History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedAnti-Arab propaganda

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
Author
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 18:09
I was correcting your misconception about Christian history and highlighting the null nature of your analogy.
Back to Top
Saka View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended
Avatar

Joined: 03-Oct-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 60
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 18:23

Ohhh maybe we have to create a Zagros empire 

Lord Zagros, You are the man, the boss, the best of AE, the king of the king. 

Sorry my Lord I have a request:  can you just defend your own empire instead  defending your own intelligence?    because people here don't care about you are 
 

Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 19:02
I gave you ammunition to use in your argument but you,unsurprisingly, overlooked it.

Why did Catholicism insist that all biblical texts remain in Latin? So that it could maintain monopoly over its interpretation. Now, why is Arabic considered the divine language by fundamentalist Islamists?

Hint: similar rationale.

Back to Top
ok ge View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Aug-2005
Location: Saudi Arabia
Status: Offline
Points: 1780
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 20:29

Though difficult for anyone to read between the lines, that was smart Zagros

Anyhow, I cannot imagine myself going over this issue because we had 4 pages discussion about that exact point. Here:

http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5442& ;PN=2&TPN=6

Save us all the redundancy

D.J. Kaufman
Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk.
Back to Top
ok ge View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Aug-2005
Location: Saudi Arabia
Status: Offline
Points: 1780
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 22:50
Originally posted by Miller Miller wrote:

  Recent archaeological finds have also shed some light on the origins of the Qur'an. In 1972, during the restoration of the Great Mosque of San'a, in Yemen, laborers stumbled upon a "paper grave" containing tens of thousands of fragments of parchment on which verses of the Qur'an were written. (Qur'ans were and still are disposed thus, so as to avoid the impiety of treating the sacred text like ordinary garbage.) Some of these fragments were the oldest Quranic texts yet found [3]. The European scholar Gerd-R. Puin has studied these fragments and published not only a corpus of texts, but some preliminary findings. Interestingly enough, the variations from the received text that he did find seemed to match variations reported by Islamic scholars, in their descriptions of the variant Qur'ans once held by Abdallah Ibn Masud, Ubay Ibn Ka'b, and Ali, and suppressed by Uthman's order. ("Observations on Early Qur'an Manuscripts in San'a", Puin, in The Qur'an as Text, ed. Wild, Brill, 1996)

Miller, I took a look on the huge section you posted out of Wikipedia. Now, i don't see a correlation between what you posted and our topic in this thread. Was this posting regarding the Salman Al Farisi Islam invention? The allegation that Salman Al Farisi created Islam has been asnwered already again. You cannot create something that is already existed. Thus, for the last time, Salman Al Farisi did not create Islam. I hope this time it sunk in everybody's head.

Now, did he help the prophet in "forming" the religion (Notice I use quotation mark, because we believe it is a revelation), that is still baseless. No evidance whatsoever that proves that point.

Most Zoroastrians will try to draw their argument to the similarities of monothiest religions and Zoroastrianism. I talked about it already and I even showed that the case is complex to the extend that some scholars have even concluded that it is the opposite where Zoroastrians learned many Monothiest concepts from the Jews. (Again, go back to the post).

Finally, a new allegation in that post that claims Quran during the time of the prophet is not identical to the one we use today. Now despite that it is posted in Wikipedia introducing Quran!! It is definitely a very contraversial topic that has many flaws to point. I will point them here:

1-  Puin claims that one-fifth of the Qur'an is incomprehensible, apparently because he himself cannot understand it. Funny enough, Dr. Puin has never been seen talking in Arabic and has not taught Arabic language at his university. Also, the government of Yemen has placed the "found Koran" complete in the makhdudat library and invited anyone interested to come and check for themeselves. You can search for some pages scanned through UNESCO and you won't find differences. Plus, no other visiting scholar to the Makhdudat has proved Puin's initial expectation (I say initial expectation because he himself never came on public to announce the findings) available too at http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Mss/#1

2- That page of Wikipedia is actually a copy of the article in the Atlantic monthly magazine. You will be surprised that if  you copied three, four, or even five lines of that article in Wikipedia and googled them, you will find the exact same wording and the same article almost in all the different found sources. Here is the article anyhow: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/199901/koran

Aslo, the discovery of the seventh century manuscript of Yemen in 1972 (The Atlantic Monthly, January 1999) do not add a new dimension, and reveal nothing new, as it has already been identified by Muslim scholars as falling within the well-known standard variants of the Koranic readings, "kera'at". The significance of the discovery is more historical than religious.  By the way, the Atlantic Monthly was sued for defemation on that matter.

