While Black Nationalist strains of Islam were very popular in the United States during the 60's and 70's, it has since come under constant attack from an increasing Sunni population in the West. When the NOI and 5% nation first became popular, it was seen as an alternative to Christianity, which justifiably was seen as a "slave master religion." Now many NOIers and five percenters have converted over to Sunni Islam, and this unique form of African American identity is on the verge of being totally assimilated. The Allah Team presents the only attempt to counteract Sunni missionary activity.

Both Christianity and Islam are imperialist religions. One need not look any further than Africa, where indigenous culture has been almost completely wiped out due to assimilation into these two mythologies. Now, African is poised against African in places like Nigeria, where Muslims and Christians fight each other, in the name of foreign faiths. The same is the case in the Philippines, Indonesia, and elsewhere. With Christianity and Islam eradicating and assimilating African culture, there is no such thing as a purely African identity. In America, descendants of Africans have been totally cut off from their identity due to the slave trade. Now, African Americans struggle to forge some sort of unique identity. Because of this, I sort of appreciate what the Allah Team is doing.

Undoubtedly, we strongly disagree with the racist nonsense that is found in NOI and five percenter doctrine, and we also frown on the fact that they still choose to call their ideology "Islam," which is an Arab concept. We also acknowledge that many of the Allah Team's arguments are fallacious and unsupported. Still, their attempts to justify anthropomorphic belief in Islam are often highly intelligent. The Freethought Mecca especially recommends Part One and Part Two of the debate between the five percenter named True Islam, and a Sunni named Dawood Muhammad on the topic of whether or not Allah is a man.

Finally, we'd like to offer a discussion that took place on the Allah Team's now defunct message board. A Sunni dawagandist tried to put forth an argument that he assumed would both refute Mr. True Islam, as well as win over a few gullible five percenters. The arguments this Sunni put forth were so riddled with fallacies, that I could not help but to step in and argue on behalf of the Mushrik Zanj, my ikhwaan al-kaafireen from the Allah Team. Without further introduction, here is one Sunni's attempt to refute anthropomorphic belief in Islam, and the FTMecca's champion of kufr's response...

 In the Name Of Allah the Beneficent, the Merciful

This is a reply to the debates that True Islam has had with Muslims of various beliefs. Some Were correct and other had flaws. My concern is not with those Muslims. It is with the false accusation made that Allah the creator of the heavens and earth is a man, and that he resembles His creation in manner of being a man (human). Here in lies proof and evidences from Qur’an, Sunnah, scholars from Islam and Western scholars of Islam. I pray that Allah will show us the light, to the Understanding of Islam.

Likening to His Creation

This portion will be dealing with the concept of “Laysa kamithlihi shay” “ There is nothing like or similar to Him” (H.Q.42:11) The concept of the salaf in taking the qur’an in its apparent meaning is greatly misunderstood. Sheikh Ashqaar says In His Book dealing with the Name and Attributes according to the salaf states:

“ Those who understand the Attributes according to their apparent meaning and make that apparent meaning from the category of the attributes of created beings. They are anthropomorphists, (those who liken Allah to His creation) and their doctrine is false. As-salaf (the early Muslims) denied and denounced it and waged war against it and its proponents. Their mistake was that they believed that the apparent meaning of the Attributes constituted anthropomorphism (tashbeeh), while everyone who truly glorifies and sanctifies His Lord knows that the apparent meaning of the Attributes is in fact elevation of Him Above anthropomorphism.” (Pg 198)

We see from the above statement that taking the apparent meaning of hand, face, feet, etc. as being Allah is a man is False. The correct meaning is that we take the attributes, and except them bi-lakayf (without asking how). We know he has them, and we leave it at that. We do not contemplate on Allah. In a hadeeth it states:

“Contemplate Allah’s creation and do not contemplate Allah”
(Saheeh al-Jaami: Sagheer 3/9)

