Hijab Woman of London Attack Defends Herself
- Thread starter Hoof Hearted
- Start date
Most of you have no idea what you are talking about at all
you have been, like the biblicans: PLAYED
DISCOVERY: Oldest Quran Found Has Little Similarity To Modern Version
[youtube]w_vq9_Wipic[/youtube]
Published on Sep 4, 2014
Like the bible, and to apparently an even greater extent, the Qur'an of today cannot be claimed to be a true version of the oldest Qur'an in the world discovered in 1972, written in 705-715 AD, and available to researchers in 1979. There are TREMENDOUS differences, an excellent example of one being an original text of "72 grapes" being changed to the infamous "72 virgins" awaiting the faithful in the afterlife hundreds of years later.
The standard histories of Muhammad and the early development of Islam are based on Islamic literature that dates to the ninth and tenth centuries--some two centuries or more after the death of Muhammad in 632. Islamic literary sources do not exist for the seventh and eighth centuries, when, according to tradition, Muhammad and his immediate followers lived. All that is preserved from this time period are a few commemorative building inscriptions and assorted coins.
As the researchers meticulously show, the name "Muhammad" first appears on coins in Syria bearing Christian iconography. In this context the name is used as an honorific meaning "revered" or "praiseworthy" and can only refer to Jesus Christ, as Christianity was the predominant religion of the area at this time. This same reference exists in the building inscription of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, built by the caliph `Abd al-Malik.
The implication of these and other findings here presented is that the early Arab rulers adhered to a sect of Christianity. Indeed, evidence from the Koran, finalized at a much later time, shows that its central theological tenets were influenced by a pre-Nicean, Syrian Christianity. Linguistic analysis also indicates that Aramaic, the common language throughout the Near East for many centuries and the language of Syrian Christianity, significantly influenced the Arabic script and vocabulary used in the Koran. Finally, it was not until the end of the eighth and ninth centuries that Islam formed as a separate religion, and the Quran underwent a period of historical development of at least 200 years.
In other words, even should one believe the Qur'an as written by Mohammad is a sacred text, the Qur'an of today is a substantially different book, unqualified to be called the true Qur'an or even a reasonable facsimile. Thus contemporary Islam is complete bull**** based on the false and inaccurate Qur'an in current use by Muslims. Muslims leaders, of course, reject the physical and irrefutable evidence and facts presented.
you have been, like the biblicans: PLAYED
DISCOVERY: Oldest Quran Found Has Little Similarity To Modern Version
[youtube]w_vq9_Wipic[/youtube]
Published on Sep 4, 2014
Like the bible, and to apparently an even greater extent, the Qur'an of today cannot be claimed to be a true version of the oldest Qur'an in the world discovered in 1972, written in 705-715 AD, and available to researchers in 1979. There are TREMENDOUS differences, an excellent example of one being an original text of "72 grapes" being changed to the infamous "72 virgins" awaiting the faithful in the afterlife hundreds of years later.
The standard histories of Muhammad and the early development of Islam are based on Islamic literature that dates to the ninth and tenth centuries--some two centuries or more after the death of Muhammad in 632. Islamic literary sources do not exist for the seventh and eighth centuries, when, according to tradition, Muhammad and his immediate followers lived. All that is preserved from this time period are a few commemorative building inscriptions and assorted coins.
As the researchers meticulously show, the name "Muhammad" first appears on coins in Syria bearing Christian iconography. In this context the name is used as an honorific meaning "revered" or "praiseworthy" and can only refer to Jesus Christ, as Christianity was the predominant religion of the area at this time. This same reference exists in the building inscription of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, built by the caliph `Abd al-Malik.
The implication of these and other findings here presented is that the early Arab rulers adhered to a sect of Christianity. Indeed, evidence from the Koran, finalized at a much later time, shows that its central theological tenets were influenced by a pre-Nicean, Syrian Christianity. Linguistic analysis also indicates that Aramaic, the common language throughout the Near East for many centuries and the language of Syrian Christianity, significantly influenced the Arabic script and vocabulary used in the Koran. Finally, it was not until the end of the eighth and ninth centuries that Islam formed as a separate religion, and the Quran underwent a period of historical development of at least 200 years.
In other words, even should one believe the Qur'an as written by Mohammad is a sacred text, the Qur'an of today is a substantially different book, unqualified to be called the true Qur'an or even a reasonable facsimile. Thus contemporary Islam is complete bull**** based on the false and inaccurate Qur'an in current use by Muslims. Muslims leaders, of course, reject the physical and irrefutable evidence and facts presented.
All of the above is pretty much moot, as the quran as written today is the one that is being used. It matters not what this scholar or any other has come up with.
like the muslims
you are being played
...and with the addition of the word "RETARDED" also applies to you too
look at how people treat you around here for your head gear A$$HAT
you are being played
...and with the addition of the word "RETARDED" also applies to you too
look at how people treat you around here for your head gear A$$HAT
like the muslims
you are being played
No, dummy, I am not.
Yelling, "That isn't the the way it is". "That isn't how it's supposed to be", means sweet fu ck all. The REALITY is what is written and what they believe. A "non muslim" can spout off that it's not right all he wants, it means nothing to a Muslim. It won't change their mind. It won't "make things better".
gerryh...
Who cares what you have to say about anything from now on?
When you call a woman on this forum a 'c unt' simply for exercising her right to free speech, your credibility is shot. Your opinions don't count anymore. Go piss in the wind.
Who cares what you have to say about anything from now on?
When you call a woman on this forum a 'c unt' simply for exercising her right to free speech, your credibility is shot. Your opinions don't count anymore. Go piss in the wind.
You make it sound like this is the first fu cking time I have done this. Fu ck are you EVER a fu cking moron.
and if that's what you believe, then moron doesn't even come close to describing your lack of intelligence.