Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims Home Links Articles Authors About Us Feedback Leaving Islam Library Contact us Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims Home Links Articles Authors About Us Feedback Leaving Islam Library Contact us
10 Dec, 2008
A self-professed ex-Muslim atheist found a miracle in the Koran in the story of Pharaoh, the Egyptian king. In discussions with his friend, he discovered a stunning revelation in the Koran which says that Pharaoh was saved in body although the Bible (Torah) says, 'Pharaoh was drowned in the Red Sea while chasing Moses and his companions'. The point he intended to put across is that the Biblical account is incorrect while the Koranic one is correct. Relevant Koranic and Biblical verses he cited are as follows:
Bible: "And the waters returned, and covered the Chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them." (Exodus, 14:28)
Amazingly, when this was all the world knew about the drowning of Pharaoh, the Quran produced this astounding revelation: "We shall save you in your body this day, so that you may become a sign to all posterity." (Koran: 10:92)
 |
| Editor MA Khan's book
(Feb 2009). Learn more here | Paperback: $ 24.95 | Kindle ed: $ 7.96 | E.Book: $ 6:00 |
He sought to relate the Koranic claim of saving Pharaoh's body in the discovery of mummies of ancient Kings (Pharaohs) in Egypt in the early 20th century. However, he conveniently ignored the other Koranic verses, which give a conflicting picture of the fate of Pharaoh as cited below:
The story of Pharaoh goes in the Islamic discourse goes like this:
When Moses took the was fled with the children of Israel, Pharaoh with his people pursued him. Upon arrival at the read sea, Allah parted the sea. Moses and his people crossed it and when Pharaoh and his people were in the middle of the parted sea, Allah let the water flow. Pharaoh with his people were drowned.
Now let us have look at the confusing and contradictory picture the Quran draws of Pharaoh's fate:
This account gives a glimpse of an utterly confused author, the Islamic God Allah, of this alleged Holy Book of Truth. When confronted with these Koranic contradictions, this atheist guy, like a typical Islamic apologist, quickly changed his mind that the Koran is no more a book of astounding revelation as compared to the Bible and insisted that these divine books describe a similarly correct account of Pharaoh as he said: "Astonishingly, all three books narrates the story of Moses having contents with startling resemblance". Now he is impressed by the miracle of these alleged books of revelation that some Egyptian king named Pharaoh ever existed: "Is there any scientific proof exists that shows Moses or any other component mentioned in the stories present in Torah, Bible, Quran does exists? At least I know one, a very weak component, existence of Pharaohs!."
Here is an example of dishonesty and intellectual bankruptcy, which a typical religious apologist will normally demonstrate. This gentleman initially found an astoundingly different account of Pharaoh in Koran as compared to the Bible (which is indeed true), but the next moment he changed his mind that all these "holy books", in fact, give a similar account of Pharaoh. The fact that the Koran itself gives a very contradictory picture of Pharaoh's fate will not get into him. No doubt the Koran, as uncovered by Maurice Bucaille, is a book of all the sciences on earth. This Saudi royal family doctor's devout disciples from the Muslim community continue to unravel more.
This gentleman appears to believe that it was so difficult for Moses, Jesus and Muhammad to know that Egyptian king Pharaoh ever existed. Hence, the simple mention of Pharaoh in the Torah and the Koran itself is a piece of scientific miracle of these divine books. This account clearly demonstrates his ignorance about the historical background of the religious scriptures and history of the Middle East and Egypt as I will expound it in the following paragraphs.
All Muslims (also probably all believing Jews and Christians) believe that Pharaoh was the name of the Egyptian king during the time of Moses and he died drowned in the Red Sea when he and his men were chasing Moses and his men (Children of Israel) who were fleeing Egypt. But Pharaoh was not the name of an individual king; it was actually the title of the ancient Egyptian rulers like the king, emperor or raja.
Thus, there were many Pharaohs in Egypt from 3200 BCE until Alexander the great conquered it in 332 BCE. Although some of them may have been unkind rulers like other rulers around the world at that time, a few of them were actually kind, generous, intelligent and concerned about the welfare of the people. The most kind and generous Pharaoh was Ahmis I (d. 1610 BCE). He was very concerned for his subjects and ensuring better comfort, happiness and welfare of his people was his motto. He was so popular with his people that the Egyptians worshiped him for almost a thousand years after his death until the Persians conquered Egypt in 525 BCE.
Another great Pharaoh was Rameses II (or Rameses the Great, 1317–1251 BCE) and if Moses (allegedly born in 1359 BCE) ever had lived on earth, Rameses II is the evil Pharaoh drowned in the red sea as described in the Bible, later copied in the Koran. The truth of the matter is that Rameses-II was a very intelligent, strongly secular and scientific-minded; he had great interest in arts and architecture. He was in no way a cruel king as described in the story of EXODUS. If the Pharaoh in the story of EXODUS was indeed Rameses II, then this story is one of the greatest character-assassination efforts in human history. Character-killing incidences are not rare in human history, particularly in holy scriptures. We see in Hindu tradition that Ravana, a very kind and respectable monarch, is horribly character-assassinated in the epic of Ramayana, while the uncouth, unjust and treacherous gang of Rama and his brother are revered. In Islam, similar character assassination has been done concerning the Pagans and Jews of Arabia, who were, in any account, a very tolerant, generous and nonviolent people, opposed to Prophet Muhammad's gang of plunders, mass-murderers, enslavers and rapists.
Name Pharaoh in books of revelations a miracle?
This gentle atheist feels that simply the occurrence of the word Pharaoh in the Bible and the Koran is a miracle, a scientific proof (weak?) of the divinity of these books. But does it qualify to be any kind of miracle?
Unlikely so! Egyptian rulers assumed the Pharaoh title from ~3200 to 332 BCE and scores of Pharaohs ruled Egypt during that period. Given that the story of the EXODUS was revealed either by an alleged God or composed by some jealous and mischievous writer as folklores, during about the time of alleged Moses (1300–1200 BCE) or later, when Pharaoh was still the title of the Egyptian king, the author naturally used the term 'Pharaoh' to describe the Egyptian monarch. Hence, it is naive at best to discover a miracle in the occurrence of the word 'Pharaoh' in the Bible and the Koran. The failure of divine books to specify which Pharaoh was involved in animosity with Moses exposes their baselessness.
The mummy story
The Egyptians used to mummify their dead bodies if they could afford, which, they thought, would ensure peace to their departed soul in afterlife. And obviously, the dead bodies of Kings (Pharaohs) were mummified. Mummification of dead bodies continued for about 3,000 years until the 4th century CE, when many Egyptians had become Christians and no longer believed that mummification was necessary for after-death salvation of the soul. Eventually, the Egyptians gave up the art and science of making mummies.