Below are statements from different Imaam from the Early Muslims (Salaf) dealing with Likening Allah to His creation. In the book Names and Attributes of Allah sheikh asqaar quotes ibn Badran as saying:

Pg 153 “ Ibn Badran in defining the people of truth and their way (madhab), says:”They accept the verses and Ahadeeth in which His Attributes are mentioned as they are, without likening them to the attributes of creation (tamtheel) without interpreting them (ta’weel) and without negating them (ta’teel) “

As we see from the above statement that we are to take the attributes as they are. What does, as they are mean? Ibn Bafran says in the above “without likening them to the attributes of creation (tamtheel) without interpreting them (ta’weel) ” What is likening them to His creation that is saying that He is a Man, or saying He is a human being. On page 193 of the same book the sheikh says:

Pg 193 “based on what Ahlus-sunnah wa jamma’ah have understood from the words of Allah, they affirm that nothing from His creation is like Him, neither with respect to His Essence nor His Attributes. The Commentator on At-Tahawiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him says: “Ahlus Sunnah are agreed that there is nothing similar to Allah, neither with respect to His Essence, nor His Attributes, Nor Actions.”

Now from the above statement we see that even in individual aspects Allah is not like us. Not in the difference as we are different from each other. But different to us as a whole. Only in name can it be stated, anything other than this is Bid’ah (innovation). For those who Liken Allah to His creation ibn Hammad says:

“Whoever likened Allah to something from His creation what Allah has described Himself with, Has committed Kufr, And there is no similarity between what Allah has described Himself with or between what His Messenger (saaws) has described Him with and creation”
(Sharh al Aqeedah at-tahawiyah PG 120)

From the above statement we see that If Allah describes Himself with a hand, and we come and say His hand is like our Hand then from the sheikhs statement “Whoever likened Allah to something from His creation what Allah has described Himself with, Has committed Kufr” We see they are disbeliever’s. Is’haaq ibn Rahaweeyyah, says:

“Whoever describes Allah and in so doing likens Him to any of His creation is a disbeliever (Kaafir) in Allah.”
(Aqeedah at-Tahawwiyya pg 120)

Another Muslim commenting on the topic of similarity is Abu Ja’far at-Tahawi who says:

“Imagination can not conceive Him, Minds can not grasp Him and He does not resemble creation.”
(Names and Attributes of Allah according to the salaf PG 226)

My final Statement concerning the likening of Allah is from sheikh Ashqaar which says:

“There are three types of heresy with respect to the names and Attributes of Allah”
(Names and Attributes of Allah according to the salaf PG 228)

For sake of space we will use the second which is dealing with likening Allah to his creation:

“The second: Describing the Creator with Attributes of creation.”
(Names and Attributes of Allah according to the salaf pg 229)

on PG 231 he says

“Likening Allah’s Attributes to the attributes to the attributes of creation. Al-Mushabbihah (those who liken Allah to His creation) claim that Allah has a face, Like our face and hand like our hands and Istawa (establishing on His throne) in the way that people do.”
(Names and Attributes of Allah)

All of these are Kufr (disbelief) according to the Muslims on the manhaj-ul-salaf (the way of the early Muslims)

 Will the believers see Allah?
 

In this section we will show the belief that the believers will be able to see Allah. According to the way of the salaf (early Muslims). The believers will see Allah. Yes! But what they will see is not known. What do I mean not known? Yes they will see a face, a hand, feet etc… but how will those hands, and face be only Allah knows. We just affirm the vision, and that’s all. I will only quote a few references since we (true Islam and I) are in an agreement on this issue. In the qur’an we read:

“They indeed are losers who denied their meeting with Allaah”(al-An’aam 6:31)

It is also stated:

“Whoever hopes for the Meeting with Allaah, then Allaah’s term is surely coming” (al-‘Ankaboot 29:5)

Also the qur’an reads:

“Those who hope not for their meeting with Us, but are pleased and satisfied with the life of the present world” (Yoonus 10:7)

The Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) said, "Death is a barrier between us and the meeting with Allaah."

