Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm (Read 3489 times)
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #15 - Mar 12th, 2015 at 10:29pm
 
Karnal wrote on Mar 12th, 2015 at 5:55pm:
There is no mention of Jesus, the Buddha, Krishna, Abraham, etc, in any document outside the respective Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Jewish texts. I don’t see why Muhammed would be any different.

Mind you, Archangel Gabriel exists in a number of texts, as is God.

Perhaps we should believe in God and the angels, and give their prophets a miss.



Thank you, genius.

How many mentions are there of Confucius in Roman, Greek, Christian, Jewish, Muslim texts?

Your relentless, reflex relativising is just too stupid.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Karnal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 96575
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #16 - Mar 14th, 2015 at 8:44pm
 
Soren wrote on Mar 12th, 2015 at 10:29pm:
Karnal wrote on Mar 12th, 2015 at 5:55pm:
There is no mention of Jesus, the Buddha, Krishna, Abraham, etc, in any document outside the respective Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Jewish texts. I don’t see why Muhammed would be any different.

Mind you, Archangel Gabriel exists in a number of texts, as is God.

Perhaps we should believe in God and the angels, and give their prophets a miss.



Thank you, genius.

How many mentions are there of Confucius in Roman, Greek, Christian, Jewish, Muslim texts?

Your relentless, reflex relativising is just too stupid.



Oh, old boy, where do you think the name Confucius comes from?

Hint: it’s Latin.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #17 - Mar 16th, 2015 at 11:45am
 
Karnal wrote on Mar 14th, 2015 at 8:44pm:
Soren wrote on Mar 12th, 2015 at 10:29pm:
Karnal wrote on Mar 12th, 2015 at 5:55pm:
There is no mention of Jesus, the Buddha, Krishna, Abraham, etc, in any document outside the respective Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Jewish texts. I don’t see why Muhammed would be any different.

Mind you, Archangel Gabriel exists in a number of texts, as is God.

Perhaps we should believe in God and the angels, and give their prophets a miss.



Thank you, genius.

How many mentions are there of Confucius in Roman, Greek, Christian, Jewish, Muslim texts?

Your relentless, reflex relativising is just too stupid.



Oh, old boy, where do you think the name Confucius comes from?

Hint: it’s Latin.



Thank you, idiot. Confucius was first translated into Latin in the 17th century.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Karnal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 96575
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #18 - Mar 16th, 2015 at 1:18pm
 
Soren wrote on Mar 16th, 2015 at 11:45am:
Karnal wrote on Mar 14th, 2015 at 8:44pm:
Soren wrote on Mar 12th, 2015 at 10:29pm:
Karnal wrote on Mar 12th, 2015 at 5:55pm:
There is no mention of Jesus, the Buddha, Krishna, Abraham, etc, in any document outside the respective Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Jewish texts. I don’t see why Muhammed would be any different.

Mind you, Archangel Gabriel exists in a number of texts, as is God.

Perhaps we should believe in God and the angels, and give their prophets a miss.



Thank you, genius.

How many mentions are there of Confucius in Roman, Greek, Christian, Jewish, Muslim texts?

Your relentless, reflex relativising is just too stupid.



Oh, old boy, where do you think the name Confucius comes from?

Hint: it’s Latin.



Thank you, idiot. Confucius was first translated into Latin in the 17th century.




Ah. No translations.

How many mentions are there of Confucius in Roman,  Greek, Christian, Jewish, Muslim texts, old boy?

I’m curious.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Classic Liberal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 769
sydney
Gender: male
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #19 - Mar 16th, 2015 at 8:27pm
 
Karnal wrote on Mar 12th, 2015 at 5:55pm:
There is no mention of Jesus, the Buddha, Krishna, Abraham, etc, in any document outside the respective Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Jewish texts. I don’t see why Muhammed would be any different.

Mind you, Archangel Gabriel exists in a number of texts, as is God.

Perhaps we should believe in God and the angels, and give their prophets a miss.

The extant manuscripts of the writings of the 1st-century Romano historian Flavius Josephus include references to Jesus and the origins of Christianity.[1][2] Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20 and a reference to John the Baptist in Book 18.[1][3]

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Classic Liberal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 769
sydney
Gender: male
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #20 - Mar 16th, 2015 at 8:34pm
 
we have also found archaeological evidence of  the biblical King David in the Tel Dan Stele.

The Stele consists of several fragments making up part of a triumphal inscription in Aramaic, left most probably by Hazael of Aram-Damascus, an important regional figure in the late 9th century BCE. Hazael boasts of his victories over the king of Israel and his ally the king of the "House of David".

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Karnal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 96575
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #21 - Mar 16th, 2015 at 10:25pm
 
King David was a king. It makes sense that there would be historical references to him.

Do you have the Josephus quotes you mention? It would be interesting to see what they say.

There were Roman references to the cult of Paul from around the third century. There are also enigmatic references to Jesus-type figures as far away as Tibet, if you believe the reports.

