Somebody, PLEASE! PLEASE! ...drop a nuke or two on Mecca and Medina and get rid of these delusional maniacs!
Muslims are more worthy of Moses than Jews are
- Thread starter selfsame
- Start date
Oh hold on... you'll be told your a racist a seek help from the CC minions here for that.. :lol:
Some of the CC members here are definitely members of the The Islamic Party of Canada - Sharia Law in every Canadian household - your wife is your property.
Well I guess there's no point wading in on Selfsame's latest propaganda thread.
Boomer's already here whining like a professional victim.
Boomer's already here whining like a professional victim.
Oh hold on... you'll be told your a racist a seek help from the CC minions here for that.. :lol:
Some of the CC members here are definitely members of the The Islamic Party of Canada - Sharia Law in every Canadian household - your wife is your property.
The Shia will probably do the nuking just as soon as Iran breaks their newly written treaty with the US and finishes some bombs.
No doubt... all hell breaking out over there between Saudi Arabia and Iran anyhow after they executed that Shi'ite Muslim cleric.
Saudi Arabia may take more measures against Iran in execution row: foreign minister | Reuters
Destroying the Temple in Jerusalem didnt get rid of the Jews. Destroying Mecca wont destroy Islam. You cant get rid of ideas.
As for who gets Moses...im wondering which group is more entitled to Batman.
Oh hold on... you'll be told your a racist a seek help from the CC minions here for that.. :lol:
Some of the CC members here are definitely members of the The Islamic Party of Canada - Sharia Law in every Canadian household - your wife is your property.
You've noticed the change in me haven't you Boomer?
I wake up, the clock wakes me I immeadiately prostrate myself to the light, I am not a criminal. any longer
ell I don't know about Harper and the shrub but you definitely are to blame for something.
Yes Boomer is a satanic agent, so I would caution you abouit further discourdse (n a crime by the qway} he's insanen don't get sucxked in
God this is funny, a devout Muslim praising the prophets of Israel
Do you not understand the great leaders were Jews not Muslims.
They spoke of the Jews as the chosen people the rest of us were
rabble I guess. Who are you to decide thought you left all things up
to God
Do you not understand the great leaders were Jews not Muslims.
They spoke of the Jews as the chosen people the rest of us were
rabble I guess. Who are you to decide thought you left all things up
to God
A.T.Fomenko , G.V.Nosovskiy
HOW IT WAS IN REALITY
Chapter 5.
THE EPOCH OF THE XV CENTURY
The Western commentators' of the XIX century's attitude towards the Koran and Muhammad (still not completely overcome to this day) was on the whole very sceptical. Purporting that it is a derivative recent text, largely based on the Old Testament Bible, on the Judaic and Christian works. Originally, they say, recorded either on the bones, papyrus, palm tree leaves, pebbles, or preserved in memory…
Now we understand the reasons for such a negative attitude. The fact is that the chronologists of the XVI-XVIII cc. brutally distorted the past. The Bible and the 'ancient classic' texts, which in reality were created in the XIII-XVII cc., were dated to the deepest antiquity and declared venerated works embedded in the foundation of the entire civilization. The Koran, written approximately in the same epoch, was shifted to a not so remote past and the first year of The Hijra era was professed to be 622. As a result, the Koran, purportedly turned out to be 'much younger' than the Bible and the 'ancient classics'.
Moreover, as a result the Koran and the Bible turned out to be the holy books of different religious movements, seceding from the previously united Christianity of the XIII-XVI cc. This made a strong impression on the representatives of various spiritual schools which emerged in the XVII-XVIII cc. which was reflected in their appraisal of the holy books.
The new chronology fundamentally changes this psychological picture. It becomes clear that the Koran is one of the versions of the holy books which were created in the XIII-XVII cc. that is to say simultaneously to the Bible. This is why many testaments in the Koran are not the 'quotations from the canonised Bible', but often independent and original. Even when they describe the same events as the Bible, the interpretation is different. What the bewildered commentators declare to be 'incorrect citation' of the Bible and the other sources known to us today is just a different perspective on the mediaeval events contemporary to the authors of the Koran.
That is why the Koran is a vitally important and fascinating book, and in regards to us, we read the Koran with an immense interest from the beginning to the end. It turns out that it conveys to us important information lost or cleaned out in the other religious movements.
After the split of the Great Empire the attitude in the Romanovs' Russia towards the Koran and Muhammad became complicated. The emerged religious schism further aggravated tension between the Romanovs and the rulers of Turkey. Nevertheless in the Russian scientific community, unlike in Western Europe, the attitude towards the Koran on the whole remained respectful. It was published and translated in our country as a major work which merited serious study. Even the wars of the pro-Western Romanovs with Turkey didn't influence the respectful attitude towards the Koran in Russia. Despite the attempts of the Romanovs to drive a wedge between the Russians (the Orthodox Christians) and the 'Mongol' Tatars (the Muslims), it didn't succeed.
