Why does God speak only Arabic?

Just wondering from an outsider’s perspective:
Why does Islam’s God, (Allah) speak only Arabic?

Peace

Allah speaks in whatever language he likes. It is just that the last Book from him was in arabic . His words will always be preserved same as they are revealed to The prophet Muhammed PBUH . If you wanna translate it to another language then it is called " Translation of the meanings of The Quran "

No language translates exactly from other language . That is why we hold ONLY the Quran in Arabic to be Allah’s words.

Peace

[quote=JimG]Just wondering from an outsider’s perspective:
Why does Islam’s God, (Allah) speak only Arabic?
[/quote]

He has spoken to other prophets, through revelation, in other languages.

Allah has knowledge of all things…He chose to reveal the last and final revelation in Arabic.

…i will almost guarantee you that if you polled the members of CAF you would find some who thought God was Blue-eyed, and Blonde-haired… and spoke only American, not to be confused with the King’s English… IMHO…:cool:
http://www.specialneedsfamilyfun.com/family-spirituality/teachers/jesus.jpg

Peace:thumbsup:

[quote=JimG]Just wondering from an outsider’s perspective:
Why does Islam’s God, (Allah) speak only Arabic?
[/quote]

Because he is not the Christian God.

Because it’s very logical that God’s final and ultimate revelation to all of mankind would be authentic in only one of the most vague languages on earth.

[quote=exoflare]Because it’s very logical that God’s final and ultimate revelation to all of mankind would be authentic in only one of the most vague languages on earth.
[/quote]

vague languages?? I was born and raised here in America, and started studying arabic seriously in my early college years, and the language is not only richer than english but so much more beautiful.

Please elaborate on your statment, or at least give some kind of proof.

[quote=JimG]Just wondering from an outsider’s perspective:
Why does Islam’s God, (Allah) speak only Arabic?
[/quote]

SubhanAllah, i almost forgot this verse.

And if We had sent this as a Quran in a foreign language other than Arabic, they would have said: “**Why are not its Verses explained in detail (in our language)? ** What! (A Book) not in Arabic and (the Messenger) an Arab?” Say: "It is for those who believe, a guide and a healing. And as for those who disbelieve, there is heaviness (deafness) in their ears, and it (the Quran) is blindness for them. They are those who are called from a place far away (so they neither listen nor understand). (Quran 41:44)

[quote=Faith101]vague languages?? I was born and raised here in America, and started studying arabic seriously in my early college years, and the language is not only richer than english but so much more beautiful.
[/quote]

Arabic may be a richer and more “beautiful” (which by the way is a very subjective word… how would you empirically measure beauty?) language than English, or many other ones, but that’s not the same thing as clarity. The Arabic language also enables you to be purposefully vague in definition when you want to be. For those like me who have no knowledge of Arabic, look at this segment from Babel-Arabic:

http://i-cias.com/babel/Arabic/07.htm
[size=3][size=2]

Arabic is a very rich language in its vocabulary. This means that expressions can be very clear, or consciously vague. For the student of Arabic, this is a challenge.

[/size][/size]

It seems the problem is compounded even further when you consider that the “classical” Arabic writing used in the Quran was a type of shorthand that was even more defective than the Arabic writing of today. Many consonants were expressed primitively by the same sign, with short vowels not even expressed (hence the many alternate spellings of words like “Muhammad” you always see, for example). This is why the Quran was completely memorized by people and spread through oral tradition at first. (“we have now made it easy on your tongue, in order that they remember.” - 44:58)

The discrepancy between classical and modern Arabic apparently has further complications… For instance, you hear it frequently claimed that Muhammad was illiterate, and as far as I know this claim is based only on the Quran’s use of the word “ome”. This word can be translated to mean illiterate now, but in classical Arabic it was only used to refer to non-Jewish people. And yet these rumors of Muhammad’s illiteracy persist widely amongst Muslims themselves, despite the Quran’s supposed straightforward and self-sufficient nature as a book of guidance, needing no supplementary reading or outside interpretation.

It wouldn’t all be such a problem for a “universal” religion maybe, if only the entire planet could speak classical Arabic as their first language for all of eternity.

Arabic may be a richer and more “beautiful” (which by the way is a very subjective word… how would you empirically measure beauty?) language than English, or many other ones, but that’s not the same thing as clarity. The Arabic language also enables you to be purposefully vague in definition when you want to be. For those like me who have no knowledge of Arabic, look at this segment from Babel-Arabic:

I looked at the site, i dont know what segment you are talking about. That segment is just explaining how the letters are put together.

