God (Khoda)

[jjbb]

ghashang bood

[Rasputin]

Here is the real topic about God !

[Rasputin]

Allah

The word Allāh is the Arabic term for "God". In other languages, it is often used to refer specifically to the Islamic concept of God.

Although, outside the Arab world, use of the word Allāh is most often associated with Islam, it is not exclusive to that faith; Arab Christians and various Arabic-speaking Jews (including the Teimanim, several communities and some Sephardim) also use it to refer to the monotheist deity. Arabic translations of the Bible also employ it, as do Roman Catholics in Malta (who pronounce it as "Alla"), Christians in Indonesia, who say "Allah Bapa" (Allah the Father) and Christians in the Middle East who use the Aramaic "Allāha".

It was used in pre-Islamic times by Pagans within the Arabian peninsula to signify the supreme creator. Pre-Islamic Jews referred to their supreme creator as Yahweh or Elohim. The pagan Arabs recognized "Allāh" as the supreme God in their pantheon; along with Allah, however, the pre-Islamic Arabs believed in a host of other gods, such as Hubal and 'daughters of Allāh' [the three daughters associated were al-Lāt, al-`Uzzah, and Manah]" (Encyclopedia of World Mythology and Legend, "The Facts on File", ed. Anthony Mercatante, New York, 1983, I:61). This view of Allah by the pre-Islamic pagans is viewed by Muslims as a latter development having arisen as a result of moving away from Abrahamic monotheism over time. Some of the names of these pagan gods are said to be derived from the descendants of Noah, whom latter generations firstly revered as saints, and then transformed into gods (although non-Muslims often view polytheism as having come before monotheism). The pagan Arabians also used the word "Allāh" in the names of their children; Muhammad's father, who was born into pagan society, was named "`Abdullāh", which translates "servant of Allāh". "`Abdullāh" is still used for names of Muslim and non-Muslim arabs.

The Hebrew word for deity, El (אל) or Elōah (אלוה), was used as an Old Testament synonym for Yahweh (יהוה), which is the proper name for the Jewish God according to the Tanakh. The Aramaic word for God is alôh-ô (Syriac dialect) or elâhâ (Biblical dialect), which comes from the same Proto-Semitic word as the Arabic and Hebrew terms; Jesus is described in Mark 15:34 as having used the word on the cross, with the ending meaning "my", when saying, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (transliterated in Greek as elō-i). One of the earliest surviving translations of the word into a foreign language is in a Greek translation of the Shahada, from 86-96 AH (705-715 AD), which translates it as ho theos monos
literally "the one god". Also the cognate Aramaic term appears in the Aramaic version of the New Testament, called the Pshitta (or Peshitta) as one of the words Jesus used to refer to God, e.g., in the sixth Beatitude, "Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see Alāha." And in the Arabic Bible the same words . "طُوبَى لأَنْقِيَاءِ الْقَلْبِ، فَإِنَّهُمْ سَيَرَوْنَ الله"

[Rasputin]

Atheism

Atheism, in its broadest sense, is an absence of belief in any deities. That is, all who do not have such a belief — whether they are nontheists, agnostics, or even Buddhists — are covered under this term. Atheism can also be defined more narrowly as the active rejection of the existence of gods, either of a specific or general kind, or even of the possibility that gods can exist. Generally speaking, atheism refers to a lack of belief in all deities for whatever reason.

Although atheists often share common concerns regarding empirical evidence and the scientific method of investigation and a large number are skeptics, there is no single ideology that all atheists share. Additionally, there are atheists who are religious or spiritual, though many of these would not describe themselves as atheists.

Atheism should not be confused with the related, but not equivalent, position of anti-theism, as many atheists practice religious toleration (which should not be confused with the principle of Freedom of religion). An atheist who advocates his atheist views may be considered anti-theist, so some atheists call themselves agnostics even if they don't believe in deities, in order to not seem in opposition to other people's faith.