The Western torrent of 'scientific criticism' at some point descended not just on the Koran, but also on the Book of Mormon [6v]. The accusations against it were in many respects similar to those towards the Koran. Generally the Book of Mormon is often declared to have been 'made up' in the XIX century. The reasons for this 'criticism' are the same. As it turned out the Book of Mormon which surfaced in the XIX century has conveyed to us an old version of history which substantially differs from the Scaligerian one. Subsequently this book was immediately condemned and categorised as 'illegitimate'.
The XVII century author Andrey Lyzlov annotated the Koran and captured a great deal accurately. But as a XVII century Christian, already having been brought up with a sceptical attitude towards Islam, he thought that the Koran (and Islam on the whole) despite, allegedly, being in conflict with the Christians, nevertheless borrowed important ideas from 'earlier' Christianity, Judaism and 'Paganism'. It is not entirely true. All these movements emerged from the whole Royal (and later the Apostolic) Christianity of the XII-XVI cc. That is why they retained so much in common.
At the same time the opinion voiced by Lyzlov has its reasons. As we understand now, the Koran was created in the XV – first half of the XVII cc. as some kind of specific 'ecumenical Book' intended to rectify the rupture, which emerged in the Empire and in the religion. The Islamic leaders sincerely desired to restore the former unity. At least for the significant part of the former Empire (Western Europe was not considered 'their own' any longer). To achieve that they incorporated into the Koran ideas close to the representatives of different religious branches. Their intention was to attract them under their banner. To a great extent it succeeded. Islam has united a great number of people.
The Koran's structure also becomes clear. It is a highly poetic work filled with allegories, and also ideas close to the Christians, the Jews and the 'Pagans'. The poetic language has attracted many. The idea of the restoration of the former unity struck a chord.
In the Prophet Muhammad's life story there are also accounts of Moses and Joshua Ben Nun from the XV-XVI cc. For example, a mother gives up her child to be raised by another woman, later the infant is returned to his mother, but she still gives him back. Moses kills the Egyptian, and a pharaoh in revenge wants to kill Moses, but fails. In the life story of Muhammad we are told that he was falsely accused of the murder of a Christian called Sergius, and also about the failed attempt to assassinate the Prophet Muhammad. The Exodus of Moses with the Israelites from Egypt corresponds with Muhammad and his followers' migration (Hijra) from Mecca. Muhammad's great Battle of Badr corresponds with Moses' victory over the pharaoh's army. Muhammad, like Moses, at a single blow cuts though the water, etc. See [PRRK].
However, the facts of the famous Sultan Mehmed II the Conqueror were incorporated into the life story of Prophet Muhammad most of all. The well-known Arab conquest is the Ataman (Ottoman) seizure of the Pro
HOW IT WAS IN REALITY
Chapter 5.
THE EPOCH OF THE XV CENTURY
26. THE KORAN AND THE BIBLE.
Over the course of time Islam underwent great change and only recently assumed its current form. The Western commentators' of the XIX century's attitude towards the Koran and Muhammad (still not completely overcome to this day) was on the whole very sceptical. Purporting that it is a derivative recent text, largely based on the Old Testament Bible, on the Judaic and Christian works. Originally, they say, recorded either on the bones, papyrus, palm tree leaves, pebbles, or preserved in memory…
Now we understand the reasons for such a negative attitude. The fact is that the chronologists of the XVI-XVIII cc. brutally distorted the past. The Bible and the 'ancient classic' texts, which in reality were created in the XIII-XVII cc., were dated to the deepest antiquity and declared venerated works embedded in the foundation of the entire civilization. The Koran, written approximately in the same epoch, was shifted to a not so remote past and the first year of The Hijra era was professed to be 622. As a result, the Koran, purportedly turned out to be 'much younger' than the Bible and the 'ancient classics'.
Moreover, as a result the Koran and the Bible turned out to be the holy books of different religious movements, seceding from the previously united Christianity of the XIII-XVI cc. This made a strong impression on the representatives of various spiritual schools which emerged in the XVII-XVIII cc. which was reflected in their appraisal of the holy books.
The new chronology fundamentally changes this psychological picture. It becomes clear that the Koran is one of the versions of the holy books which were created in the XIII-XVII cc. that is to say simultaneously to the Bible. This is why many testaments in the Koran are not the 'quotations from the canonised Bible', but often independent and original. Even when they describe the same events as the Bible, the interpretation is different. What the bewildered commentators declare to be 'incorrect citation' of the Bible and the other sources known to us today is just a different perspective on the mediaeval events contemporary to the authors of the Koran.
That is why the Koran is a vitally important and fascinating book, and in regards to us, we read the Koran with an immense interest from the beginning to the end. It turns out that it conveys to us important information lost or cleaned out in the other religious movements.
