Dr. Robert Morey proves in his book that Allah is the name of the moon god worshipped in Arabia before Islam. Is he right?

The book you refer to is entitled The Islamic Invasion:
Confronting the World's Fastest Growing Religion, published by Harvest
House Publishers, Oregon, US, 1992. The author, Dr. Robert Morey, sees
Islam as an invasion into North America and a threat to his religious
heritage.
Unfortunately, Dr. Morey has resorted to dishonest tactics in
combating Islam. To prove his contention that Allah is not the God of
Christians and Jews, he quoted from several books in such a dishonest
fashion that thequotations say the opposite of what we find in those
books (see quotations on pages 47-53 of Dr. Morey's book).
Dr. Morey quoted from the Encyclopedia Britannica to support his case.
But in fact the Encyclopedia says:
Allah is the standard Arabic word for "God" andis used by Arab
Christians as well as by Muslims (Britannica, 1990 Edition, vol.1,
p.276).
Dr. Morey also quoted from H.A.R Gibb to support his case. But Gibb
actually says the opposite.In his book Mohammedanism, Gibb says on
page 26 that bothMuhammad and his opponents believed in"the existence
of a supreme God Allah." Gibb further explained this on pages 37-38
(see Mohammedanism by H.A.R. Gibb, Oxford University Press, 1969). Dr.
Morey should have checked his references more carefully before his
book went into print.
Dr. Morey said that Alfred Guillaume agrees with him, and he refers to
page7 of Alfred Guillaume's book entitled Islam. But here is what
Alfred Guillaume actually says onpage 7 of his book:
In Arabia Allah was known from Christian andJewish sources as the one
God, and there can be no doubt whatever that he was known to the pagan
Arabs of Mecca as the supreme being (Islam by Alfred Guillaume,
Penguin,1956, p.7).
How could Dr. Morey misquote like this? Furthermore, Dr. Morey quoted
from page 28 of a book by another non-Muslim writer Caesar Farah. But
when we refer to that book we find that Dr. Morey gave only a partial
quotation which leaves out the main discussion. The book actually says
that the God who was called Il by the Babylonians and El by the
Israelites was called ilah, al- ilah, and eventually Allah in Arabia
(see Islam: beliefs and Observances, by Caesar Farah, Barron's
Educational Series, 4th Edition, p.28). Farah says further on page 31
that before Islam the pagans had already believed that Allah is the
supreme deity.Of course they had 360 idols, but, contrary to Dr.
Morey's assertion, Allah was never one of the 360 idols. As Caesar
Farah points out on page 56, the prophet Muhammad, on whom be peace,
personally destroyed those idols.
Dr. Morey also quoted from William Montgomery Watt. But Watt says on
page 26 of his book that the Arabic word Allah is similar to the Greek
term ho theos which we know is the way God is referred to in the New
Testament (see Muhammad; Prophet and Statesman by William Montgomery
Watt, OxfordUniversity Press, 1964, p.26).
Dr. Morey also quoted from Kenneth Cragg's book entitled The Call of
the Minaret. However, on page 36 of Kenneth Cragg's book we find the
following:
Since both Christian and Muslim faiths believe in One supreme
sovereign Creator-God, they are obviously referring when they speak of
Him, under whatever terms, to the same Being. (The Call of the Minaret
by Kenneth Cragg, Oxford University Press, 1964, p. 36). Further on
the same page,Cragg explains that the One whom the Muslims call Allah
is the same One whom the Christians call 'the God and Father of
ourLord Jesus Christ', although the two faiths understand Him
differently.
Dr. Morey should know that as a scholar he has the academic obligation
to quote honestly. He should also know that as a follower of Jesus, on
whom be peace, he has an obligation to speak thetruth.

--
- - - - - - -

How can you say that death is not theconsequence for sin whereas the Bible clearly teaches that it is?