[Rasputin]

In early Ancient Greek, the adjective atheos (from privative a- + theos "god") meant "without gods" or "lack of belief in gods". The word acquired an additional meaning in the 5th century BCE, expressing a total lack of relations with the gods; that is, "denying the gods, godless, ungodly", with more active connotations than asebēs, "impious". Modern translations of classical texts sometimes translate atheos as "atheistic". As an abstract noun, there was also atheotēs: "atheism". Cicero transliterated atheos into Latin. The discussion of atheoi was pronounced in the debate between early Christians and pagans, who each attributed atheism to the other.

A.B. Drachmann (1922) notes:

Atheism and atheist are words formed from Greek roots and with Greek derivative endings. Nevertheless they are not Greek; their formation is not consonant with Greek usage. In Greek they said atheos and atheotes; to these the English words ungodly and ungodliness correspond rather closely. In exactly the same way as ungodly, atheos was used as an expression of severe censure and moral condemnation; this use is an old one, and the oldest that can be traced. Not till later do we find it employed to denote a certain philosophical creed. (p.5)

In English, the term atheism is the result of the adoption of the French athéisme in about 1587. The term atheist in the sense of "one who denies or disbelieves" actually predates atheism, being first attested in about 1571 (the phrase Italian atheoi is recorded as early as 1568 Atheist in the sense of practical godlessness was first attested in 1577. The French word is derived from athée, "godless, atheist", which in turn is from the Greek atheos. The words deist and theist entered English after atheism, being first attested in 1621 and 1662, respectively, with theism and deism following in 1678 and 1682, respectively. Deism and theism exchanged meanings around 1700 due to the influence of atheism. Deism was originally used with a meaning comparable to today's theism, and vice-versa.

The Oxford English Dictionary also records an earlier irregular formation, atheonism, dated from about 1534. The later and now obsolete words athean and atheal are dated to 1611 and 1612, respectively.

[Rasputin]

Qur'anic definitions of God
Main article: Islamic concept of God

Allah (Arabic allāhu الله) is traditionally used by Muslims as the Arabic word for "God" (not "God's personal name", but the equivalent of the Hebrew word "El" as opposed to "YHWH"). The word Allah is not specific to Islam; Arab Christians and Arabic-speaking Sephardi and Mizrahi Jews also use it to refer to the monotheist deity. Arabic translations of the Bible also employ it, as do the Catholics of Malta who pronounce it as "Alla" in Maltese, a language derived from and most closely related to Arabic, as well as Christians in Indonesia, who pronounce it "Allah Bapa" (Allah the Father).

Most of the 99 names of God found in the Qur'an are not actually names, but attributes. One, however, Al Haq, meaning The Truth, seems to equate to absolute truth as that which cannot be negated. Al Haq is more than a reflection of faith in the existence of The God, and links the concept of God to all creation forever. Thus Allah transcends the prophetic origins of Islam and is thus universal in all time and applies to all existence—past, present, and future.

[Rasputin]

Biblical definition of God

God according to the Bible is characterized not just as Creator, but also as the "Heavenly Father".

The Torah (which would later be incorperated into the Christian Old Testament) characterizes God by these attributes: "The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children's children, to the third and the fourth generation." (Exodus 34:6-7)

The Torah contains no systematic theology: No attempt is made to give a philosophical or rigorous definition of God, nor of how God acts in the world. It does not explicitly describe God's nature, exemplified by God's assertion in Exodus that "you cannot see my face; for man shall not see me and live". Nowhere in the Hebrew Bible are the words omnipotent, omniscient, or omnibenevolent used to define God in a systematic sense.

Although Scripture does not describe God systematically, it does provide a poetic depiction of God and His relationship with people. According to the Biblical historian Yehezkal Kaufmann, the essential innovation of Biblical theology was to posit a God that cares about people, and that cares about whether people care about Him. Some people believe that the Bible should be viewed as humanity's view of God, but theologian Abraham Joshua Heschel described the Biblical God as "anthropopathic", which means that one should read the Bible as God's view of humanity, and not as humanity's view of God.

