Author Topic: The bible corrupted?  (Read 1461 times)

good logic

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: The bible corrupted?
« Reply #60 on: August 13, 2017, 10:41:45 AM »
Peace Man Of Faith.

I disagree with what you say here about Mohammed,quote:

 There are indications Muhammed decreed that an invasion force should attack villages, apparently defenseless, and then wreak havoc there. This is without even counting any hadith record. The record of the opponents of Muhammed says that the conquerors were there on behalf of Muhammed "the prophet"

For at least 20 odd years after Mohammed ,there was no  compulsion in deen.
 History investigation,in my opinion, will confirm for us that the political establishment after the civil war and the massacre of most of Mohammed s family,  i.e When  Traditional Islam was born,is the culprit of all the made up history about what people know as Islam today and the birth of all the fabrications that you call sectarians.

According to my study of Qoran ,Mohammed was of "Khulukan Adhim" -Good peaceful/moral human.
What you describe in your comments are lies about Mohammed and in his name.
My view brother.
GOD bless you.

38:65″ Say:” I warn you; There is no other god beside GOD, the One, the Supreme.”


  • Beginner/Inquirer
  • *
  • Posts: 91
Re: The bible corrupted?
« Reply #61 on: August 18, 2017, 10:15:33 AM »
But there are historical records of a Muhammed, and they say he was a ruthless warmonger. It fits the portrayal of Muhammed according to so-called hadith. And Muhammed according to (the mainstream interpretation of) Quran is not a saint either.

E.g., this:

    In January {the people of}[2] Ḥomṣ took the word for their lives[3] and many villages were ravaged by the killing of {the Arabs of} Muhammad[4] and many people were slain and {taken} prisoner from Galilee as far as Beth…[5]
    On the tw{enty-six}th of May the Saq{īlā}ra went {…} from the vicinity of Ḥomṣ and the Romans chased them {…}
    On the tenth {of August} the Romans fled from the vicinity of Damascus {and there were killed} many {people}, some ten thousand. And at the turn {of the ye}ar the Romans came. On the twentieth of August in the year n{ine hundred and forty-}seven there gathered in Gabitha {a multitude of} the Romans, and many people {of the R}omans were kil{led}, {s}ome fifty thousand.[6]

Dated around 636 AD.

The issue is that is not known whether the Muhammad in question (more exactly MHMT in Syriac, the language of the Fragment of Arab Conquest) was actually the messenger of Qur'an or not.
I believe it is not the same person, but I have no proof either.