patrick.net

Greatest I am says

Rome, now the West, would have had to have a different God than what their Eastern counterparts had. Rome was created as a defensive response to invasions from the Khans and tribes of the Fertile Crescent, Islam. As the Asian tribes relented in their expansion, the main enemy of the West became and is now Islam.

Huh? The Mongol invasions appeared long, long after the end of the Roman Empire and the adoption of Christianity. Rome pushing northward? The peak of the Empire was about 100AD. After that, it was on the wane. This was before hardly anybody even knew who Christ was.

The Golden Horde, the Westernmost branch of the Mongolian Invasions, appeared in Russia around 1200. The Western Roman Empire was dead by 500, 600 years before that. Charlemagne and Charles Martel were centuries gone before the Mongolians stirred along the Don.

Christianity was adopted before the Huns attacked Europe, too (c. mid 400s). Constantine's adoption of Christianity, the whole thing with the Chi-Rho, is probably more of Eusebius' (his chronicler) lies. We know that Constantine first was a Sol Invictus worshiper, and did not convert himself until his deathbed even according to his most fanatical Christian apologists. He may have made friends with Christianity simply to create another powerbase for himself to fend off any other challengers to his Title.

I have other posts describing Hellenization of Eastern Med religions (Mithraism, Atis, Serapis, etc.); the last to be Hellenized was Judaism, which resulted in Christianity, IMHO.

The Khans and the Huns weren't stopped by Christianity, but the fact that densely wooded Europe could not support large numbers of nomadic horse tribes for more than a few months at a time. That's why the Golden Horde never got further than Poland. It's also why the center of Power in Russia shifted from Konugard - Kiev - on the plains, to Moscow and Novogorod in the heavily wooded North.

As for Muslims vs. Rome; the Eastern Roman Empires #1 foe was the Persians, who were Zorasterians.
In the 600s, the Byzantines (eastern Roman Empire) and Persians fought themselves to basically a bloody stalemate. The WW1 of it's day. Because BOTH the Byzantines and Persians were weakened by their wars, it created a vacuum filled by a dude named Mohammed who led the Arab tribes (who were at the peak of a population boom) to seize the many poorly defended outposts of both Persia and Byzantium.
The high taxes, religious disagreements with Constantinople and Rome (many Easterners were closet non-trinitarians), etc. created fertile ground for the Arab-Muslim invasions and the spread of Islam.

No argument with your history. That does not take away from the fact that it was pressure from Eastern forces generally speaking that forced a coalition and expansion of Christianity.

I do admit that I am loose with the term East only because I do not have the information as yet on who was preparing to move West at year 0 to 200 ce or so.

Have you written anything on this period?
If so, please link me up.

If you are a history buff you will like this.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/qrMtRm3b8MU&feature=autoplay&list=PLCBF574D134B912A5&playnext=1

Regards
DL

Greatest, interesting link.

I put some stuff up a while ago about "Hellenizing" some of the Eastern Med Religions under the Early Roman Empire. For example:

Phyrgian Myth + Hellenization = Atis Cult
Persian Myth + Hellenization = Mithras Cult
Egyptian Myth + Hellenization = Serapis Cult
And finally...
Jewish Myth + Hellenization = Christianity

I don't see any firm evidence for Romans inventing a religion for the single purpose of pacifying Jews, but it's possible, so I'd need to see some examples of the Romans doing it intentionally some other time. I say Hellenizing as a stand-in for Latin-Greco Culture both; since Rome itself was heavily hellenized.

Maybe I'll give his book a read.

It is good to see people finally recognizing the Roman and Greek influences in the New Testament Gospels.

Thanks for this.
Unfortunately it does not fill my knowledge void.
I checked the board and could not find it.
Do you have a link to see if it fits the time line I mentioned?

Regards
DL

Greatest I am says

Do you have a link to see if it fits the time line I mentioned?

Here's a link for a general timeline of the Roman Empire:
http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/romans.html

A good discussion on the scarcity of secular reports on Jesus, which might be somewhat relevant:
http://patrick.net/?p=1213078

A good discussion on the early Roman Empire as it relates to Christianity:
http://freethoughtfestival.org/audio/FTF120428Carrier-ed.mp3

I was incorrect about my discussion on the Jesus Myth, I most have written it for somewhere else, it's not on this board. But the Carrier Mp3 above is a good substitute.

Sweet.

Thanks for this.

Regards
DL

There only is Islam.