Since Prophet Muhammad was born just about two hundreds years after the tradition of mummification ceased to continue and given the proximity of the Arabia with Egypt, Prophet Muhammad undoubtedly heard folklore stories and legends about mummification, especially of Egyptian Pharaohs (Kings). Although Muhammad failed to describe mummification of Pharaoh's bodies properly (simply said Pharaoh was saved in his body), indeed Pharaoh Rameses II was mummified and preserved; he was never drowned in the Red Sea as described in Exodus. When everyone accompanying Pharaoh was perished by Allah in the red sea, who brought the dead body of Pharaoh from there to Egypt and did the mummification? It was more likely that Moses and his followers would have brought Pharaoh's dead body to Israel for preservation as wished by the Allah. But there is no mummy found in Israel. If at all that happened, the mummy of the Pharaoh of Abrahamic scriptures must be buried underneath somewhere in Israel and is not at all acting as the warning or signs of evil, for which Allah wished to save Pharaoh in his body [Quran 10:90–92]. Allah's wish failed to materialize.
The fact is that Muhammad was confused by the stories of Old Testament and the stories of mummies of Pharaohs preserved in Egyptian pyramids; therefore, he gave conflicting accounts of Pharaoh's fate in the Koran.
In fact, Ramses II is one of the three most famous Egyptians mummies, namely Tutankhamen, Seti I and Rameses II (Ramses the Great). Although great Pharaoh Ramses II may have been severely character-assassinated by the fables of divine scriptures, the civilized people of the world paid due respect to the mummified body of Ramses II; it never served as a "sign of evil" as Allah wished in the Koran. Here goes the story:
Rameses the Great ruled over Egypt from 1279–1212
BC, an incredible 67 years. Rameses was legendary in many
respects.
At a time when most people
lived only a few decades, Rameses was about 90 years old when he
died. He was a tall man about six feet in height, when the
average Egyptian was a little over five feet tall. Rameses had
many wives in his lifetime and is believed to have fathered over
100 children.
In 1974, Egyptologists at the Cairo Museum noticed that the mummy's condition was getting worse rapidly . They decided to fly Rameses II to Paris so that a team of experts could give the mummy a medical examination. Did you know that even a mummy needs a passport to travel? Ramses II was issued an Egyptian passport that listed his occupation as "King (deceased)."
Once in Paris, Ramses was diagnosed with, and treated for, a fungal infection. During the examination, scientific analysis revealed battle wounds and old fractures, plus arthritis and poor circulation Pharaoh's body at the time of his death. In addition, experts were able to determine some of the flowers and herbs that were used for the embalming him, which included lots of camomile oil.
Thus, the story of Pharaoh or the discovery of mummies of Egyptian kings or whatsoever, none of them gives any credibility to the fables or legends described in the Bible and the Koran. A proper historical, scientific and rational investigation only unravels the baselessness of those stories.
Name: great egyption civilazation needs to studied
well.
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 01:04:40 -0500
Comment
great egyption civilazation needs to studied well.After islamization the egypt has become breeder for islamic terrorism and ignorence.All the previous wisdom was lost.
Name: vbv
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 01:05:20 -0500
Comment
Good article. Iwas also impressed by the author who wrote that Ravan was noble but Rama and his hordes were treacherous. Maybe,but there is no historical evidence that either Rama,his kith and kin and his monkey army or Ravana the wholesomely vilified character ever existed except in the imagination of the poet Valmiki.Ramayana,like its much larger counterpart Mahabharata are great works of fiction in the genre of Illiad and Odyssey of Homer with elements of history mixed with much mythology to present a way of life and morality of those times,perhaps before 1500BCE. We can appreciate it as a work of Art, Literature and philosophy,unlike Bible and Quran taken literally to be the historical Truth that is held sacred and placed above criticism. In India many of us are critical of these two great poems as well as other ancient literaturse such as puranas,or upanishads without fear of getting murdered for holding an unorthodox views.Sadly ,ofcourse,with the influence of semetic creed/cults of Judaism,Christianity and Islam(above all) ,the hindus have also imbibed extreme intolerance and bigotry,which is typical of the semetic creeds/cults of Judaism,Christianity and Islam ,especially the last two which thrive on proselytisation and hatred of all other belief system. Both Islam and Christianity thrive on hatred and intolerance calling those who do not belong their idealogy as Kaffirs,infidels,pagans,heathens,etc. Only with the eradication of both these cults the world will attain peace and sanity with good secular values.
Name: RE:vbv
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 01:40:40 -0500
Comment
Dear VBV where did you get that Rama killed his own kith and kin? While I really dont know if he existed or not, yet there are conclusive evidences coming out that point towards such wars and civilizations as mentioned in the texts of Hindus. However with Leftists and liberals as the leaders of our country we could never except these findings to ever see the daylight. Now what you really want to say here is that it is always the winners who write the history, however this analogy is not an absolute. This is the problem with majority of the sworn atheists. We should try and analyse things and try to find out conclusive proofs. Saying things like Rama did not exist or that Krishna was a nonexistent entity is not a very good approach. It sounds pretty much like what the Muslims claim today that the Holocaust never happened, or maybe as some Prof in Germany is claiming that Mohomet was a fictional character. Science tells us to be critical and not stupid. The approach of your borders on stupidity rather than criticality. Opinions should be critical and not fanatical, without proof and enquiry nothing is conclusive. As far as the stupidity of the Quran is concerned, the book itself bears witness to it. Hence it has been proven wrong. Can you show us a single verse in Ramayana or Mahabharata which tells others to indulge in mass genocide and rape? Your opinions are based on hearsay and not reading or research. Just by banging Islam one does not become entitled to be called a free thinker. A free thinker keeps his mind open and not enclosed in a shell. Pretty much like your claims saying that all of Christianity and Judaism and all other religions are evil. Show us the proof, which is in context and then we can talk in a civilized and descent manner and not shout and scream. Because if we do that we are no better than the Muslims who destroy those who like to kill people who are critical of their beliefs. Hating is one thing and being critical is another? So which side are you on?
Name: I THINK RAM IS NOT AS BAD AS RAVAN
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 02:29:02 -0500
Comment
[Editor: I request readers not to post comments in all-caps. Future comments on all-caps will be deleted.
Linguistics: It's unfortunate that a majority of the comments made here are poor in language, filled with errors. This is a result of not re-reading the comments before posting. I encourage all commenters to do a revision of their comment before posting. We have many readers whose English is not strong. Substandard English makes it hard for them to understand the comments.]
