Chili

I hope you are no offended by this Muan but in the Gospel of John we also have an allusion that the Word was God and was with God since the beginning of time, etc. Luke defines this in his lineage and these very same Gospels insists that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. So my deduction is substantiated and no more.

Clivedurdle

(and Handel's Messiah!)

Toto

Well, we know it is off the mark anyway. It was just the result of Christians taking over the celebration of the birth of Sol Invictus.

So what is the message? That we should develop human cloning??

That might be a very misleading message. Somebody had to have sex and have children for society to continue.

What does this all have to do with Biblical Criticism or History, other than quoting some verses from the Bible?

benny

No. Jesus was an Israelite, an ancient ethnic group now essentially extinct. He spoke a semitic language but was not a Jew in the sense of what one thinks of today(after the diaspora) and probably looked like a modern palestinian, who before conversion were Israelites.

Jesus about 5 AD-30 AD

Islam in Israel 638 AD
Omar ibn al-Khattaab enters Jerusalem and ends the Byzantine rule.

Thats quite a gap in time to bridge, even for the immortal Son of God.

lpetrich

That linguistic argument is pure rubbish; it's grasping at extremely thin straws.

"Allah" is from a generic word for "god" shared by several Semitic languages (Akkadian ilu, Canaanite el/elah/eloah, Arabic ilah, etc.).

This relationship is something like

Latin deus, Italian dio, Spanish dios, French dieu
English god, German Gott, Swedish gud

Lugubert

Exactly. And as has been pointed out, Allah is the form prefixed by the definite article. "Lâ ilâha illâ 'llâhu ..."; "There is no God (generic, no article) except The God (or Allâh, with the article)". This very old Semitic name for God will of course be found in several Semitic languages, like Ipetrich showed. Jesus' Eloi is Aramaic.

Muan:
That the name Allah is used in the Sikh holy book Sri Guru Granth Sahib (SGGS) proves no more than that the authors (the Sikh gurus, poets like Kabir etc.) were acquainted with Islam and knew that their audience was as well. The most common Sikh names for God are Shabd (the Word), Nâm (the Name). Many other names of Gods are used in SGGS; Kabir uses Ram conspicuously often, but I interpret this as "Ram" being his generic name for God. I haven't bothered to search the book for the name Allah, but I am never the less convinced that it is never used as the "real" name of God.

The reference should be verse 11. (I will be writing the underdots necessary for correct transcription before the letters in question.) In v. 11, the not uncommon epithet for Agni i.lâ occurs. The letter .l, clearly distinct from the ordinary "l" or the emphatic l in 'Allah', becomes .d in later language. I.lâ is a personification of the libation in worship, and thus has no connection whatsoever to anything outside the Vedic religion.

You should have mentioned that you got your information from the web site http://islamicwell.com/faqsbyhindus.htm (or one of its clones), which is to blame for the II/11 misunderstanding, and is where you found the statement that "Islam existed since time immemorial".

The name ‘Allo’ Upanishad is new to me. Could you please explain which of the ca. 200 Upanishads you (and Dr. Zakir Naik, from the site quoted above, and who seems to be the only one on the Internet to use that name) mean by that, so that I can explain to you why this is a misunderstanding (to use a kind word for it)? On http://www.hinduwebsite.com/upalist.htm I find a list of 108 Upanishads. No "allo" among them. I have in fact found no word "allo" in Sanskrit. The closest I get is allâ, 'O Mother!' (and Pali alla 'moist, wet').