  Now, we really got deviated from the topic. Can we get back to the original topic before we get this one aslo closed?



Edited by ok ge
D.J. Kaufman
Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk.
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Status: Offline
Points: 3963
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 03:39
ok ge, I said "if Islam is a divine religion then it doesn't belong to just Arabs", it doesn't mean that I believe in the divinity of Islam, in fact I call those who are called prophets, as the greatest philosphers of the world not as illiterate messengers of the God, so I see Quran and their other books as treasures of knowledge not as holy books, when we accept a book as divine and holy then we have to believe in even its errors or try to interpret those errors to something for fooling ourselves, for example in Quran we read "And the Sun runs on its fixed course around the Earth for a term. That is the Decree of the All-Mighty, the All-Knowing." (Quran, Surat Ya-sin, Ayat 38), it doesn't matter who says it, this is wrong, of course these errors can be found in almost all books of the world.
Back to Top
Ahmed The Fighter View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Lion of Babylon

Joined: 17-Apr-2005
Location: Iraq
Status: Offline
Points: 1108
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 06:31

Cyrus,you consider the prophets as philosphers not realy prohets I can't understand this situation.

I think each prophet is a philospher but not vice versa.

"May the eyes of cowards never sleep"
Khalid Bin Walid
Back to Top
ok ge View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Aug-2005
Location: Saudi Arabia
Status: Offline
Points: 1780
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 09:47

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

for example in Quran we read "And the Sun runs on its fixed course around the Earth for a term. That is the Decree of the All-Mighty, the All-Knowing." (Quran, Surat Ya-sin, Ayat 38), it doesn't matter who says it, this is wrong, of course these errors can be found in almost all books of the world.

Actually we were more interested in your interpretation of calling Islam an "Arab religion". That we are waiting for its clarification.

Now, regarding the verse you posted, I'm not sure what translation you used, but most translations will yield this:

38. And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing. (Ya-Sin Surah, Ayah 38)

http://web.umr.edu/~msaumr/Quran/36.html

This proves the point I mentioned earlier, that what you have and I have as an English is a translation and not an authentic valid Quran as the original Text. Therefore, the mistake you have in your translation is accepted as human error. Rendering the verse to its origin script in Arabic will yield:

As you see, the original and the translation texts I find does not talk about sun running around the Earth. There is no mentioning of Earth. It only says, the sun runs on its orbit fixed path to its destinated end.

 



Edited by ok ge
D.J. Kaufman
Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk.
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Superfluous Enabler of Sekostan

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8681
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 10:02
Wouldn't it be nice for a change that those who want to challenge the Koran actually get their quotes straight. For the unknowing, such accusations sound credible. But for the knowledgeable out here it sounds immature. Make a point if you will but get the darn thing right or don't bother at all. If some wants to ask then that is a different matter. We will not hesitate to help.
Copyright 2004 Seko
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Status: Offline
Points: 3963
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 16:27

Quote Actually we were more interested in your interpretation of calling Islam an "Arab religion". That we are waiting for its clarification.

If Muhammad was an Arab then his religion (or better to say "his philosophy") would be Arab, don't you think so?

Quote As you see, the original and the translation texts I find does not talk about sun running around the Earth. There is no mentioning of Earth. It only says, the sun runs on its orbit fixed path to its destinated end.

If you read the next verses then you will undrestand that my translation was so much better than yours!

Does someone who knows the situation of the huge Sun and the small moon of the earth, say:

40. It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law).

Back to Top
Miller View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 25-Aug-2004
Status: Offline
Points: 392
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 17:12
 

Your statement

Originally posted by ok ge ok ge wrote:

(we explained Salman came after islam establishment)



My response

Originally posted by ok ge ok ge wrote:

Islam or other religion were not revealed in one spot. I don't think anyone believe that god just delivered a CD ROM to Muhammad in a cave with everything on it and that was the end of it. The Quran you see today was not completely revealed and written down till long after Salman was in the picture going to Arabia to find a new messenger from god whether he found one or created one depends on what you want to believe. Again that does not prove the Salman connection, , but your argument does not disprove it either





View of the writer of arcticle from Wikipedia:

Quote

Some Western scholars are less willing to attribute the entire Qur'an to Muhammad. They argue that there is no real proof that the text of the Qur'an was collected under Uthman, since the earliest surviving copies of the complete Qur'an are centuries later than Uthman. (The oldest existing copy of the full text is from the ninth century [2].) They see Islam as being formed slowly, over the centuries after the Muslim conquests, as the Islamic conquerors elaborated their beliefs