I think ram is not as bad as ravan,as per the ramayan etc....ravan did genocide against brahmins and killed them.also,he took away the wife of ram in a deceptive way.ravan as a great devotee of shiva etc...great scholar etc...but he did evil,that is why he was killed.taking away ram's wife was 1 part,but he did genocide against the rishis-brahmins etc...and killed them as theyw were opposed to worshipping him as against the kafir gods.he was another muhamed.just as muhamed did evil by taking away someon'e wife so also ravan did it.beside this ram never told anyone to do genocide against anyone in his name. He fought against the well organised army of ravan with a motley army of monkeys and bears.as per ramayan ravan was a demon althought son of a brahmin he did evil deeds and became a demon.he did penance and obtained a boon from brahma that he shud not die,but since everyone even the gods have to go some day he was not granted this,so he said ok....he shud not be killed by any god etc...but humans and monkeys r ok,bcoz they r demon's food.thus the god vishnu took human form of ram to kill ravan.and after killing ravan ram gave him salvation.whether this is real story or not,i dont know,but it has great moral values,like respecting parents, etc...i request the authour to pls read the various versions of ramayan before coming to any conclusion.pls dont vilify kafir pagan indian values.i as an ex-muslim from india,having studied all religious texts greatly value indian texts literature and values over the islamic values. Yes there were many bad things in india liek casteism and 2nd grade status of woman,but things r changing now,for the better as hindus r becomeing secular.the main challange is to make muslims see the light and save the world from nuclear world war 3.
Name: From concerned
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 02:49:55 -0500
Comment
*** Fellow commentators *** Please keep your comments short. Very few people will read and understand the long ones. You are wasteing your time. Try to make your comments clear and easily understandable. Also, try to write in clear english, because people who speak many different languages visit this site. Thank you and take care
Name: Another mistake concerning Pharaoh
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 03:29:11 -0500
Comment
The title Pharaoh wasnīt in use during the alleged time of Moses. The term means "Great House" or Palace and came into use much later. Today it is widely used by scholars but they know that it wasnīt in use before the New Kingdom at all. Here we can clearly see how the quran drew mistakes from the Bible like a student taking from his neighbour during a test. The Books of Moses were written much later than most people think, at a time when the title Pharaoh had come into use. Moreover, most scholars agree that Moses was not a historic character because many of his stories occured at different ages. However, fact that the authors of the quran are widely relying on these stories clearly reveals that the quran is fake! It cannot be written by god because it relies on untrue accounts written by humans. It is so clear!
Name: Another mistake concerning Pharaoh II
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 03:41:54 -0500
Comment
And there is even more to say: In 020.071 (Yusuf Ali) Pharaoh says: "be sure I will cut off your hands and feet on opposite sides, and I will have you crucified on trunks of palm-trees: so shall ye know for certain, which of us can give the more severe and the more lasting punishment!" Similar quotes can be found in surah 26.49. Here we must say that crucification was not in use during the Pharaohs time at all because it was introduced by the phoenicians and the cross was a very important for Life in the Egyptian religion (Ankh). Thus, we can clearly see that the quran is wrong and it is very likely that the author are simply talking about well-known punishments during their lifetime.
Name: To vbv
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 04:22:56 -0500
Comment
"Only with the eradication of both these cults (Islam and Christianity) the world will attain peace and sanity with good secular values." It seems that you cannot differentiate between Islam and Christianity. USA and Europe both Christian nations are more peaceful, progressive, prosperous and liberal than most non-Christian nations. Get you facts straight or do a research first on Jesus.
Name: christians have moved away from true dark ages
christianity,but if u read bible its as genocidal as koran
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 06:16:31 -0500
Comment
christians have moved away from true dark ages christianity,but if u read bible its as genocidal as koran.pls ggogle : www.evilbible.com
Name: Sarvesh to Muhammad Hussain
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 06:21:16 -0500
Comment
I think the author Muhammad Hussain has not read the epic Ramayana in detail. Ravana kidnapped Ram's wife and took her to Lanka. He repeatedly asked her to marry him but she denied. Ram, being a dutiful Kshatriya, took the help of Hanuman, crossed the sea, defeated Ravan, and got back Sita. Why is Hussain comparing Ram and his army to that of his Prophet Muhammad. Perhaps, bits and pieces of bigotry taught to him in madarsas when he was a child are being recollected. He is taking time to distinguish between good and evil because of the effect of Quran and hadees on him. Coming to Ramayana, at the end of the battle when Ravana fell, Rama asks his brother to learn knowledge of administration from Ravana. How many would dare to do this? In Hinduism, there is a saying that we must accept good things from enemies as well. I am sure in his next article Muhammad Hussain might admonish Mahabharath war by saying Kauravas were good and Pandavas were bad. Grow up X-muslim. Leaving Islam is not enough; get the real knowledge by reading Upanishads, Bhagavad gita, and vedas.
Name: to Muhammad Hussain
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 06:51:01 -0500
Comment
while the uncouth,unjust,and trecherous gang of Rama and his brothers are revered.This is incredible stuff.I dont know from where the author got this. Or is it that he is still biased againts Hindus deep within.We are not contesting if Ram existed or not.Just look upto the morale of these epics.Victory of good over evil.You cant even remotely compare the spiritually devoid Quran with these epics even if they are half true,half fiction.
Name: Charles Martel
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 11:02:35 -0500
Comment
The Bible doesn't say Pharoah was drowned -- it says his host was drowned -- "...all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them." I'm a Christian, and I know that it is explicitly assumed in Christian Bible interpretation that he did not drown, because it doesn't say so, and that would be a significant fact.
Name: No Historicity in Bible and Quran
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 11:28:11 -0500
Comment
We must realise that all accounts on Moses in the Bibel are pure fiction. There is no historicity in it since we donīt even know the name of the pharaoh mentioned. And the author of the quran relies heavily on this fiction that never happened in history though we have much knowledge from egyptian sources, but they never mention somebody like Moses. While muslim believe that their quran is the original which had been altered by Jews and Christians, it is more than clear that Muhammad relied on them and alterend them in his favour.
Name: To anti-Christian fellows
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 12:47:32 -0500
Comment
The violence recorded on the Old Testament of the Bible is a record of past events but that does not make the Bible evil as some people here liked to portray. This is analogous to a newspaper reporting a violent event in its pages does not make the newspaper evil. The Bible is one third history relating to the Israelites. One portion of the Ten Commandments in the Old Testaments says "You shall not kill". Yet despite this some people with hidden agenda like to spread lies that Bible is evil.
Name: To No historicity in Bible
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 13:14:32 -0500
Comment
The proof of the historical evidence of the Bible is the Jewish people now living in the State of Israel. These tiny group of people had outlived all the great empires that persecuted and invaded their land from the Assyrian empire to the Babylonian to the Roman empire to Hitler's Third Reich and now the Islamic menace. These people had preserved their sacred records for posterity. One more proof that the Bible is the inspired Word of God is its prophecy.The Bible foretold the worldwide dispersal of the Jews and their persecution because of their national sins. That is a historical fact. The Bible again foretold that God will gather his people from all over the world in one place. That again was fulfilled in May 1948 with the creation of the State of Israel. The Bible described the Jews in this manner, "Your hands shall be in the neck of your enemies". How true today despite overwhelming odds the 1.5 billion Muslims cannot obliterate tiny Israel not counting the previous world empires. Ask any hardcore Muslims. Israel is special and its meaning is God's people.
Name: G.Ryan
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 14:55:20 -0500
Comment
Rameses was truly a great man and father to his people.He fought the war like Hittites at the battle of Kadesh,and won.People should read more about this great man.
