Koran dated to before Muhamad birth.

[outhouse]

You don't trust the Islamic tradition when it talks about splitting the moon or winged donkeys, but you do accept it regarding details of Muhammed's life which are not contained in the Quran.

I don't trust any Islamic tradition of any kind.


DO NOT put words in my mouth, I NEVER implied or stated.

 

[outhouse]

Now, the Quran acknowledges its roots in the traditions of Judaism and Christianity for example:

No it does not.

You refuted nothing.

It acknowledges that what it calls their prophets who worshipped islam back then were part of said previous religion.

And since moses has no historicity as ever existing outside mythology, you have to explain why your religion views him as a real figure.

 

[paarsurrey]

No it does not.
You refuted nothing.
It acknowledges that what it calls their prophets who worshipped islam back then were part of said previous religion.
And since moses has no historicity as ever existing outside mythology, you have to explain why your religion views him as a real figure.

As our friend outhouse has given his religion as " Atheistically", the same way our friend Augustus has given his religion as "None", so our friend Augustus is not a Muslim, if I don't get him wrong.
Regards

 

[outhouse]

You are also treating culture, and the fuzzy ground between real history and religion/mythology, as if it has an owner and a copyright like Micky Mouse or Goofy.

No im not.

Anyone can plagiarize Judaism and Christianity. Many have.

 

[outhouse]

The spread of Christianity and its subsequent reification of Jewish history as being part of mankind's history means that people operate within the paradigm of Jewish (pseudo) history.

And since religions are not about accurate history.

The spread of islam and its subsequent reification of biblical history means that people operate within the paradigm of (pseudo) history.

 

[outhouse]

Just because an idea originated somewhere doesn't lead to perpetual ownership and exclusive rights to it.

Non sequitur and rhetoric.

Moses and Abraham are 100% Jewish in origin. These are factual 100% Jewish religious characters.

Im glad you call it an idea, because under the definition of Plagiarism, taking someone else ideas and claiming they are yours is a factual definition of plagiarism.

 

[outhouse]

History based on education and academia RING true like a musician hitting harmonics in tune and on key. There is a song there telling a story.



We people try and change real history into personal made up rhetoric, there is no music at all.

 

[Unification]

Non sequitur and rhetoric.

Moses and Abraham are 100% Jewish in origin. These are factual 100% Jewish religious characters.

Im glad you call it an idea, because under the definition of Plagiarism, taking someone else ideas and claiming they are yours is a factual definition of plagiarism.

Did Vedic Brahma(Abraham) and Saraswati(Sara) arise before Jewish?

 

[Shad]

Did Vedic Brahma(Abraham) and Saraswati(Sara) arise before Jewish?

Yes as the term in grounded in a specific tribal/kingdom identity specific to Jacob and the southern kingdom being the only people that maintained the true religion.

 

[outhouse]

Did Vedic Brahma(Abraham) and Saraswati(Sara) arise before Jewish?

Ya um about that, maybe you could describe what time Israelites became jewish, so we can even begin to define what was before or after.

And if you think there is a link between the two religions, instead of asking rhetorical non sequitur questions. MAYBE you could post credible sources

 

[Shad]

Ya um about that, maybe you could describe what time Israelites became jewish, so we can even begin to define what was before or after.

And if you think there is a link between the two religions, instead of asking rhetorical non sequitur questions. MAYBE you could post credible sources

I just ignored the mixing of the two religions and focused on the context at hand which is Jewish, Judaism and the people. Easier to cut to the chase at times.

 

[outhouse]

Did Vedic Brahma(Abraham)

Do you think Brahma means abaraham, is that what you are trying to say

 

[outhouse]

I just ignored the mixing of the two religions and focused on the context at hand which is Jewish, Judaism and the people. Easier to cut to the chase at times.

No problem bud.

Israelites existed as proto Israelites around 1200BC and still resembled their Canaanite origins at this time.


Late Vedic is brahmas earliest usage and its around 1000 BC.


I don't think there is any mixing at all here. Not that it is impossible, but Abraham has a specific literary context that in no way was influenced from that religion.

 

[Unification]

Ya um about that, maybe you could describe what time Israelites became jewish, so we can even begin to define what was before or after.

And if you think there is a link between the two religions, instead of asking rhetorical non sequitur questions. MAYBE you could post credible sources

I'll clarify more... Did the "Indian" have "Brahma" and "Saraswati" before the "Jewish" had Abraham and Sara?

Do you see striking parallels in names, without even bringing up the "academic" story parallels?

I hear your child is very wise, maybe she can google it.

 

[Unification]

Do you think Brahma means abaraham, is that what you are trying to say

Brahma and Saraswati existed before Abraham and Sara, and the parallels are striking... that is what I am saying.

 

[Unification]

Ya um about that, maybe you could describe what time Israelites became jewish, so we can even begin to define what was before or after.

And if you think there is a link between the two religions, instead of asking rhetorical non sequitur questions. MAYBE you could post credible sources

Not a bad one.... http://www.academia.edu/4540206/Brahma_and_Abraham_Divine_Covenants_of_Common_Origin

 

[Shad]

Brahma and Saraswati existed before Abraham and Sara, and the parallels are striking... that is what I am saying.

Parallelism is a fallacious method at identifying an idea, concept, object, etc relationship.

Not a bad one.... http://www.academia.edu/4540206/Brahma_and_Abraham_Divine_Covenants_of_Common_Origin

Evidence based on quotes of speculation to further speculation. Aristotle and Megasthenes made assumptions which were wrong and refuted by archaeology. Godfrey Higgins ideas have been refuted for centuries. The rest is parallelism backed by no evidence other than a few similarities. However since archaeology and Biblical scholarship show a link to the culture of the area had a greater impact than any supposed parallel after. Nevermind Abraham is a construct not a real person thus further pushes the article into the occult and poor research.

 

[Unification]

Parallelism is a fallacious method at identifying an idea, concept, object, etc relationship.



Evidence based on quotes of speculation to further speculation. Aristotle and Megasthenes made assumptions which were wrong and refuted by archaeology. Godfrey Higgins ideas have been refuted for centuries. The rest is parallelism backed by no evidence other than a few similarities. However since archaeology and Biblical scholarship show a link to the culture of the area had a greater impact than any supposed parallel after. Nevermind Abraham is a construct not a real person thus further pushes the article into the occult and poor research.

I'm not worried about the names listed, and every human that's ever existed has made assumptions that are wrong...

Fictional or not, what exists are the written text similarities, constructs, concepts, ideas, word origins, their meanings, and where they came from.

 

[Unification]

Parallelism is a fallacious method at identifying an idea, concept, object, etc relationship.



Evidence based on quotes of speculation to further speculation. Aristotle and Megasthenes made assumptions which were wrong and refuted by archaeology. Godfrey Higgins ideas have been refuted for centuries. The rest is parallelism backed by no evidence other than a few similarities. However since archaeology and Biblical scholarship show a link to the culture of the area had a greater impact than any supposed parallel after. Nevermind Abraham is a construct not a real person thus further pushes the article into the occult and poor research.

Isn't that what's been going on here... Parallelism between religions as "plagerism?"

 

[outhouse]

Isn't that what's been going on here... Parallelism between religions as "plagerism?"

No.

You don't have the knowledge to understand the origins of the Israelite cultures.


YOU have also not shown a credible connection. One article that had similarities showed nothing that substantiates your imaginative Plagiarism.

Israelites did not plagiarize Abraham from Vedic sources, and NO CREDIBLE scholar states it ever did.

While the plagiarism of islam is not even up for debate. IT IS what took place