There was a small cult in modern Syria, I think, who buried a teacher with crucifixion scars on his feet, hands and torso. He too was alleged to be Jesus. His grave still exists today.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Classic Liberal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 769
sydney
Gender: male
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #22 - Mar 17th, 2015 at 8:42pm
 
Josephus makes two references to Jesus.  In one reference, he refers to the stoning to death of James in 62 C.E., calling James "the brother of Jesus who is called Christ."  The other, more significant reference to Jesus follows:

"About the same time there lived Jesus, a wise man for he was a performer of marvelous feats and a teacher of such men who received the truth with pleasure.  He attracted many Jews and many Greeks.  He was the Christ.  When Pilate sentenced him to die on the cross, having been urged to do so by the noblest of our citizens; but those who loved him at the first did not give up their affection for him.  And the tribe of the Christians, who are named after him, have not disappeared to this day."
- Antiquities 17.3.3. (81-96 AD.)

also roman historian Tacitus mentions jesus 30-40 years after his death.

" Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, and the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. "
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Karnal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 96575
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #23 - Mar 17th, 2015 at 9:37pm
 
Thanks, Pender. I hate to be a dirty little pedant, but no original copies of Tacitus exist - all are Medieval "copies".

The Jewish scholar Josephus, however, is a good source. I’m getting my source from Wikipedia, so who knows?

Good references.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
SweetLambo
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1271
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #24 - Mar 21st, 2015 at 11:09am
 
At the end of the day since all Mohammed references began with a Caliph ordering people to write stories about him it is quiet obvious he was invented to support his political ideology.

It just goes to show how slow mentally or abused by a dictator the people were in the day in order to believe in a fictitious prophet that never even existed.

Having said that it is a very sad thing that there are so many gullible people in this world that actually believe the joke of islam that was played on them yet so many years ago and is still being milked for all it is worth until this very day.

Mohammed never even existed that much is historically clear.

If you need to bend your mind to think any reference to him magically appeared 60 years after his pretend death of his pretend existence by all means go ahead. It is priceless watching all the babble about islam that was all made up in the first place. These people are all so called self appointed scholars of islam so called educating the west yet can't afford the mental capacity to challenge the fools that are making fun of them and I am not talking about the kaffir I am talking about their own leaders. Clerics, mothers and fathers, sheiks and self appointed milking muslim leaders.

Somewhere up the chain someone is giggling hard at all muslims.

I'd say they live in a castle in Medina.

Islam clearly is a political ideology of one man gone viral.
It should go down in the history books as one of the greatest scams that ever existed.

Lets not even bring up halal and facing mecca what a cack. 

Mohammed never existed period.
Back to top
 

The quran was not written by allah unless allah has no knowledge of science and historical facts. No quran or prophet mohammed existed until 60 years after mohammed's death.
 
IP Logged
 
LifeOrDeath
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1548
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #25 - Jun 7th, 2015 at 3:07pm
 
Maybe Hot Breath you should watch the video in the OP in this thread and rebut that.

Back to top
 

There is no evidence of the existence of a muslim,mohammed,or quran until 60 years  after mohammed was supposed to have died. Grin Grin Grin Posting on islam just encourages them and is a waste of time.
 
IP Logged
 
LifeOrDeath
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1548
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #26 - Sep 22nd, 2015 at 8:46pm
 
SweetLambo wrote on Mar 1st, 2015 at 1:46pm:
Can no one defend the false prophet mohammeds honor ?

Maybe that is because him being a prophet is clearly BS.


Clearly its all BS, its amazing what dopey arabs from countries that are dumps ruled by men who concoct tales to demand their allegiance on pain of death if they don't follow will believe.

In today's day and age you just have to shake your head at musseys who quote the Quran and argue over translated words like its all actually real. I mean  c'mon Mohammed the pedophile prophet of almighty god ROFL. Seriously.
Back to top
 

There is no evidence of the existence of a muslim,mohammed,or quran until 60 years  after mohammed was supposed to have died. Grin Grin Grin Posting on islam just encourages them and is a waste of time.
 
IP Logged
 
ordinaryguy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 625
Gender: male
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #27 - Sep 28th, 2015 at 8:06pm
 
Karnal wrote on Mar 12th, 2015 at 5:55pm:
There is no mention of Jesus, the Buddha, Krishna, Abraham, etc, in any document outside the respective Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and Jewish texts. I don’t see why Muhammed would be any different.

Mind you, Archangel Gabriel exists in a number of texts, as is God.

Perhaps we should believe in God and the angels, and give their prophets a miss.


Incorrect
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 139530
Gender: male
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #28 - Sep 28th, 2015 at 8:08pm
 
LifeOrDeath wrote on Jun 7th, 2015 at 3:07pm:
Maybe Hot Breath you should watch the video in the OP in this thread and rebut that.




Have you been rebutted before?

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
ordinaryguy
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 625
Gender: male
Re: No historical mention of a ‘prophet’ called Muhamm
Reply #29 - Sep 28th, 2015 at 8:25pm
 
Bottoms Up groggery.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print