Judaism and Christianity are man-made terms conveniently capturing the ideas of Prophets Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them). These ideas were the monotheistic nature of God which messengers from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Jesus to Mohammed (Peace be upon all of them) preached.

They are all, in fact, Islam or submission to the will of Allah.

Islam it the only comprehensive summary of how our live are to be lead. It is the middle path which God has chosen for us.

Peace.

Neph says

Islam it the only comprehensive summary of how our live are to be lead.

Is it right and good to murder anyone who decides that Islam is false?

Neph says

There only is Islam.

Judaism and Christianity are man-made terms conveniently capturing the ideas of Prophets Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them). These ideas were the monotheistic nature of God which messengers from Adam to Abraham to Moses to Jesus to Mohammed (Peace be upon all of them) preached.

They are all, in fact, Islam or submission to the will of Allah.

Islam it the only comprehensive summary of how our live are to be lead. It is the middle path which God has chosen for us.

Peace.

You follow a book and are an idol worshipper.
If you are to do so you should know who wrote the book you follow.

I will add these clips to the mix for your consideration. The first which is part of the second speaks to my Gnostic Christian label and the second shows my view of religions overall and the Noble Lie that I think we and our governments should rescind. The third clip speaks to the reason that religions were invented in the first place as it shows why social control was required for city states that had to deal with the reality of finite resources. I see these city states as led by a timocratic king who through the religion that he would have created, also realized that there had to be a tyrannical part to his benevolent duty and created a religion to be just that
http://www.youtube.com/embed/oR02ciandvg&feature=BFa&list=PLCBF574D134B912A5

http://www.youtube.com/embed/qrMtRm3b8MU&feature=autoplay&list=PLCBF574D134B912A5&playnext=1

http://www.youtube.com/embed/Ne1wIEGnPWo

I see the King/God as having to have the morals shown in the Haigt clip.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

He would have to create his religion as expressed through his high priest/tyrant who would live by the first commandment of God, place no one above me as the enforcer of his King/God's rules and laws while still obeying his King. The larger Roman system would later assume the same system through the Noble Lie. First through the Flavians and later through Constantine.

http://www.youtube.com/embed/WD0eSqFJ7J4

Regards
DL

Is it right and good to murder anyone who decides that Islam is false?

where is the source of this?

Patrick, great website.. your knowledge of housing markets is awseome! what makes it great is that you have substance to what you say DUE to your knowledge.

However, your knowledge of Islam is based on "Why I'm not a Muslim" and other drivel. If you would like to know about Islam, read the Quran - the source. don't rely on misinformation. In other words, stick with housing and don't discuss issues which you have no knowledge of. It will make you look foolish.

Greatest I am says

You follow a book and are an idol worshipper.
If you are to do so you should know who wrote the book you follow.

Islam is nothing to do with idols. It is to do with monotheism. You don't know what you are talking about.

The books of Christianity and Judaism are tainted and unreliable as they're altered as each society of the time sees fit.

Neph says

Is it right and good to murder anyone who decides that Islam is false?

where is the source of this?

There is a death penalty for any Muslim who tries to leave Islam. That is Islamic law.

Or how about the death penalty for blasphemy? Also Islamic law.

Do you feel you can freely and publicly renounce Islam, or would that be likely to get you killed? If you are not free to do that, you are not free.

Neph says

Is it right and good to murder anyone who decides that Islam is false?

where is the source of this?

There is a death penalty for any Muslim who tries to leave Islam. That is Islamic law.

No there is not. show me the Quran source.. just google it and let me know. .

Or how about the death penalty for blasphemy? Also Islamic law.

Do you feel you can freely and publicly renounce Islam, or would that be likely to get you killed? If you are not free to do that, you are not free.

feel free to leave/embrace Islam. Feel free to be blasphemous. God judges us not people... that is why there is no such consequence for apostates or blasphemy found in the Quran.

If you see anything to the contrary to this then that is man exploiting religion to create his own laws, not Islamic law found in the Quran. In other words, yes there are bad Muslims (many of them). But as far as religion goes? Islam is the only perfection in all of existence. Some of what you are referring to are secular laws of countries which proclaim to be Muslim. Should I extrapolate everything you do to be representative of all ppl named Patrick? then don't judge Islam based on the practices of a few countries.

feel free to renounce Islam at any time. Makes no diff.

Hey Patrick... try questioning the Holocaust numbers... then you'll realize YOU aren't free either. :)

Neph says

feel free to leave/embrace Islam. Feel free to be blasphemous

You have a good attitude, but Islam does not. The Islamic penalty for apostasy and blasphemy are both death.

The Koran is not a shining example of tolerance either:

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/call_to_muslims.htm

Neph says

that is man exploiting religion to create his own laws, not Islamic law found in the Quran.

Islamic law (Sharia) was never based solely on the Koran, but also on the hadiths.

Neph says

In other words, yes there are bad Muslims (many of them).

About a billion people say that Sharia is the right way to live, and that then necessarily includes the murder of apostates and blasphemers. Which means no freedom of religion or freedom of speech.

But most of those people are also fundamentally good just because they are human and can see the humanity in non-Muslims. Most Muslims are good in spite of Islam, not because of it. Islam tells them to kill, but they do not. You're one of those good people I think.

Neph says

Islam is the only perfection in all of existence.

I disagree. I think Islam is deeply and fundamentally flawed, because Mohammed robbed, raped, and murdered and then justified it with religion, according to official Islamic history.

Neph says

try questioning the Holocaust numbers... then you'll realize YOU aren't free either

I agree with you there. It is not politically correct to question the Holocaust, and there are even laws against it in some countries. That also is a fundamental violation of freedom of speech. Yet I am pretty sure the Holocaust happened and the numbers are approximately correct. I personally met people who went through it.

You have a good attitude, but Islam does not. The Islamic penalty for apostasy and blasphemy are both death.

No it is not. Show me the source in the Quran.

The Koran is not a shining example of tolerance either:

seriously? Those quotes are strung together and meshed in a way to make it support ANY argument. If one were to read and understand the paragraphs BEFORE AND AFTER in the Quran, they would realize that war is waged on hypocrites who have threatened Muslim lives by a) preventing the practice of Islam by peaceful Muslims, b) removal of Muslims from their homes forcibly or c) oppression.

That link is a joke, Patrick. come on...

Islamic law (Sharia) was never based solely on the Koran, but also on the hadiths.

Shariah (or islamic law) can only be based off Quran and those hadiths which are consistent with the Quran. This is b/c the Quran is perfect and preserved, whereas the hadiths have some truths but also some shady things which opponents to Islam have mixed in. For this reason it can't be accepted in the way the Quran can.

About a billion people say that Sharia is the right way to live, and that then necessarily includes the murder of apostates and blasphemers. Which means no freedom of religion or freedom of speech.

Shariah can not be enforced on non-Muslims, therefore yr statement is untrue.

Most Muslims are good in spite of Islam, not because of it. Islam tells them to kill, but they do not. You're one of those good people I think.

If I do any good it's b/c of God. If I were left to my own devices I would just spend this life in pleasure with drugs, women etc.... why not? if there were no further life after this, then what would stop me? No, it's BECAUSE of Islam and God-consciousness which leads one to always strive (and THIS is jihad) to fight temptations such as that.

hahaha Islam doesn't tell to indiscriminately kill. What do you think this is blackwater/xe/AIPAC? Per the Quran, any harm against a single soul unjustly is harming all of humanity.

Mohammed robbed, raped, and murdered and then justified it with religion, according to official Islamic history.

who did he rob? nobody. where's yr source?
raped? nobody. source?
murdered in battle against hypocrites who violated a trust to protect Muslims and for Muslims to protect the Quraishi Arabs in the region? yes, because Muslim lives were threated by traitors - a standard punishment for traitors was (and even today) is death.

What is this Official Islamic History you speak of? hahah nothing could be shadier than that statement. come on Patrick...

Neph says

Show me the source in the Quran.

If you do not accept Islamic law, then you are not a Muslim, according to Islam.

Neph says

Those quotes are strung together and meshed in a way to make it support ANY argument.

Those quotes look very clear to me. I don't see how they could be misinterpreted.

Neph says

the Quran is perfect

The Koran contains many errors. For example, it confuses Miriam the sister of Moses with Miriam the mother of Jesus.

Neph says

Shariah can not be enforced on non-Muslims

The people trying to kill cartoonists who draw Mohammed are definitely trying to enforce Sharia on non-Muslims.

Neph says

If I were left to my own devices I would just spend this life in pleasure with drugs, women etc.... why not? if there were no further life after this, then what would stop me?

What would stop you is your ability to question things and think for yourself, which Islam forbids you from doing.

Thinking people can see that drugs are harmful, promiscous sex leads to disease, and that treating others as you would want to be treated is the best way to live, whether there is an afterlife or not.

Neph says

Islam doesn't tell to indiscriminately kill

I didn't say indiscriminate. Islam tells you to kill anyone who asserts freedom of religion and freedom of speech.