Similarly, the New Testament contains little systematic theology: no philosophical or rigorous definition of God is given, nor of how God acts in the world; however John's gospel states: "God is light" (John 1:5 before he states: "God is love" (John 4:8 and: "God is a Spirit" (John 4:24 The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews presents a more grim side of the deity when he states: "For our God is a consuming fire." (Hebrews 12:29

The New Testament provides an implicit theology as it teaches that God interacted directly with people, in the person of Jesus, and that he subsequently sent the Holy Spirit. In this view, God becomes someone that can be seen and touched, and may speak and act in a manner easily perceived by humans, while also remaining transcendent and invisible. This appears to be a radical departure from the concepts of God found in Hebrew Bible. The New Testament's statements regarding the nature of God were eventually developed into the doctrine of the Trinity.

[Rasputin]

A PRACTICAL MAN'S PROOF OF GOD

The existence of God is a subject that has occupied schools of philosophy and theology for thousands of years. Most of the time, these debates have revolved around all kinds of assumptions and definitions. Philosophers will spend a lifetime arguing about the meaning of a word and never really get there. One is reminded of the college student who was asked how his philosophy class was going. He replied that they had not done much because when the teacher tried to call roll, the kids kept arguing about whether they existed or not.

Most of us who live and work in the real world do not concern ourselves with such activities. We realize that such discussions may have value and interest in the academic world, but the stress and pressure of day-to-day life forces us to deal with a very pragmatic way of making decisions. If I ask you to prove to me that you have $2.00, you would show it to me. Even in more abstract things we use common sense and practical reasoning. If I ask you whether a certain person is honest or not, you do not flood the air with dissertations on the relative nature of honesty; you would give me evidence one way or the other. The techniques of much of the philosophical arguments that go on would eliminate most of engineering and technology if they were applied in those fields.

The purpose of this brief study is to offer a logical, practical, pragmatic proof of the existence of God from a purely scientific perspective. To do this, we are assuming that we exist, that there is reality, and that the matter of which we are made is real. If you do not believe that you exist, you have bigger problems than this study will entail and you will have to look elsewhere.

[Rasputin]

THE CAUSE

If we know the creation has a beginning, we are faced with another logical question_was the creation caused or was it not caused? The Bible states, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." Not only does the Bible maintain that there was a cause_a creation_but it also tells us what the cause was. It was God. The atheist tells us that "matter is self-existing and not created." If matter had a beginning and yet was uncaused, one must logically maintain that something would have had to come into existence out of nothing. From empty space with no force, no matter, no energy, and no intelligence, matter would have to become existent. Even if this could happen by some strange new process unknown to science today, there is a logical problem.

In order for matter to come out of nothing, all of our scientific laws dealing with the conservation of matter/energy would have to be wrong, invalidating all of chemistry. All of our laws of conservation of angular momentum would have to be wrong, invalidating all of physics. All of our laws of conservation of electric charge would have to be wrong, invalidating all of electronics and demanding that your TV set not work!! Your television set may not work, but that is not the reason! In order to believe matter is uncaused, one has to discard known laws and principles of science. No reasonable person is going to do this simply to maintain a personal atheistic position.

The atheist's assertion that matter is eternal is wrong. The atheist's assertion that the universe is uncaused and selfexisting is also incorrect The Bible's assertion that there was a beginning which was caused is supported strongly by the available scientific evidence.