Al-Nawawi said: "The meaning of the hadeeth is that the like and dislike referred to are those that occur at the time of death, at the stage when repentance is no longer acceptable, when the dying person is shown where he is headed. There is also some discussion in the hadeeth about the dislike of death. Whoever dislikes death because he prefers this life to the blessings of the Hereafter is condemned. Whoever dislikes death because he fears being brought to account for his shortcomings, lack of preparation and failure to carry out the commands of Allah properly, is not to blame in this case. The one who feels this way should hasten to prepare himself so that when death comes to him he will not dislike it but will love it because of the meeting with Allaah which he is hoping for after death.

There are many lessons to learn from both the quranic verse and the words of Imaam nawawi. A couple of the lessons is that:

1) The meeting with your Lord will not be in this present life.

2) Imaam Nawawi’s mention of death refers to the death of one in the ground which means meeting Allah will not come till after the physical death.

Imaam Muslim narrated from Abu Umaamah, in which the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) says:

"Know that you will not see your Lord until you die.”

Now we have hear two well-known and recognized Imaams of the Muslims. Both relating or stating Allah will not be seen till after death. Which means He (Allah ) will be seen on the Judgement day
 

Again since True Islam and I are in agreement with seeing of Allah on the day of Judgement I will not go any further with this.

The Angels and their size

The reason I chose this angle to use is because to know the size of the Angels (some of them) is to know that Allah is Greater than that. In a literal sense! This is how the Early Muslims excepted them. A hadith from Ibn Mas’ood states:

The Messenger of Allah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) saw Jibreel in his true form. He had six hundred wings, each of which covered the horizon. There fell from his wings jewels, pearls and rubies, only Allah knows about them." It was reported by Ahmad in al-Musnad, and Ibn Katheer said in al-Bidaayah 1/47 that its isnaad is jayyid.

Now I would like to make a point of reference here. If the Angel Jabril’s wings in his (jabrils) true form “covered the horizon” Imagine His whole self, and then Imagine Allah’s self compared to the angels. What men do you know are that size? Can you say that Allah is a human (Man) based of this? Also in Another Hadith it states:

“The Messenger of Allah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) said, describing Jibreel:"I saw Jibreel descending from heaven, and his great size filled the space between heaven and earth." (Reported by Muslim, no. 177).

Again read the size that the Angel was in. And Allah is bigger that that. But yet the angels sized “his great size filled the space between heaven and earth”.

Also Among the greatest angels are those who carry the Throne of Allaah who were described in the following report:From:

“ Jaabir ibn ‘Abdullaah from the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him), who said: “I have been given permission to speak about one of the angels of Allaah who carry the Throne. The distance between his ear-lobes and his shoulders is equivalent to a seven-hundred-year journey.’" (Sunan Abee Daawood, Kitaab al-Sunnah, Baab fi’l-Jahamiyyah).

This is just speaking of the distance between the ear lobe, to his shoulders, again! Now imagine Allah’s size. Great is he above what they associate to him. Speaking on the throne of Allah. We see that the Angel who carries the throne in size is massive. What about the throne itself? It is reported that:

“ It was narrated that Ibn Mas’ood said: Between the first heaven and the one above it is (a distance of) five hundred years. Between each of the heavens is (a distance of) five hundred years. Between the seventh heaven and the Kursiy is (a distance of) five hundred years. Between the Kursiy and the water is (a distance of) five hundred years, and the Throne is above the water. Allaah is above the Throne, and nothing whatsoever of your deeds is hidden from Him.”
(narrated by Ibn Khuzaymah in al-Tawheed, p. 105; by al-Bayhaqi in al-Asmaa’ wa’l-Sifaat, p. 401)

Imaam Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab said, in the list of points noted from this hadeeth:

(9) The great size of the Kursiy in relation to the heavens.
(10) The great size of the Throne in relation to the Kursiy.
(11) That the Throne is something other than the Kursiy and the water.
(Sharh Kitaab al-Tawheed, p. 667, 668).