Name: Re: To No historicity in Bible
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 15:12:32 -0500
Comment
Your suggestions have nothing, I say absolutely nothing to do with my comment. I was referring to the historicity of Moses and you are making claims about the superiority of israel and the jews. Or can YOU tell me the NAME of the Pharaoh who dealt with Moses?
Name: lw1 to Muhammad Hussain
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 15:21:15 -0500
Comment
You have given sourses ie Bible- Exodus 14:28 and Koran 10:92. Can you give sourses for your claims about Rama and Ravana? If you can't then you are doing what Mohammad was doing, relying on what he had heard and misrepresenting the Bible.If you are mistaken it is best to apologise rather than behave like Muslims who try to defend Islam without logically arguing their case.
Name: Re: re: To No historicity in Bible
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 15:47:19 -0500
Comment
Nothing in the previous comments claims to speak of the superiority of Israel or the Jews. You are clearly a bitter ex-Muslim who like your religious kin views any comment about the Jews that is not disparaging as unnecessary flattery. What does the identity of the Pharaoh have to do with anything?
Name: Re: Re: re: To No historicity in Bible
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 16:36:18 -0500
Comment
First of all: I am not an ex-muslim nor a muslim! I am only interested in facts and not in Pro-Jewish or Pro-Zionist agitation. You wrote: "What does the identity of the Pharaoh have to do with anything?" Very much! I was talking about the fact that the Books of Moses cannot regarded as historical accounts. Perhaps the Books of the Maccabaeans can be regarded as historical sources but the Torah canīt. You cannot write that Moses met a Pharao with an unknown name (the titel Pharaoh was not in use at the supposed time) during a not exactly known time at an unknown place and claim that it is a historical fact. Another problem is that it is extremely biased. You cannot claim that the Egyptians and the Pharaoh are bad while the Jews are good in general. And concerning the alleged prophecy of the bible we can agree that any country can survive with support of the USA and the entire western world. Thatīs not too difficult since the arabs donīt look too intelligent either. I am not for or against Israel or the Jews in general but we can summarize that Israel is a welcome present for Arabs and Islamists to blame a jewish conspiracy or whatsoever for anything. Without Israel, I believe, the Arab and Muslim World would have developed much more towards democracy.
Name: continuum
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 17:26:59 -0500
Comment
"We see in Hindu tradition that Ravana, a very kind and respectable monarch, is horribly character-assassinated in the epic of Ramayana, while the uncouth, unjust and treacherous gang of Rama and his brother are revered." Muhammad Hussain seems to have not taken his head out of gutter still. Even if one takes these stories, Mahabharatha and Ramayana, to be fictional in nature or even real, a sane person cannot in any stretch of imagination call Ravana as a good person. Uttara Khanda of Ramayana clearly shows, Ravana committing heinous crimes like raping women and genocide against even Devatas (who are according to Hindu stories superior to human beings). As for Rama, He did not commit any heinous act. I wonder why deprogrammed semitic followers go from one extreme to another extreme without studying things properly.
Name: continuum
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 17:35:22 -0500
Comment
Q 2:50, Q 8:54, Q 10:90 DO NOT contradict each other. The author seems to have some kind of comprehension problem. Verses Q 2:50, Q 8:54 say that "people of Pharaoh" ere drowned and NOT that the Pharaoh was drowned. Verse 10:90 says Pharaoh was saved. This is such an obvious mistake and one of the worst articles I have seen here.
Name: Re: Re: re: To No historicity in Bible
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 19:03:52 -0500
Comment
"You cannot claim that the Egyptians and the Pharaoh are bad while the Jews are good in general." - The Exodus story doesn't imply that at all. I don't know where you're deriving that from. "Without Israel, I believe, the Arab and Muslim World would have developed much more towards democracy." - On what grounds do you base that assumption?
Name: Muhammad Hussain on ''Rama & Ravana''
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 22:42:40 -0500
Comment
I regret that I am unable to engage in a debate on this topic at this moment; I read these stuffs nearly twenty years ago & my books are left behind. If anyone is keen on a debate, I will collect the books when go back home in about 5-6 months. Also we need a well-established Hindu forum for a thorough debate on this topic.----------------- >>> However, let me summarise what I can remember. The battle between Rama & Ravana started over the kidnapping of Rama's wife Sita. Ravana's "raping women and genocide," killing Brahmans etc.---as some commenters have mentioned---were not in the equation of Rama. Behind this story, what is buried is Rama's brother Arjuna's barbarous act of chopping the nose of Ravana's sister (I forget the name, probably Janaki???), possibly for expressing her love for Arjuna (love is the sickness of the heart, not in Islam alone). What was Rama's response to this barbaric act? Ravana was forced to kidnap Sita. Still Rama did not punish his brother; instead, he waged war to destroy Ravana. And he used every treacherous trick to bring down Ravana. -------------->> Those, who say that Ravan was a mass-rapist, should take into account of his gestures toward Sita. He requested Sita for marry him, not raped her even though she was the wife of his staunchest enemy. Seeing her devotion to Rama, Ravana did not rape her in anger to exact his vengiance; instead, he bowed down to her and called her 'devi'. Ramayana is written by an author to defame Ravana, the stories should be read taking that factor into mind. May I ask my Hindu friends: what would have been the response of Rama and his gang if Ravana was the one to start the feud by cutting the nose of Sita or a sister of Rama for a similar non-offense??? I, however, did not want to put the stories of Muhammad and Rama on the same scale. Just wanted to point out that all religions have stories where a noble person is character-assassinated by the lesser person and the latter people revere/worship today. Undoubtedly, our psyche, our morality is shaped to some extent, consciously or subconsciously, by the popular notions of such revered epics. ------------->>> Undoubtedly, the Ramayana story is a fiction, mostly if not completely. Hanuman (monkey) moving the mountain, Ravana, a ten-headed monarch (although some rationalists interpret it as a reflection of his high level of wisdom), and stuffs like never occurred in history, never will.
Name: RE:Muhammad Hussain on ''Rama & Ravana''
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 23:17:20 -0500
Comment
You sound like a pseudo scholar on Hinduism. Arjuna was not the brother of Rama, Laxman was. So please spare us your watered down education of Hindu sources. Your attempts at comparing the Vedic civilization with the Arabic one is simply pathetic. Seems you have been reading Romilla Thappar a lot. She is the same woman who calls Auragezeb a great man. My advice is that you read the authentic sources of Hinduism and then write articles and make such propositions. You are extremely confused between Mahabarta and Ramayana. If you have to comment then you should rather stick to the authentic sources. No I am not asking you to read from the original Sanskrit texts. All I am saying is that first try to read and learn things before contesting them.
Name: continuum to Hussain
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 23:34:51 -0500
Comment
"The battle between Rama & Ravana started over the kidnapping of Rama's wife Sita. Ravana's "raping women and genocide," killing Brahmans etc.---as some commenters have mentioned---were not in the equation of Rama." Have you read the full Ramayana Muhammad Hussein ? Go anad read. On the request of Devatas to save Devatas and humanity from ravaiging Ravana, viSNu (God) takes avatara as Shri Rama. Devatas request God to help them because Ravana was too powerful for them Devatas. So the equation started already with this.