[Rasputin]

THE DESIGN

If we know that the creation had a beginning and we know that the beginning was caused, there is one last question for us to answer--what was the cause? The Bible tells us that God was the cause. We are further told that the God who did the causing did so with planning and reason and logic. Romans 1:20 tells us that we can know God is

"through the things he has made." The atheist, on the other hand, will try to convince us that we are the product of chance. Julian Huxley once said:

We are as much a product of blind forces as is the falling of a stone to earth or the ebb and flow of the tides. We have just happened, and man was made flesh by a long series of singularly beneficial accidents.
The subject of design has been one that has been explored in many different ways. For most of us, simply looking at our newborn child is enough to rule out chance. Modern-day scientists like Paul Davies and Frederick Hoyle and others are raising elaborate objections to the use of chance in explaining natural phenomena. A principle of modern science has emerged in the 1980s called "the anthropic principle." The basic thrust of the anthropic principle is that chance is simply not a valid mechanism to explain the atom or life. If chance is not valid, we are constrained to reject Huxley's claim and to realize that we are the product of an intelligent God

[Rasputin]

Arguments for God's Existence

There are several famous arguments for the existence of God. The argument from the First Cause maintains that since in the world every effect has its cause behind it (and every actuality its potentiality), the first effect (and first actuality) in the world must have had its cause (and potentiality), which was in itself both cause and effect (and potentiality and actuality), i.e., God. The cosmological argument maintains that since the world, and all that is in it, seems to have no necessary or absolute (nonrelative) existence, an independent existence (God) must be implied for the world as the explanation of its relations.

The teleological argument maintains that, since from a comprehensive view of nature and the world everything seems to exist according to a certain great plan, a planner (God) must be postulated. The ontological argument maintains that since the human conception of God is the highest conception humanly possible and since the highest conception humanly possible must have existence as one attribute, God must exist. Immanuel Kant believed that he refuted these arguments by showing that existence is no part of the content of an idea. This principle has become very important in contemporary philosophy, particularly in existentialism. The consensus among theologians is that the existence of God must in some way be accepted on faith.

[Rasputin]

A HELP IN UNDERSTANDING WHAT GOD IS

To help the reader comprehend the nature of God, I would like to borrow an analogy from the book Flatland by Edwin Abbott.1 Abbott was a mathematician and the model is geometric in nature. It was originally written in the 19th century for the purposes we are using it for here. Flatland is the story of a man who lives in a two dimensional world--like a sheet of paper. In the surface of the paper there is only length and width-there is no such thing as thickness. You and I are three-dimensional beings-we have length and width and frequently considerable thickness. You cannot get me, a three-dimensional being, into a two-dimensional sheet of paper. You can draw a front view of me (a portrait), but that is not the whole me. You can draw a top view of me which because I am bald, ends up being three concentric circles, but that is not the whole me. If you and I were to look at the man in Flatland, we would see him as a profile . He would be outlined but have no thickness.

One day the man in Flatland is visited by a sphere. The sphere is a three-dimensional object just as we are, and it just so happens that it crosses Flatland right in the man's living room. Now if you will think about that for a moment, you will realize that for the man in Flatland a rather incredible thing has happened. A dot appears on the man's floor with no cause that the man in Flatland can understand. A dot in Flatland is matter! In figure 1, the man, himself, is made up of a series of dots. Just as a tennis ball dipped in paint and touched to a sheet of paper would produce a dot on the paper, so too has our dot which the man in Flatland calls matter appeared out of nothing . As the man in Flatland watches, the dot becomes a circle which continuously grows in size . You will see if a plane truncates (or slices) a sphere, it will produce a circle; and the deeper the sphere sinks into the plane, the larger the circle will become.

[Rasputin]

The names below represent the key ideals of this ancient civilization, compare these ideals with those of t he American notions of democracy, justice, equality, individual human dignity, liberty, rule of law and progress.

