Clivedurdle

I do not know why Freke and Gandy haven't got a fatwa on them for Laughing Jesus but...

FnG quote Harnack that M was influenced by Judeo-Christian gnostics:

They note that originally M was very egalitarian - a clear gnostic influence.

premjan

The Iliad starts off with "Sing".

Clinical

Wrong. This is a myth that was invented 150-200 years after the death of Muhammad. The Quran never mentions any of this.
This is true because many Arabs at the time were following a distorted version of the religion of Abraham. Islam does not sanction circumcision.
Again, the Quran never mentions any of this. Are there any historical records for this? Would be very interesting.
Again, this is a myth that was invented 150-200 years after the death of Muhammad. The Quran never mentions any of this.
Muhammad was literate, and he wrote the Quran as it was dictated to him.
Again, these are myths that were invented 150-200 years after the death of Muhammad. The Quran never mentions any of them and actually rebukes them.
It was not at the end of his life. It was actually at the beginning of his Prophethood when he was still in Mecca. If you want to satcastically mock other religion then do get the basics right. And it was not on a flying horse either.
He did not stop off in Jerusalem, bust somewhere else.
Again wrong. The Quran never mentions any of these encounters
He did not ascend into Heaven. None ascends into Heaven except angels. He knew God face to face (Did not see Him) and spoke with Him.
Where did you get his from? Even the fabricated Hadiths do not mention this? Seems our friend is influenced by Christian mythology here.
But Jesus indeed was not crucified, was he? Call it "Judeo-Christian gnostics" or whatever, I do not really care. What matters is that the Quran got it right. And for your information, Christianity never existed in the Hijaz, so your premise is wrong in the first place.
23 years.
Wrong. Muhammad wrote the Quran as it was dictated to him. The Quran itself says this.
Your "camel ribs" and "parchment" etc... information all come from fabricated Hadiths. There is also no historical evidence for "Uthmanic recension", which confirms that the Quran was already written and compiled. Those "scholars" you talk about should get a refund from their universities because we have Quranic manuscripts from the 7th century that match the Quran that we have today.
As I said above, the Quran was written by Muhammad as the Quran says this. Muhammad's first revelation is not really at the end. You have to understand that the Quran has no beginning or end. It is not like a novel or school textbook.
Hadiths are man inventions after the death of Muhammad by 150-200 years. They have nothing to do with Islam or its Prophet Muhammad.
It is not a "mess" because those repetitions were there because people were usually repeating their own mistakes and so they had to be reminded time and time again. They were not unimportant either? Why would he bother repeating unimportant things? It does not make sense. They must have been important to them, and indeed they are.
Do not read the Quran as a novel or a textbook. Read it as lessons from someone to another over 23 years.
Wrong. No Muslim scholar acknowledges this. And Omar was a very fundamentalist person and would not dare do something like this. It would have caused a massive backlash too.
Wrong. The Quran does not order women to wear veils. This is in a fabricated Hadith. See how your statement above was wrong?
Muhammad did not have personal grudges against anyone. It was the other way around. His uncle had a personal grudge against him not necessarily because he was an "imposter", but because he believed Islam would strip the authority from the rulers of Quraysh, Abu Lahab included. It was all politics.
God did not abuse Muhammad's uncle. He only told him of his destiny in the Hereafter. And it was a waster of time either. The morale of those five verses is to tell us the farthest the human mind will go to to protect his own ego or interests, even to as far as abusing his very kin and throwing stones and dirt in his way. It is not just about Abu Lahab. There have been many Abu Lahabs throughout history. These verses address them too. The Quran talks about several people as good or bad examples, such as Luqman the Wise for instance. Did God waste our time there? No, because we learn great deal from them.
If you want a cure for leprosy then go consult a physician or medical book. The Quran encourages us to study science, but it is not itself a book of medicine or science.

Roger Pearse

Some details would be nice.

What is the evidence either way?

What are the medieval sources for all this?

Erm, are you sure about this? There were Christian groups all along the coast in the 5-6th century, and a Christian kingdom in Yemen, Najiran, which was the object of a Jewish-led persecution and an Ethiopian rescue expedition. Simeon of Beth-Arsham describes these events, and Cosmas Indicopleustes was in Ethiopia quite by chance at the time when the expedition was preparing.

A quote would be nice here.

More details on all of this would be nice.

Do Shi'ites agree about Omar?

Sources?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Clinical

1. The Quran does not mention that story which is enough evidence anyway that it is false.
2. That story appears in Bukhari's book, who died 243 years after Muhammad.
The Quran.
What do you mean by medieval sources? Anyway his Night Journey was from the Sacred Mosque (The Kaaba). So it happened when he was in Mecca at the beginning of his Prophethood.
The Quran does not mention any "flying horses". It was God who carried him by night from Mecca to the Farthest Mosque. "Glory to Him Who did take His servant for a Journey by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Farthest Mosque, whose precincts We did bless,- in order that We might show him some of Our Signs: for He is the One Who heareth and seeth (all things)." [17:1]
Yes I am sure. Christianity existed in the north, where the Ghassanids were agents of the Byzantines, and as you said, in the south in Yemen. Nowhere else.
"Read: In the name of thy Lord who createth," [96:1] So he was able to read and write.
"And they say: Fables of the men of old which he hath had written down so that they are dictated to him morn and evening." [25:5] Here we understand that the opponents of Muhammad knew that he was writing the Quran as it was dictated to him morning and evening.
"A messenger from Allah, reading purified pages" [98:2] So he was reading from pages, not "camel ribs" and "parchments".
The story of "Uthman's recension" appears only in Bukhari and later writers who lived hundreds of years after his death. It is pure fiction.
More than 40 Quranic manuscripts have been discovered at Sanaa in Yemen and they date to the 7th century, some of them even to early mid 7th century.
They believe the rulership should have gone to Ali, not him or Abu Bakr. Their differences with Sunnis are mainly political.
The five verses say that Abu Lahab's "wealth and gains will not exempt him" [111:2] We can deduce that it was about business/politics.
My regards,

Roger Pearse

Do you mean this book?

The earliest available sources written at the time or soon after (i.e., not modern ones).

Can I ask why you are sure? If there are certainly some at the top and some at the bottom, there are likely to be some in between?

Thank you for the Koran references you give -- that's the sort of thing I had in mind.

Do I take it that you reject all of the Hadith as unhistorical?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Solo

The nur-i-Muhammadi ('the light of Mohammed') is simply the mystical "inner light", accounts of which exist in myths all over the world. Islam, traditional or Sufi, never used the concept to promote "unio mystica" with Mohammed or attach theological or eschatological meanings to it. In Islam, Mohammed was a prophet of God who was born and died, peace be upon him, and that's the end of that.

There was a Christ-like martyr among the ecstatic dervishes, Mansur al- Hallaj, who in a trance declared himself the Truth (one of the 99 sacred names of Allah) and was executed for blasphemy by the caliph. He might have become a venerated founder of a new religion, but the Mongols were about 300 years late in destroying Baghdad (where Mansur was tortured and executed) so the connection between his martyrdom and God's punishment was not made.

Jiri

Clinical

Yes.
OK. I explained from the Quran that the Night Journey was at the beginning of his Prophethood.
There could not be some in between because it was all deserts and mountains. Christian missionaries could not go there, and if they could they would have encountered severe resistance because those guys were not very tolerant.
You are welcome.
Yes.
Regards,

Clinical

Still that is not Islamic. Many Muslims have all kinds of convictions which contradict the Quran.
True.
Allah does not have "99 names". He has 70+ titles/descriptions in the Quran.
And there is no punishment for blasphemy in Islam. Punishing apostates/blasphemers is a Biblical law that found its way into Muslim tradition when Jews converted to Islam. That Hallaj was a victim, may he rest in peace.

fatpie42

So what, in your opinion, is the reason for the 99-beaded rosaries? If they aren't for counting 'names of God', what are they for?