The best way to understand this would be to study the story found in
the book of Genesis in the Holy Bible. Let us begin with a brief
outline of the story. We are told that God warned Adam that if he eats
from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he will surely die.
This was communicated also to Eve. The serpent, however, being
deceptive,promised Eve that they will not die from eating it.So she
ate the fruit, and gave also to her husband. As a result of eating the
fruit, they realized for the first time that they were naked, so they
covered themselves with fig leaves. When they heard the sound of God
walking in the garden in the cool of the day, they hid from Him among
the trees. He called out to them asking where they were and asked
whether they had eaten from the forbidden tree. Adam blamed Eve, and
Eve blamed the serpent. God then cursed all three of them. The serpent
shall henceforth crawl on its belly and eat dust. The woman shall
suffer in childbearing and remain under the domination of her husband.
The man shall have to sweat for his living until he returns to dust.
God then said: "The man has now become likeone of us, knowing good and
evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from
the tree of life and eat, and live forever." So God banished him from
the garden and placed a flaming sword to prevent access to the tree of
life (Condensed from Genesis 2:17 - 3:22).
Many people misunderstand this story to mean that physical death is a
consequence for sin. But the biblical scholars who are aware ofall its
implications explainotherwise. The Interpreter's One Volume Commentary
on the Bible explains that death here means separation from God, the
giver of "life" (p.6).
The reason for this other explanation is the obviousfact that in the
story Adam did not die. He livedon for 930 years (see Genesis 5:5).
And when God spoke of his eventual death, He mentioned it not as a
consequence of sin, but as a natural outcome of the fact that Adam was
created from dust - and to dust he must return (see Genesis 3:19).
When a few verses later itis stated that God deprived Adam in access
to the tree of life many people again conclude that because of sin
Adam was deprived of everlasting life. But this too is not what the
book of Genesis says. The story goes that once Adam gained knowledge
of good and evil, God was concerned that he may now gain eternal life
also (see Genesis 3:22). The Abingdon Bible Commentary explains
thatAdam was deprived of eternal life because he had already acquired
some power, namely knowledge, and God was concerned lest Adam should
acquire more, namely eternal life, and become a threat to God (see the
Abingdon Bible Commentary, p.223).
It is clear from the story that even if Adam was promised death he was
given a lesser penalty, and death must be taken as the maximum
possible penalty - that, obviously, was not given. Elsewhere in the
book of Genesis, when God killed certain men for their wickedness, it
meant instant death (see Genesis 38: 7, 10). But the death that comes
as the natural end to physical life is not a penalty for sin. It is
better to understand that God in His mercy gave a lesser penalty to
Adam than to suppose that God in His anger gave more penalties in
addition to what He stated initially. This is why Reverend W. K.
Lowther Clarke explained in his Bible commentary that God relented and
gave Adam alesser penalty (see the Concise Bible Commentary1952,
p.343). For the Qur'anic perspective on the Genesis story, see
question 17.

--
- - - - - - -

Does the Qur'an havethe story of theFall ofMan as told inthe Bible? Are the storiessimilar or different?

They are similar in a basic outline, but different on a few important points.
First, let us consider the basic outline. Adam and Eve were placed in
a garden in a state of happiness. God instructed them to eat from any
treeexcept one tree. Eventually, they were deceived into eating from
the forbidden tree and their nakedness became apparent to them. God
then expelled them from the garden.
Now, the disagreements.
1. Neither book names thefruit, but the Bible alone calls it the tree
of knowledge of good andevil. The Qur'an does not call it such, but
teaches that humans are already inspired with the knowledge of good
and evil at creation in order toenable them to exercise choice between
good and evil. This knowledge did not come as a result of eating from
a forbidden tree.
2. The Bible says the deceiver was a serpent, but the Qur'an says it was Satan.
3. The Bible says that Adam was not deceived, but only Eve was
deceived; it says that Eve then gave the fruit to Adam and he ate. On
the other hand, more thanone Qur'anic passages mention that they were
both deceived. One passage specifically says that Satan approached
Adam and deceived him. The Qur'an does not singleout Eve for blame in
any passage.
4. The Bible says that when the couple heard thesound of God walking
in the garden in the cool of the day, they hid from him among the
trees. So God called out to Adam asking where he was, andasking if he
ate from the forbidden tree. On the other hand the Qur'an does not
depict God in limited human form. The Qur'an and the Bible both teach
that God knows everything always.
5. According to the Bible, when the couple was confronted with their
mistake, they blamed eachother, and Adam even blamed God becauseGod
gave him the womanwho gave him the fruit. According to the Qur'an they
did not pass the blame. Instead, both repented.
6. According to the Bible, God cursed them. According to the Qur'an,
God forgave them and guided them.
7. According to the Bible, they were driven out of the garden/

--
- - - - - - -

Time for Imsaak (Starting the Fast) when the Calendar Times are Different

There are apparent discrepancies in the times of Salaat-ul Fajr stated
on the different timetablesdistributed by the various mosques of the
same town or city. Would it be a 'safer' practice if one was to follow
the earliest of those times for the purpose of Imsaak (abstaining from
eating, drinking, etc.)?
It is permissible to eat, drink, etc. until one is certain of the time
of Fajr (interpretation of the meaning): "…eat and drink until the
time wherethe 'white' and'black' thresholds of Al-Fajris evident to
you…" [Soorat-ul Baqarah]
So, this means it is permissible to continue eating and drinking
unless it is evident for onethat it is time for Fajr. Fajr can be
defined as the 'white' lightspreading across the horizon from the
eastern side. If one was unable to sight Al-Fajr and there was no one
else who could tell him about it through means such as raising the
Azaan (The call to prayers),then one should follow the timetable
that, according to the best of his knowledge, is the most accurate.
This accuracy is usually established through experience or by asking
experts or the earlier Muslim residents of the area.