Muhammad never had a Whopper with bacon.
Therefore, Muhammad never lived.
ping
If Muhammed never lived then how did Allah get all of his xenophobic, sexist, racist, violent teachings written down?
Time Magazine, ABCDisney, and PBS would never dare ask this question during an Islamic holy season. And certainly not EVERY Islamic holy season.
Does it matter if he lived or not? Hmm? Muslims are the problem today, not Muhammad and whether or not he existed...It’s a matter for historians and religious scholars...it is interesting though...
Muhammad is remarkable amongst legendary religious founders, in that he is at once supposed to have been a regionally significant secular figure who somehow left no mark amongst his contemporaries of his existence.
On balance, I’m inclined to believe that a man named Muhammad did exist, but that his secular role was embroidered over time and that he was presented post-facto as the leader of the Arab conquest when he was more likely just its most “spiritual” capo who provided the theological justification for the “bandit socialism” the Quraysh and their allied tribes were imposing on the region.
This ought to be an interesting thread to watch. We get a lot of extreme idealogical cynicism on the crevo threads to the point that evos question whether Jesus even existed. Using that same standard, there are virtually no other historical figures that would survive the scrutiny. Especially Mohammed.
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks Perdogg.To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.Zul-Qarnain - What is the argument?I have never claimed that Zul-Qarnain *is* the historical Alexander the Great. I don't know why your move to agree with me in this is considered a rebuttal... The argument is then that the Qur'anic story is clearly taken from the legends about Alexander. There are many many details of the Qur'an account which are nearly verbatim to be found in the Alexander legends. Conclusion: Zul-Qarnain clearly is the Alexander the Great of the legend stories. And because the Qur'an presents the material from the legends as if this were history, it shows that Muhammad could not distinguish between legends and history when he incorporated this material in the Qur'an. This is evidence that the Qur'an is not of divine origin. |
||
|
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
And; I am still confused, is this historical question worse than a cartoon, equal to a cartoon, or (since there are no visuals) merely worth being beaten up in an alley?
PS: Has anyone ever attempted to compare the entity of Allah with...oh,say; Satan?
After all, Lucifer would have known much the same as did Gabriel - and Christ.
It is an opposing theology - the "other" side.
And, six hundred years does not seem too long a time for a counter attack.
Muhammad never had a Whopper with bacon.
Therefore, Muhammad never lived.