• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Was Moses even a Hebrew?

Remté

Active Member
I try not to look at it from the perspective of Muslims, but of the 'state' of Islam itself as an ideology and how it is constructed/designed to immediately appeal to idol worship before it even reaches the person (at a young age). Of course children are indoctrinated to love/respect the prophet Muhammad, and this is what many Muslims grow up feeling/believing. Not that these feelings are not genuine or insincere, they are just based on lies.

For example the Qur'an is out-of-order: it does not flow in a linear way. This is to conceal the step-by-step modus operandi of Islam in how it begins to infiltrate and take over from within. This is encoded into the life of Muhammad: he starts as a nothing-burger and becomes king of Arabia under the guidance of Allah. A Muslim then, whether or not they realize it, are adopting this same behavior/model by virtue of being a Muslim. That is what makes Islam inherently idolatrous: the entire spine or backbone of Islam is the life of Muhammad. You can not have Islam without Muhammad: he is the very structure of it.
No he's not. The Quran is the core. Mohammad is who delivered it to the people. That is all. If someome wishes to make Mohammad what you call an idol then they may. And they may still call themselves Muslims. It's just a term. But Islam as a word mean submission to Allah and that way I think true Islam as that mainly. Meaning God is the main thing, not the irrelevancies. And the Hadiths that have caused all this you find so repulsive are not written by Mohammad. According to many he prohibited the writing of his Hadith. The Quran makes it very clear that is the only real God's word and stays that way and that it is complete. It also says God will allow the other forgeries regarding Him to be made to test the people.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
I would say that your position begs a series of other questions, most predicated on your particular belief of what "definitely happened", but if that's your belief then have at it.

I don't "believe" anything - there are many things we do not know about the life of Akhunatun, but there are some we do, and that he was educated in Egypt, tried to implement a monotheistic structure, was subsequently exiled and return etc. are all historical - these are maintained in records even among the many attempts to remove Akhunatun from history. Some of these records are talked about in the following book:

https://www.amazon.com/Moses-Akhena...549282039&sr=8-1&keywords=moses+and+akhenaten

If just seems that the title and supposed central challenge is secondary to your underlying denial of the validity of the entirety of the text and therefore the entirety of particular belief systems. Questioning Moses' position as a Hebrew seems too local a point to try and make. Best of luck to you.[/QUOTE]

I don't deny the validity of the text: I understand the books of Moses as Hebrew mythology. They are not wholly factual (ie. historical) but they do contain commentaries on various aspects of life from the Hebraic point of view, which in and of itself can be appreciated. Much of it is derived, however, directly from Egypt and are the same stories rebranded from Egyptian mythology. However how I see the books of Moses is not relevant, it is how others see them - especially if they see them as something they are not (ie. the perfect word of god). This is not true; and when conjunct with the likelihood that Moses was actually based on an Egyptian monotheist starts to paint a picture that provides a much better explanation as to why humanity as been fighting wars for thousands of years - human ignorance. Unfortunately no god would even need intervene in the affairs of such ignorance: humanity is quite capable of destroying itself over it, as has proven true at least these few thousands of years.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
No he's not. The Quran is the core. Mohammad is who delivered it to the people. That is all. If someome wishes to make Mohammad what you call an idol then they may. And they may still call themselves Muslims. It's just a term. But Islam as a word mean submission to Allah and that way I think true Islam as that mainly. Meaning God is the main thing, not the irrelevancies. And the Hadiths that have caused all this you find so repulsive are not written by Mohammad. According to many he prohibited the writing of his Hadith. The Quran makes it very clear that is the only real God's word and stays that way and that it is complete. It also says God will allow the other forgeries regarding Him to be made to test the people.

The Qur'an contains the injunctions to adopt the sayings/doings of Muhammad. You can't have a Qur'an without Muhammad and vice verse, so trying to disassociate them is impossible. As I said before, you can't have Islam without Muhammad - and this is true, because the Qur'an outlines the sayings/doings of Muhammad which are to be taken as example, as is stated 89 times. The adoption of the idol of Muhammad can be thought of as a payload that is delivered through the Qur'an: there is no doubt that Muhammad, given Muslims' immense attachment to him and violent response to criticisms of him, is an idol like Jesus is to the Christians.

