Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 07/15/2025 6:59:49 AM PDT by cuz1961
Two New Findings That Mohammed Didn't Exist
Islamofacist kryptonit
aka
Dismantling Islam
RT 1 hr 56 m
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy_iD6Lf6MY&pp=ygUqVHdvIG5ldyBmaW5kaW5ncyB0aGF0IG1vaGFtbWVkIGRpZG50IGV4aXN0
.
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
lots of proof he didn't exist as portrayed .
Not existing as portrayed is very different from not existing.
Whoever is the yahoo responsible for kicking off Islam is by definition the premier Mohammed
Somebody kicked it off.
Mohammed definitely existed. You don’t combat error with falsehood. Spreading the idea that he didn’t exist is counterproductive and nonsense. We can confront and confute Islam without this kind of nonsense.
Islam’s adherents believe it teaches them to murder or enslave you.
No way you had time to listen to the many facts this guy presented, so you are talking out your rectum.
I wouldn’t have posted after I watched this if it was almost 2 hours of opinion or theory.this guy brings facts.
Islam may exist, but Mohammed himself as Islam claims didn’t .
Also read Spencer’s book!
Read Spencer’s book!
Whoever is the yahoo responsible for kicking off Islam is by definition the premier Mohammed.
/ I challenge you to watch this then come back and offer YOUR facts that Islam was Mohammeds creation.
Islam exists . Mohammed as the prophet who established it doesn’t.
Teaser, the name Mohammad isn’t a name , it’s a title.
The whole basis of Islam is a sham. One does not go into a cave to receive the Word of God. His Word is not delivered second hand, either. The entire ideology would be lost in the distant past, but for their inherent fanatical violence.
Well I have read many Hadiths and it seems clear to me that Muhammed existed.
Yeah I know you added the clarification that the story really states “he didn’t exist as portrayed”. But if the article misrepresents the story with a false headline then it can’t be trusted.
Cheers. :-)
In combatting religious error, I have conducted numerous classes on various false religions including Islam. This entailed much, much more than watching a two hour video.
There are better ways to attack error than with nonsense.
He covers the origins of the Hadiths.
they prove nothing and are themselves very problematic as to their origins.
But then again , you didn't bother to watch and learn.
You can believe anything you like, but it's just unbased belief.
You sound like the UK academic that refused to debate this man in public , but demanded an academic closed door debate.
That's called a “ tell” in the US.
From the outside, most religions appear to be demonstrably silly.
I don’t much care, so long as they leave me peaceable in my silly religion, which all but one do.
islam is special: it requires my murder.
So, I am desperately interested in islam.
How do you know it’s non sense if you haven’t watched it ?
You don’t.
Your statement is a non sequitur.
You sound like a professional academic , are you ?
Teach in s seminary or attended one perhaps ?
The majority of classical scholars believe Muhammad existed as a historical figure.
The earliest Muslim source of information for the life of Muhammad,
the Quran, gives very little personal information and its historicity is debated.
Been following Jay Smith for some time.
It looks as though Islam emerged from the Arian heresy. This was a 3rd Century doctrine, associated at that time with Arab-Christians, that Jesus was (merely) the adopted son of God. The Arian heresy rejected the Trinity and, in particular, John 1:1. I invite you to reread that verse to remind yourself of just how beautiful is our religion. Constantine, then a secular ruler, called the Council of Nicea to resolve this controversy.
Anyway, by the 8th Century, rulers from Damascus transitioned from Christian unitarians to full-blown Muslims. This was during the reign of Al-Malik. You can see this transition in the coins issued by Al-Malik. Originally, with a Christian Cross (15:19 on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8fqn5C6knQ), later as Muslim coins.
Muslims, you may know, destroy archeological evidence whenever they can. This is because they know, deep down, that theirs is a fake, made-up religion, which is contradicted by archeological evidence. We saw this destruction of antiquities when ISIS came in control of Ninevah. (We do not destroy archeological evidence as we have a sense that everything that is true testifies to God. But, watch out, pantheism is another heresy. There’s a difference in seeing nature as an evidence of God, and seeing God as part of everything.)
The evidence of that Islam emerged under Al-Malik and then was redacted back to the 6th Century is repressed by Muslims as on the wikipedia article on Arab coins. That article is a total lie. As long as Muslims lie about the origins of their religion, they cannot be trusted in anything.
So, who is the founder of Islam? It is Al-Malik. Was there a person named Mohammed who led the Arab conquest of the Arabian peninsula, Palestine and other parts of the near east? Maybe or maybe not. All records to a person named “Mohammed” of about that time are to persons from Iraq and such, not to a person from the Arabian peninsular.
(There are references to Mahmod, meaning the annointed one, going far back in history. But these references are often to the Messiah, that is, to Jesus.)
Some theorize it emerged from Ebionites. An early Christian sect that viewed Christ strictly as a prophet in the Jewish sense in some ways how Muslims view Mohammed. A super prophet but not the Son of God, so strict monotheists.
youre very very welcome to confront and defeat Islam in any honest way you wish
but still there is no contemporaneous evidence, not to say proof, of Mo’s existence ... or for that matter Mecca or the koran itself
go forward a couple hundred years and the story begins to spread
and yes, it is that story that must be refuted regardless of anything else. confronting it on doctrinal grounds is fine and necessary for sure. false teachings and all that. have at it, fine good excellent!
confronting it on historical grounds is also fair game imho.
I managed 7 minutes of the video this morning-—your reply encourages me to come back when I have time.
Thanks
Exactly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.