Posted on 10/16/2001 8:12:34 AM PDT by SocialMeltdown
Muslim scholars prepared (faulty) Arabic translations of Aristotle (and little else) which Western Christians became aware of in 1190 A.D. By 1225 A.D. Christian scholars abandoned these texts as faulty and sought higher quality editions in the original Greek. Greek monks in Venice who ran the Muslim blockades provided Western priests with accurate texts. Starting in 1222 this project was underway without any Muslim involvement - and despite Muslim interference.
The myth of Islam as a preserver of Greek knowledge was an invention of the atheistical French Encyclopedists and their precursors like Rameau. They were antithetical to traditional Christianity and lived at a time when French explorers had rediscovered fragments of Aristotelian works translated into Arabic. Their theory became an accepted myth, since it served the rhetorical purpose of making the Roman Church seem backward.
The numerals we use are not actually Arabic - the number system used in Arabic is only vaguely similar. Our numerals are more Indo-Persian than Arabic. The significant difference between Roman and "Arabic" numerals is that the latter have zero as a placeholder, making multiplication and factoring much simpler. These were innovations discovered by Indian mathematicians, however, not Muslims. Indians also invented algebra, an insight that Islam absorbed but eventually abandoned.
The Muslims abandoned speculative mathematics after Al-Qarizmi died. No one followed him and mathematical research became unknown again in Islam. The next major breakthrough in mathematics occurred in Europe, not in Islam - the calculus invented by English and German thinkers.
And the eleventh century was not a "Dark Age". It saw the development of new principles of architecture, musical polyphony, advanced techniques in demography, important advances in legal theory, the growth of sophisticated trading centers in Italy and the Low Countries, the Cluniac revolution and the reorganization of the Church and the Empire.
We Americans/Christians eventually came out on top of both groups of Semites, and that is why some of their more radical members are both mad at us and constantly try to tell us what to do.
The crusades made the Islamic Arabs even more mad at Christians and Gentiles, as did the loss of their Ottoman Empire. The world-wide success of proselytizing Christians has made militant Islamic Arabs and Israelis mad at us, because they think they are supposed to run and influence the world the most.
But the basic root cause of this problem, in my opinion, is simple human jealousy, just like when the Nazis thought that “Germanic” people should control the world and the Japs thought they should control the Orient. I think this is a human problem (uhhh, mainly a man problem). Some times it can exhibit itself in terms of religion or race or nationality.
"Allah" does not mean "God of Abraham". Allah was the name of a local Arabian moon god. The Arabic word for the God of the Jews was "adonah" - an Arabicization of "Adonai", a Hebrew/Aramaic name for God.
Mohammed preached that this moon god was actually the only God and that Abraham worshipped Allah. He told Arabs that they were the true descendents of Abraham and that the Jews were liars and descendents of pigs and monkeys.
There is a reason why a crescent moon is the symbol of Islam to this day - it shows the true provenance of Allah. Fascinating, isn't it, that Islam forbids making an image of anything created - yet adopts an image of the moon as its symbol? Even more interesting that Muslims worldwide are expected to travel to Mecca at least once to do obeisance to a black stone - yet they claim that Christians are blasphemers and idolaters for worshipping Christ.
Nice lie, bert. Glad to hear useless comments from the American Taliban.
Look, linguistics is just not your area. Please see the following from the Catholic Encyclopedia about the Hebrew word for God used in the OT. (I assume you don't think the CE is overrun with PCness.)
"Elohim has been explained as a plural form of Eloah or as plural derivative of El. Those who adhere to the former explanation do not agree as to the derivation of Eloah. There is no such verbal stem as alah in Hebrew; but the Arabist Fleischer, Franz Delitzsch, and others appeal to the Arabic aliha, meaning "to be filled with dread", "anxiously to seek refuge", so that ilah (eloah) would mean in the first place "dread", then the object of dread. Gen., xxi, 42, 53, where God is called "the fear of Isaac", Is., viii, 13, and Ps. lxxv, 12, appear to support this view."
All other Semitic peoples used a form of "el" as a title for their gods. The Hebrew word Adonai is most often translated as Lord, not God. El, elohim and adonai are all titles, anyway. In the OT the personal name of God is YHWH.
I liked this article though the inappropriate title is still making me ponder. We have not been 'drawn' 'into' anything. They came over here and started a war. Different.
Anyway, I liked the article because it is a nice little synopsis for the uneducated ... and that's pretty near everybody these days. In this culture, in this age, highly educated people, like doctors, lawyers, most CEO etc, are some of the MOST poorly educated people on the planet. All they know is their specialty. They worked so hard in class to get grades and get to or near the top in order to get the big bucks ... that they are functionally illiterate about history, economics, geo-politics, religion, etc, etc.
And they remain culturally stupid. They are so enmeshed in their fast paced work-a-day world that they have no time (unlike us political-junkie-keyboard-commandos) to REALLY look at and understand the world around them.
This is undoubtedly one of the root causes our culture has become so cheap, vain, shallow and debuched. It's also why we don't stand a very good chance of making a dent in Islamic fundamentalism.
****So while the West may not see history in such stark terms, it should not forget both the power of the Crusades and their use as a motivator for destroying the United States and its allies. America's cause for conflict is only a month old, while its enemy's has lasted more than 1,000 years. ****
It's like the bacon and eggs story. You usually hear it as an anology told to a young groom by way of explaining 'commitment'. You know, the chicken was 'involved' but the pig was 'commited' in this breakfast. Which leaves me with more pondering ....How can a society with a 50% divorce rate, a huge illegitimacy rate, and a solid love for abortion ... muster the commitment and resolve to wholly defeat a quickly coalescing and uniting Islamic front of over fifty nations?
PS: I wrote this about four hours ago but FR has been down (for me, and it looks like a few thous others, but not all) untill now.
Eggs Akley! BUMP for you.
Nice lie, bert.
Not really a lie. Have you read about the Albigensian Crusade, the Inquisition, the persecution of Protestants in the Netherlands by Charles V, or the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre? These events really happened. In each case, the Pope either initiated or celebrated the results.
Not Catholic-bashing, just trying to be accurate.
I think this is true, however the compound, contracted word Allah formed from Al (the) & Lah (contracted and bastardized from the original Lil meaning god) is the ancient Arab name of the Sumerian sun god. At the time of Mohammed the Arabs of Mecca had hundreds of gods and Lil was one of the more popular. Mohammed chose it as the one god. Is a name really important when the speaker actually does mean 'the one god' in his mind? I don't know. You tell me.
Perhaps you need enlightened.
ON 24 june 1209, Pope Innocent III unleashed Simon de Montfort on the Christians of southern France because they did not submit to his orthodoxy. He slaughtered 20,000 in their homes and villages. Since they were dead, it was no problem to appropriate all their lands and goods.
Once the wholsale killing was over, it was only a small step to the Inquisition lasting 300 years or so.
I suggest you spend a little more time with the books.
Hitler was quite wealthy, primarily from royalties on his book. Of course, from 1933-45 he essentially owned Germany and everyone in it.
Who cares what they think they know? None of us will know for sure till the moment of death. I've never understood this obsession with whether someone else thinks you're going to hell. Whether he's right or not, his belief has no effect on me one way or the other.
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.