It doesn't matter what the Qur'an says, we know it is forged from Christian strophic hymns and is not the perfect word of god. It is nice that the Qur'an states it is the only word of god and to avoid Hadiths, but that did not stopp the Hadiths from being generated and used for over a thousand years. This argument that god actually allows these forgeries as a form of test is precisely the same kind of moronic "belief"-based justification that keeps people in ignorance: imbuing any book as having the authority of god is idol worship, especially when it is known that these books are man-made. Treating the Qur'an as having divine authority is itself idol worship, because we know it is not divine - Muslims "believe" something else, but this is precisely where the ignorance begins: in "belief" which requires dogmas to sustain, such as the assertions you cited. This entire problem begins with "belief" and unfortunately Islam is full of "believers" that all "believe" things that are absolutely not true. This is precisely why there is war and conflict, and why Islam has never managed to actually manufacture peace as a state. Sure there are peaceful Muslims, but you will never find a stable Islamic State that does not rely on secular institution(s) be they governmental, political, social etc. A pure full-blown Islam would essentially be ISIS: perpetual waging of war against unbelievers and committing genocide against Jews, which is precisely what Muhammad (and Adolph Hitler) did. It is not surprising to see so many Muslims supporting the work of Adolph Hitler. They are united in their hatred of Jews.

So I don't care what claims Islam makes and/or what dogmas it feeds its adherents: Islam is just about as idol worship as it can possibly get, spilling the blood of people who criticize a pedophile man for having 11 wives, telling his followers to take up to 4 beyond their slaves, and committing genocide. This is not the behavior of a stable/holy man, and if Muslims can't stand criticisms of Islam, Muhammad and/or the Qur'an, this is precisely what reveals their idol worship: enmity and desire to spill blood, which is actually funnily enough the precise division between Cain and Abel. The story is there and preserved: but Muslims don't even read the books of Moses despite calling him a prophet. It's pure hypocrisy, as the Palestinian so-called 'state' is. The state of Palestine is just as much a Semitic illusion as the state of Israel is: both based in falsity, and this is why there is conflict.
 

Remté

Active Member
The real history of Islam is not as the House of Islam claims: it is very different, and if people knew the extent of it, they would probably commit suicide (especially the women) - this is also true for Muslim men if they knew who the real historical Muhammad was and what he actually did, and who helped him do it. The "good" version of Muhammad that is sold to the Muhammadans is an idol that is concealing a very degenerated man: who lived a life of polygamy and nightly fornication, daily war and cutting off of heads in genocidal (organized) fashion, and never appointing a successor to his rule. His death erupted into a bloodbath of factions fighting one another over who is the rightful heir: Sunni vs. Shia which has lasted 1400 years. Approx. 270 000 000 are dead as a result of Islamic jihad.

I understand the basis of this argument. We don't really have any certainty historically speaking of what Mohammad was like. But I don't see.why you assume this exaggarated idea of yours is the exact truth?
 

9-18-1

Active Member
I understand the basis of this argument. We don't really have any certainty historically speaking of what Mohammad was like. But I don't see.why you assume this exaggarated idea of yours is the exact truth?

Well it is already attested to by P2 Freemasons and held in the Catholic Encyclopedia (according to a journalist Benjamin Fulford - I have not seen it myself as its not accessible to the public) that Muhammad was trained in the Vatican and Islam was designed/intended to consolidate the Arabian peninsula under a monotheism. However this project destabilized and went rogue, and Muhammad turned on the people who propped him up (Jews), and in turn they turned on him, hence his extreme polarization against the Jews. Muhammad even died cursing Jews - this is how polarized he was against them, and this polarization is bred directly into Islam which is exploding on a global scale now: it's all over the place. This anti-Semitism is generated and imported by Islam, which is an inherently racist institution and bizarrely so, given Muslims and Jews share the same Semitic roots. It's a tribal war, essentially, that the entire world is being dragged into.

My idea of Muhammad is not exaggerated, he actually was and did the things that are attested to him even by Islamic orthodoxy that simply can't deny it either. Muhammad did have multiple wives; did reveal taking up to four wives was permissible, did engage in pedophilia, did commit genocide etc. These are not contested on either side of the table - what is contested is whether or not these actions are sanctioned/ordained by some god. Idol worshiping Muslims "believe" yes, while people who actually search for what is true will undoubtedly come to find the many problems and absurdities of even entertaining such a notion, which is the category I fall in. I therefor have no particular regard for Muhammad and understand Muslims' attachment to him as pure idol worship.
 

