The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the oldest Quran
naturalplastic wrote:
Well...you're asking a question, and answering it at the same time.
you're saying both faiths are like dictators who nefariously stuff the ballot box, and then claim they were "democratically elected", and have a "mandate from the people- so I must be something right!".
you're saying both faiths are like dictators who nefariously stuff the ballot box, and then claim they were "democratically elected", and have a "mandate from the people- so I must be something right!".
Thank you. That is the first time I have ever choked on an M&M.
GGPViper wrote:
What specific chapters, passages, sections etc. in these works are you unimpressed with, and why?
You will receive a more detailed answer if you discuss the contents of the books with the historians rather than myself. I am interested in reading The Syro-Aramaic Reading of the Koran but I have read reviews that in depth fluency in many languages is required to properly understand and comprehend it. Christoph Luxenberg has been criticised for his knowledge of Syriac being limited to that of dictionaries by people with greater fluency in the language.
Why should anybody, including yourself, hold a high level of faith and trust in controversial books written by an unknown author? The historians I mention are not professionals or university academics but both hold degrees in a history related subject and are fully proficient in critical analyses of sources of information. One said that such books are a variation of conspiracy theories.
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/89f03/89f031dbd6c284bd8aab996e06c0da8bd1edf327" alt="User avatar"
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,123
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
khaoz wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
khaoz wrote:
Why is it that all over the internet are these battle zones between believers in Christianity and believers of Islam? There are many religions and faiths which predate both Christianity and Islam along with the birth of Jesus Christ and the creation of Mohammed. Why are only these two religions afforded credibility and numbers of adherents? Why are all earlier faiths/religions dismissed as irrelevant? There are as many varying origins of Christianity as there are of Islam. Although the existence of Jesus Christ is acknowledged, even the exact dates of his birth and death are questionable. The resurrection itself is questionable and improbable. Even the resurrection has various explanations which Christians will not even consider.
Out of all the religions/faiths known through history, what makes these two stand out other than their mutual history of using violence around the world to spread their beliefs and intimidate people into absconding other faiths, which still goes on today, by both of these two "major" religions?
Out of all the religions/faiths known through history, what makes these two stand out other than their mutual history of using violence around the world to spread their beliefs and intimidate people into absconding other faiths, which still goes on today, by both of these two "major" religions?
Not sure what the question is that you are asking.
Obviously an extinct religion is just that- extinct. So you're not gonna find missionaries for the gods of Mount Olympus on the internet today.
You might find classical scholars who know Bullfinch's Mythology inside out. But theyre not going to try to convert you to being a Pagan. Even when Greek Paganism was alive in ancient times the Greek pagans had no concept of "spreading the faith" in the Olympian Gods.
The living Asian religions of today dont have "jealous gods". Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shintoism, Jainism, allow you to sample the buffet. You can be a Buddhist, Taoist, and Confucianist, at the same time.
But if you're Jewish, Christian, or Muslim, you cant eat from the buffet. You have to be loyal to that one faith. And the last two are also evangelical- you have to spread the good news. And they are both huge relgions in the world ( a a billion plus adherents each). So its to be expected that Islam and Christianity are going to dominate the conversation on the world wide web. Both are exculsivist, militant, and evangelical.
Well there is still the reality that Christianity and Islam have spread so widely mainly because of their use of violence, and that violence still exists, even verbally, to denounce other religions and hold people to Christianity and Islam. I just do not give either of these religions credibility simply because of their numbers when I take into consideration how those masses were accumulated, and continue to spread.
I know, just because I don't recognize it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Check my other thread.