Name: continuum to Hussain
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 23:38:55 -0500
Comment
"Behind this story, what is buried is Rama's brother Arjuna's barbarous act of chopping the nose of Ravana's sister (I forget the name, probably Janaki???), possibly for expressing her love for Arjuna (love is the sickness of the heart, not in Islam alone). What was Rama's response to this barbaric act? Ravana was forced to kidnap Sita." Janaki is another name Sita. Arjuna appears in Mahabharatha. Laxmana is Shr Rama's brother, who cut Surpanaka's (Ravana's sister) nose. According to the story, Surpanaka is a demon who took a form of woman and entertained thoughts to harm Sita in order to covet Shri Rama. So Shri Rama sent her to Laxmana who taught her a lesson for hiding her real identity and for her thoughts to kill Sita. I find nothing wrong here.
Name: continuum to Hussain
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 23:43:08 -0500
Comment
"Ravana was forced to kidnap Sita. Still Rama did not punish his brother; instead, he waged war to destroy Ravana. And he used every treacherous trick to bring down Ravana." What kind of dumb logic is this to say "Ravana was forced to kidnap Sita" ? I think we have an Islamic zealot in this website posing as a rational thinker. This is what Muslims say when they kill innocent people, that they are forced to kill infidels. If ravana was man enough he should have fought with Laxmana, instead he opts to kidnap an innocent woman. That speaks a lot about you being a Muslim through and through.
Name: Muhammad Hussain on "Pharaoh Drawning"
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 23:46:36 -0500
Comment
I have acknowledged that I am disconnected from the Hindu stories for over 15 years after moving overseas. I wrote my comment from recollection. Thanks to the gentleman/lady for correcting the name of Rama's brother. The rest of my comment stand.------------------- ---------- >>> Some commenters, including some Muslims, assert, based on lack of clarity of Quranic & Biblical texts, that Pharaoh was never drowned. This would be tantamount to blasphemy in Islam. Is any Muslim ready to stand in Mecca and say that Pharaoh was never drowned, this is a false story. ----------- ----------- --- >>> Shocking is the way these believers would accept this horrible punishment of a rather innocent people misguided by Pharaoh; but Pharaoh himself, the master culprit if at all, need not be punished.
Name: continuum to Hussain
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 23:49:30 -0500
Comment
"Those, who say that Ravan was a mass-rapist, should take into account of his gestures toward Sita. He requested Sita for marry him, not raped her even though she was the wife of his staunchest enemy. Seeing her devotion to Rama, Ravana did not rape her in anger to exact his vengiance; instead, he bowed down to her and called her 'devi'." Again, Hussen you are talking/thinking through your bum just as muslims do. Go and read Uttarakhanda in particular. When Ravana raped one of the women belonging to heaven(apsara), Ravana was cursed by Kubera, that he would die immediately if he ever touched a woman without her consent. That is why Ravana was did not dare to touch Sita Devi. Besides you do not understand the position of Sita Devi in Hindu gradation of Devatas and Devis. She is Lakshmi Devi, just Shri Rama is viSNu (God) Himself. Ravana does not have the capacity to harm Sita Devi, but yet She, Sita Devi, acted along to bring about ultimate destruction of Ravana and to expose Ravana. Please understand Hindu teahings and scriptures first before talking crap. I almost have a feeling that you are a Tamilian as you talk just like Dravida party members of that state.
Name:
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 23:51:05 -0500
Comment
"Ramayana is written by an author to defame Ravana, the stories should be read taking that factor into mind." Such an assumption is itself wrong. Have you heard of the statement assumption is the mother of all ....
Name: continuum to Hussain
Date: Wednesday December 10, 2008
Time: 23:58:06 -0500
Comment
"May I ask my Hindu friends: what would have been the response of Rama and his gang if Ravana was the one to start the feud by cutting the nose of Sita or a sister of Rama for a similar non-offense???" Your conclusion is based on wrong assumptions that this is a petty feud among two groups of human beings. 1. Ramayana is clear that Ravana and his gangs were a group of Rakshasas who eat human beings as food. 2. The same epic says right from the beginning that this war is between Devatas and Rakshasas. 3. Surpanaka is no ordinary woman who came to express her love, she came there taking a human form hiding her grotesque Rakshasa form in order to mate with Shri Rama because of His beautiful form, thinking He is a human being. At the same time Surpanaka entertained thoughts about killing Sita Devi seeing Shri Rama and her together. Frankly you have a lot to learn about Hindu stories and the characters even before commenting on them. So please stick to quran, on which you cannot even comment properly on three verses. Hussein, you have severe comprehension problems.
Name: continuum to Hussain
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 00:02:14 -0500
Comment
"I, however, did not want to put the stories of Muhammad and Rama on the same scale. Just wanted to point out that all religions have stories where a noble person is charaster-assassinated by the lesser person and the latter people revere/worship today. undoutedly, our psyche, our morality is shaped to some extent, consciously or subconsciously, by the popular notions of such revered epics. ------------->>>" As shown above, your analysis of any epic or story or history should be based on proper analysis. When you do not even know what the story is about, how can you make comments on it ? You do not even know who the characters are ? Besides, you cannot even do proper analysis of three verses in quran. You see contradictions where there is none. I think that should suffice for the readers to show what is your intellectual capacity.
Name: continuum to Hussain
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 00:09:27 -0500
Comment
"Undoutedly, the Mamayana story is a fiction, mostly if not completely. Hanuman (monkey) moving the mountain, Ravana, a ten-headed monarch (although some rationalists interpret it as a reflection of his high level of wisdom), and stuffs like never occurred in history, never will." Now, this is a different subject.If you do not believe this is a real story, then too your conclusions are based on complete misinformation. You talk about Surpanaka's case, yet the same Ramayana says that Surpanaka changed shapes etc. in the same context. The whole story is full of magical stories all along. If you remove all these pats of magical stories from Ramayana, then nothing will remain. Infact the whole Surpanaka episode will have to be rejected as imaginary as also the kidnapping story, because it contains descriptions of flying machines Ravana possessed. The same context also speaks about Rava himself taking human forms (shape shifting if you do not understand what I am talking about). It is unfair to criticize a character, choosing only parts you think are real and then making ludicrous conclusions by dissecting the character out of the epic.
Name: continuum to Hussain
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 00:18:49 -0500
Comment
"I have acknowledged that I am disconnected from the Hindu stories for over 15 years after moving overseas. I wrote my comment from recollection. Thanks to the gentleman/lady for correcting the name of Rama's brother. The rest of my comment stand." You comments are shown to be nonsense...
Name: To the felow inquiring the identity of the
Pharoah confronting Moses
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 00:30:04 -0500
Comment
Pharaoh Ramesses II.