Remté

Active Member
The Qur'an contains the injunctions to adopt the sayings/doings of Muhammad.
It does not.

You can't have a Qur'an without Muhammad and vice verse, so trying to disassociate them is impossible.
Makes sense (though perhaps there could have been a different messenger)

As I said before, you can't have Islam without Muhammad - and this is true,
Technically true. A Muslim needs to recognize Mohammad as the prophet for them to be a Muslim (I'm quite certain - correct me if I'm wrong)

because the Qur'an outlines the sayings/doings of Muhammad which are to be taken as example, as is stated 89 times.
Are you sure you're not reading the Hadiths? The Quran doesn't outline Mohammad's doings. It's not a journal.

It doesn't matter what the Qur'an says, we know it is forged from Christian strophic hymns and is not the perfect word of god.
How do you know?

It is nice that the Qur'an states it is the only word of god and to avoid Hadiths, but that did not stopp the Hadiths from being generated and used for over a thousand years. This argument that god actually allows these forgeries as a form of test is precisely the same kind of moronic "belief"-based justification that keeps people in ignorance: imbuing any book as having the authority of god is idol worship,
Now I see what you meant when you said "what don't I mean by it" - everything is idol worship to you. Have you ever conaidered studying the details with some sincerity?

specially when it is known that these books are man-made. Treating the Qur'an as having divine authority is itself idol worship, because we know it is not divine
Who are these people who know and are they kind?

Muslims "believe" something else, but this is precisely where the ignorance begins: in "belief" which requires dogmas to sustain, such as the assertions you cited.
So your problem starts from the human brain that is so built that we cannot not have beliefs unless we're brain dead.

This entire problem begins with "belief" and unfortunately Islam is full of "believers" that all "believe" things[]
It would be absurd if it wasn't.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Here comes the triggering.

There was no Hebrew Moses - it is a fictional character based on the historical Akhunatun, who was not a Hebrew, but an Egyptian. Just because it is written in the Bible (which has at least four different authors) doesn't make it true, which is the first problem: "belief". The second problem is idol worship: "wanting" something to be true because it is the "belief" one has.

It is the problem of people placing authority over (as) truth rather than truth itself over (as) authority. I am sorry for those who reside in the former, as it necessarily leads to idol worship, which is essentially what the Abrahamic religions are and/or have become.
ROFL.

Just because you say it isn't true, doesn't make it false. That is your first problem with "belief".

Jews believe he was not fictional along with the Christians and Muslims.

It is the problem of people placing authority over (as) truth rather than truth itself over (as) authority. I am sorry for those who reside in the former, as it necessarily leads to idol worship, which is essentially what you have done
 
there was never a central historical prophet Muhammad until the time of Abd al-Malik (late 7th CE) when he starting distributing a currency with prophetic imagery on it.

In response to Zubayrid coins mentioning Muhammad issued during the 2nd Fitna. So clearly he was not the first...

For example the Qur'an is out-of-order: it does not flow in a linear way. This is to conceal the step-by-step modus operandi of Islam in how it begins to infiltrate and take over from within.

This really is an inane line of argumentation: "it doesn't accord to my own personal structural preferences, therefore it must be some kind of a trick!!!" :D

It's structure is similar to that of other items of 'semitic rhetoric' such as Syriac homilies, etc.

Approx. 270 000 000 are dead as a result of Islamic jihad.

Approx. 100% of stats like this on the internet are obviously wrong yet uncritically lapped up by those who combine credulity with ideological self-interest.
 

9-18-1

Active Member
It does not.

Unless you can produce a version of Islam that has no regard for Muhammad, I'm afraid your contention will never stand. It does - Islam requires the adoption of Muhammad, it is even in the shahada itself which every single Muslim must take (which is a false testimony contrary to the ten commandments).

Makes sense (though perhaps there could have been a different messenger)

Technically true. A Muslim needs to recognize Mohammad as the prophet for them to be a Muslim (I'm quite certain - correct me if I'm wrong)

Are you sure you're not reading the Hadiths? The Quran doesn't outline Mohammad's doings. It's not a journal.