Now I ask you again what size is Allah compared to the massive Kursiy, and the Arsh, also the Massive Angels who carry this throne? If Allah the Most Great is Greater (Literally) than the above mentioned. So what man you know that is this size? The point I am making is that just because something is described with Physical Attributes does not mean it is Human, or man. On the last note concerning the massive throne and arsh is stated:

“Abu Dharr (May Allaah be pleased with him) said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “The Kursiy in relation to the Throne is like an iron ring thrown out into empty land.” (Sharh al-‘Aqeedah al-Tahhaawiyyah, p. 312, 313).
 

Can Allah be seen (True Islam arguments)

“True Islam Quotes Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (d. 835), in his book Al-Radd ‘ala ‘l-Zanadiqa wa-l’Jahmiya (The Refutation of the Zanadiqa and Jahmiyya):

An exposition of the denial by the Jahmiya of Allah’s word’s: "On that day shall faces beam with light, looking at their Lord" (75:22). We asked them (Jahmiya: "Why do you deny that those in Paradise will look at their lord?" They replied:" It is not proper for anyone to look at his Lord: a thing looked at is passible and qualifiable; things are only seen by refraction."…But the Prophet, who knew what Allah meant, said: "You will surly see your Lord." And Allah said to Moses, "…Thou shalt not see me," Q. 7:139, but he did not say, "I shall not be seen." Who then of the two is more deservedly followed: the Prophet who said, "You shall surely see your Lord," or Jahm who said, "You shall not see your Lord”
 

Now If we look at this verse we will see that it is talking about the Hereafter and Not in this life. Based of the statement “Why do you deny that those in Paradise will look at their lord?”We see that this is clearly talking about paradise, and not this life. True Islam is also bearing witness that the verses of the Qur’an are speaking of the sight in Paradise. He says speaking on the word Ghaiyb:

“On the contrary, the word denotes a being that can be seen but has made the conscious decision to withdraw His presence until the appointed Hour when the face of the believers will be shinning bright as they are "looking toward their Lord." (75:23) “

So we see that the sight of Allah by the believers will be on the day of Judgement and not before. True Islam also quotes a detailed description of Allah that was seen by Muhammad (saaws) he quotes:

“ Muhammad said, "I saw my lord in a dream, in a most beautiful shape, a youth with rich hair, his feet in green, with two shoes of gold, on his face carpet (firas) of gold."
 

Now The Question becomes is this Hadeeth authentic, and correct? When we read from the Book the Names and Attributes of Allah according to the Salaf we see in the chapter of Fabricated hadeeth sheikh Ashqaar states:

“Weak and Fabricated hadeeth. False and incorrect ahadeeth have played their part in distorting the doctrine of the Muslims. These fabricated ahadeeth attributed to the messenger (saaws) include”
(Pgs 332- 333 Names and Attributes of Allah according to the salaf)
 

Then the sheikh go on to quote the fabricated, and concted hadeeth. One of this hadeeth was:

I saw my Lord in a dream in the best possible form; a venerable youth in green, wearing golden sandals and on His face a golden cover.
(Pg. 333 Names and Attributes of Allah according to the salaf also the mention of this hadeeth is in Tanzeeh ash-Sharee’ah)

The great Muhadith that has just passed away (May Allah have mercy on him) is the sheikh nasirudiyn Al-albaani he spoke on the hadeeth, and says:

“Its chain of narrators is weak and its text is not known. It would be appear to be a fabrication of the Jews.”

