Sura 86... |
Post Reply | Page <1 45678> |
Author | |||||||||
Noah
Senior Member Joined: 25 June 2005 Status: Offline Points: 199 |
Posted: 05 August 2005 at 6:32pm | ||||||||
You still plagiarized his �work�. Period. Thanks for not denying�
Horus, the morning star. Sura 86, the morning star. Please inform us how horus came to be contained in the Koran? Thanks�
uhmmm....NO...youre still the one who has explaining to do! |
|||||||||
Noah
Senior Member Joined: 25 June 2005 Status: Offline Points: 199 |
Posted: 05 August 2005 at 6:34pm | ||||||||
oh and psst...originally the Quran's surahs didnt have names. Just thought id let you know.
|
|||||||||
Apple Pie
Guest Group Joined: 21 July 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 138 |
Posted: 05 August 2005 at 6:47pm | ||||||||
Greetings Noah, Thanks for your reply� You still plagiarized his �work�. Period. Thanks for not denying�
Actually, you did claim it as your own. The post was under your name�not Maxwell�s name. Nor did you even once mention that the material came directly from Maxwell�s website. In addition, you even bracketed the beginning and ending of Maxwell�s plagiarized webpaste with your own intro and ending� Not very smart. This is what we call plagiarism�
Horus, the morning star. Sura 86, the morning star. Please inform us how horus came to be contained in the Koran? Thanks�
It is simply amazing that you acknowledge that horus was the morning star and that he made his way into your beloved book of faith� Now�.in your vast research into this area�.please inform us exactly how it is that Muslims worship a pagan deity�.?
oh and psst...originally the Quran's surahs didnt have names. Just thought id let you know. Great�..then we are both in agreement that the sura�s were man-made�.and man-manipulated�. Thanks� |
|||||||||
Deus
Senior Member Joined: 13 July 2005 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 134 |
Posted: 05 August 2005 at 9:22pm | ||||||||
Apple Pie, the exegesis that Muslims generally rely on were written 700-1000 years ago. The language found therein is as understandable as literature written today, which is as understandable as literature written at the time of the Quranic revalation. Instead of asking people to refute your exegesis, why don't you first refute the already existing exegesis by scholars such as Ibn Kathir, Tabari, and others? Your exegesis seems very subjective and opinionated, and it is prohibited for Muslims to accept an exegesis that is based solely on opinion. The interpretation (tafsir) must be supported by reports (hadith) made by Muhammad. As to the naming of the Quranic Surah's... the names were not revealed as part of the Quran. They were added to make it easier for us to distinguish between the surahs (same reason why everything in existence has a name.) Many surahs have more than one name. I thought you'd know this fact, given your vast knowledge in "Classical Arabic" and Quranic exegesis. |
|||||||||
Noah
Senior Member Joined: 25 June 2005 Status: Offline Points: 199 |
Posted: 06 August 2005 at 3:24am | ||||||||
deus could i have you post the email answer that i gave you, when you
asked about the post? So we can shut up the troll once and for all?
just like all the verses you post along with word definitions. It is not the issue, the issue is the message, not the messenger.
and added other reseachers work aswell, in the sense that they wrote down from the sources that i listed for you. especially that of john allegro, and manley p hall - the secret teachings of all ages, where Maxwell obviously got most of the research in this article from. This is called making a compendium. Instead of attacking the messenger, you should focus on the message. Deus asked me about the work, and i answered him strieght out whoms work it was, altso.
