3 readers online now  |  69 million page views

There is really "true history"?

Reader comment on item: The Temple Mount's Indian counterpart
in response to reader comment: The true history

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Aug 23, 2010 at 07:30

Our dear Thomas wrote "true history" This title is evidence that you have no clue about what the study of history is all about

>Ill educated personal insults do not clarify matters here.

Oh do us a favor: do not lecture

>The Qur'an is of human authorship.

So? but how can you be sure?

>It includes reference to the works of Ptolemy

Allah had no clue who is really Ptolemy but his Almagest was the accepted cosomology at the time as in the earth is the center of the universe and the moon and the sun rotate around earth

>and Galen

Galen in the Qur'an? really? where?

> and much can be found which was taken from Gnostic and Apochryphal sources as well as canonical Jewish and Christian writings.

As would be expected as literature is a by-product of the time and the place as well as the liguistic and religious milieu and in the case of the Qur'an is the civilized Middle East in the late antique period

>Islam means submission to divine will, revealed by Jesus, son of the Virgin Mary.

No it does not

1. Istislam means submission so why is Islam is not called istislam? Any guesses?

2. The Arabic word Islam means the religion of islam (gasp!) and that is it and if we are to believe Luxenberg then Islam really means conformity/agreement/concord but again because of the tyrany of the Islamic historical tradition (J W) we are told that islam means submission to Allah

3. And what does Jesus have to do with the religion of the Arabs? Oh let me see: The Qur'an says that Jesus must be God right our dear Thomas?

>The Prophet of the Arabs did exist, there are records of him composing Suras that became part of the Qor'an after discussing religious books with Jewish and Christian slaves.

No we do not know and the chances are he did not exist. Let me help you there is no extant evidence to attest to the exsistence of Muhammad or is it Ahmad and the evidence we have is literary evidence written by the ulama 300 years after the death of the so called historical Muhammad so what we have in the islamic historical tradition is the biggest literary fraud in the history of man and woman kind

>He name, however, was probably not Muhammed bin Abdullah.

The islamic historical tradition tells us that his name was Qutham and his Kunya is Abul Qasim and it is Mohamed ibn 3AbdAllah

>The word Muhammed in the Shahadah means exalted or praiseworthy.

It is al-shahada there is no h as the last letter and if you take the time and read the masoritic exegesis of Muhammad (vocalized as Muhammdan) in al-shahada you will realize that the masorites in the 3rd century of islam were reading such word as the name of the historical Muhammad in the sira

>The word ibadi, as found in the Tashahud means slaves (of God) but comes from Mesopotamia, the area of Al Hira. If the Tashahud had been composed in Mecca, the word would have been Abadi.

Oh straight from Volker Popp right? and for this see Volker Popp's "The early history of islam following inscriptional and numismatic testimony" page 31 word for word

and do us a favor if you quote an author then you should tell us or this is called plagiarism right?

So her is a bit of Arabic for you

1. The word 3abd means slave and the plural is 3abeed

2. the word 3abid means he who prays to and 3ibad is the plural and this is the word that was used by the Arabs in al- Hira

>Islam was originally pre-Nicene, non-Trinitarian Arab Christianity and the inscription in the Dome of the Rock, on Temple Mount, Jerusalem, is a polemic against the Trinitarian beliefs imposed after the Council of Nicea in 325CE.

This is what Luxenberg believes

>Incidentally, the Dome of the Rock was built, with its inscription, as a place of Christian worship, hence the 12 pillars supporting the cupola (one for each of Jesus' disciples).

This is why I call it the Byzantine Church of the Umayyads

>Later regional politics led the leaders of the Arab empire to confirm the fusion of this foreign religion with an indigenous, Mecca, cult of moon god worship as their state religion.

No Mecca is a late invention of the islamic historical tradition

>All of this is in the public domain and can be confirmed by reference to academically rigorous texts and web-sites.

Oh the "argumant from authority"! No the rule here is you have to provide us with your sources

>The Meccan cult provided the Islamic calendar, the Hajj and Ramadan.

If we are to believe Patricia Crone's Meccan Trade then there was no Mecca and all we have in islam was created in the civilized Middle East and not in far away Mecca but again the tyranny of the Islamic historical tradition brings your likes back to mecca

>The crescent moon on mosques is evidence of this heritage. The Prophet of the Arabs may have been inspired to write some of the content of the Qor'an in Arabic after hearing a Christian preacher, but most of it was written in Syrio-Aramaic. Confusion arose when this was inaccurately transcribed into Arabic. Restoration of the original words confirms the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, son of Mary.

For the readers: The Arab polity (the umayyads) that invaded the Middle East starting in 633CE followed a pre-Nicene Syrian Christianity but the 3Abassids that took over from the umayyads in 750CE selceted a new religion that was being formed in the civilized Middle East out of the debates that must have been in a Judeo-Christian milieu and the end result is Islam

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to There is really "true history"? by dhimmi no more

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)