So we see that from the Above. Many fabricated hadeeth were being circulated around that time, before the harsh method of authentication of the two most authentic sahihs of Imaam Muslim, and Imaam Bukhari. The Encyclopedia of religion states:

“Forgeries and Fabrications were numerous, springing out of the sectarian atmosphere of the time. Non-Islamic materials. Often of Christian origin. Were also appropriated.
(Encyclopedia of Religion PG 145 )

True Islam uses the Musnad of Imaam Ahmad as a source for the vision. I ask based of this statement from G.H.A. Juynboll who states:

From the Account on pg 247 of vol xv it appears that all volumes, edited and published by Shakir, contains some 8100 traditions, 35 athar, 293 traditions added by Abd Allah ibn Ahamd” (his son)”Which he had heard from teachers other than his father, and 73 traditions abd Allah had found in the handwriting of his father, but which the latter had never recited to him. Of these 8100 traditions shakir found 7200 to be sound, that means that of every nine traditions on e is weak. Ie 11.1%
(Studies on the Origins and uses of Hadith II pg 226)

So I ask you are the hadith of the detailed vision truly authentic, or are they fabrications reports reported by persons for whatever purpose?

Lies on the ibn Tayimaiyah, and other Great Imaams
 

Another aspect that is occurring in the Muslims ummah. That is lies made upon the Muslims. Saying that they were anthropomorphists, when they really were not. True Islam quotes:

“ The great Muslim scholar Ibn Taymiyya, in 1291, gave his famous speech in which, while referring to the Throne verses, said "Allah comes down from heaven to earth, just as I am coming down now," and he came down the steps of the pulpit staircase ("Tashbih," Enc. Isl., p. 584.). “

Now this is interesting because many, many lies have been told on this great scholar, and revivalist of Islam. But lets see if this statement allegedly made by Ibn Taymiyyah is authentic. This relation is made by Ibn batutah, and others. However as we will see ibn taymiyyah could not have made this statement. Concerning Allah and His Coming Down to the Lowest Heaven. Sheikh Ashqaar says:
 

“Those who have researched this matter have established that this was fabricated by ibn Batutah himself because ibn Taymiyyah, May Allah have mercy on him, was in prison the year that ibn Batutah entered Damascus. In addition, sheikh al-Islam wrote down his position with respect to the tenants of belief and clarifies it in tens of places in his books. Everything he has written clearly indicates that he is innocent of what is attributed to him.”
(Pg 361 Names and Attributes of Allah)

Another Lie that was told on ibn Taymiyyah is that he was an anthropormorphist (likening Allah to his creation). Well there is one way to find out. That is read his books, or quotes or information written about him. The Encyclopedia of religion states:

“ Ibn Taymiyyah polemic activity extended to the philosophers, especially the logicians, against whom he wrote a refutation, al-Radd ala al-manntiqiyn. He wrote extensively against the monistic (ittihadiyah) and incarnations (Hululiyah) Sufis and condemned as heretical innovation many of the Sufi practices of his day.”
(Encyclopedia of Religion PG 573)
 

The sheikh al-Ashqaar goes on to say:

The followers of Imaam of Ahlus-Sunnah, Imaam Ahmad who stood in the face of the mu’tazilah who wanted to destroy this religion and extinguish its light, were also accused of at-tajseem (attributing body to Allah) and at-tashbeeh (likening Allah to His creation) and they were described as being hashaweeyyah.

It is also stated:

“What is also astonishing is that our hanbali scholars agree with the doctrine of the salaf and they describe Allah with what he has described Himself and with what His Messenger (saaws) described Him without distortion nor denial and without describing manner of likening Allah to His creation. Despite this, you find that those who do not care about their religion attribute at-Tajseem (Body to Allah). While their (imaams of the salaf) position is that whoever attributes body to Allah is a disbeliever.
(Aqaaweel ath-thuqaat fi ta’weel al-asmaa wa as-siffat” By Mari ibn Yusef al-Hanbali PG 64)

Ar-raazi states:

“Know that a group from the mu’tazilah attribute at-tajseem to Imaam Ahmad, Ishaaq ibn Rahaweeh and Yahya ibn Ma’een May Allah have Mercy on them. This is wrong because they are free from likening Allah to his creation (at-Tashbeeh) and denying His Attributes (at-Tateel). Rather they did not speak about al-Mutashabeehah (those verses whose meaning are not clear) and they would say “We have believed in them and excepted them” while asserting that there was nothing similar or equal to Allah and it is well known that this belief is far removed from at-Tashbeeh.”
(I’tiqaad firaaq al-Muslimeen wa al-Mushrikeen by Ar-Raazi pg 16.)