Just like horus was the christ, just like he walked on water, died for 3 days and was ressurected. I think perhaps the reason someone named the sura like that is because of its reffrence to the piercing star within the sura. traditional refference works will tell you that it is sirius. and sirius is not associated with Horus, and the morning star is traditionally venus. This can be traced back to a greek system forming a trinity with sirius (Seirios)being the female diety. Get your facts streight atleast. Again, you should rather focus on the material presented, than the way it was presented, nomatter if youre comfortable with it or not. the issue here is not me, its the text! As for pagan influences, i cannot and will not denie such. Personally im very sceptic about the ka'baa, as the black cube is an age old symbol of venus and saturn. Interresting that the name givers of the sura's would chose to call the sura the mornings star, and at the same time reffer to it being sirius in their refference works. Edited by Noah |
|||||||||
Apple Pie
Guest Group Joined: 21 July 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 138 |
Posted: 06 August 2005 at 3:01pm | ||||||||
Greetings Deus, Thanks for your reply� Apple Pie, the exegesis that Muslims generally rely on were written 700-1000 years ago. The language found therein is as understandable as literature written today, which is as understandable as literature written at the time of the Quranic revalation. Wrong. Tafsir�s are no more than personal opinion. They rarely (if ever) show references to the classic Arabic Lexicons, nor to they concord the text to see exactly how it is used else where in scripture� Furthermore, Arabic is a horrendously corrupted language. Modern Arabic is a far cry from classic Arabic� Instead of asking people to refute your exegesis, why don't you first refute the already existing exegesis by scholars such as Ibn Kathir, Tabari, and others? A tafsir is the Muslim �equivalent� of an exegesis. Unfortunately, a tafsir is hardly a critical analysis of anything except the authors� opinion� If you can locate a tafsir that is worthy of comparison to our exegesis, then please bring it forth�as of yet, all have fallen woefully short� Your exegesis seems very subjective and opinionated, and it is prohibited for Muslims to accept an exegesis that is based solely on opinion. Our exegesis is objective. The conclusions drawn by the analysis are rock-solid with ample scriptural support. Again�the only opinion being offered here is your own� The interpretation (tafsir) must be supported by reports (hadith) made by Muhammad. So�.a tafsir on the Koran requires hadith support�.? The Koran cannot stand on its own�.? As to the naming of the Quranic Surah's... the names were not revealed as part of the Quran. No kidding� They were added to make it easier for us to distinguish between the surahs (same reason why everything in existence has a name.) Many surahs have more than one name. I thought you'd know this fact, given your vast knowledge in "Classical Arabic" and Quranic exegesis. We are also cognizant that the lion�s share of sura titles come from the Biblical material of the sura that they are naming� Thanks� |
|||||||||
Apple Pie
Guest Group Joined: 21 July 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 138 |
Posted: 06 August 2005 at 5:27pm | ||||||||
Greetings Noah, Thanks for your response�
Instead of attacking the messenger, you should focus on the message. Deus asked me about the work, and i answered him strieght out whoms work it was, altso. Again, you should rather focus on the material presented, than the way it was presented, nomatter if youre comfortable with it or not. If the messenger (you) is an admitted plagiarizer�.and obviously does not put forth much effort past a five-minute �google-job��.then this definitely reflects upon the message contained therein, as it also is not very well researched�
Now�.you have just admitted to plagiarizing even more material than Maxwell�s�wonders never cease�
Interresting that the name givers of the sura's would chose to call the sura the mornings star, and at the same time reffer to it being sirius in their refference works. Since (according to your research) you have no issue at all with Horus being the morning star of sura 86; let�s see how far the rabbit hole goes�
Now�you have no choice but to accept these other facts that you also want to pertain to your pagan god Horus�and just from sura 86�.! You truly do worship a pagan god�.
Good move� For the most part, the Koran is 99% translated Biblical material. However, it does contain quite a smorgasbord of other heretical Jewish and Christian scriptures as well. Further, the �allah� of the Koran traces its roots back to pagan Arab deities�which should be right down your alley� Basically, the pagan Arab god �allah� of the Koran has been wrapped in Biblical deity, by the authors who penned the text. By doing so, the authors of the Koran have confirmed that Jesus is God Almighty. We are sure that you were already aware of this� Personally im very sceptic about the ka'baa, as the black cube is an age old symbol of venus and saturn. The �kabba� concept, as most Islamic concepts, has its genesis in the Holy Bible. The �kabba� is taken from the Book of Revelation. Thanks� |
|||||||||
Deus
Senior Member Joined: 13 July 2005 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 134 |
Posted: 06 August 2005 at 6:28pm | ||||||||
Yes, Quranic exegesis requires hadith support. I don't understand what you mean by "the Koran cannot stand on its own." Please provide an exegesis for your statement - "the Koran cannot stand on its own" - because it cannot stand on its own. |
|||||||||
Post Reply | Page <1 45678> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |