Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Elijah · 11-19-2008, 12:08 AM

From article.

Quote:

He devoured works questioning the existence of Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Then "I said to myself: You've dealt with Christianity and Judaism but what about your own religion? Can you take it for granted that Muhammad existed?"

In other words: "These guys got published with this idea in their religions, maybe I can hack their stuff over Muhammad and push some paper."

Gotta get paid.

Toto · 11-19-2008, 12:31 AM

No one has gotten rich dissenting from a major religion, unless they form their own. I think Kalish's motives are not so crass.

There is a comment on the gypsy scholar blog that indicates that Kalish's univery is a hotbed of "gnosticism", and Kalish has relied on The Hidden Origins of Islam: New Research into Its Early History (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Karl-Heinz Ohlig, ed, and Gerd-R Puin, ed.

Quote:

As the authors 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, finalised 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 Koran underwent a period of historical development of at least 200 years.

There is some criticism of the Ohlig thesis here.

Quote:

Marx: There are far too many pieces of evidence that make Ohlig's thesis that the Prophet never lived untenable. In the 14 centuries of polemics between Christians and Muslims, this issue has never made an appearance. Even in Syrian-Aramaic sources, however, there is some documentation about the prophet from an earlier time.

Sounds like a familiar argument. . .

Quote:

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Your scholarship focuses on the early period of Islam and the Koran. What is the evidentiary situation? How could we prove that the Prophet lived?

Marx: You have to be a bit delicate about it. In general, when it comes to history, you can't point to any scientific proof. How would we, for example, prove the existence of Charlemagne? We can't conduct any experiments; we have to work with evidence. And, for this issue, the evidentiary thread is the Koran. In this case, the evidentiary situation is better than it is for any other religion. . . .

Sounds very familiar. . .

Quote:

SPIEGEL ONLINE: In other words, if the Prophet did not live, in order to explain the literature, there must have been an enormous conspiracy.

Marx: Precisely.

Elijah · 11-19-2008, 01:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

No one has gotten rich dissenting from a major religion, unless they form their own. I think Kalish's motives are not so crass.

Didn't say anything about getting rich. But hopefully you are right and I'm just being cynical but it just read like a giant ad for an upcoming book to me. "Coming soon. More controversial then the Danish cartoons. A man willing to die to expose the truth about hackedy hackedy hackady."

Bloodnf · 11-19-2008, 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Didymus

Is it an insult to Muhammed to think - or even claim - he didn't exist? Of course not; you can't insult someone who never existed. Surely those rioters and beheaders will soon realize that they have no case against Muhammad Sven Kalisch.

That only applies to the rioters and beheaders who think rationally, of course. ;

Doesn't seem to be much rioting or beheading going on. Maybe rioters cant read and only riot at pictures a la the Danish Cartoons?

Question · 11-19-2008, 05:46 AM

Think about how many people will become unemployed because of this!!!

Roger Pearse · 11-19-2008, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

No one has gotten rich dissenting from a major religion...

Well, what about people like Spong, or Hans Kung, tho? People with a book to sell? Bishops notoriously publish such stuff, and presumably get paid?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Potoooooooo · 11-19-2008, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Pearse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

No one has gotten rich dissenting from a major religion...

Well, what about people like Spong, or Hans Kung, tho? People with a book to sell? Bishops notoriously publish such stuff, and presumably get paid?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

but are they rich?

Toto · 11-19-2008, 10:28 AM

If you want to look at rich people, try Rick Warren, or Pat Robertson. That's the road to wealth.

This guy is a German academic. He might lose his academic appointment, and might have to go into hiding.

But, whatever his motivation, his ideas should still be evaluated as ideas. He could be corrupt and evil, and still be right.

Didymus · 11-19-2008, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

But, whatever his motivation, his ideas should still be evaluated as ideas. He could be corrupt and evil, and still be right.

Satan has led you astray. Or maybe it was the liberal secularist establishment. Same thing, really.

Makes no difference what is known about the man. Obviously he is selfish and vile, just another hack atheist, plagiarizing others and plotting against God, religion and all else that is good. Surely, the writings of such a contemptible person are beneath consideration and he deserves what he gets.

Welcome to the New Dark Age.

Ddms

Elijah · 11-19-2008, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

If you want to look at rich people, try Rick Warren, or Pat Robertson. That's the road to wealth.

Its naive to think that the vast majority of people in church are not in it for the cash, it's equally as naive to not think that book writers are just as greedy. The vast majority of people in general are motivated by greed. IMO

And if he was presenting evidence or a new idea it would be one thing but he's just taking the Jesus myth "no evidence", "argument from silence" deal and applying it to Mohammad... the Dane Cook of religious study.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-19-2008, 05:46 AM	#15
Question Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: By the Lake Posts: 342	Think about how many people will become unemployed because of this!!!

11-19-2008, 10:28 AM	#18
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	If you want to look at rich people, try Rick Warren, or Pat Robertson. That's the road to wealth. This guy is a German academic. He might lose his academic appointment, and might have to go into hiding. But, whatever his motivation, his ideas should still be evaluated as ideas. He could be corrupt and evil, and still be right.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.