By: Anonymous-Muslim

 

Refuting the fraudulent and absurd claims Pagan Trinitarian Christian missionaries make about Almighty Allah

 

In this article we will investigate 3 Pagan Trinitarian Christian missionary claims, we will see clearly how the Pagan Christians claims are false and full of deceit.  These 3 absurd Pagan Trinitarian Christian claims are that Allah is a moon-god, that Hubal is the same as Allah, and that Rahmanan (RHMNN) is an Ancient South Arabian moon-god.  These three Pagan Christians claims are asserted by the likes of the Pagan Robert Morey and his idiotic Pagan Trinitarian Christian colleagues.

 

 

1) The claim Allah is a moon-god is asserted by the Pagan Trinitarian Christian apologist Robert Morey and other Pagan Christian apologists.  This lying claim is FULLY REFUTED by the website Islamic-Awareness

The link for their full articles are here:

 

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/moongod.html

 

and

 

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/moongods.html

 

Let us quickly read any excerpt from the Islamic-Awareness article that can be found at this link:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/moongod.html

 

7. Conclusions

Morey claims to have conducted groundbreaking research on the pre-Islamic origins of Islam. However, on the basis of his poorly edited popular level book, there is a substantial lack of evidence to support this assertion. In fact, there is a considerable amount of evidence to conclude quite the opposite.

Morey claimed that "Allah" of the Qur'an was in fact a pagan Arab "Moon-god" of pre-Islamic times. To support his viewpoint, he presented elaborate evidences from an archaeological site in Hazor, Palestine, and the Arabian "Moon temple" at Hureidha in Hadhramaut, Yemen. An examination of these two evidences confirms that none of them support the view that Allah was the "Moon-god" of pre-Islamic times. The evidence from Hazor suggests that the interpretation of the statue of a man with an inverted crescent suspended from his necklace and holding a cup-like object in his right hand, which Morey labelled as "Moon-god", is disputed among the scholars. This statue could be of a deity, king or priest. None of the scholars, however, say that the statue represents a "Moon-god", let alone the statue representing Allah!

As for the "Moon temple" at Hureidha in Hadhramaut, it was a claim of G. Caton Thompson which Morey dutifully repeated. The name of the Hadramitic patron deity according to the epigraphic evidence is and it is transcribed as SYN, which Thompson transcribed as Sin. Modern scholarship rejects this view on the basis of South Arabian orthography and the testimony of the Natural History of Pliny which points to a vocalization Sayīn. Furthermore, the numismatic evidence from Hadramaut shows that Sayīn appears as an eagle, a solar animal, and this clearly points to him as being the Sun god. Coupled to this is the fact that none of the inscriptions say that Sayin was a Moon-god. Morey also claimed that G. Caton Thompson discovered an "idol which may be the Moon-god himself" and that this "was later confirmed by other well-known archeologists". We have shown that Thompson did nothing of the sort; as to how "well-known archeologists" can confirm something that Thompson never claimed is a mystery to everyone. Rather Morey concocted the evidence to fit his pre-conceived notion that Allah was a "Moon-god".

Morey's deception is also clearly highlighted by the numerous misquotes. An examination of the actual quotes suggests that none of them say what Morey is claiming they say. Certainly, none of them say that Allah was a "Moon-god". In conclusion, Morey set us up with a case which we could not lose. Instead, he has cast his own credibility into doubt by penning a shoddy piece of pseudo-scholarship. Recently, however, there are signs that some Christian missionaries, especially those tentmakers involved in field work in Muslim dominated areas have discovered that this form of untruthful argumentation is hampering their presence and is operating as a counter-balance against their missionizing efforts. Such was the seriousness of the situation, members of the missionary communities were compelled to write articles to disprove such speculative and fallacious theories, attempting to consolidate and strengthen the strategies already in place for evangelizing Muslims.

Morey's book will be remembered as one of the worst examples of published Christian missionary polemics and will join those category of books attempting to disparage Islam at the expense of objective cogent scholarship. In general, it will be observed that on numerous occasions Morey has resorted to forgery, deception, suppression of evidence and deliberate misquotation. When these fatal academic flaws are combined with his established inability to consistently cite references in an accurate manner, Morey's argument is left in tatters. Such are the extent of the factual inaccuracies in his book that one would be flabbergasted if it had been read by anyone else prior to publication.

In relation to truth and falsehood, and, in particular, the enduring nature of these two concepts, we are bound to be reminded of a very appropriate Qur'anic maxim:

And say: Truth hath come and falsehood hath vanished away. Lo! falsehood is ever bound to vanish. [Qur'an 17:81]

And Allah knows best!