About western scholars True Islam uses

I chose this but will keep in brief. Dealing with the uses of western Scholars as pure authentic sources is questionable. The reason being they are biased, and prejudiced against the knowledge that has come to us from the Imaams of the salaf. If we take a look at the method used by western scholar Joseph schact and Goldziher we will see the false approach used by the western scholars.

“Joseph Schact took Goldzihers observation a step further. He concluded that the hadith and the Qur’an were not the original basis of the law, but that local custom, misleadingly labeled Sunnah. Served as the original bases.”
(Encyclopedia of Religion pg 147)

It is also stated that nabia abbot only used early papyri from the late second, and third century. So her information also has lack in it.

Going to the Extremes
 

This is something that the Muslim Ummah is definitely not free from. They have many Muslims, even from the people of the Sunnah who have gone to the extreme. Adh dhahabi says:

“ Al-jahm ibn Safwaan appeared in Khurasaan and propagated the doctrine of denying the Lord, the Blessed, the Exalted and the doctrine that the qur’an was created and so Muqatil ibn Sulayman al-Mufasir appeared in Khurasan holding a completely opposite doctrine which was to exaggerate in affirming the Attributes, to the extent that he attributed body to Allah.”
(tadhkirah al-Huffoadh “ 159-160. Sheikh al-Islaam also indicated this in meaning in Majmu Fataawa 6/35)

True Islam states and notes:

“The early Ahl al-Sunna took these verses LITERALLY. The Encyclopedia of Islam notes that "the ancient traditionalists took these verses on their face value (1960. p. 412.)"

Again the statement” literally” is correct but not in the sense of like we are. It is understood without tashbeeh (similitude) or bi-lakayf (without asking how) they just leave the understanding as literal and that’s all.

True Islam quotes al-Ashari as saying:

“Ash'ari went on to reiterate the old orthodoxy,
"We confess that God is firmly seated on His Throne (without asking how)...We confess that God has two hands (without asking how)...We confess that God has two eyes...We confess that God has a face...We affirm hearing and sight, and do not deny, as do the Mu'tazila, the Jahmiyya, and the Khawarij..."
 

But True Islam denies (bi-lakayf) himself when he says Allahs hand is as our hand (human hand) he is thus saying how it is a hand. This is going to the extreme, and going beyond what the Muslims affirmed and denied about Allah. True Islam also states:

“This, brother Aboo, is the difference between Allah Wa’ta ‘ala and man in his current, degraded and deprived state. Allah is a Man who is Self-Sufficient, being Supreme in Knowledge, Power, and Holiness. Allah Wa’ta’ala has the form of a man, the look of a man, but is different from man in his current state. “

Please show me in the qur’an or authentic Sunnah where this comparison to Allah, and man in His degraded state is made. We can not pick and choose when we want to use the qur’an, and Sunnah (with the understanding of the early Muslims) when we want to. This is the problem with deviancy they act as if they are in accord with the early Muslims, but then you see their sway in issues that play an important part in the history of Islam

