Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Duvduv · 11-01-2012, 01:28 PM

It's interesting that you choose to berate me because I offered some information. But if you are really interested you can always check the chapters of essays in the book edited by Ibn Warraq called The Quest for the Historical Muhammad, including the one by Henri Lammens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Net2004

Quote:

have no evidence at all aside from certain unverifiable hadiths.

you are master/scholar of hadeeth science? who taught you hadeeth science? harold motzki or robert spencer?

Clivedurdle · 11-01-2012, 01:28 PM

Quote:

What I found far more interesting (and frustrating) was the way he challenged the conventional view of Islamic history. Thus is a footnote on page 304 he claims that the concept of their being only a single version of the Koran dates back to 1924; before then it was largely accepted that there were seven 'readings'. The first mention of Mecca outside the Koran was in 741 (Mohammed died before 634). 'Mecca' is described as a significant trading town which presumably required significant agricultural resources: impossible for this remote part of the desert. The Koran itself is unmentioned in the early Islamic writings; it only mentions Mohammed four times.

In The Shadow Of The Sword: The Battle for Global Empire and the End of the Ancient World (or via: amazon.co.uk)

alternate AMAZON Link (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Huon · 11-02-2012, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Quote:

What I found far more interesting (and frustrating) was the way he challenged the conventional view of Islamic history. Thus is a footnote on page 304 he claims that the concept of their being only a single version of the Koran dates back to 1924; before then it was largely accepted that there were seven 'readings'. The first mention of Mecca outside the Koran was in 741 (Mohammed died before 634). 'Mecca' is described as a significant trading town which presumably required significant agricultural resources: impossible for this remote part of the desert. The Koran itself is unmentioned in the early Islamic writings; it only mentions Mohammed four times.

Mecca is not very far from the harbour of Djeddah. Today, it is a big town, which requires significant agricultural resources...

Duvduv · 11-02-2012, 08:02 AM

If there was no Mecca in the 6th century, then the Islamic tradition about it is incorrect. If the hadiths conflict about the time and age of Muhammad, then there are problems which conventional history that makes unproven assumptions about this man and his existence.

If there is no evidence or mention of the Quran or how it was "revealed" until the 8th century, then this is very problematic for the conventional wisdom.

If it was the Abbasid caliphate that collected the documents that created the Quran from non-Islamic and pre-Islamic sources, then even romantic scholarship has to be re-examined.

aa5874 · 11-02-2012, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

If there was no Mecca in the 6th century, then the Islamic tradition about it is incorrect. If the hadiths conflict about the time and age of Muhammad, then there are problems which conventional history that makes unproven assumptions about this man and his existence.

If there is no evidence or mention of the Quran or how it was "revealed" until the 8th century, then this is very problematic for the conventional wisdom.

If it was the Abbasid caliphate that collected the documents that created the Quran from non-Islamic and pre-Islamic sources, then even romantic scholarship has to be re-examined.

And what about the characters in the Hebrew Bible?? Did Moses exist??

What about characters in the Mormon Bible?? Did the angel Moroni exist??

Mankind deserve better.

It is time to reverse the curse of religion.

Admitted sources of fiction and myth fables are the foundation of religious belief.

If at one time people were considered atheist and evil if they did NOT accept that God was a Stone then mankind have not made much progress. Now, people are considered atheist and evil if they do NOT accept known Myth characters.

Duvduv · 11-02-2012, 09:30 AM

I am not sure why you are asking me that on this thread. You are welcome to your views, and I am welcome to mine, despite the provocations of people like Adam. You may start a new thread if you wish. However, I don't seem to recall that we all must indicate all of our views on all subjects of religion or anything else to be considered for participation on FRDB.

Furthermore, pure rhetoric, prejudice and beligerence is not valuable in analyzing subjects at hand.

Do you also need to know how I view contemporary politics, the Holocaust, 9/11, my views of Marx and Lenin and Mao, in order to acquire legitimacy in terms of participation here?

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

If there was no Mecca in the 6th century, then the Islamic tradition about it is incorrect. If the hadiths conflict about the time and age of Muhammad, then there are problems which conventional history that makes unproven assumptions about this man and his existence.

If there is no evidence or mention of the Quran or how it was "revealed" until the 8th century, then this is very problematic for the conventional wisdom.

If it was the Abbasid caliphate that collected the documents that created the Quran from non-Islamic and pre-Islamic sources, then even romantic scholarship has to be re-examined.

And what about the characters in the Hebrew Bible?? Did Moses exist??

What about characters in the Mormon Bible?? Did the angel Moroni exist??

Mankind deserve better.

It is time to reverse the curse of religion.

Admitted sources of fiction and myth fables are the foundation of religious belief.

If at one time people were considered atheist and evil if they did NOT accept that God was a Stone then mankind have not made much progress. Now, people are considered atheist and evil if they do NOT accept known Myth characters.

aa5874 · 11-02-2012, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I am not sure why you are asking me that on this thread. You are welcome to your views, and I am welcome to mine, despite the provocations of people like Adam. You may start a new thread if you wish. However, I don't seem to recall that we all must indicate all of our views on all subjects of religion or anything else to be considered for participation on FRDB....

