RomeSweetRome
my post wasn't directed at you... since i do believe you can call God Allah or Deus or Dios as long as the name reffers to the God discribed in the Bible then your praising the same God. Like i said the Manicheans altered texts in order for countries to rely to their scripture with their cultural perspections of God, they used the name Brahman in their context in order that The Indiërs would of relied to their semi abrahamic semi mandean semi zoroastrian text. A bible can be translated in arabic and have the name Allah in it instead of God, as such will relate to them more then if we didn't. (with exclusion of translating the name Yehovah thou, wich has meaning)
You can call the God of the bible Allah as longs as it reffers to Jesus. and not the one described in the quran. They do not match.
alltough i stick to my statement that "you either believe in God or in Allah" because muslims made the arabic name of God a trademark of Islam it's always in it's first meaning associated to the God of the Quran. I still don't get why Muslims can't use the name God when they are talking english or any other language. Why the constant notion for not translating Allah into God.
And your right to say that the Jews don't believe in the truine nature of God, but seen in context that Christianity is a global jewish religion we accept the jews perspection of God since it's the same one mentioned in the new testament only is his nature less revealed. Yet even for the Jews if they stick to believing that God is incorporeal then they are believing not a different God but a obsolete doctrine. Everything old is made new, and they stick with the old.
Anyhow i don't know if shifted subjects from linguistic to theology if i did i'm sorry. Yet RomeSweetRome i do believe we agree mostly as do i think that Severyn would agree with it as well if we debated it constructivly. Since i think Severyn missunderstood what you ment at first.