It seems the problem is compounded even further when you consider that the “classical” Arabic writing used in the Quran was a type of shorthand that was even more defective than the Arabic writing of today. Many consonants were expressed primitively by the same sign, with short vowels not even expressed (hence the many alternate spellings of words like “Muhammad” you always see, for example

lol, you got to be kidding. Can you please cite your source.

Take a look at an arabic Quran, you will see so much action going on around ONE word…it tells you how to pronounce the word exactly. Where are you getting this stuff from?

The discrepancy between classical and modern Arabic apparently has further complications… For instance, you hear it frequently claimed that Muhammad was illiterate, and as far as I know this claim is based only on the Quran’s use of the word “ome”. This word can be translated to mean illiterate now, but in classical Arabic it was only used to refer to non-Jewish people. And yet these rumors of Muhammad’s illiteracy persist widely amongst Muslims themselves, despite the Quran’s supposed straightforward and self-sufficient nature as a book of guidance, needing no supplementary reading or outside interpretation.

Mohamed peace be upon him, did not know how to read…this is backed up by history.

There is “classical” arabic and then there is the ghetto kind that my parents taught me at home…the different dialects. In the news, at large professional meetings…everyone speaks “classical” arabic.

Exoflare, please state your source

Exflorate

I apprecite your research but the funny thing is that you are referring to another verse of the Quran to substantiate ypur point .

" Lays aleikum fe al Omeeeen sabeel "

The verse was talking about the Jews opinion of arabs when dealing financially with them. The jews used to believe that if they deal in usury with Arabs then its ok but with jews its forbidden. So the verse means " we have no burden of sin when it comes to illiterate people " Meaning the arabs back then .

The Jews used to call arabs illiterate because many were really illiterate so they generalised them as illiterate. It doesnt mean that the word ommee is another noun for teh word arab!! It still means illiterate but because the majority was illiterate it became generalised.

[quote=Bobby A. Greene]Because he is not the Christian God.
[/quote]

i believe there’s only one God in this universe for all religions

[quote=exoflare]It seems the problem is compounded even further when you consider that the “classical” Arabic writing used in the Quran was a type of shorthand that was even more defective than the Arabic writing of today. Many consonants were expressed primitively by the same sign, with short vowels not even expressed (hence the many alternate spellings of words like “Muhammad” you always see, for example).
[/quote]

arabic is a phonic language, not a written one. that is why old arabic script is the way it was and was developed over time to what it is today. the language still remains pretty much the same, and unlike craig winn’s super retarded claim that only 500 people on the face of the earth at any given time can understand “paleo-arabic”, there are hundreds and thousands of people alive today that can understand it just fine. i myself have an easier time understanding classical arabic than many of the different “dialects” out there today, the north african dialects (like egyptian, libyan, moroccan, etc) being the ones that give me the toughest time.

[quote=exoflare]The discrepancy between classical and modern Arabic apparently has further complications… For instance, you hear it frequently claimed that Muhammad was illiterate, and as far as I know this claim is based only on the Quran’s use of the word “ome”. This word can be translated to mean illiterate now, but in classical Arabic it was only used to refer to non-Jewish people. And yet these rumors of Muhammad’s illiteracy persist widely amongst Muslims themselves, despite the Quran’s supposed straightforward and self-sufficient nature as a book of guidance, needing no supplementary reading or outside interpretation.
[/quote]

whoever told you this doesn’t know what they’re talking about. the word أمي (pronounced: um mee) can be used to refer to gentiles or commoners, but it’s meaning is illiterate, unlettered. it’s a fact that prophet muhammad was illiterate and this is proven simply by the testimony of one of his paternal cousins, abdullah bin abbaas who said, “he is your prophet. he was illiterate, not writing, nor reading, nor calculating.” abdullah bin abbaas was only 13 when prophet muhammad died, and only spoke “classical” arabic. if ummee wasn’t understood to mean illiterate in classical arabic, surely, this statement from him wouldn’t have been made. also, many of the Quranic exegesises written are only written in classical arabic, and all the classical works of exegesis that are depended on by the scholars of ahl as-sunnah explain this word as meaning “one who does not read, nor write” i.e., illiterate.

i have posted about this particular topic previously, here: forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=61916

as for the original topic of the thread… i must ask this question: who said that Allah only speaks arabic?

