Thread: God's Name

Originally Posted by Hanna

1) Islam recognises Jesus as a major prophet, but not (I think?) as the son of God.
2) Islam is the religion of the decendants of Hagar in the Old testament. (The woman who got kicked out into the desert by Jacob, together with her son She gets treated in a terrible way, in my opinion! ).

Point 1: Absolutely correct, as bitpicker has noted. In fact, Jesus Christ is praised in the highest terms in all Islamic texts. And the first time I read about Saint Mary in Quran, I was almost moved to tears. True, that was long ago...

Point 2: I don't know about the Christian sources, but according to the Islamic sources, Hagar was left in the desert by Abraham (not Jacob, who was Abraham's grandson, I think). Mohammad was a descendant of Ismael, Hagar's son.

Originally Posted by Misha Tal

Point 1: Absolutely correct, as bitpicker has noted. In fact, Jesus Christ is praised in the highest terms in all Islamic texts. And the first time I read about Saint Mary in Quran, I was almost moved to tears. True, that was long ago...

Point 2: I don't know about the Christian sources, but according to the Islamic sources, Hagar was left in the desert by Abraham (not Jacob, who was Abraham's grandson, I think). Mohammad was a descendant of Ismael, Hagar's son.

Mohamed had very poor knowledge of Tora and Bible so there are numerous times in the Koran where he makes mistakes and gets confused about names and such. For example Mohamed claimed that Moses was raised by Egyptian king's wife instead of his daughter. This is why Mohamed had to cover his mistakes by saying the "Jews changed the Bible". However in your case Mohamed was right. Abraham kicked Ishmael and his mother out, not Jacob. But mohamed goes on the say the Ishmael received the "Birthright" when clearly, he did not. That's why he was kicked out, so that their would be no dispute over Isaac receiving the Birthright.

Also, Mohamed's praise for Jesus is in name only. Mohamed did not believe the things that Jesus preached as a matter fact Mohamed preached the exact opposite of Jesus and performed works contrary to Jesus. Jesus did not behead his enemies nor did he enslave their wives. Mohamed preached jihad, while Jesus told his disciples to "shake the dust from your coat and move on when people do not receive your gospel."

Originally Posted by Sgt. Cold

Mohamed had very poor knowledge of Tora and Bible...

In fact, Mohammad had no such knowledge whatsoever. The fact that he was illiterate is explicitly stated in Quran. According to the Islamic faith, neither Quran nor Tora were written by mere mortals. Moses, Jesus and Mohammad were not "writers". They didn't make things up. They were only "messengers".

As for your anti-Islam rhetoric, it only proves my point about religious hatred.

Originally Posted by Misha Tal

In fact, Mohammad had no such knowledge whatsoever. The fact that he was illiterate is explicitly stated in Quran. According to the Islamic faith, neither Quran nor Tora were written by mere mortals. Moses, Jesus and Mohammad were not "writers". They didn't make things up. They were only "messengers".

But it should be said that nothing in the New Testament is attributed to Jesus as a writer, it's more like a biography. And the books about Moses aren't written by the Moses person either, it would be very strange for him to say things like "he was born on..." and especially "he died then and there and afterwards...". In fact it has been established that the five Biblical books of Moses are themselves collections of texts spanning generations and which are even mutually exclusive and internally inconsistent. So the only factual writer (or rather illiterate narrator whose uttered words were written down directly or at a later date according to hearsay) among these is Mohammad. Whether such dictation is divinely influenced or not remains a matter of faith alone.

Originally Posted by bitpicker

But it should be said that nothing in the New Testament is attributed to Jesus as a writer, it's more like a biography.

Your deduction is flawless, except for the fact that it doesn't disprove the Islamic interpretation. Islam holds that the text of the Bible has undergone various modifications by Christian clergies. Things have been added and deleted here and there. It's hardly any surprise that the remaining looks more like a biography.

Actually, there are many lines in the Quran that prove it wasn't written by Mohammad in person. There are prophecies and historical references and such. So a non-Muslim can question the validity of the claim that "the Quran is divinely dictated" in a similar way: it has been manipulated by others.

What remains unquestionable, is the fact that Muslims, from pagan Arabs all the way to our time, have always held Jesus and Moses in high esteem. Talking in disrespectful language about Jesus is considered as foul as doing so about Mohammad. In that regard, Muslims rarely receive mutual respect from Christians and Jews.