Neph says

who did he rob? nobody. where's yr source?

All Islamic sources acknowledge that Mohammed robbed caravans.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/muhammad/myths-mu-raid-caravans.htm

http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/op-ed/was-badr-a-battle-or-muhammads-highway-robbery/

http://www.4truth.net/fourtruthpbworld.aspx?pageid=8589953043

Neph says

raped? nobody. source?

http://www.islam-watch.org/authors/45-ali-sina/622-did-muhammad-rape-safiyah.html

http://alisina.org/blog/2010/12/04/aisha-the-child-bride-of-muhammad/

Safiya was a prisoner and Mohammed slept with her on the same day he killed her family. Not likely she was in the mood.

Aisha was 9 when Mohammed slept with her. Statuatory rape.

Neph says

murdered

He didn't just murder the 600 or more Quereshi after they surrendered, he also ordered the murder of 100 year old Abu Afak, and approved the murder of the pregnant mother Asma bint Marwan for writing poetry that mocked him, for example.

Where is the forgiveness and tolerance? Mohammed does not look like a good example of humanity, let alone anyone you should follow.

those statements from the Quran are strung together from different verses into what the writer wants the reader to believe is a single linear paragraph, when it's not.

The Koran contains many errors. For example, it confuses Miriam the sister of Moses with Miriam the mother of Jesus.

huh? there is no mention of Moses' sister in the Quran. It only refers to Miriam (or Mary) mother of Jesus (peace be upon him).

The people trying to kill cartoonists who draw Mohammed are definitely trying to enforce Sharia on non-Muslims.

once again, Muslims who do not understand Islam bad, Islam perfect.

All your sources are islamophobic hate sites. they spew lies and have no basis.

Even Mohammed's (peace be upon him) enemies couldn't question his character, and now 1400 some years later, you do?

you have no credible, intelligent source of what you say. I could just as well make up anything and have others (who are paid to say what they say) regurgitate the same garbage.

Where is the forgiveness and tolerance? Mohammed does not look like a good example of humanity, let alone anyone you should follow.

Read his speech upon return to mecca, when the Quraish had tried killing him numerous times, when they'd oppressed him (peace be upon him ( PBUH) ) and the Muslims and killed many of them.. .he returned and asked them in his speech how he should treat them ... He (PBUH) forgave them all.

When

Aisha was 9 when Mohammed slept with her. Statuatory rape.

9 was a common age of marriage. See Solomon (PBUH) who married young as well. it was customary.

the rape accusation is baseless. see above.

Neph says

once again, Muslims who do not understand Islam bad, Islam perfect.

From the little studying I've done on Islam - the biggest problem I have with it are that current manuscripts don't match up with the old ones.

Apparently there are around 30-35 known versions, these were then whittled down to a handful or so currently accepted versions. These newer versions vary so greatly that the meaning of the text takes on a different meaning. Even Muslim scholars acknowledge this crap.

So if this text is so sacred, and so divine - why isn't the current copy a photocopy of the original?

Neph says

Muslims who do not understand Islam bad, Islam perfect.

Evidently then, a huge number of Muslims do not understand Islam, which may explain why Shia and Sunni are killing each other in Iraq. This raises a definition question: whose definition of Islam is the one right one, if any? There is no perfect religion. Good people can be good in spite of religion, but religion too often has the opposite effect: it misleads people who would otherwise be good into doing terrible things, e.g. killing their own daughters.

Neph says

you have no credible, intelligent source of what you say

Just look up each of those events in whatever official Islamic source you like.

There are many more when you're done with those.

Neph says

Even Mohammed's (peace be upon him) enemies couldn't question his character, and now 1400 some years later, you do?

Mohammed's character was definitely questioned at the time, for example by Abu Afak and Asma bint Marwan, who Mohammed then murdered for their impertinance.

Neph says

huh? there is no mention of Moses' sister in the Quran. It only refers to Miriam (or Mary) mother of Jesus (peace be upon him).

Koran 19:27-28 -- "At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: 'O Mary! Truly an amazing thing hast thou brought! O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!"

Anyway, I know that sincerly looking at the facts of the origin of Islam is probably very painful, would lead to the loss of certainty, loss of friends and maybe family, and maybe even your own life, so I can't expect you do it.