[quote=Bobby A. Greene]Because he is not the Christian God.
[/quote]

From a purely objective point of view, regardless of the doctrinal teaching professed by Mohammedans and Catholics, it is evident that Almighty God is the God over both. God exists. His existence is not dependent on the acknowledgement of mankind that He exists. Nor is God’s existence dependent upon any religion. He is the Creator and the Providence of the Universe: the whole of creation, the entire cosmos, of all existing things, whether they be angels, human beings, animals or plants, animate or inanimate. He is also the Savior and the Judge of the living and the dead, having redeemed mankind and must judge Catholics and Mohammedans, believers and atheists. Their god is but another strange god. On every essential point concerning the true God and the nature of the true God, the Mohammedan belief radically and seriously conflicts with the established and revealed Dogma of the Catholic Church.

[quote=r.gonzales]whoever told you this doesn’t know what they’re talking about. the word أمي (pronounced: um mee) can be used to refer to gentiles or commoners, but it’s meaning is illiterate, unlettered. it’s a fact that prophet muhammad was illiterate and this is proven simply by the testimony of one of his paternal cousins, abdullah bin abbaas who said, “he is your prophet. he was illiterate, not writing, nor reading, nor calculating.” abdullah bin abbaas was only 13 when prophet muhammad died, and only spoke “classical” arabic. if ummee wasn’t understood to mean illiterate in classical arabic, surely, this statement from him wouldn’t have been made. also, many of the Quranic exegesises written are only written in classical arabic, and all the classical works of exegesis that are depended on by the scholars of ahl as-sunnah explain this word as meaning “one who does not read, nor write” i.e., illiterate.
[/quote]

Do you know which hadith that quote is from? Is it Bukhari?

To hear some on these forums tell it, He only speaks Latin.

[quote=JimG]Just wondering from an outsider’s perspective:
Why does Islam’s God, (Allah) speak only Arabic?
[/quote]

Kind of a weird question isn’t it? I’m under the impression thats its used because its the language of the (muslim) revelation, and for a sense of universality much to the same point we used to use latin.

[quote=Faith101]I looked at the site, i dont know what segment you are talking about. That segment is just explaining how the letters are put together.
[/quote]

The part on the link where it says,
[font=Verdana,Ariel,Helvetica][size=3][font=Verdana,Ariel,Helvetica][size=2]jacala[/size]- become; bring [someone into a state]. Arabic is a very rich language in its vocabulary. This means that expressions can be very clear, or consciously vague. For the student of Arabic, this is a challenge.[/font][/size][/font]

[quote=Faith101]lol, you got to be kidding. Can you please cite your source.

Take a look at an arabic Quran, you will see so much action going on around ONE word…it tells you how to pronounce the word exactly. Where are you getting this stuff from?
[/quote]

I know those pronunciation indicators are there in the Quran in the present-day Arabic copies. They didn’t exist in the “original” Quran, though, did they? By this I mean the one Uthman compiled when he ordered all the other copies burned. I didn’t copy and paste my whole reply from the internet or something, otherwise I would have just linked to the exact source as you just requested. I’m only referring to the known evolution of written Arabic language.

Mohamed peace be upon him, did not know how to read…this is backed up by history.

If it is, then I was not aware of it. I only knew of the word “ome” being translated as "illiterate"in several different places in the Quran being cited as justification for this, and that the very same word could also mean “Gentiles”. My point was not to prove Muhammad was illiterate, but I see how that could have come across. My point was that if this was the only evidence there’s no way to be sure what they meant, apart from relying on the opinion of outside sources to the Quran. Anyway, with gonzales posting that whole thread I never saw before I guess I’ll take a look at that and maybe it will give me a better idea of the claims of Mohammed’s illiteracy. Until then, it’s probably best we keep further discussion of that issue confined to that thread as well, so as to not unwittingly derail this topic.

[quote=Faith101]There is “classical” arabic and then there is the ghetto kind that my parents taught me at home…the different dialects. In the news, at large professional meetings…everyone speaks “classical” arabic.
[/quote]

I know, that’s why I was referring to the different style of writing.

[quote=twiztedseraph]Kind of a weird question isn’t it? I’m under the impression thats its used because its the language of the (muslim) revelation, and for a sense of universality much to the same point we used to use latin.
[/quote]

At first I would draw the comparison to the Catholic Church’s widespread use of Latin as well. The difference that sticks out for me is that the Church does not state that dogma in any other language is rendered invalid. The use of Latin was only for purely functional purposes… used as a template for consistent translation into other languages. It wasn’t considered some kind of “superior” and “beautiful” language like in the case of the Quran.

[quote=JKirkLVNV]To hear some on these forums tell it, He only speaks Latin.
[/quote]

:rotfl:

However, it was the first official language of His Church. Good thing, I couldn’t understand the early language - it was greek to me.

Now perhaps, his Vicar will return to Latin more often, and we will be better off for it… :hmmm:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.