Name: To the fellow who made this comment
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 00:42:41 -0500
Comment
"You cannot claim that the Egyptians and the Pharaoh are bad while the Jews are good in general. And concerning the alleged prophecy of the bible we can agree that any country can survive with support of the USA and the entire western world." From where did you pick up this assumption that the Egyptians are bad and the Jews are good.? Another thing, did the USA existed during the Assyrian Empire or the Babylonian Empire or the Roman Empire to assist Israel and ensure her survival? You better organized your thinking first or do some research about the Israelites before making comments about this people.
Name: Muhammad Hussain
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 01:30:47 -0500
Comment
I accept that I am unable to continue this debate. A lot of presumptive accusations are there against Ravana, like Muhammad made imagined accusations against the Jews (like Banu Nadir had planned to kill 'Mo' by throwing stones or that he feared treachery from Banu Qainuqa. On the basis of these presumptive accusations, he attacked them). If those accusations are to be taken as true, as do believers, then both Muhmmad and Rama were probably justified in their respective actions. What Ravana truly did to Rama and his party, as recounted in Ramayan, does not deserve the vilifications Hindus universally doles out to him. I would still find him a decent character, a praiseworthy one too. ------------ --------- --------- >>> To me, the whole story is a fiction, but a prime moral story in Hindu society. It has a strong influence in shaping morals of Hindus. Ravana could possibly feature somewhat more positively. I will stop commenting futher on this story. Thanks for your feedbacks.
Name: continuum to Hussain
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 01:46:47 -0500
Comment
"What Ravana truly did to Rama and his party, as recounted in Ramayan, does not deserve the vilifications Hindus universally doles out to him." How do you know that that is the fact ? You were neither there nor heard it from any other source. The case of Muhammad can be seen from the primary source and by doing an analysis of the events/psychology in hadiths and Quran. Now show to me the same from Ramayana and why you think Ravana does not deserve those things that are attributed to him ? On the other hand if you agree Ramayana is fictional work, then too your argument must be based on Ramayana. The fact remains that the whole war scenario in Ramayana started after Ravana kidnapped Sita Devi. Your stupid arguments like Ravana was forced to kidnap Sita Devi is pure bull shit. Your hatred for Hinduism when you were a muslim is carried into this life as a non-believer. I am not surprised at all. You talk about vilification of a rapist and a kidnapper of Ravana and seem to be worried about that. Don't muslims also worry about non-muslims calling prophet as pedophile. Will you call that vilification even if it is the truth ? So why are you so worried about a rapist/kidnapper such as Ravana ?
Name: vbv
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 02:45:56 -0500
Comment
I think some of the readers have got me wrong. Rama or Krishna are definitely far more noble ,magnanimous and spiritually endowed and far more civilised than Muhamad or Abraham ,or Moses ,or Lot, etc.Muhamad was the worst of the lot,a rapist, child molester, plunderer, arsonist, looter, a big liar ,womaniser, slavetrader, etc. Infact the worst person ever. Absolute Evil. What I am driving at is that in India one could be critical of Rama or Krishna or any other God and still live to see another day. This is not possible in Islam or traditional Christianity (I am not refering to present day Europe or America , though in the USA atheists are looked down upon), for this would mean getting branded as "heretic" and subject to torture and death unless the person in question recants. We all know what happened to Edward Bruno who was burnt at stake and Galileo made to recant with the threat of torture by the Church for the simple fact they upheld Copernican theory that Earth goes around the Sun and not vice versa. Europe and America has overcome such intolerance and bigotry to become economical prosperous and more civilised. Prosperity, cultural diversity, tolerance are all the fruits of modern secularism ,not Christianity. Christianity was prosperous and powerful only in the Dark Ages. Christianity was almost as brutal ,divisive ,ruthless as Islam of today. Islam of today is a much mellower version of its original arabic barbarity. Yet it is the most retrograde,backward-looking and violent cult ever. Only when muslims relegate Islam to being a personal faith than a compulsory "state religion" ,like Christianity of today is there any hope of sanity ,decency, tolerance and peace not only in the 'muslim' world but also all around the world. I am not a leftist. I certainly am a sceptic and a rationalist.I can survive as such in India, for I am open about it and nobody bothers me or threatens me here in India for holding such view. At best they ignore me may pass a derisive comment at worst. I am fortunate to be in India that way. I can't imagine myself in any muslim society or even in the USA!
Name: RE: To the fellow who made this comment
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 03:39:14 -0500
Comment
You are boring me! But let me tell you one word: With people like you it is no surprise that so many muslims become radical. Itīs people like Bush and his fundamentalist voters who are the best supporters for islamists, radicalls and extrememists.
Name: Mr. Deet
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 03:39:22 -0500
Comment
There are some stuff about this in www.1000mistakes.com - which now is nearly complete (except that some more will be added next year). Look at the relevant verses in chapter 1 - much is wrong. wRONG FACTS.
Name: Re: re: To the fellow who made this comment
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 05:26:43 -0500
Comment
I don't know how you can deny being a Muslim when you spew the same Muslim crap. Bush and fundamentalist Christians in America are not the reason for Muslim violence and intolerance. People of that ilk existed before there was even an America. You keep blaming other people for why Islamic societies are so dysfuctional. It's getting old.
Name: Re: Re: re: To the fellow who made this comment
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 06:01:26 -0500
Comment
Are you ok? I am posting here because I like to critisize Islam and all I did was to show that the quran is errornous. But you cannot stand the fact that the bible shares some errors with the quran because you appear to be a christian or jewish fundamentalist. Do you thing that this is better than islamic fundamentalism? Do you think that your obscurantism is better than that of others? Donīt point at others while refusing critic against yourself. I am not a muslim and I never was. Period. And I keep my opinion that one of the weaknesses of the quran is that it shares some errors with the bible. The big difference is that the quran claims to be written by god while the bible does not. Christians claim that the bible was inspired by god which does not mean too much. Everybody can write a book and claim that he was inspired by god, even if it contains a few errors here and there. Moreover, the quran contains so many errors that I donīt believe that it was written by an intelligent author. Of course I think that the bible is much better than the quran. However, it contains some errors too. And all the fundamentalists donīt even understand the bible because they misinterprete it.
Name: lw1 to Muhammad Hussain
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 07:59:03 -0500
Comment
You are separated from your books, but that is not a valid excuse. There must be libraries near you, otherwise the internet is there, which you are using. So many 'factual' mistakes which have been pointed out about Ramayana is enough for you to admit your mistake. The Pope apologised for hurting Muslims' feelings, but not for calling Mohammad a terrorist, which he still believes. You should do the decent thing and apologise, unless you want to behave like Muslims who always try to find a new excuse.
Name:
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 08:27:26 -0500
Comment
I'm fine and I know when I read someone claiming that the Bush administration is responsible for Muslim behavior or Israel is responsible for the Arabian rejection of modernity, I'm talking to a Muslim or at least an Arab nationalist. Nobody but a Muslim or one of their meeching left-wing apologists say such nonsense (and those folks never criticise Islam). If Gore and Kerry won the elections and Israel never existed there would still be Arabs dying every year from cholera because they still crap in their own drinking water and it's nobody else's fault. All the world did was make them the wealthiest people on earth without having to lift a finger. That's a fact and I don't have to be a fundamentalist anything to call them on it.