But I do appreciate your polite responses.

joshuatrio says

Apparently there are around 30-35 known versions,

no there is only one. that is why there are ppl who memorize the Quran - called Hafiz.

where's yr source on numerous versions.curious2 says

whose definition of Islam is the one right one, if any?

good question. one has to apply logic which is consistent with the Quran. if one can justify it, then it's correct else it's incorrect. the basic tenets are to enjoin good with good and prohibit evil.

Koran 19:27-28 -- "At length she brought the (babe) to her people, carrying him (in her arms). They said: 'O Mary! Truly an amazing thing hast thou brought! O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!"

that doesn't mean direct sister. here's a link for something which has been around for 1400 years. Patrick, you are simply taking hate sites convenient links and shotgunning any ammunition:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Contrad/External/mary.html

Anyway, I know that sincerly looking at the facts of the origin of Islam is probably very painful, would lead to the loss of certainty, loss of friends and maybe family, and maybe even your own life, so I can't expect you do it.

on the contrary! it only strengthens me to see the arguments islamophobes have had for generations, and muslims topple them all. when I look at the origins of Islam I start with Adam, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed (peacebe upon all of them) and I see the unifying message which only Islam contains regarding the universality of God.

your arguments are fabrications which any hate site can concoct. think it's tough? ppl like michelle gellar, daniel pipes, robert spencer... these ppl get paid...they get PAID to slander Islam. and you do it for free. have you ever thought to maybe even read the Quran - the source of Islam before selling it short?

I definitely recommmend it.

want a copy? I'll mail it to you. then decide for yourself. If you read it and decide you were right, then you've got all the credibility in the world and lots of arguments to back you up...let me know and i'll send you a self addressed mailer to return it to me. If you're wrong, maybe you'll learn something.

what've you got to lose?

applies to anyone.

indie1212 at hotmail dot com

I've read the Koran twice and get the gist of it. I was not impressed. It does not contain coherent stories like the bible does. Instead, it seems to consist mostly of hectoring threats of punishment for non-believers.

Neph says

what've you got to lose?

My freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of speech.

The nightly glass of wine I greatly enjoy.

Bacon.

ahahha

suit yrself

to each their own.

Neph says

no there is only one. that is why there are ppl who memorize the Quran - called Hafiz.

where's yr source on numerous versions.

No. There is not only one. Google is your friend.

The quran was passed down from so called "readers" - who each wrote down their own interpretation/memorization of this "book." From one author to the next, there are too many errors/discrepancies for you to say there is only ONE quran. I read somewhere that there are over 1,000 differences from one author to the next - that the text takes on different meanings.

Sorry man, but if this were divinely written - it would be perfectly preserved; and not sown together from so-called "readers" who recorded this book differently.

You can call your religion faith, or whatever you want - but there are too many historic, scientific, and grammatical errors for it to be the work of a perfect being.

Bacon.

+1

Early Muslims did make a good attempt to standardize on a single version. Caliph Uthman burned alternate versions of the Koran in 634:

http://www.harvardhouse.com/quran_purity.htm

There are three Arabic letters at the beginning of each chapter of the Koran of unknown meaning. My guess is that they are a checksum, the same way that computers use checksums as in the Unix command "sum".

Caliph Uthman burned alternate versions of the Koran in 634:

They wanted to standardize the book because the differences were so great between all the different versions floating around. Seems to me that the leaders at the time were more concerned people would doubt islam - or which version was "true."

Neph says

joshuatrio says

Apparently there are around 30-35 known versions,

no there is only one. that is why there are ppl who memorize the Quran - called Hafiz.

where's yr source on numerous versions.

Josh is correct.

Like the Sinai Codex, which is a Bible with substantially different parts AND is earlier than much of the fragments and scrolls that were historically used (and still used in the King James and other traditional versions), for example there is the Samarkand Koran, which contains very different wordings, missing pieces, and added pieces the commonly used versions of the Koran today do not have.

In the 19th C. when the Sinai Codex was found, many Christians insisted the Sinai Codex was Satanic. Some still hold that position, the reason they advocate "King James Only" as the KJV was compiled long before the discovery of the Sinai Codex.

In Islam, the "King James Version" is the 1342 Cairo Text; here is a background on some of the textual variations:

http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/16608

Like Christian Fundamentalists and the Bible, Muslim Fundamentalists try to argue the Koran was complete and safe-guarded from the beginning from change; textual evidence suggests otherwise. Like the Epistles and Gospels, complete versions can be found no earlier than 100 years after the life of the Founder - and there are many differences in the earlier copy. In fact, there are more differences between earlier copies than later copies (in Christianity)

There is only one version.

you guys must use the same islamophobe handbook.

all your arguments are retread lines conveniently packaged onto websites. If you'd take any time to read the Quran from front to back (which Patrick I guarantee you did not do, rather it's simply lines from hate sites which constitutes your "reading the Quran twice") you would realize that all your arguments are baseless.

we are getting nowhere as you refuse to go to the source and, rather, rely on lies. this is like creating your own reality - you can never be wrong, then. Enjoy preaching to your choir and getting no where in searching for the truth.