Oormazd = Ahooraa Mazdaa = The Life Giving-Great Wise One.
Bahman = Good Thought
Ardi-Behesht = Best Truth and Purity
Shahrivar = Strong & Progressive Leadership
Sepandaarmez = Humility and Pure Love
Khordaad = Good Health & Self Awareness
Amordaad = Immortality
Day B-e Azar = Creator
Aazar = Light or Fire
Aabaan = Water
Kheer or Khor = Sun, Sunlight
Maah = Moon
Teer = Arrow, Mercury, The Rain Star
Goosh = World, Life, Existence
Day B-e Mehr = Creator
Mehr = Friendship
Soroosh= Obedience
Rashn = Justice
Farvardeen = " Fravar " or Faravahar, the Power of Progress
Verahraam = Bahraam, Victory
Raam = Tranquility, Happiness & Joy
Baad = Wind
Day B=e Deen = Creator
Deen = "Vojdaan" The Ability to Distinguish good from bad
Ard = Erd = "Ashee," Happiness, God Given Wealth
Ashtadd = Truth, Work
Aasemaan = Sky
Zaameeyaad = Earth
Maantraspand = Good Words
Anaaraam = Eternal Light

[Rasputin]

All praise be to Almighty God, Lord of the Universe, and may peace and blessings be upon His final messenger Muhammad, and upon his companions, his family and all those who follow Clear Guidance until the Last Day. We humbly seek the grace and forgiveness of God Most High—and were it not for His most bountiful mercy, we would all certainly be amongst the losers. There is none who can forgive sins or answer prayers except for Almighty God—the All-Compassionate, the Most-Merciful—and we seek refuge in Almighty God from the evil of our souls and from our sinful deeds. Only the misguided claim that God—the Loving, the Powerful and the Wise—cannot freely bestow His forgiveness on whomsoever He pleases! We testify that there is nothing divine or worthy of being worshipped except for Almighty God—the Mighty and the Sublime—and that Muhammad is His noble servant and final messenger.

In conjunction with this, we intend to advocate a return to the balanced and moderate understanding of Islam as preserved in the living tradition of the erudite scholars and wise sages of Sunni Islam. Indeed, the cure for the widespread ignorance and plague of extremism which engulfs the Muslim World today is getting back in touch with an authentic spiritual and intellectual heritage that is second to none. Even though Islam and Muslims have their fair share of bigoted critics, the negative stereotypes and bad press that commonly malign Islam these days are ultimately the fault of Muslims since they've allowed themselves to be seduced by nascent modern interpretations of Islam that are often unduly militant, subtly self-righteous and spiritually arid. Unfortunately, today many Muslims have been duped into abandoning their rich spiritual legacy in favor of various simplistic and shallow forms of what is fittingly referred to as "Protestant Islam". Quite often this is done with the well-intentioned desire of returning to the pure way of the early generations of Muslims (Arabic: Salaf as-Salih) without realizing that inherent in this modern pseudo-Islamic ideology is the implication that the vast majority of Muslim scholars for the past fourteen centuries were collectively misguided. The traditional Muslim understanding, based on an authentic prophetic utterance, is that their religion is operative on three levels: submission (islam), faith (iman), and sincerity (ihsan). Over the centuries, this understanding manifested itself in corresponding Islamic sciences which brought forth not only a rich and vast literature of incredible depth and breadth, but solidified in several authentic schools of thought in each area as well. While the outward sciences of Islam were expounded upon by the scholars of Prophetic narration (hadith) and jurisprudence (fiqh), the intricacies of correct iman were clarified by the scholars and schools of creedal belief ('aqidah). Unfortunately, many of the more intolerant and puritanical understandings of Islam on the loose today, although they often recognize and ostensibly value the work of authentic Islamic scholarship in the first two operative levels of Islam, when it comes to the level of Ihsan, which historically manifested itself in the science of tasawwuf, they ignore and even falsify the classical Muslim tradition while turning a blind-eye to Islamic history. This break with tradition is most unfortunate, since by only paying facile lip-service to the importance of substantive self-purification and failing to tap into this highly-developed aspect of the Islamic legacy, as expounded by our upright scholars and illustrious sages, a profound transformation of the Muslim community is very unlikely.

[donsaeid]

من چشم از او چگونه توانم نگاه داشت...