No - the sunnah is called upon / invoked when something in the Qur'an requires further insight. You can not have a state of Islam that does not use the social (sunnah) and legal (hadith) components of Islam - specifically how to handle disputes and/or matters of warfare. This notion that true Islam is only Qur'an is fictitious - while there are many Muslims who claim and wish it were so, it simply does not reflect the reality. Muhammad is just as central to Islam (if not moreso) than Allah.

How do you know?

One would have to read through the works of people like John Wansborough, Gunter Luling, Luxenberg etc. who disseminate the Qur'an and reduce it back into what it originally read as: Christian strophic hymns. This essentially explains why we find so many non-Arabic words in the Qur'an - the contents used to compile the Qur'an were originally of Syriac origin.

Of course, if this is true (as it is) the shahada is necessarily a false testimony contrary to one of the ten commandments, which effectively severs Islam from whatever god (if it exists) delivered the Israelites out of Egypt. Of course, also knowing that this also didn't happen as described in the Bible, as well as Moses not having been a Hebrew, throws this entire mess into one giant ball of absurdity - which is precisely the state which would explain why there has been nothing but war in the middle east.

Now I see what you meant when you said "what don't I mean by it" - everything is idol worship to you. Have you ever conaidered studying the details with some sincerity?

That's actually what I do - I do sincerely search for what is actually true. Not "belief" but what actually happened and what fits the evidence we see. This requires diligence and detatchment - I don't care who is or is not right, or what others "believe", I care about what is actually true. I did not start with the assumption that the Abrahamic faiths were idol worship (quite the contrary) but this is where my pursuit naturally lead, because for me truth itself must serve as the ultimate authority, whether or not I like it is irrelevant.

That said, not everything is idol worship. Anything that is not grounded in reality is idol worship: imbuing man-made books with divine authority is idol worship, and bearing testimony of long-dead men and assuming their example to be superior to all others is idol worship. If Christians and Muslims did not adopt idols as the basis of life, this planet would be much, much closer to world peace. The problem is Islam is asserting itself as a solution when in fact it is a problem. The moment you make a problem a solution, you will manufacture misery, suffering and death, which is precisely what Islam (and Christianity before it) did, and still does. First there is idol worship, then there are idolatrous religious institutions. If people rejected idols entirely, these institutions would not stand.

Who are these people who know and are they kind?

Basically anyone/everyone on the pyramid that knows religion is man-made, which is essentially every single powerful family. Some are kind, most are not because they use religion to motivate war. If the people knew the truth about these religions, things would be much different on this planet.

So your problem starts from the human brain that is so built that we cannot not have beliefs unless we're brain dead.

The problem actually starts with how people manage their sexual energy: it is the first story in the first book of Moses. The brain and sex are a polarity: one works off the other. In other words, when you are sexually attracted to someone (or god forbid something), this energy manifests in the sex and rises into the brain. The brain then starts to become influenced by these energies. This is symbolically expressed in the Edenic scene of Eve giving the fruit to Adam. When the power of the sexual organ (in extreme cases: lust) hijacks the rationale of the brain, you have something called "evil" which is essentially a person that only uses their brain to find ways to satiate their sexual desire/lust. This is eating the forbidden fruits and manifesting death. Alternatively, one can preserve and transmute this energy, allowing it to nourish the brain instead of degenerate it. These two options produce two results: subjective reasoning (which leads to "belief"-based thinking) and objective reasoning (a product of having a basis in reality).

In this way, sex is actually the core mystery of being: abuse of it (fornication) degenerates the brain while learning how to use it yields the same benefit spoken to in Genesis: to become "like" Elohim which is to know good and evil: how the two polarities are actually producing only one thing.

This is what makes Muhammad an archetypal psychopathic warlord: many wives, sex slaves, nightly fornications, pedophilia etc. and like many corrupt politicians, involved in running human trafficking networks. The human trafficking networks on the planet are serving sexually degenerated wealthy business/politican types. Muhammad established a human trafficking network which is still running today, and the Clinton Foundation was the Western front for "access" to this network. This is why the entire DNC and Clinton/Islam idol worshipers are attacking Trump with everything they have: he is going after the human trafficking networks that are their main source of income.

So the problem starts with how the brain responds to the vital (sexual) energy - either it learns to control it, or it is controlled by it. This is Jacob's ladder: up or down. Unfortunately such mysteries are not explained in the religious institutions because these institutions are doing the opposite of what is actually written, especially in the books of Moses, and Islam is about as hypocritical as one can possibly get when it comes to the mysteries of even the first book/chapters of Moses.

It would be absurd if it wasn't.

Belief itself is absurd - and monstrously destructive. Millions of years to produce a human brain, and religions telling people not to use them but to "believe" and endure the test that god has given them. It is such a tragedy - especially considering most Christians/Muslims are good people, and the beauty of the soul is buried deep underneath layers of dogmatic conditioning since early childhood. Many of the Muslims I know are amazing people, but also suffer the most and are the most volatile. If this god-forsaken principle division of "believer" vs. "unbeliever" didn't exist (as it does as a barrier within Christianity/Islam) the world would be so much closer to a state of 'peace'.
 
Last edited:

9-18-1

Active Member
ROFL.

Just because you say it isn't true, doesn't make it false. That is your first problem with "belief".

Jews believe he was not fictional along with the Christians and Muslims.

It is the problem of people placing authority over (as) truth rather than truth itself over (as) authority. I am sorry for those who reside in the former, as it necessarily leads to idol worship, which is essentially what you have done

Just because they say it is true, doesn't make it true. I don't care what Jews, Christians or Muslims "believe".

It is not my saying something is false that makes it false - what is false is false whether I say it or not, the same is true for truth.

In response to Zubayrid coins mentioning Muhammad issued during the 2nd Fitna. So clearly he was not the first...

Thanks - this supports my argument.

This really is an inane line of argumentation: "it doesn't accord to my own personal structural preferences, therefore it must be some kind of a trick!!!" :D

That's an inane representation of the argument: if you can't address the argument, don't go about trying to invent a rhetorical one to attack in lieu of it. But it seems one shouldn't expect much else from you, as you play these games all of the time.

It's structure is similar to that of other items of 'semitic rhetoric' such as Syriac homilies, etc.

I don't know what structure you are talking about - there are two portions, Mecca (peaceful) and Medina (warfare). You start in/as Mecca, and progress into Medina which abrogates Mecca over time in accordance with whatever phase of jihad is next. The Qur'an is a war manual, and it is placed out-of-order on purpose to prevent non-Muslims from seeing/understanding what Islam is doing. When you place the Qur'an in its proper historical order, it assumes the war manual form it is - a cyclic progression of how to subdue and eradicate all "disbelief". This is the principle rolling cycle of Islam: generate refugees and flood them into non-Muslim nations.

Approx. 100% of stats like this on the internet are obviously wrong yet uncritically lapped up by those who combine credulity with ideological self-interest.

Of course they are wrong, especially if they don't paint Islam as the perfect picture of which it wishes to present itself. We really shouldn't get into who uncritically laps up anything before getting into religious dogma and "belief"-based thinking, which is precisely what Islam is. Ideological self-interest is a fitting term of someone like Muhammad: making himself the central power authority claiming to have been receiving revelations from an angel and cutting off people's heads who didn't agree with him. This is precisely the kind of behavior one would expect from one who is saturated with ideological self-interest.

But it is funny that you would use that expression probably unaware it perfectly describes the historical Muhammad and his forgery of the various Qur'anic stories.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
My idea of Muhammad is not exaggerated... Islamic orthodoxy simply can't deny it either

You can not have a state of Islam that does not use the social (sunnah) and legal (hadith) components of Islam - specifically how to handle disputes and/or matters of warfare. This notion that true Islam is only Qur'an is fictitious

Respectfully: I think your entire argument against Islam and the Biblical figure of Moses is actually against Orthodoxy and Politics. It seems like you do not believe that moderates exist in authentic versions of the Abrahamic religions.
 
Last edited:

9-18-1

Active Member
Respectfully: I think your entire argument against Islam and the Biblical figure of Moses is actually against Orthodoxy and Politics. It seems like you do not believe that moderates exist in authentic versions of the Abrahamic religions.

Well of course it is, Orthodoxy and Politics (as you put it) are the vehicles of, to borrow from Augustus, a dogmatic set of "beliefs" and/or assertions that are "uncritically lapped up by those who combine credulity with ideological self-interest." The self-interest part is people who exploit these idolatrous systems for personal gain and benefit. This is precisely the framework of idol-based institutions such as Christianity and Islam which use a single male figure as an "example" for what is now billions of people. This same framework was also present in Egypt and their entire religion involving ISIS/OSIRIS and HORUS: divine mother, divine father, divine child. Christianity rejigged this into father, son, holy spirit (eliminating the feminine / matriarchy) and Islam is just a mess when it comes to the balance of men and women. How Islam regards women is absolutely patriarchal: there is no feminine aspect to divinity in Islam whatsoever. In fact, the opposite was true for Muhammad (and thus Islam): hell is mostly full of women!

