RSSFair enough. Though, your highly emotional response, lacking anything but invective, would lead me to wager my Kingdom against whether you know a a mouse fart's worth of significant information about the religion and history of YHVH.Replies: @Eliseo
“Yahweh has been addicted to the “sweet smell” of carbonized flesh ever since.”The most stupid remark in the context of religious commentary I have ever read.We live in a time of self-satisfied learned imbeciles.
My “emotional” response is due to the fact that I have no appetite for outrageous and impertinent stupidity, so there is no need for me to treat it honorably to satisfy fools unable to discern stupidity when it is evident. By the way, it is risky to wager when you are being emotional yourself.
“Yahweh has been addicted to the “sweet smell” of carbonized flesh ever since.”
The most stupid remark in the context of religious commentary I have ever read.
We live in a time of self-satisfied learned imbeciles.
Fair enough. Though, your highly emotional response, lacking anything but invective, would lead me to wager my Kingdom against whether you know a a mouse fart's worth of significant information about the religion and history of YHVH.Replies: @Eliseo
“Yahweh has been addicted to the “sweet smell” of carbonized flesh ever since.”The most stupid remark in the context of religious commentary I have ever read.We live in a time of self-satisfied learned imbeciles.
The conclusion is most likely based on the numerous examples that are given in The Book.
The most stupid remark in the context of religious commentary I have ever read.
I am struggling to understand why you think it's not an appropriate thing to say, given that the stupid book of primitive nonsense is full-to-bursting about burning flesh and sweet savours. Just a few examples...The most stupid remark in the context of religious commentary I have ever read.
“Yahweh has been addicted to the “sweet smell” of carbonized flesh ever since.”
And thou shalt burn the whole ram upon the altar: it is a burnt offering unto the LORD: it is a sweet savour, an offering made by fire unto the LORD. (Exodus 29:18)
And
And ye shall offer a burnt offering for a sweet savour unto the LORD; one young bullock, one ram, and seven lambs of the first year without blemish (Numbers 29:2)
Laws for Burnt Offerings
1And the LORD called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying, 2Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock. 3If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD. 4And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt offering; and it shall be accepted for him to make atonement for him. 5And he shall kill the bullock before the LORD: and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall bring the blood, and sprinkle the blood round about upon the altar that is by the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. 6And he shall flay the burnt offering, and cut it into his pieces. 7And the sons of Aaron the priest shall put fire upon the altar, and lay the wood in order upon the fire: 8And the priests, Aaron's sons, shall lay the parts, the head, and the fat, in order upon the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar: 9But his inwards and his legs shall he wash in water: and the priest shall burn all on the altar, to be a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD.
10And if his offering be of the flocks, namely, of the sheep, or of the goats, for a burnt sacrifice; he shall bring it a male without blemish. 11And he shall kill it on the side of the altar northward before the LORD: and the priests, Aaron's sons, shall sprinkle his blood round about upon the altar. 12And he shall cut it into his pieces, with his head and his fat: and the priest shall lay them in order on the wood that is on the fire which is upon the altar: 13But he shall wash the inwards and the legs with water: and the priest shall bring it all, and burn it upon the altar: it is a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD.
14And if the burnt sacrifice for his offering to the LORD be of fowls, then he shall bring his offering of turtledoves, or of young pigeons. 15And the priest shall bring it unto the altar, and wring off his head, and burn it on the altar; and the blood thereof shall be wrung out at the side of the altar: 16And he shall pluck away his crop with his feathers, and cast it beside the altar on the east part, by the place of the ashes: 17And he shall cleave it with the wings thereof, but shall not divide it asunder: and the priest shall burn it upon the altar, upon the wood that is upon the fire: it is a burnt sacrifice, an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the LORD.. (Leviticus 1:9)
“Note that “Allah” is not a name, it is the word “God” and “rasul” can be translated as “prophet”.”
The word Allah is a name; it is in fact the Supreme Name (Ism Azam). A name is a word after all.
As for the word ‘rasul’ its meaning is Messenger; the word for Prophet is ‘naby. A Rasul is the vehicle of a Divine Revelation, whereas a Prophet is rather an eminent continuator of the Revelation. The Rasul is the higher rank; there have been relatively few of them in comparison to the multitude of prophets.
———————————
“Was Islam really spread by the sword? Maybe. But anybody making that claim better make darn sure that his/her religion, country or ideology has a much better record. If not, then this is pure hypocrisy!”
But the statement in question is not merely a subjectivism. It is either a historical truth or not. The “record” of the faith of a person who is of a different faith is irrelevant. A pertinent issue would be to what extent was the faith spread by the sword. This doubtless varied according to place and time. Hypocrisy might come in if there is an element of untruth in a person’s affirmations and opinions, or an element of bad faith or of impassioned bias or prejudice.
———————————-
Comparing Christianity and Islam is a task beyond the Saker in my view. He is doubtless well-intentioned, but essentially he is way over his head, a dilettante.
———————————-
“The Vision of Islam” by Sachiko Murata and Wm. Chittick, is a good intro. to Islam. But the very best and most profound treatment by far is Frithjof Schuon’s “Understanding Islam.” It is a demanding book, to be sure. Martin Lings’ book “Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources”is best biography of Muhammad. There is a wonderful video of Lings’ Pilgrimage to Mecca in 1941:
Circling the House of God: Martin Lings Narrates His Hajj Journey (The Faith)

Saker is correct that word Allah it is NOT a name. Allah consists of two words, "al" and "ilah" which means, "The God".Jews and Christians use the same word, but write it differently in English because of vowels differences in Arabic and English, such as many versions of the name Mohammad in English. Quran and Muslim use ilah in English for God and Jews/Christians use eloh for God in English. Both ilah and eloh are same word, and both can become dual and plural, such as elohim which is a plural of eloh (meaning three or more gods).The Jews also use the plural form of elohim for God due to the respect for the Supreme Being. Also, Jews use elohim for gods, but in the first case elohim is used with a singular verb and in the later case elohim is used with plural verb. Such as elohim (God) is walking and elohim (gods) are walking.However, the beauty of allah is which is two words, cannot be made plural.BTW, both ilah and eloh are feminine nouns. Do you think that God has a gender? And, his gender is feminine?Replies: @peterAUS
“Note that “Allah” is not a name, it is the word “God” and “rasul” can be translated as “prophet”.”The word Allah is a name; it is in fact the Supreme Name (Ism Azam). A name is a word after all.