Conclusion

I would like to say that the Imaams of the Salaf (early Muslims) do not believe Allah is every where. They believe He is High above His throne in a manner which befits his majesty. Also they except the attributes, and Names as they are with out denying them or likening them to His creation. You may come across some Muslims who have attributed to Allah a body, or likening Allah to us (His creation), or even totally denying His Names and attributes. But know that they are to the extreme. Either to the left, or to the right. And know that Ahlus-Sunnah wa jamma’ah are the people of the middle course. There are many aspects that were disgust, that were misleading and explained in a manner which made the early Muslims seem to believe Allah was some man, sitting on a throne, but this can in no way be understood from what is related by the Imaams of Ahlus-Sunnah. You may disagree with the way they understood it. However it is the method in which they took, and we can not say they understood it in the manner we want them too. For this will be lying on them, the Messenger, and Allah. As the Qur’an says, “who will forge a lie against Allah”. There is plenty of information that is present both in English, Arabic, and many other sources to verify. And when you do not have a point to prove, or you are non biased then you will truly see the way that they viewed Allah. I pray that this settle the view of Allah. I pray Allah bless us all with this divine wisdom, and guidance.

 In Reply to: Allah is A man? posted by al-ameen ibn toledoe on October 01, 2000 at 10:00:22:

 Al-Ameen ibn Toledoe, I'm not down with the Allah Team, the NOI, or any permutation of the five percent nation. However, I still noticed some flaws in what you wrote (which was laced with numerous fallacies, and an overall tone that made it seem like one big ad hominem). I'd like to put my own two cents in, as a Western educated Mulhid, and try to show some of the problems in what you wrote.

In another post in this thread, you wrote the following:

I used the western scholars to show you even they know the truth

"[Y]ou have the nerve to suggest that the 'spreading of Islam in North America,' particularly in the Black Community, is due to so-called Orthodox Muslims. Like Hell. Muslims from the East do no missionary work in the hood. Your interest is in converting white people. Your business in the Black Community of pushing that which Allah has forbidden. When it comes to the 'consumer/materialistic based socioeconomic system' Arab Muslim merchants say to hell with Qur’an, to hell with Sunna, to hell with 'niggas.'"
[ http://allahteam.com/True%20.htm ]

We see from the above statement that taking the apparent meaning of hand, face, feet, etc. as being Allah is a man is False. The correct meaning is that we take the attributes, and except them bi-lakayf (without asking how). We know he has them, and we leave it at that. We do not contemplate on Allah.

In a hadeeth it states: “Contemplate Allah’s creation and do not contemplate Allah” (Saheeh al-Jaami: Sagheer 3/9)

Then you go on to quote Sheikh Ashqaar, who quotes Ibn Badran as saying:

”They accept the verses and Ahadeeth in which His Attributes are mentioned as they are, without likening them to the attributes of creation (tamtheel) without interpreting them (ta’weel) and without negating them (ta’teel)“

Moving on, you went into the issue of not seeing God until judgement day. What does any of this have to do with anthropomorphism. True, the Sahih collections of ahadith state that God will not be met until after one dies, but this does not negate anthropomorphism. The ahadith generally treat the resurection as something very physical, and there are ahadith that quote Muhammad as saying that on the day of judgement you will see your Lord as clear as you see the moon. If anything, all of this supports anthropomorphism rather than refuting it!

Moving on, you wrote the following:

Now I would like to make a point of reference here. If the Angel Jabril’s wings in his (jabrils) true form “covered the horizon” Imagine His whole self, and then Imagine Allah’s self compared to the angels. What men do you know are that size? Can you say that Allah is a human (Man) based of this?

Moving on, you built a strawman argument by focusing on one hadith that was deemed fabricated by Sheikh Nasirudiyn Al-albaani. First of all, you've committed a fallacy because you want to invalidate any ahadith that do not coincide with your view. This is what all Orthodox Muslims do: they only support the traditions that support their stance. Furthermore, there are many more ahadith that say that one will be able to see God, as clearly as one sees the moon. This means he can be seen, he has a look, and image, therefore this is anthropomorphism. Your strawman arguments and your ad-numerum, ad-verecundiam mantra have both failed to dispute the arguments put forth by True Islam.

Finally, in your conclusion, you wrote the following:

I would like to say that the Imaams of the Salaf (early Muslims) do not believe Allah is every where. They believe He is High above His throne in a manner which befits his majesty.