Originally Posted by Misha Tal

Your deduction is flawless, except for the fact that it doesn't disprove the Islamic interpretation. Islam holds that the text of the Bible has undergone various modifications by Christian clergies. Things have been added and deleted here and there. It's hardly any surprise that the remaining looks more like a biography.

Do you mean to say that Islam views anything in scripture as having been written by Jesus?

Theology by the way along with historical research also holds the same view that all scripture has been rewritten and modified beyond recognition. And that there is little use in being literal about what's written there.

Originally Posted by bitpicker

Do you mean to say that Islam views anything in scripture as having been written by Jesus?

Did I say anything remotely resembling that?

From Wikipedia (under "Jesus in Islam"):

"Muslims believe that God revealed to Jesus a new scripture, the Injil (Gospel), while also declaring the truth of other previous revelations, the Tawrat (Torah) and Zabur (Psalms). Descended 600 years after Jesus' life on earth, the Quran speaks favorably of the Injil, which it describes as a scripture that fills the hearts of it's followers with meekness and pity."

Originally Posted by bitpicker

all scripture has been rewritten and modified beyond recognition.

Not so sure! Remember the Qumran scrolls (at work, so can't check it up..) But essentially they were several thousand years old Torah scrolls that were found hidden away in a cave in an inaccessible mountainous area. When they were investigated, they found, if I recall correctly, that there were only a few letters that were different to the Hebrew "Torah" today! To Jews, it was a fantastic sign of the holiness of their Torah.

In the New Testament, I think they removed the "apocrypha" books and found some signs that a section had been added to one of the testaments during the Middle Ages. But that was about it! Apart from that, the the gospels were written 50-100 years after the death of Jesus, approximately. To some degree they are supported by a totally independent Roman history writer that was a contemporary of Jesus, but not a Jew. He wrote about it simply because it was major news in the area at the time. His name was Josefus.

A few things need to be clarified.
It is not known that Mohamed was illiterate. He was the top man who worked for a wealthy merchant and made many long trips to into Arabia and Syria with valuable cargo, made deals and returned with traded goods. It is likely that someone in his position and influence and who had family members who were leaders of his city, that he was able to in fact read and write. Sure the Koran and Hadith alludes that he was illiterate but it also says that "Adam was formed from a clot of congealed blood" too, so I think it is fair to say that we can take the Koran with a grain of salt.

The Koran if not written at least in part by Mohamed was at least written UNDER HIS SUPERVISION so it is neither here nor there who actually wrote it. When Mohamed died (as a result from the poisoning of his food by his captive Jewish sex slave three years earlier) he left nothing but a pile of papers that had to be collected by his followers and put into some order. There was no end of story or accomplishment in the Koran. There was no original Koran. It just ended when Mohamed ended.

Many of the verses were found and burnt by Muslims because they did not fit into Mohamed's line of thinking as he progressed. An example of this would be the Satanic Verses where Mohamed proclaimed for a time that Allah existed with his daughters godesses; from Alah's relationship with the Sun godess. These verses were systematically searched for found an most of them destroyed. Another, according to Mohammed's wife, Aysha, with whom he resided at this death, was kept under their bed at the time of Mohammed's death, but was eaten by a domestic animal. References: Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal. vol. 6. page 269;

Mohammed's child bride, Aysha, said this after he died:
"The verse of the stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the messenger of Allah expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper."


In 1972 in the Great Mosque of Yemen was found and ancient bag of decaying Korans (the earliest found). They differ from the Koran as it reads today in quite a few places proving that the Koran is not the "sacred copy of the version kept in a tablet in heaven."

... The devastating truth is that a large number of ancient Quranic manuscripts, dating from first century of Hijra were discovered in the Great Mosque of Sana’a (Yemen), which significantly differs from the present standard one. Carbon dating system confirmed that these Qurans are not forged one by religious rivalries. Moreover, these Qurans were discovered by Muslims, not infidels.

This is, probably, the most embarrassing event to Muslims in the 1,400-year history of Islam.

... Until now, only three ancient copies of the Quran are found. The one preserved in the British Library in London, dates from the late seventh century and was thought to be the oldest one. But the Sana’a manuscripts are even older. Moreover, these manuscripts are written in a script that originates from the Hijaz—the region of Arabia where prophet Muhammad lived, which makes them not only the oldest to have survived, but one of the earliest authentic copies of the Quran ever.