Unfortunately, you and some of the others here are a microcosm of the foxnews/neocons in that you revel in the absolute certainty you carry yourselves in your beliefs and opinions because. .... you surround yourselves and live in your own opinion!

here's the bottom line:

[Kafiroon 109:1] Proclaim, (O dear Prophet Mohammed - peace and blessings be upon him), “O disbelievers!”

[Kafiroon 109:2] Neither do I worship what you worship.

[Kafiroon 109:3] Nor do you worship Whom I worship.

[Kafiroon 109:4] And neither will I ever worship what you worship.

[Kafiroon 109:5] Nor will you worship Whom I worship.

[Kafiroon 109:6] For you is your religion, and for me is mine.

Neph says

There is only one version.

So how do you square the differences between the Korans over the centuries?

By denying it.

Just like KJV-only Christians deny the most ancient copies of NT epistles and gospels.

Maybe Neph can give us some of the ways to know if a person is a true follower of his religion, or not? I only assume there are some type of rules of behavior, dress, and conduct, and maybe some bloodline rules, but I do not know.

So, Neph, if you would please, please list for us how you, Neph, are able to judge if someone is following your religion, and doing so correctly.

I would think that it is pretty important to know who's on who's side before strapping on the TNT vest. Thank you.

Neph says

lies.... Unfortunately, you...revel in the absolute certainty you carry yourselves in your beliefs and opinions because. .... you surround yourselves and live in your own opinion!

Actually, that is precisely what you are doing Neph. Others are citing a wide range of sources, considering and debating different ideas, yet when people prove you wrong you call them all liars. You insist with absolute certainty that your stated opinion is perfect, even though it is not shared by most people nor even most of those who claim to believe in the religion that you profess. This is a basic problem of religious fundamentalism generally, the insistence on a received text as a perfect statement that must be true in all respects. Such a belief system denies the inevitable errors in translation, differences of opinion, etc. The reason is because the motive is to find one true omnipotent force controlling everything and answering all questions. Putting motive ahead of evidence, i.e. seeing what you want to see, is wishful thinking.

Prioritizing that, i.e. insisting that the world must be exactly what you wish regardless of evidence and conflicting opinion, is what misleads many Muslims into killing each other. They can't handle the fact that the world doesn't conform to what they want to believe, so they destroy ancient Buddhist statues in order to conceal evidence that other people had other opinions and a more advanced civilization.

On a related point, the most ardent proselytisers are usually those with the most doubt. So, if anyone is lying, it's probably Neph.

Neph says

If you'd take any time to read the Quran from front to back (which Patrick I guarantee you did not do, rather it's simply lines from hate sites which constitutes your "reading the Quran twice") you would realize that all your arguments are baseless.

Any religion where the original manuscripts were burned - so that people wouldn't doubt a "true Islam" has already lost credibility.

Come on, you guys pray towards a rock - that you think is sacred, because some guy may have stepped on it.

And you think we should have "faith" in "allah?"

Neph says

we are getting nowhere as you refuse to go to the source and, rather, rely on lies.

It's pretty obvious that you haven't looked into the lies of Islam.

Neph says

Unfortunately, you and some of the others here are a microcosm of the foxnews/neocons in that you revel in the absolute certainty you carry yourselves in your beliefs and opinions because.

I hate Fox news.

whose arguments carry more weight:

someone who's read the book

or

someone who gets paid, as an industry, to slam the book.

this discussion has no merit from your perspectives b/c you speak without knowledge.

btw: the link to numerous versions of the Quran are referring to the english translations - the original arabic is unchanged since the beginning.

Neph says

whose arguments carry more weight:

someone who's read the book

or

someone who gets paid, as an industry, to slam the book.

Neither. Whoever understands the history of the book does.

Neph says

this discussion has no merit from your perspectives b/c you speak without knowledge.

You may want to re-read this thread.

Neph says

the original arabic is unchanged since the beginning.

Wrong again. You don't know your history. Please re-read this thread.

There is an answer, maybe people shouldn't base the way they live based on collections of ancient fables. Science and reason are the path to truth.