شبهاي جمعه، ميليونها انسان عاشقي كه دستان خاكيشان ، لبريز از احساس نياز است ، به سوي دامن ترحم حق دراز ميشود.

اين طلب نياز وقتي به اوج ميرسد كه فرسنگها از وطن دور باشي و بخواهي با كميل علي (ع) بگويي " الهي و ربي من لي غيرك".

اينجا كوالالامپور است، مركز مالزي. امشب به مانند شبهاي جمعهي ديگر، جمعي از ايرانيان در محل اجتماعات سفارت جمهوري اسلامي ايران جمع شدهاند تا با به واسطه كميل علي(ع) به خداي علي(ع) سلامي دوباره دهند.

شبهاي جمعهي دور از وطن ، آسمان احساس همه ايرانيان نيازمند رحمت حق، ابري است. اگر خوب توجه كني، ميبيني همه آنهايي كه گرد كميل علي (ع) جمع شدهاند، احساسشان در آستانه باريدن است.

و راز ماندگاري شيعه در طول تاريخ و اعصار مگر جز حب علي(ع)، فاطمه(س) و حسين(ع) و .... است.

دعاي كميل كه قرايت شد، ايرانيان مقيم مالزي مهماني از حوزه عليمه مشهد داشتند كه آمده بود تا "راز" حلقه وصل خالق و مخلوق را "هويدا" كند.

از سوره "زمر" مدد گرفت تا بگويد تا به هر جا كه رفته باشي، باز راه بازگشت باز است.

در بهاران كي شود سرسبز سنگ
خاك شو تا گل برويي رنگ رنگ
سالها تو سنگ بودي دلخراش
آزمون را يك زماني خاك باش
(مولوي)
" منور شايستهخو" در طول سخنان خود در پي تبيين نقش دعا در زندگي انسان و نتيجه حرف زدن مخلوق با خالق بود.

او از رحمت بيكران حق گفت ، از اينكه خدا به همه انسانها اين اجازه را داده است كه با او گفتوگو كنند، به هر زبان و كلامي.

ديد موسي يك شباني را به راه
كو همي گفتاي خدا واي اله
تو كجايي تا شوم من چاكرت
چاروقت دوزم كنم شانه سرت
اين استاد حوزه و دانشگاه از اين نيز فراتر رفت و گفت خدا نه تنها بندگان خود، بلكه آنان را كه رو از درگاه او برتافتند نيز دوست دارد.

" باران رحمت بيحسابش همه را رسيده و خوان نعمت بيدريغش همه جا كشيده "
اديم زمين سفره عام اوست
بر اين خوان يغما چه دشمن چه دوست
(سعدي)
استاد حوزه ميگفت براي ديدن "او" نبايد راه دوري رفت "نحن اقرب اليه من حبل الوريد" (قرآن)
بيدلي در همه احوال خدا با وي بود
او نميديدش و از دور خدايا ميكرد
(حافظ)
او مومنان را از "غفلت" از برحذر داشت كه اولين حربه شيطان است و بندگي و عبوديت را هدف غايي خلقت برشمرد.

از هواها كي رهي بيجام هو
اي زهو قانع شده با نام هو
گر زنام و حرف خواهي بگذري
پاك كن خود را زخودها يكسري
(مولانا)
استاد حوزه به حاضران در كميل علي (ع) توصيه كرد كه درياي رحمت حق مرواريدهاي بسيار دارد كه بايد بيكاهلي در پي صيد آن بود.

آنك از گنج گهر خرسند شد
هم بدان گنج گهر در بند شد
آنك او در ره به چيزي ماند باز
شد بتش آن چيز گو با بت بساز
هان مشو آخر به يك ميمست نيز
ميطلب چون بينهايت هست نيز
(عطار)
او گفت و رفت در حاليكه درويش در كنج تالار اجتماعات سفارت، با خود زمزمه ميكرد:
من چشم از او چگونه توانم نگاه داشت
كاول نظر به ديدن او ديدهور شدم
(سعدي)