With Barry Nussbaum of the American Truth Project, Tuesday.
Order the new revised and expanded version of Did Muhammad Exist?here.
Comments
Niemollersays
No offense, but I don’t believe there has ever been a poem or story orally passed from even one generation to the next without alteration. That goes a 1000X over for passing on long books like the Iliad, Genesis and the Quran to subsequent generations for hundreds of years prior to writing them down. Indeed, that’s part of the brilliance of the ancient oral traditions: they got richer over time as each generation’s “remembrancers” repeated them.
gravenimagesays
The Islamic texts are vicious and murderous–not exactly “rich” in the way most of us would use the term.
And I fully believe that we have the right to question every aspect of Islam and any other ideology–including the historicity of Muhammad.
mortimersays
If the Koran was recited with variations or recorded incorrectly, then Allah did not defend the text as the Koran claims. Thus, Islam is false and man-made, since the claim of perfect preservation is seen to be false.
gravenimagesays
I’m not sure most Muslims would see it that way–more likely they would just condemn any versions that don’t match the current Qur’an as heretical.
One thing is for sure, nothing Muslims claim as “revealed truth” can be relied upon to be factual.
They are not objective in their record keeping, nor factual and therefore not trustworthy. They themselves created that reputation that now comes back to embarrass them. It’s called Karma.
Michael Copelandsays
As mentioned before, Arabs are 98% unreliable.
That is what Bukhari found when he collected his Hadiths.
mortimersays
The stories about Mohammed were fabricated, and not only by Arab Muslims. Persians, Africans, Asians, they all fabricated stories in order to please their sultans and masters. Even Bukhari confessed that some of the material didn’t seem plausible, even though ‘sahih’ (reputedly authentic).
mortimersays
If the hadiths are discovered to have been fabricated, and if the Koran appears to be man-made, then why wouldn’t ‘Mohammed’ ALSO be fabricated, just like the stories of Beowulf, Robin Hood and King Arthur were fabricated?
Muslims have no reason to follow Islam if the Koran, hadiths and Mohammed himself are all fabricated.
gregbeethamsays
I’d say most orthodox Muslims aren’t permitted to even consider or think about the possibility that the Koran is fabricated in any way because Allah can see their thoughts, (so they are taught), and they will become apostate if they have any doubt creeping into their mind so most devout Muslims would only listen to unsubstantiated rubbish coming from people like fakir Naik or Uthman ibn Farooq, both being dedicated snake oil salesman.
Unfortunately it seems just getting the attention of most Muslims about the deceit of Islam itself would be a challenge.
Discover more from
Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.
Niemoller says
No offense, but I don’t believe there has ever been a poem or story orally passed from even one generation to the next without alteration. That goes a 1000X over for passing on long books like the Iliad, Genesis and the Quran to subsequent generations for hundreds of years prior to writing them down. Indeed, that’s part of the brilliance of the ancient oral traditions: they got richer over time as each generation’s “remembrancers” repeated them.
gravenimage says
The Islamic texts are vicious and murderous–not exactly “rich” in the way most of us would use the term.
And I fully believe that we have the right to question every aspect of Islam and any other ideology–including the historicity of Muhammad.
mortimer says
If the Koran was recited with variations or recorded incorrectly, then Allah did not defend the text as the Koran claims. Thus, Islam is false and man-made, since the claim of perfect preservation is seen to be false.
gravenimage says
I’m not sure most Muslims would see it that way–more likely they would just condemn any versions that don’t match the current Qur’an as heretical.
Alfredo says
One thing is for sure, nothing Muslims claim as “revealed truth” can be relied upon to be factual.
They are not objective in their record keeping, nor factual and therefore not trustworthy. They themselves created that reputation that now comes back to embarrass them. It’s called Karma.
Michael Copeland says
As mentioned before, Arabs are 98% unreliable.
That is what Bukhari found when he collected his Hadiths.
mortimer says
The stories about Mohammed were fabricated, and not only by Arab Muslims. Persians, Africans, Asians, they all fabricated stories in order to please their sultans and masters. Even Bukhari confessed that some of the material didn’t seem plausible, even though ‘sahih’ (reputedly authentic).
mortimer says
If the hadiths are discovered to have been fabricated, and if the Koran appears to be man-made, then why wouldn’t ‘Mohammed’ ALSO be fabricated, just like the stories of Beowulf, Robin Hood and King Arthur were fabricated?
Muslims have no reason to follow Islam if the Koran, hadiths and Mohammed himself are all fabricated.
gregbeetham says
I’d say most orthodox Muslims aren’t permitted to even consider or think about the possibility that the Koran is fabricated in any way because Allah can see their thoughts, (so they are taught), and they will become apostate if they have any doubt creeping into their mind so most devout Muslims would only listen to unsubstantiated rubbish coming from people like fakir Naik or Uthman ibn Farooq, both being dedicated snake oil salesman.
Unfortunately it seems just getting the attention of most Muslims about the deceit of Islam itself would be a challenge.