So when you have an entire religion based on a man who said "hell is full of women", and ~1.6 billion people subscribe to this religion, then no, I do not "believe" (as I don't believe in anything) that "moderates" exist in "authentic" versions of the Abrahamic religions: they are all depraved in their very core and basis. I'm sorry if that comes across as extreme, but it's actually the opposite: a rejection of the extremism of the Abrahamic system as a whole, especially as it pertains to the relationship men should have with women - Muhammad's example being that of how low one can sink and turn women into a form of currency. It's completely "Satanic" - using "Satanic" actually knowing what the word itself means: an expression of being bound to/by something in an ongoing state. Islam is just this: an expression of being bound (in submission to) Muhammad's Allah, and Islam is the only acceptable religion.

So here is an obvious prophecy that even a retarded child could make: there will never be peace on this planet so long as there are religious institutions which continue to employ a division-based world view (ie. "believer" and "unbeliever") utilizing male patriarchal figures. This entire problem began with/in Judaism and their transformation of an Egyptian reformer into a prophet of THEIR god, which/who was (and still technically is) 'el', taking the new form YHVH. Islam will always be hostile, aggressively asserting itself as the only acceptable religion while "extracting" wealth from non-Muslims in order to continue to fund its expansion until ultimately it conquers the planet. That is the goal of Islam: globalism and it is precisely what is happening on this planet. Unless these patriarchal religious institutions which began with corruption in Judaism are eradicated, there will never, ever be peace, even after Islam conquers and commits genocide on all non-Muslims for their "disbelief". That's how this all ends, and the idol worshipers are still running to their Jesus thinking he is about to come and save them! This isn't helpful - it's the problem itself, idol worship. The same is true for Muhammad and Islam: idol worship. If these two idols were removed, humanity could live in peace before destroying the planet and each other.
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
If Moses wasn't a Hebrew, Judaism is obviously false.
If Judaism is false, Christianity and Islam are also false.

The son of Amenhotep III (Akhunatun) has almost too many striking similarities to the biblical Moses.

He grew up and was educated in the Egyptian mystery schools, attained a co-regency with his father and began preaching monotheism: the worship of only one god (Atun) [or Aten]. He decommissioned all other existing forms of worship to the point where he was expelled from Egypt by the military (controlled by the clergy who were losing business), only to return to claim the throne and be rejected and taking his own followers with him into the desert. All of this transpired around the time between 1300 BCE and 1000 BCE (depending on when one places the Exodus, of which there were actually two).

So if Moses is a mythical figure who was given a Hebrew identity, despite having actually been an Egyptian, then the entire god of Abraham paradigm is based on falsehood from the beginning regarding the Hebrews being the "chosen" people. The Canaanite god 'el' is found everywhere in the books of Moses, only to later be replaced by YHVH.

This would render Moses a false prophet, Jesus a false prophet, and Muhammad a false prophet. It would also explain why humanity has been at war for thousands of years due to the principle division of "believer" vs. "unbeliever" as is so prevalent in Christianity and Islam: both having spread by the sword. Judaism treats non-Jews in a similar way: so-called "gentiles" and/or "goyim". The labels begin in religion: someone is always something.

The profound attachment(s) [worship] people have to/for these religious figures is precisely the scheme that has been used time and again: erect a central figure (not necessarily physical), imbue this figure with fantastical qualities, start a religion based on them, and implore adherents to take this figure as their "example" on how to live.

If Moses wasn't a Hebrew, all of these Abrahamic faiths are essentially idol worship. As it is obvious to me what probably "happened" with Moses/Akhunatun, the (earlier) god of Abraham is nothing but a mythological story concocted by the Jews (Shasu; "Israelites") to justify their existence. This has interesting implications relating to why Islam is hostile to Jews and the State of Israel: of course they would be, but unfortunately Islam is just as degenerated as Judaism is, as it is a product of it. Islam makes the same claims for itself that Judaism does: both are (apparently) in possession of the perfect word of god, both worship only one god, and both are gods "chosen" people. This huge mess is inherently a Semitic problem that has its roots from ancient Egypt, and these "cults" have (and continue to) create many problems on the planet, none of which have ever ended without bloodshed.
Cool story ... :rolleyes:

I'm sticking with the Bible. :D
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
This is precisely the framework of idol-based institutions such as Christianity and Islam which use a single male figure as an "example" for what is now billions of people.