Name: Re : ??
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 10:02:10 -0500
Comment
I am no muslim, no ex-muslim, no arab and no muslim apologist. I am critisizing islam whereever I can but you should also agree that the Invasion in the Iraq by Bush because of mass destroying weapons which never existed and the torture scandals under the Bush administration delivered welcome arguments to any islamist. This is the truth even you cannot deny. But now Bush is over and I am very hopeful that he will be charged for what did and that the new government will be much more productive in fighting terrorism, islamism and fundamentalism. What we need is a modern Weltanschauung and not obscurantism no matter where it comes from. How can we use our arguments against the quran if we are not allowed to apply them for the bible as well?
Name: to "To the felow inquiring the identity of
the Pharoah confronting Moses"
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 10:48:45 -0500
Comment
Please identify the source of this information. I do not remember the name EVER being said in the Bible. You may be assuming it is Ramses the Great based on movies. Please identify the source(s).
Name: Historicity of Moses - Ramesses II?
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 12:26:41 -0500
Comment
Quotes from Wikipedia (The Exodus - Challenges to the Historicity of the Exodus): (I hope this will help) "Many archaeologists, including Israel Finkelstein, Ze'ev Herzog and William G. Dever, regard the Exodus as non-historical, at best containing a small germ of truth." -- ----- ----- "Biblical minimalists, such as Philip Davies, Niels Peter Lemche and Thomas L. Thompson, regard the Exodus as a historical. Hector Avalos, in The End of Biblical Studies, states that an Exodus, as related in the Bible, is an idea that most Biblical historians no longer support." There is no hint about Ramesses II I think.
Name: To vbv
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 13:01:05 -0500
Comment
-"Prosperity, cultural diversity, tolerance are all the fruits of modern secularism ,not Christianity. Christianity was prosperous and powerful only in the Dark Ages. Christianity was almost as brutal ,divisive ,ruthless as Islam of today."- You seems to forget that the politicians of the West are Christians. Don't you know that in the good land that is USA the dollar says "In God WE Trust" or in the UK who once ruled one fourth of humanity the motto of the government is "God Save the Queen". Whenever the President of the USA takes his oath of office he placed his left hand on the Bible. The same can be told of the coronation of the British monarchy, the British monarch being the Titular Head of the Church of England. Are you still living in the Dark Ages where the horrors of religious wars is still fresh in your consciousness? Why are you threatened with Christianity? Jesus said, " Love your neighbor as you love yourself", "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you". These are the basic tenets of Christianity. Is this a dogma of hate to you? Does this represent a menace to mankind?
Name: To the fellow who made this comment
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 13:08:43 -0500
Comment
-"You are boring me! But let me tell you one word: With people like you it is no surprise that so many muslims become radical."- Are you a confused person? Muslims are radical or violent because of the evil influence of the hate book Koran not because of people like me.
Name: On the question of Ramesses II
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 13:37:13 -0500
Comment
It is obvious that Egyptian Pharaohs would only commemorate their victories and not their defeat or humiliation in their records. This explains the absence of Egyptian records of the Exodus.
Name: Re: To the fellow who made this comment
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 14:16:36 -0500
Comment
You are complaining??? You were insulting me by calling me a muslim, ex-muslim and arab. All I did was to explain that the quran is wrong. You cannot blame me for the fact that there are errors in the bible too. And you cannot fight islamic obscurantism with jewish or christian obscurantism. I admit that islamic fundamentalism and extremism is worst, however, I donīt like jewish or christian extremism either. We can give evidence that the quran is wrong with modern research. However, if jewish and christian fundamentalists insist that the bible is perfect we will face many probelems. People may ask us: Why are you applying modern research against islam but not against the bible? We cannot have one thing without the other.
Name: Addendum
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 14:18:28 -0500
Comment
I was called a jewish whore by muslim fanatics and now I was called a muslim by you! This explains very much I think.
Name:
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 16:00:40 -0500
Comment
First off I'm an atheist and not a Jewish or Christian fundamentalist. However, I'm honest enough to admit that those groups don't affect me so I don't see why I have to put them on an equal level as Muslim fundamentalists who push for Sharia law in the West and who actually murder people in the name of their religion. I don't want to have to pay to have their mosques monitored or pay more for an airline ticket because some 72-virgin seeker may decide to stab the pilot. I don't want to have to worry about them blowing up a subway car or bus because their religion tells them they are living in a land of war that must be subdued. Sorry but Christians and Jews, irration though they may be, don't concern me because as the Muslims say, "they love life more than death." I wish we'd nip this problem in the bud quickly. Put an end to the state of Israel and send all of the Muslims back to their countries. I wouldn't mind an Israeli neighbor. They are among the leading nations in the development of nanotechnology. Muslims idiots talk about boners after death. I won't miss them.
Name: re:
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 17:02:45 -0500
Comment
I agree with you! You are putting the words out of my mouth! The whole world would be much better off without islam. 45% of all muslims are totally poor. Another 45% are poor and a little bit better off, but only because of the oil. A small minority is rich (half of them in the gulf region, the other living in western countries). I believe that Islam is an obstacle to any progress because it is still what I call a Hula Bula Religion which means that there is no rational thinking behind it. Christianity has rational roots (Logos-Philosophy) as well as Buddhism and Hinduism. What made me a little angry was that you told that the Jews as well as Israel are elected by God. Do you think that God loves only them (provided that god exists)? Muslims are already thinking that they are better and this is wrong! Nobody should think that he is superior!
Name:
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 17:34:11 -0500
Comment
First of all, the person who wrote of the Jews and this supposed prophecy was someone else. I just don't speak that way. But having read the comment I didn't think the comment was of a supremcist nature. If you believe that either the Koran or the Bible was inspired by God, than you probably accept the belief that the Jews were "elected" to receive the Books of Moses. Who cares? I minored in religion in school so I have read the Bible and never came across a passage that insinutaed that they were chosen because they were favored in any way. Only because they had no code of law of their own. In fact, anyone who has read the Bible knows God is always pissed at the Jews and they wrote the book.
Name: to vbv
Date: Thursday December 11, 2008
Time: 22:18:35 -0500
Comment
The original phrase in the US currencies was Mind Your Business.The term In God We Trust was later forced upon by the powerful Christian lobby in those days.This phrase has no relevance in these times.
Name: To Bible hater
Date: Friday December 12, 2008
Time: 01:05:59 -0500
Comment
Whatever faults you find in the Bible present it so that it will be open for discussion.
Name: In God We Trust
Date: Friday December 12, 2008
Time: 03:42:46 -0500
Comment
The U.S. government did not share the idea that this phrase is irrelevant otherwise it is not printed on the U.S. dollar, the currency of international business. U.S. presidents recognized the existence of God. Take for example what former President Ronald Reagan said, "Without God, America is finished". Americans are never ashamed to say "God bless America".
