Aerik Von

This sites arguements are pretty weak imo. The Jewish messiah has OBVIOUSLY not been fuffilled and nor he Jesus OR Mohummad done ANYTHING promised in the Old Testament. Neither have instituted the 1,000 year reign under Israel. Simply put - and this was promised to them. Jesus and Mohummad both dodge and rewrite the originals goals of the messiah - but really - it's easy to choose a belief and THEN use texts to justify it. I could justify my entire belief system according to a Dilbert comic book. Qoute here, qoute there - claim it's divine - BOOM! I have a religion with a holy text that is hard to qeustion since I've taken all the time to smooth the edges - like fixing the flow of a movie.

Jesus did not make the land promises or reinstall the kingdom of David instantly and instead "promised it for later" which most Rabbis I know find to be lying and excuse making at best. Mohummad has not made any lasting kingdom and the Koran really doesn't do anything but re-cast the history of the past and twists it to use it how it likes. Mohummad was one of many who contributed, and you haven't proven otherwise other than using the books words to justify itself.

Maybe Mohummad could not read, but many people wrote down the Koran other than he in opinion of the unfaithful, and those people may certainly have had great interest in the Torah.

Using competing theologies doesn't do much for you case River, it'd be best to see if Islam can stand on it's own claims. All theologies adapt to fight each other and your links about Islam are no different.

:banghead:

Hence continues the cosmic drama of theologies at
war

River

It does.

mark9950

Than he could not write the koran either.

I do not know if the prophet knew how to read and/or write but I do know that he was a caucasion european(whether he was arabic descent I do not know).

Now he may not have been able to write in arabic but if the torah was translated in english (or whatever language he spoke) he could have been able to read his translation of the hebrew torah.

I really doubt that he could not read or write in his language,but he may not have been able to read or write in arabic because he was not an arab.

River

This is probably one of the most bizarre claims about the Prophet . I have once heard something similar...that the Prophet was Iranian.....but theres no evidence for this.

Secular Pinoy

Was there really an historical Mahomet?

River

Yes, he is the only Prophet that is considered to be a historical figure by modern day historians and scholar.

Secular Pinoy

Citations, please. Who are these scholars and historians, their methods, the whole nine yards?

River

dude, do you want me to cite like every historian in the world minus say...like 2 or 3.


This thread has some useful info on the topic
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=59162

Secular Pinoy

At least give a representative sampling. I'm interested.

River

I'm sorry but I dont really know where to start . Muhammad's existence is pretty much accepted amongst the vast majority of Historians and Anthropologists....


Do you want a website with some reference to the items left behind by the Prophet

http://www.altmuslim.com/world_comme...=P627_0_22_0_C