It's a problem with institutions not individuals.

"hell is full of women"

That's a Hadith, I think. Please correct me if I am wrong. It's not in the Qur'an. I think it's hearsay: information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor. But you believe it because it confirms your bias.
 
Thanks - this supports my argument.

Not really given that you said abd al-Malik started it...

That's an inane representation of the argument: if you can't address the argument, don't go about trying to invent a rhetorical one to attack in lieu of it. But it seems one shouldn't expect much else from you, as you play these games all of the time.

You: the Quran has a non-linear structure, this is to conceal....

Me: You have invented this devious intention out of thin air, such a structure is common to the era/genre.


I don't know what structure you are talking about - there are two portions, Mecca (peaceful) and Medina (warfare). You start in/as Mecca, and progress into Medina which abrogates Mecca over time in accordance with whatever phase of jihad is next. The Qur'an is a war manual, and it is placed out-of-order on purpose to prevent non-Muslims from seeing/understanding what Islam is doing. When you place the Qur'an in its proper historical order, it assumes the war manual form it is - a cyclic progression of how to subdue and eradicate all "disbelief". This is the principle rolling cycle of Islam: generate refugees and flood them into non-Muslim nations.

Of course! That's exactly how people thought in the 7thC: let's hide our true intentions by having a book with a non-linear structure.

They desperately wanted to conceal the fact that they were warlike from the people they had just conquered so they could play the long game and create refugees in the 21st C!


Of course they are wrong, especially if they don't paint Islam as the perfect picture of which it wishes to present itself. We really shouldn't get into who uncritically laps up anything before getting into religious dogma and "belief"-based thinking, which is precisely what Islam is. Ideological self-interest is a fitting term of someone like Muhammad: making himself the central power authority claiming to have been receiving revelations from an angel and cutting off people's heads who didn't agree with him. This is precisely the kind of behavior one would expect from one who is saturated with ideological self-interest.

But it is funny that you would use that expression probably unaware it perfectly describes the historical Muhammad and his forgery of the various Qur'anic stories.

You appear to be arguing that "I may be really biased and credulous, but so are they".

I can live with that.
 

Remté

Active Member
Unless you can produce a version of Islam that has no regard for Muhammad, I'm afraid your contention will never stand. It does - Islam requires the adoption of Muhammad, it is even in the shahada itself which every single Muslim must take (which is a false testimony contrary to the ten commandments).
You are quoting me saying "it does not" in reply to your: "The Qur'an contains the injunctions to adopt the sayings/doings of Muhammad."
Which has nothing to do with what you just said. How is it against the ten commandments?

No - the sunnah is called upon / invoked when something in the Qur'an requires further insight.
The Quran says it is complete.

You can not have a state of Islam that does not use the social (sunnah) and legal (hadith)
State of Islam? Are you speaking of the state like a nation kind of a state or a state of being? In both cases you are wrong. Ever heard of Quranism?

components of Islam - specifically how to handle disputes and/or matters of warfare.
That is in the Quran because it is complete.

This notion that true Islam is only Qur'an is fictitious
This is a bit strange. Like telling a brain surgeon there is no such thing as a brain. Because there is such a sect of Islam as Quranism and you can ignore it yourself but to decide by yourself for the rest of the world that it is fictitious is sort of delusional.

Muhammad is just as central to Islam (if not moreso) than Allah.
Who denied his significance?

Throws this entire mess into one giant ball of absurdity - which is precisely the state which would explain why there has been nothing but war in the middle east.
You think this confusion is the reason for war in the middle east? How?

That's actually what I do - I do sincerely search for what is actually true. Not "belief" but what actually happened and what fits the evidence we see.
You say you know exactly what Mohammad was like though he lived over a thousand years before you and not a single historian has been able to determine it.

That said, not everything is idol worship. Anything that is not grounded in reality is idol worship
You are draining any meaning from the word idol worship. Which means it no longer serves as a solid argument. You must have compairsons. The world is not black and white.