... As if it is not enough, many manuscripts showed the sign of palimpsests, i.e., versions very clearly written over even earlier washed off versions. The underwriting of palimpsest is, of course, often difficult to read visually, but modern tools, such as ultraviolet photography, can highlight them. It suggests that the Sana’a manuscripts are not only variants to the present version of the Quran, but the Sana’a manuscripts themselves were variants of earlier version, re-written on the same paper. It means, Allah’s claim that original text is preserved in heaven on golden tablets (Q 56: 77–78; 85:21–22), which none can touch except angels is also a fairy-tale.

THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS: THE SANA QURANS: PROOF THE KORAN IS A POORLY WRITTEN, TERRIBLY EDITED AND TOTALLY MISINFORMED BOOK, AND NOT THE REVELATION OF A PROPHET



Furthermore are the 35,000 microfilms have showed up.
Asia Times Online :: Middle East News, Iraq, Iran current affairs

Before the Yemeni authorities shut the door to Western scholars, two German academics, Gerhard R Puin and H C Graf von Bothmer, made 35,000 microfilm copies, which remain at the University of the Saarland. Many scholars believe that the German archive, which includes photocopies of manuscripts as old as 700 AD, will provide more evidence of variation in the Koran.

Given the abundant evidence I think it is only fair to say that it appears that Mohamed may have simply been a man with the personality of a Charles Manson who made up stories using bits and pieces form Zoroastrian, Jewish and Christian sources that he had picked up in his travels. His first wife had family members who were of a Christians sect and it is written than Mohamed used to meet with a certain hermit "monk" during his trips as a merchant into Syria. (That was before he started raiding and looting merchant camel trains) Allah was known as a name by some pagan Arabs for their Moon god. We have ancient Arab archaeological finds that confirm this. The Moon is a symbol all over Arab countries dating back to Pagan times and has been adopted by Islam. I think it is therefore a just a matter of closing the case.

Speaking of the Moon, I have to inform you that there is no such thing as the Moon. It's actually the left testicle of an ancient camel that has been mysteriously put in the orbit. Arabs knew that, so they worshiped the "Heavenly Testicle"; it was believed that the god of Moon would in that way save their camels from misfortune.

In 1969, when man finally conquered the Moon, the undeniable fact was revealed at last. But people in NASA decided not to tell anybody. Not a word about it. What? You think they should have let the cat out of the basket? Who would believe it then?

It was only quite recently that this greatest mystery of all times was made public. The Moon, the ornament of the skies, the glorious bride of heavens that has been a constant source of inspiration for poets, is in fact the left testicle of a camel.

Reference: "What I saw up there"; Niel A. Armstrong, page 25

Now go back to your Quran-burning ambitions.

Originally Posted by Misha Tal

it was believed that the god of Moon would in that way save their camels from misfortune.

In fact, since the ancient Egyptians the humankind knew the moon is not a god on its own, but just a manifestation of the deity. Similarly to animals. So, what Neil had seen was not in fact a testicle, but at most a manifestation of the testicle.

Originally Posted by Misha Tal

Speaking of the Moon, I have to inform you that there is no such thing as the Moon. It's actually the left testicle of an ancient camel that has been mysteriously put in the orbit. Arabs knew that, so they worshiped the "Heavenly Testicle"; it was believed that the god of Moon would in that way save their camels from misfortune.

In 1969, when man finally conquered the Moon, the undeniable fact was revealed at last. But people in NASA decided not to tell anybody. Not a word about it. What? You think they should have let the cat out of the basket? Who would believe it then?

It was only quite recently that this greatest mystery of all times was made public. The Moon, the ornament of the skies, the glorious bride of heavens that has been a constant source of inspiration for poets, is in fact the left testicle of a camel.

Reference: "What I saw up there"; Niel A. Armstrong, page 25

Now go back to your Quran-burning ambitions.

If you have something to debate, about concerning the previous information complete with links and sources which I posted, then perhaps you should try to articulate your point, because right now you come across as giving the typical emotional response of name calling and labeling that an ideologue often gives when confronted with information that he can not assimilate. Truth is never discovered through emotions!

I see now from your avatar that you claim to be currently in Iran. If you are Iranian you appear to have turned your back on your ancestors who resisted fiercely the men of Mohamed when they came for them. Great battles were fought and many men died trying to preserve their freedom from Islam back then. The original Iranians were called the Aryans who came down from Russia and settled where they are today.
History of the Ancient Aryans