What's Your Religion?

Considering I'm a descedent of Muhammad (as), no. I'm sayyid. I don't really understand why you would make this particular assertion. As for the other questions, there could be a possibility but again, I don't believe so.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You think you're a decedent of Mohammad. But, it is possible there was never a Mohammad. ALL archeologists regardless of faith agree there is no contemporary evidence for Mohammad. Unless you have some? Do you? We can publish and be famous

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Just to summarize: You and I both agree that it is possible:
Allah does exist.
The Qur'an is the words of God.

You and I both agree that it is possible
Allah does not exist.
The Qur'an is not the words of God.

Is that correct?
Michael

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

For me that is not a mere possibility but a necessity for He's the only objective reality

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The existence of God is one thing but this is something else.

 

Why Michael, thats a new one. Could I see a link to this dramatic revelation by the archaeological community please?

 

What are you getting at?

 

Agreed.

 

I think I can agree to this too.

 

There is no contemporary evidence - unless you have some SAM? Do you? If not, then we agree. It's THAT simple. Nothing needs to be debated. If you have the contemporary evidence - bring it out. Because the last time we discussed this YOUR Patricia Crone linked website stated the only flimsy somewhat contemporary evidence was a Greek Patriarch complaining about a heretical Christian warlord twisting the truth and killing people near the southern reaches of the Byzantine Empire. It should be noted: this may or may not have been Mohammad.

As it stands Mohammad is a literary creation much like Hercules, Amaterasu and Jesus.

I simply want to make sure we both are in agreement.

Allah may exist.
Allah may not exist.
The Qur'an may be divine revelation.
The Qur'an may be a totally man-made endeavor.

Why "He" Big Chiller? Shouldn't you say "It" to be more specific? "He" suggests that this God has a sex organ. Would you feel comfortable saying "She"? Something you want to think about with your "Objective Reality". Because I'm fairly certain it's no where near Objective. I do like that turn of phase though: Object Reality. Sounds important and meaningful. Reminds me of the thread where the guys' boss calls him into upstairs saying: Come into my office, I like to talk verbally

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Hey, look it's the 800th iteration of this same thread question.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Well, I'll bite...again.
Solitary Wiccan, traditionalist and hard polytheist.

 

Where is the option in the poll, "None of the Above"?

 

We haven't forgotten about the many centuries of conflict your religion and the other religions have provided for us. You and other believers feel it necessary to pick up the reigns of these organizations and continue the conflict.

The offender never understands why they offend.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Can I still see where this claim has been made? Pretty please?:bawl:

with sugar on top?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

When i answered the was no other. i had to put atheist but atheism is still like too fundamentalist for me.

Satanism is not on the list either. The guy pacing in hell saying 'we need more people down here'.

 

From what I understand of Satanism, it's an Atheist "religion," and or philosophy, thus I think for the sake simplicity, that should do fine, no? Or are you talking about those reverse Christians?

 

No it is not Atheist but that was not serious.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Especially the quote i made up.

 

So the Church of Satan is wrong? Anton LaVey wasn't an Atheist?

 

How in the world could someone come to think of Satanism as atheistic?

Right here. You just read it yourself.

I don't give it much credence - I'd bet there was a centrally important guy involved somewhere in the early days of Islam, whom we now know as "Muhammed" or some similar spelling in English. Just as there was a guy centrally important to the establishment of Christianity, whom we now refer to as "Jesus". And a guy pivotal in the early days of the Cargo Cults, whom we now name "John Frum". But nobody was born of a virgin, took dictation from angels, or brought cargo with a wood carving of a radio housing and the right magic words.

According to this guy, I'm an Animist - he seems at least as authoritative in the matter as anyone else.

 

Considering the utter paucity of archaelogical expeditions in the region, I would dearly love to know on what basis all those archaelogists [regardless of religion] have made this claim. I googled archaeology and Mohammed, to no avail. :shrug:

I guess I am fascinated by archaeologists arriving at conclusions based on absence of excavations = absence of evidence

 

This is really not much cause for concern afterall how well do we really know all of history and the past.