After the split of the Great Empire the attitude in the Romanovs' Russia towards the Koran and Muhammad became complicated. The emerged religious schism further aggravated tension between the Romanovs and the rulers of Turkey. Nevertheless in the Russian scientific community, unlike in Western Europe, the attitude towards the Koran on the whole remained respectful. It was published and translated in our country as a major work which merited serious study. Even the wars of the pro-Western Romanovs with Turkey didn't influence the respectful attitude towards the Koran in Russia. Despite the attempts of the Romanovs to drive a wedge between the Russians (the Orthodox Christians) and the 'Mongol' Tatars (the Muslims), it didn't succeed.
The Western torrent of 'scientific criticism' at some point descended not just on the Koran, but also on the Book of Mormon [6v]. The accusations against it were in many respects similar to those towards the Koran. Generally the Book of Mormon is often declared to have been 'made up' in the XIX century. The reasons for this 'criticism' are the same. As it turned out the Book of Mormon which surfaced in the XIX century has conveyed to us an old version of history which substantially differs from the Scaligerian one. Subsequently this book was immediately condemned and categorised as 'illegitimate'.
The XVII century author Andrey Lyzlov annotated the Koran and captured a great deal accurately. But as a XVII century Christian, already having been brought up with a sceptical attitude towards Islam, he thought that the Koran (and Islam on the whole) despite, allegedly, being in conflict with the Christians, nevertheless borrowed important ideas from 'earlier' Christianity, Judaism and 'Paganism'. It is not entirely true. All these movements emerged from the whole Royal (and later the Apostolic) Christianity of the XII-XVI cc. That is why they retained so much in common.
At the same time the opinion voiced by Lyzlov has its reasons. As we understand now, the Koran was created in the XV – first half of the XVII cc. as some kind of specific 'ecumenical Book' intended to rectify the rupture, which emerged in the Empire and in the religion. The Islamic leaders sincerely desired to restore the former unity. At least for the significant part of the former Empire (Western Europe was not considered 'their own' any longer). To achieve that they incorporated into the Koran ideas close to the representatives of different religious branches. Their intention was to attract them under their banner. To a great extent it succeeded. Islam has united a great number of people.
The Koran's structure also becomes clear. It is a highly poetic work filled with allegories, and also ideas close to the Christians, the Jews and the 'Pagans'. The poetic language has attracted many. The idea of the restoration of the former unity struck a chord.
27. MEHMED II THE CONQUEROR AND THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD.
YAROSLAVL METEOR OF 1421.
We have discovered that the life description of Prophet Muhammad includes some accounts of Andronicus-Christ from the XII century [PRRK]. In particular the following storylines are present: the Annunciation and the Immaculate Conception; caesarean section; the Star of Bethlehem; reference to John the Baptist; the entry of Jesus into Jerusalem; Jesus driving the tradesmen out of the temple; the destruction of the temple and its rebuilding in three days; the judgement of the *****; Descent into Hell; the ascension of Jesus to heaven; Resurrection from the dead and the Last Judgement; the Conversion of Paul the Apostle (Saul). YAROSLAVL METEOR OF 1421.
In the Prophet Muhammad's life story there are also accounts of Moses and Joshua Ben Nun from the XV-XVI cc. For example, a mother gives up her child to be raised by another woman, later the infant is returned to his mother, but she still gives him back. Moses kills the Egyptian, and a pharaoh in revenge wants to kill Moses, but fails. In the life story of Muhammad we are told that he was falsely accused of the murder of a Christian called Sergius, and also about the failed attempt to assassinate the Prophet Muhammad. The Exodus of Moses with the Israelites from Egypt corresponds with Muhammad and his followers' migration (Hijra) from Mecca. Muhammad's great Battle of Badr corresponds with Moses' victory over the pharaoh's army. Muhammad, like Moses, at a single blow cuts though the water, etc. See [PRRK].
However, the facts of the famous Sultan Mehmed II the Conqueror were incorporated into the life story of Prophet Muhammad most of all. The well-known Arab conquest is the Ataman (Ottoman) seizure of the Pro
No one reads Selfsames spam darkrodent what makes ye think folks want to read this novel? Good gawd what the flyin frig is wrong with ye mayn?
He's bean a friend for a long time. A very intelligent man who enjoys trolling in Christian schools.
in the beginning there was only the great sea of cheeze
You know Beav if you spend all of your time thinkin metaphorically you will most certainly develop certain communication disabilities such as,,,,you don't make any friggin sense to anyone but yeself. Just sayin ,,if you'll pardon the over used phrase.He's bean a friend for a long time. A very intelligent man who enjoys trolling in Christian schools.
in the beginning there was only the great sea of cheeze
We believe in God as One God without associate, son or equal.
And we believe in all the prophets of God, and in all the books revealed by God.
And in Doomsday and the Next Life.
These are essentials of belief.
The atheist thinks himself smart and intelligent: so he denies God and denies the Next Life! And that the Torah, the Gospel and the Quran were fabricated by the prophets themselves.
If this belief: God and the Next Life turns to be true and you face this just following your death, what will you do?
Selfsame you remind me some of Warren Jeffs. A man who committed crimes against women and children in the name of religion. He's in jail now.
