Salam, Sometimes I totally miss the point. Can someone rephrase the topic for me please ? For now, Is God a man ? Are you seriously asking me if God evolved from Apes which He himself created and repeated his creation ? Since I can not be my own father, i reject any similar idea. ------------------ Student of Allah

Yes, Its true, even when concepts travel from one place to other it changes, sometimes even diametrically opposite based on the native culture. This word Jnani(wise ones) explains some of the verse in Quran which states that the Jinns patiently hear and take the reading to others. So its a general term to refer those, who use knowledge, some for good and some for evil. This is how I understand as of now.

The question is, SHOULD al-malik be held as a title or attribute by men? If so, why not al-azeez? The Arabic title "al-malik" simply means the king or ruler. Since there were other nations that had leaders called kings, this is an actual title that can be applied to men. Of course it can be applied to men, just as al-azeez can be applied to men. Quran uses both the words al-malik and al-azeez for men. But does it use these words for God anywhere? It says al-malikul haqq and al-azeezur raheem etc. But why does it no say "al-malik" only, or "al-azeez" only, why not even once? Don?t make the mistake of translating before understanding the logic. Formulate first, see if the logic is in line with the rest of the Quran, put in the values/meanings later. Or else your understanding will be prejudiced. However, the attribute "al-azeez" means the powerful or the mighty, and this is an attribute that only God possesses. But the Quran uses it for a human. Why would it use it for a human if it was a divine attribute? The titles "al-azeez" and "al-malik" are completely different... Of course, all attributes are different. But both of these are human attributes. Why else are they not used on their own for God anywhere in the Quran? But bro, we have no Quranic evidence for that. This is FALSE. The Qur'an makes it clear that all power and might belong to God (2165; 671; 1065; 515. Since there is no power independent of God, then nobody else is fitting for the title "al-azeez", or the powerful. But don?t you see, that the quran also says that all mulk belongs to God, that there is no mulk independent of God either? But despite of that, the quran still uses the term al-malik for humans. Using the same logic, why can?t it also use the term al-azeez for humans?