Name: Who is a Bible Hater???
Date: Friday December 12, 2008
Time: 05:37:50 -0500
Comment
Why these polemics? If we can critisise the quran it must be allowed to critisize the Bible as well. And I already pointed out that the titel "Pharaoh" was not in use during the alleged lifetime of Moses. While muslims are convinced that the quran is the true word of god and the bible a fake, we can clearly demonstrate that it is the quran that copied some wrong things from the bible. This is very significant! Of course there are even more examples concerning Jesus. Most scholars agree that the gospels are not historical in any way, however, the quran quotes from there, such as the Virgin Birth, some Miracles and other things. This is significant too since the gospels were not written by god but by humans. For example, the Virgin Birth probably derived from a translation error (young woman -> Virgin) and GoJohn refers to Jesus as Logos which was translated as word not only in the quran, but also in many translations of the bible as well. However, there is a very elaborated philosophy behind Logos and it seems that the author of the quran does not understand the meaning at all. Or how about Adam? The name means "Human" in old sumeric language but both Bible and Quran do not mention this. In general we can say that the quran (and many muslims as well) regards the bible as historical which is not adequate.
Name:
Date: Friday December 12, 2008
Time: 07:16:20 -0500
Comment
I've nothing against Biblical criticism. I just think it's childish to have to criticise the Bible (or any other book) in order to justify critcising the Koran.
Name: ???
Date: Friday December 12, 2008
Time: 18:40:43 -0500
Comment
We see in Hindu tradition that Ravana, a very kind and respectable monarch, is horribly character-assassinated in the epic of Ramayana, while the uncouth, unjust and treacherous gang of Rama and his brother are revered
Name: Hindu
Date: Friday December 12, 2008
Time: 18:42:23 -0500
Comment
Has the author lost his mind? What did he write about ramayan? educate yourself man, then talk.
Name: HAHAHAHA
Date: Friday December 12, 2008
Time: 18:59:54 -0500
Comment
However, let me summarise what I can remember. The battle between Rama & Ravana started over the kidnapping of Rama's wife Sita. Ravana's "raping women and genocide," killing Brahmans etc.---as some commenters have mentioned---were not in the equation of Rama. Behind this story, what is buried is Rama's brother Arjuna's barbarous act of chopping the nose of Ravana's sister (I forget the name, probably Janaki???) HAHAHA, Gods asked Rama to Kill Ravana, Rama's Brother was Laxmana and Janaki is Sita's name, she is also called Janaki because she is the Daughter of King Janak.
Name: Rationalist Indian
Date: Friday December 12, 2008
Time: 22:43:13 -0500
Comment
When I was growing up, I felted impressed by the stories of Ramayana. As I later studied the works of rationalist authors, B. Russell amongst them, I turned an rationalist atheist. Violence and mass-murder inspired/ordered by God, the supreme creator of the universe, against Her/His own creations, be it Ravana, infidels or whosoever---is just too abhorrent to a civilized human conscience. Probably except Buddhism (if you call it a religion) and its off-shoots like Taoism etc., no religion is different in this context. Violence, brutality, barbarism are in the heart of all those creeds.
Name: @ Rationalist Indian
Date: Saturday December 13, 2008
Time: 01:16:48 -0500
Comment
What you are saying is very dangerous, one must defend the righteous no matter what it takes. Besides Hindus do not believe we are a creation of God.
Name: Re: I just think it's childish to have to
criticise the Bible ...
Date: Saturday December 13, 2008
Time: 03:49:01 -0500
Comment
Actually I was only referring to the fact that the title Pharaoh wasnīt in use during the alleged lifetime of Moses. Here we can clearly see that the Bible contains an error and the quran copied it. This is what I was heavily criticised for. I also mentioned other historical errors (only in the quran) such as the fact that the ancient egyptians did not crucify. So it was more a matter of incident for what I was insulted and heavily criticised. But ok. Letīs go on criticising the quran no question how we do it. The only limitation should be that it is true.
Name: To Who is a Bible Hater???
Date: Saturday December 13, 2008
Time: 06:27:48 -0500
Comment
How can you be so sure that the title Pharaoh was not in existence during Moses time? Regarding virgin birth, it is not an impossibility. Haven't you heard of test-tube baby? A scientific achievement that proves that procreation is possible without sexual contact. Besides an Almighty Being capable of creating enormous and countless galaxies is equally capable of creating life in a womb. He even created the Universe out of nothing. The historical evidence of Jesus was confirmed by Roman historian Tacitus in his Annals (116 A.D). Regarding Adam, modern scientist now consider humans descended from a common source.
Name: Re: To Who is a Bible Hater???
Date: Saturday December 13, 2008
Time: 11:06:58 -0500
Comment
It is not true that I am a Bible Hater!!! I am only relying on what recognized scholars agree. The big churches (catholics and all european protestant churches) also agree that we cannot take the bible literally in all aspects. Why do the Gospels of Mark and John not mention the virginity of Mary? Because it was an translation error and almost all recognised scholars agree on that. Concerning Adam most scientists agree that the first humans lived somewhere in Africa (Out Of Africa Hypothesis) and that they were descendants of primates. No and I say no recognised scientists raises any doubt about that, not in Europe, not in the Americas and not anywhere in Far Eastern Countries which are not influenced by any jewish, christian or muslim traditions. They all donīt rely on socalled holy scriptures but on facts obtained via scientific research. If we are able to agree in these facts we have a powerful tool to reveal that the quran is nothing but fake!
Name: What Galileo said
Date: Sunday December 14, 2008
Time: 00:13:26 -0500
Comment
Galileo, the Father of Modern Science once said, "Mathematics is the language with which God has written the Universe". Now whoever said that great minds of Science are agnostic or atheist or hostile to God better do some self examination. Are you smarter than Galileo?
Name: Moses and Pahrao --> Imram ---> Marya
Jesus???
Date: Tuesday December 16, 2008
Time: 12:47:57 -0500
Comment
The authors of the quran had no idea about jewish and christian prophets and Jesus and the environment where they lived. All is taken from the bible and some apokryphal writings, which circulated hundreds of years before muhammad and can be traced to around 300 C. or even earlier.
Name: Robert Alpy
Date: Wednesday December 17, 2008
Time: 20:05:39 -0500
Comment
Just a note...The Egyptians Crowned Alexander The Great Pharaoh and upon his death the land and title passed to his General, Ptolomy. When mentioning Egypts greatest Pharoaohs he should not be discounted. It could easily be argued (and has been) that Egypts greatest accomplishments occurred under his reign. It was stated that the line of Pharaohs ended with Alexander but history knows this is false. The last Pharaoh was Cleopatra and she was of Ptolemys line...A Macedonian line. It was Ptolemy who gave Egypt the Pharos (Lighthouse of Alexandria) and the Great Library at Alexandria. These Ancient wonders of the world were bestowed upon the Egyptian people by Greek/Macedonian Pharaohs.
Form Results Inserted Here
[Hit Counter]