause sin and death in order to cure it as some believers claim who don't believe in the free will.  God will remove His protective hand as He did in the Old Testament and allow evil do what God knows will fulfill His plan and purpose, but He is not the author of evil, satan is.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> ...read the Old Testament like a history book


edit:  Read it as a believer reading about believers.

Pretend it's 72 AD.  You are an open-minded and devout Hindu or Zoroastrian.  You've heard about a man named Jesus whose followers are creating quite a stir among the Jews as well as the mighty Romans - and you are studying the Old Testament to learn about the faith and history of the Jewish people.

----------


## erowe1

> Because Abraham is the patriarch of Islam.


Moses is as much a part of Islam as Abraham is.

And everything Islam has to say about either of them is derived from the Bible and much later embellishments of it.

And even the, in the Qur'an, just as much as in the Bible, the God of Abraham and the God of Moses are identical.

----------


## erowe1

> Yahweh has a long history prior to the Israelites


Yes he does. He created the world. He was the God of Adam and Eve, and Noah, and Abraham, and everyone else in the book of Genesis leading up to the introduction of Moses into the biblical narrative.

But the only way we know anything about any of this is through the sources that we have from ancient Israel, which belong to what is now known as the Old Testament or the Hebrew Bible. There aren't any others except for later ones that are derived from them.




> Can't say I have any reason not to... I view the Old Testament largely as a history of the Jews. And one thing they do really well is keep good family records - all those big long genealogies, for example. Doesn't seem reasonable that they made all that stuff up, either.


Then according to your own source for the very existence of Abraham, which is the only source we have, his God was Yahweh, the same as Moses's.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> Yes he does. He created the world. He was the God of Adam and Eve, and Noah, and Abraham, and everyone else in the book of Genesis leading up to the introduction of Moses into the biblical narrative.
> 
> But the only way we know anything about any of this is through the sources that we have from ancient Israel, which belong to what is now known as the Old Testament or the Hebrew Bible. There aren't any others except for later ones that are derived from them.
> 
> Then according to your own source for the very existence of Abraham, which is the only source we have, his God was Yahweh, the same as Moses's.


You may be right.  Tell you something interesting though.... Last night about 3:00 AM while hanging out in these here forumz, I got out my Revised Standard Version c. 1962 by World Publishing Company.  It was given to me by the Methodist Church in 1968. And it's got great footnotes of every time the word Yahweh was replaced with "The LORD" (in caps).  So I'm in there reading about Moses birth, growing up in Egypt, etc. and noting the different verses where a replacement was made, and it's very, very interesting. Pretty dang close to what I was originally asking for!  God does indeed work in mysterious ways.

The devil is in the details.  wait.... I didn't mean it like that

----------


## moostraks

> Not to me. I think with the proper perspective the apparent conflict vanishes.  I will try and set it up as efficiently as I can.
> 
> To me, the doctrine of the trinity as an explanation of God's nature is a bit more detailed and logically reconcilable than most who hold the doctrine.  I assert that man was made in the image of God, therefore man is also a being of trinitarian nature.  Mind, Body, and Soul.  Man is a creature, God is uncreated.  In the same way as man is a creature of mind, body, and soul, so also is God a being of Source, Expression, and Spirit.  Father Son and Holy Spirit.
> 
> So, we can see all 3 of these aspects in God's interaction with Moshe (Moses).  The "Source" (Father) in the midst of the burning bush, and which passed through the valley where Moshe could not look at Him lest he die.  The the "Expression" (Son) who dined with the elders in the mountain, and this 'cloud' that hung over everything holy is the Holy Spirit, and particularly Exodus 33:14.  The Father that none could look upon; the Son that all the elders of Israel physically dined with, and the Spirit that unifies them and which Presence goes with us.
> 
> Now, finally, to your specific point, and I think you will see that the above-given background is critical here.
> 
> As human beings, what we want to do and what we actually do are very often different.  Without cognitive dissonance, our nature is very often in a different place than our actions.  This is a standard human interaction between mind and body.
> ...


Food for thought. Thanks!

----------