 

Again this full article can be found at this link:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/moongod.html

 

 

2) Next let us investigate the Pagan Christian fraudulent claim that Hubal is the same as Allah.  Again, this Pagan Christian claim is refuted by the Islamic-Awareness website.  The link for their full article on this is at the following link:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/hubal.html

 

Again for the refutation of this fraudulent Pagan Christian claim let us read an excerpt from the article http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/hubal.html

 

3. Conclusions

The Christian missionaries have claimed that Allah is the same as Hubal. Their claims rest on two foundations. Firstly, according to them ‘Abd al-Muttalib's praying to Allah while standing next to the statue of Hubal shows that "Allah to whom Muhammad's grandfather vowed and worshiped was none other than Hubal". We have already shown that there are clear traditions dealing with the Battle of Uhud, as well as other aspects of Islamic history and beliefs, which explicitly differentiate between the worshippers of Hubal and the worshippers of Allah. Surprisingly, this is also acknowledged by the missionaries, a clear contradiction of their own stance.

Secondly, the missionaries connect Hubal with Ha-Baal, that is, "Muhammad's Allah is actually Hubal, i.e. the Baal of the Moabites". Furthermore, they add that "Hubal being the Arabic for the Hebrew Ha Baal, "the Baal."" Noja made a more sophisticated and ingenious argument regarding the transformation of Ha-Ba‘al to Hubal who is no other than Allah. Using archaeology, it was shown that such a transformation is unlikely. For the name b‘l (i.e., Ba‘al) to become bl (i.e., Baal) with the loss of ‘ayn, it would have to have been transmitted through a language such as Akkadian or Punic in which the ‘ayn had disappeared. This would give in Akkadian Bel and in Punic Bol. Both these forms were present at Palmyra. But the problem is that Palmyrene does not use the Ancient North Arabian definite article h- or hn-. Moreover, the word b‘l, with the ‘ayn, exists in Arabic as a common noun, and as the name of a pre-Islamic idol mentioned in the Qur'an 37:125. The ‘ayn is a proper consonant and it remained pronounced into Islamic times. The Nabataean inscriptions also show a clear distinction between Hubal and Ba‘alshamin (derived from the Ugaritic deity Ba‘lu) always existed, and that they were considered two distinct deities. Thus it would be very difficult to argue that Arabic had received the word or name by either the Palmyrene route, let alone why it had been given an Ancient North Arabian definite article. In other words, the Christian missionaries' hypothesis that Ha-Baal ("the Lord") became Hubal, which was the same as Allah, becomes completely untenable.

And Allah knows best!

Acknowledgements

One of the authors (MSMS) would like to thank both Dr. M. C. A. Macdonald and Dr. R. Hoyland for stimulating discussions on Ancient North Arabian and Ancient South Arabian epigraphy. Neither of them are associated with Islamic Awareness.

 

Again this full article on this subject can be located at the following link:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/hubal.html

 

 

3) Finally, let us discuss the final Pagan Christian claim that Rahmanan (RHMNN) is an Ancient South Arabian moon god.  Again, this fraudulent Pagan Christian claim is completely refuted by the website Islamic-Awareness.  The great full rebuttal article by the website Islamic-Awareness can be found at the following link:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/rhmnn.html

 

Let us read an excerpt from the article:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/rhmnn.html

 

5. Conclusions

It was claimed by the Christian missionaries that al-Rahmān, one of Allah's names, was known in South Arabia before of the advent of Islam and that it was a Moon-god. A study of the South Arabian epigraphy antecedent to Islam shows that around the mid-4th century CE, the monotheistic religions such as Judaism and Christianity started to replace the traditional South Arabian religion.^[35] In the Jewish and Christian Sabaean texts, "God" is called "Rahmānān" (rhmnn), "the Merciful". In the Jewish context Rahmānān was the "Master of heaven and earth" and the "Lord of the Jews". In the Christian context, the Sabaean inscriptions emphasize the "power" of Rahmānān.

Referring to the Sabaic dictionaries confirmed that the word rhmnn is derived from rhm, meaning mercy. There are no lunar connotations at all. The Sabaic dictionary also compares rhmnn, i.e., Sabaic Rahmānān, with Arabic al-Rahmān and Rabbanic epithet Rahamānā showing that they all mean the same thing, i.e., "the Merciful". Let us end this article with a quote from the Encyclopaedia Of Islam.

That al-Rahmān should have been the name of a single God in central and southern Arabia is in no way incompatible with the fact that, when adopted by Islam, it assumes a grammatical form of a word derived from the root RHM.^[36]

And Allah knows best!

 

Again this preceding excerpt is from the whole great article by the website Islamic-Awareness.  The link for this full article is here:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/rhmnn.html

 

 

Again the Pagan Trinitarian Christians vicious and fraudulent LIES against the One True Religion of Almighty Allah, Islam, have been thoroughly and completely refuted and shown to be the Pagan Christian missionary LIES they have always been!

 

 

All Praise is Due to Almighty Allah!