So you don't believe in God?

If Christians and Muslims did not adopt idols as the basis of life, this planet would be much, much closer to world peace.
Religion has next to nothing to do with whether a person is good or capable or not.

The problem is Islam is asserting itself as a solution when in fact it is a problem.
Haven't seen it asserting itself as a solution. Obviously it's a problem to you.

The moment you make a problem a solution, you will manufacture misery, suffering and death, which is precisely what Islam (and Christianity before it) did, and still does.
Atheism creates what?

First there is idol worship, then there are idolatrous religious institutions. If people rejected idols entirely, these institutions would not stand.
No one knows what would be without religion.

Basically anyone/everyone on the pyramid that knows religion is man-made, which is essentially every single powerful family.
The ones sponsoring the horrible wars?

Some are kind, most are not because they use religion to motivate war. If the people knew the truth about these religions, things would be much different on this planet.
No wait. I got confused.

The problem actually starts with how people manage their sexual energy
Damn

it is the first story in the first book of Moses. The brain and sex are a polarity: one works off the other. In other words, when you are sexually attracted to someone (or god forbid something), this energy manifests in the sex and rises into the brain.
Actually it starts from the brain.

The brain then starts to become influenced by these energies.
Doctors believe brain function is a positive sign of life.

This is symbolically expressed in the Edenic scene of Eve giving the fruit to Adam. When the power of the sexual organ (in extreme cases: lust) hijacks the rationale of the brain, you have something called "evil" which is essentially a person that only uses their brain to find ways to satiate their sexual desire/lust.
Freud?

This is eating the forbidden fruits and manifesting death. Alternatively, one can preserve and transmute this energy, allowing it to nourish the brain instead of degenerate it.
Self stimulation
 
Last edited:

Remté

Active Member
This anti-Semitism is generated and imported by Islam, which is an inherently racist institution and bizarrely so, given Muslims and Jews share the same Semitic roots. It's a tribal war, essentially, that the entire world is being dragged into.
Jews do all they can to keep up antisemitisim. It is political since they can't find a reason to stop slaughtering Muslims. And the world is not "dragged into it", it wants to help the oppressed because it is getting more and more difficult for the Israelis to hide their war crimes.
 

Remté

Active Member
That's a Hadith, I think. Please correct me if I am wrong. It's not in the Qur'an. I think it's hearsay: information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor. But you believe it because it confirms your bias.
Can verify it's not in the Quran. It is said the idea of women being evil somehow has come from christianity or something.
 

Remté

Active Member
. How Islam regards women is absolutely patriarchal: there is no feminine aspect to divinity in Islam whatsoever. In fact, the opposite was true for Muhammad (and thus Islam): hell is mostly full of women!
What do you mean by feminine aspect to divinity? The Quran is very gender equal taken it was written in the conditions of society of that time. It is the Hadith that degrades women.

So when you have an entire religion based on a man who said "hell is full of women", and ~1.6 billion people subscribe to this religion,
What religion is this?

then no, I do not "believe" (as I don't believe in anything) that "moderates" exist in "authentic" versions of the Abrahamic religions:
I don't believe in not believing in the Quran. That solves it I suppose?

especially as it pertains to the relationship men should have with women - Muhammad's example being that of how low one can sink and turn women into a form of currency. It's completely "Satanic" - using "Satanic" actually knowing what the word itself means: an expression of being bound to/by something in an ongoing state. Islam is just this: an expression of being bound (in submission to) Muhammad's Allah, and Islam is the only acceptable religion.
Evidence? Any drop is appreciated.

So here is an obvious prophecy that even a retarded child could make: there will never be peace on this planet so long as there are religious institutions which continue to employ a division-based world view
That's a very smart way to manipulate the waging of war.
 

GoodbyeDave

Well-Known Member
A myth has been defined as "something that never happened but is always true" or "a story to think with". Moses is a Jewish myth — indeed he is the Jewish myth. There is no historical or archeological evidence to confirm his existence, the "Egyptian captivity", or the exodus. The story of his birth is the well-known folktale motif, "the man born to be king". The story of the exodus is a folk memory of the expulsion of the Hyksos. But the myth defined who the Israelites though they were and what their place in the world was. And such a myth is more important to those who tell it than any history could be.
 
Top