My response is specifically directed at your post in this very thread. I am pointing out that TRADITIONAL Religion around the world in general are based on dubious sources.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

..If there was no Mecca in the 6th century, then the Islamic tradition about it is incorrect. If the hadiths conflict about the time and age of Muhammad, then there are problems which conventional history that makes unproven assumptions about this man and his existence.

If there was NO Moses then Jewish tradition about Moses is incorrect. If it cannot be shown that Moses existed then there are historical problems for Jewish tradition.

Likewise, If there was NO angel Moroni then the Mormon tradition about the angel Moroni is incorrect.

The history of Religion is extremely disturbing to mankind. VIRTUALLY ALL RELIGION are fundamentally based on sources of fiction and mythology.

Duvduv · 11-02-2012, 11:39 AM

I don't think the purpose of this thread is challenging anyone's philosophical or religious beliefs, but engaging in an examination of the subject at hand. If you wish, we can do so off the Forum.
Nor is the thread for engaging in pro- or anti-religious rhetoric or debate.

aa5874 · 11-02-2012, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I don't think the purpose of this thread is challenging anyone's philosophical or religious beliefs, but engaging in an examination of the subject at hand. If you wish, we can do so off the Forum.
Nor is the thread for engaging in pro- or anti-religious rhetoric or debate.

Again, my response is directly aimed at your post in this very thread. You have challenged or questioned the existence of Mohammed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

If there was no Mecca in the 6th century, then the Islamic tradition about it is incorrect. If the hadiths conflict about the time and age of Muhammad, then there are problems which conventional history that makes unproven assumptions about this man and his existence.

If there is no evidence or mention of the Quran or how it was "revealed" until the 8th century, then this is very problematic for the conventional wisdom.

If it was the Abbasid caliphate that collected the documents that created the Quran from non-Islamic and pre-Islamic sources, then even romantic scholarship has to be re-examined.

What was the age of Moses??? What was the age of the Angel Moroni???

I am making you aware that the existence of Moses and the angel Moroni are also questionable and that ALL religion in general suffer from a tradition of relying on non-historical accounts.

Duvduv · 11-07-2012, 07:49 AM

The examination and/or rejection of specific religious ideas does not render IPSO FACTO ALL religious ideas as false. That is a logical fallacy unless one simply chooses to reject the entirety of all spiritual teachings or claims as false simply for what they are.

On the other hand, the fact of the impossibility of empirically proving one or another historical event or person having nothing to do with religion could be rejected ultimately using the same criteria.

Just to take a quick example, one could reject the idea of a man walking on water because empirical science rejects the idea that a person could walk on water. At the same time one cannot argue that the claim that Julius Caesar was killed by Brutus is ipso facto true as compared with walking on water simply just because no one has ever claimed that the murder of Caesar involved only scientifically possible activity.

But we are not focusing on the empirical evidence of ALL religious personages or events of history, or for that matter of ALL OR ANY historical personages or events, whether it be based on the Jewish or any other religion, or on secular historical claims of ancient history.

However, I would really like to be able to get back to the original subject of this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

I don't think the purpose of this thread is challenging anyone's philosophical or religious beliefs, but engaging in an examination of the subject at hand. If you wish, we can do so off the Forum.
Nor is the thread for engaging in pro- or anti-religious rhetoric or debate.

Again, my response is directly aimed at your post in this very thread. You have challenged or questioned the existence of Mohammed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

If there was no Mecca in the 6th century, then the Islamic tradition about it is incorrect. If the hadiths conflict about the time and age of Muhammad, then there are problems which conventional history that makes unproven assumptions about this man and his existence.

If there is no evidence or mention of the Quran or how it was "revealed" until the 8th century, then this is very problematic for the conventional wisdom.

If it was the Abbasid caliphate that collected the documents that created the Quran from non-Islamic and pre-Islamic sources, then even romantic scholarship has to be re-examined.

What was the age of Moses??? What was the age of the Angel Moroni???

I am making you aware that the existence of Moses and the angel Moroni are also questionable and that ALL religion in general suffer from a tradition of relying on non-historical accounts.

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

11-02-2012, 08:02 AM	#114
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	If there was no Mecca in the 6th century, then the Islamic tradition about it is incorrect. If the hadiths conflict about the time and age of Muhammad, then there are problems which conventional history that makes unproven assumptions about this man and his existence. If there is no evidence or mention of the Quran or how it was "revealed" until the 8th century, then this is very problematic for the conventional wisdom. If it was the Abbasid caliphate that collected the documents that created the Quran from non-Islamic and pre-Islamic sources, then even romantic scholarship has to be re-examined.

11-02-2012, 11:39 AM	#118
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	I don't think the purpose of this thread is challenging anyone's philosophical or religious beliefs, but engaging in an examination of the subject at hand. If you wish, we can do so off the Forum. Nor is the thread for engaging in pro- or anti-religious rhetoric or debate.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.