Back to Top
Miller View Drop Down
Consul
Consul


Joined: 25-Aug-2004
Status: Offline
Points: 392
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 17:13
 

As for Salman, whoever wrote Quran god, angeles talking to muhammad, Muhammad himself, or Slaman. Was familiar with Zoroastarnism and Iranian culture of that time. Why? Not just because both religions believe in god because there are specific places including the name of location and processes whether on earth in heaven that are the same. Cyrus gave an example of that with Pardis/Ferdows. Odds of both Muslims and Zoroastrians having the same name for a bridge in heavens based on coincident is almost zero. Now at the same time Zoroastrianism is not mentioned in Quran not even once. If this is the same god talking it sounds like that god had some kinds grudge against Zoroastrianism, had fight with his dad and ran away disgusted with Zoroastrianism (read the biography of Salman) then it seems that god was very familiar with the stories from earlier versions of Christianity which is very different that today's Christianity ( there is no son of god in there Jesus if the more like the second Adam like Islam) he even used the same rhyme that Ebionites used, so god must have been a convert to the early form what is now called Christianity ( read the biography of Salman) Then god turns to arabia looking for a messenger to continue his new religion(read the biography of Salman). Does this prove that Salman wrote Quran. Not necessarily. There could be other possibilities, but I have not seem an argument disproving it either



Back to Top
Mortaza View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 3705
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 17:15

so should we turn Tahran instead of Mecca?

will this satisfy our iranic aryan heroes?

how you call God at farsi? we should stop to say Allah too, I think.

 



Edited by Mortaza
Back to Top
azimuth View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
SlaYer'S SlaYer

Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Status: Offline
Points: 2983
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 21:32

well Miller

your CD ROM respond is not proving anything the Quran has 114 chapters and 87 chapters were already written when the prophet was in Makkah and only 27 chapters were written in madina where he and salman met.

and AFAIK salman was a salve at the time the prophet came to madina.

and in salman's biography it says that he was searching for a religion which is true and he was told that there will be a prophet comming from Arabia, and that was the reason form him to come there.

note that muslim belive that in the books of the christans and the jews it says that there will be a prophet comming and gave discribtion of that prophet.

and the article you gave earlier about the religion and the quran from some western point of veiw Didnt mention anything about Salman and Zoroastrians effecting anything.

its clear that from many  Western point of veiw the Prophet learned from Christianity and Judasisim and studied them well and made up one of his own.

others saied that he mixed up these two religion with the ancient religions of Arabia and made up one of his own.

now the latest one Salman alfarisi tought him and gave him the quran! and the basis of these theories are the similarities found between islam and these religions. which were mostly names of places and these names are a common in names in the lanugae and not something new just came up.

note as per the encyclopedias i have Judaisim is older than zoroastrian religion, and the rest of the theories talking about the opposite were mentioned as a side notes not as a main notes.

Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Superfluous Enabler of Sekostan

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8681
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 21:44
Why such motivation by some of our members to disprove the Koran's uniqueness by saying it's influence came from Zoroastror or the Zoroastrian religion?
Copyright 2004 Seko
Back to Top
Zagros View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
retired AE Moderator

Joined: 11-Aug-2004
Location: London
Status: Offline
Points: 8795
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 22:01

Why do muslims try to prove the opposite and that the Quran is unique and that it has no outside influence?

I am playing devil's advocate.

Back to Top
Artaxiad View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 10-Aug-2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 488
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 23:36

Quote If Muhammad was an Arab then his religion (or better to say "his philosophy") would be Arab, don't you think so?

Jesus Christ was an Israeli. That doesn't mean that Christianity is a Jewish religion.

Quote Why such motivation by some of our members to disprove the Koran's uniqueness by saying it's influence came from Zoroastror or the Zoroastrian religion?

The 3 monotheist religions apparently have influences from the Zoroastrianism.

Anyway, these claims seem to be similar (and as absurd as) the claim that a Greek made up the Bible. 

Back to Top
ok ge View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Aug-2005
Location: Saudi Arabia
Status: Offline
Points: 1780
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 02:58

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:

If Muhammad was an Arab then his religion (or better to say "his philosophy") would be Arab, don't you think so?.

Then in this case, I won't be redundant.  Artaxiad has already addressed the question in regards to your analogy.

However, It is not his religion. If you think he sat down in Mecca and invented Islam on a summer day, then prove it.

Originally posted by Cyrus Shahmiri Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:


If you read the next verses then you will undrestand that my translation was so much better than yours!

Does someone who knows the situation of the huge Sun and the small moon of the earth, say:

40. It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law).

Sorry Cyrus, you cannot start translating Quran by yourself. We have already translated Qurans. Summing "your own" understanding of 3 verses in one translated verse is not better than anything. That is also not "my translation" as you say. I provided a link from where I got it. Im an Arab and I can read the original verse better, but still I dont translate by my ownself as if Im an expert by default.

First, can you post a link of your Quran's translated verse. Or is it another Cyrus translation?  

Second, Also, I looked at the other verses. Still nothing really proves your point. "It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)" < this verse is not so hard to understand (assuming you got it right). It is not a nuclear science. All what it says the sun has an orbit, the moon has an orbit. The sun will not collide with the moon going out of its orbit, and the night cannot leave behind the day. All have a system, when to come, when to change, and when to follow. Very simple. Let us not act as expert in Quran by our ownself. We have previous done authenticated work. Use it.

Also as Seko said, get the original verse please, especially when you start translating by your ownself.

Originally posted by Miller Miller wrote:

   Not just because both religions believe in god because there are specific places including the name of location and processes whether on earth in heaven that are the same.

Miller, Let us not waste time on assumptions. Your only argument now is that Islam must have copied Zoraostrianism because of similarities in terminologies and concepts.

Remember that we already discussed that it is a high possiblity that Zoraostrianism copied Judaism as Jews fell under the Persian domain and the Zoroastrianism was developed during that time, as I explained earlier. Therefore, the concept of Adam and Paradise...etc is not a copyright of Zoroastrianism. Judaism has the same concepts, does it mean it stole it from Zoroastrianism? Actually, the opposite is more logical for sure.

Originally posted by azimuth azimuth wrote:

well Miller

your CD ROM respond is not proving anything the Quran has 114 chapters and 87 chapters were already written when the prophet was in Makkah and only 27 chapters were written in madina where he and salman met.

That is a good point I overlooked. Those 87 chapters cotain what Cyrus called the similarities between Zoroastrianism and Islam. So it was even before he met Salman.  The Madinah suras are mainly dealing with jurisdictions.

 

So you are left only with only one argument, which is that Islam must have copied Judaism. That is by itself depends on your preception. If you are a Jew, you will say Christianity copied Judaism. Both Christians and Jews claim Islam copied both of them. Bottom line, they are all religions that came from God, one source. One source means common grounds for all three religions.

Originally posted by Miller Miller wrote:

   Now at the same time Zoroastrianism is not mentioned in Quran not even once.

Here is a new concept you can add to your information Miller. The Quran didn't tell about all the religions has been monothiest and has been revealed from God in the past before they changed. Zoroastrianism can be one of them, or not. who knows.

.

Allah tells his messenger: and we have sent messengers before you, some of whom we have narrated to you, and some of whom we haven't. (Gafer surah, 78)



Edited by ok ge
D.J. Kaufman
Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk.
Back to Top
Seko View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Superfluous Enabler of Sekostan

Joined: 01-Sep-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8681
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 09:37
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Why do muslims try to prove the opposite and that the Quran is unique and that it has no outside influence?

I am playing devil's advocate.

My question was left unanswered.

Copyright 2004 Seko
Back to Top
Cyrus Shahmiri View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
King of Kings

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Iran
Status: Offline
Points: 3963
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 12:55

Quote Jesus Christ was an Israeli. That doesn't mean that Christianity is a Jewish religion.

Why?!! maybe you think it is a Japanese religion?

Quote Sorry Cyrus, you cannot start translating Quran by yourself. We have already translated Qurans. Summing "your own" understanding of 3 verses in one translated verse is not better than anything. That is also not "my translation" as you say. I provided a link from where I got it. Im an Arab and I can read the original verse better, but still I dont translate by my ownself as if Im an expert by default.

First, can you post a link of your Quran's translated verse. Or is it another Cyrus translation? 

Second, Also, I looked at the other verses. Still nothing really proves your point. "It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)" < this verse is not so hard to understand (assuming you got it right). It is not a nuclear science. All what it says the sun has an orbit, the moon has an orbit. The sun will not collide with the moon going out of its orbit, and the night cannot leave behind the day. All have a system, when to come, when to change, and when to follow. Very simple. Let us not act as expert in Quran by our ownself. We have previous done authenticated work. Use it.

It is obvious that you want to fool yourself, it seems as if I say "the blood runs through my veins and I walk down the street (we know the Sun is fixed, if we assume that it meant the Solar System) but it is not permitted to me to catch up the blood", isn't it silly?

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.