Q'ran or Bible is more reliable as the word of God?

[S.A.M.]

I personally find it sad you will try to erase a wonderful chapter in Arab history. It's nice to know Arabs don't share you opinion.

Hilarious, I wonder if you can even see the irony there. Thats a Syrian lirah

 

[Michael]

Like I said S.A.M. you go ahead and believe There is no pre-Islamic written history of the Arabs. , go ahead and believe that. Believe that the Qur'an is "Perfect" and it dropped right out of Heaven right onto Mohammad's lap. Believe that the moon spit in two. That Mohammad rode magical winged fairy creatures to heaven. Go ahead and believe Arabs killed their daughters and were only able to be civilized by "Islam".

If that makes you feel good, then go for it.

 

[S.A.M.]

As a curiosity, do you also consider the Roman ampitheater in Bosra on the Syrian lira as part of the glorious pre-Islamic history of Arabs?

 

[Michael]

As a curiosity, do you also consider the Roman ampitheater in Bosra on the Syrian lira as part of the glorious pre-Islamic history of Arabs?

If Arabs were involved in the construction and if Arabs participated in the the use of - and they did, so yes, of course I would consider it a part of Arab history. Who wouldn't?

 

[Michael]

Out of curiosity do you consider the Qu'ran a more reliable source than the Bible as the word of God?

 

[S.A.M.]

If Arabs were involved in the construction and if Arabs participated in the the use of - and they did, so yes, of course I would consider it a part of Arab history. Who wouldn't?

I don't recall where Arabs were involved in the construction of the ampitheatre in 2 BC, unless you are talking about the citadels built by the Kurdish Ayyubids after 1200 to protect the ampitheatre from the crusades.

 

[Michael]

SAM did you miss the sentence about Arabs living and working on Roman Garrisons in England?!?


Let me ask you SAM, do you think that it's good for Arab people's psyche to think that Philip an Arab was a successful Roman Emperor that held the one of the greatest empires on earth together, during tumultuous times? That maybe this could be a sense of pride? That instead of think their ancestors were meat-heads who clubbed their daughters into the dirt, but were in fact medical doctors, artists and ROMAN EMPERORS. People who lived and worked in ROME. In Italy.

Come on SAM, what's wrong with you? Arabs were an integral part of an Empire they helped maintain.

You don't think this can be a source of pride for Arabs?

It's fact of history regardless so get over it.


Now, you said you had all this contemporty evidence of Mohammad. I'll go first. Here's a coin of Phillip I Arabs minted during his reign. Please post some contemporary evidence for the existence of Mohammad.

Lastly: you joined the thread, care to answer the OP?

Do you consider the Qu'ran a more reliable source than the Bible as the word of God?

 

[S.A.M.]

SAM did you miss the sentence about Arabs living and working on Roman Garrisons in England?!?


Let me ask you SAM, do you think that it's good for Arab people's psyche to think that Philip an Arab was a successful Roman Emperor that held the one of the greatest empires on earth together, during tumultuous times? That maybe this could be a sense of pride? That instead of think their ancestors were meat-heads who clubbed their daughters into the dirt, but were in fact medical doctors, artists and ROMAN EMPERORS. People who lived and worked in ROME. In Italy.

Did you miss the part where I said they were traders with Indians for thousands of years? I think you have a very weird understanding of the term "Arab", probably because you have little association with their culture, you seem to think it is synonymous with the term western, since you cannot fathom that Syrians speaking Arabic is like Aboriginals speaking English, not English immigrants to Australia speaking English. I guarantee you, no one outside Syria cares that Philip was called the Arab, if they have even heard of him. Anything before 632 will not be considered as Arab culture outside Arabia anymore than anything before colonialism in Australia will be considered as British culture by the aboriginals.

I don't think you need to worry about the Arab psyche, you apparently have run into some very maladjusted ones. Most of the ones I have met are very comfortable in their identity. They don't need fictitious tales about prehistoric Syrian Roman Emperors who might have Arab ancestors to feel better about themselves, not when they can boast about converting one sixth of the world to their belief system and having the most influential man in history today as their role model.

 

[Michael]

Actually, every single time I get the opportunity I make it a point to mention to Muslims and Arabs about the great Arab Roman Emperor and guess what SAM, they are duly impressed. Very impressed. I email them the wiki if they want it. I've only ever had positive responses. I tell them about how Arabs works and lived in England and Roma, Italy and Spain. I can honestly say I have never met an Arab Muslims that was not very happy to learn this information.

I wonder why?

Gee SAM, seems that maybe Arabs don't like the tired old made-up storys about how they were a meat-headed daughter clobbering neanderthals with nothing but Islamic history.

But hey, that's just been my experience.


Anyway, you said you pills of contemporary evidence of the existance of Mohammad. Well, we're all waiting. Just start by posting ONE peace of said piles and piles of evidence.


You joined the thread, care to OH I don't know, comment on the OP?

Do you consider the Qu'ran to be a more reliable source than the Bible as the words of God?

 

[S.A.M.]

I'm very glad that the Arabs you meet are impressed with you, Michael. As a culture, they are a polite and generous people, and their tradition of hospitality makes them excellent listeners. I am sure they are sympathetic to your viewpoint that they should look at prehistoric Roman Emperors for guidance

I've already posted the sources you asked for. Why don't you spend some time and dig them up?

 

[Michael]

And come to think about it, I wonder why it bothers you so much? You just can't stand it that Arabs would have such a wonderful pre-Islamic history. One that you are not a part of.

Arabs never needed Islam, they had all the potential for greatness long long before Islam. And they are very very happy when someone tells them so.

That's been my experience,
Michael

 

[S.A.M.]

It doesn't bother me at all. I have read Arab history and its common knowledge that Arabs travelled the world. I'm sure they are suitably impressed that that knowledge finally reached you.

Some modern accounts of Arab travellers to impress your Arab ignoramuses with.

Although there is a plethora of Westerners' accounts of their travels in the Arab world, it is often forgotten that there exists a substantial body of accounts of journeys to the West by Arab travellers. Nazik Yared's study, while acknowledging the importance of major figures in classical Arabic travel literature such as al-Mas'udi (d. 957), Ibn Jubair (d. 1217) and Ibn Battuta (d. 1377), focuses on Arab travellers of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

In this period, travel was perhaps the most important means of introducing an Arab to aspects of European civilization. This contact and interaction with the West often proved disturbing and even shocking: it provoked a conflict on the political, economic, intellectual and cultural levels that remains a fundamental problem for Arab identity to this day. On the one hand, the Arabs admired the West's progress and asked to what extent their own backwardness and stagnation could be blamed on their traditional outlook. On the other, they felt threatened and wanted to preserve their identity in the face of the onslaught of new values.

This dilemma is mirrored in the works of the writers analysed in Yared's book. They also reveal the way in which the dilemma changed over time: from the Egyptian al-Tahtawi's impressions of Paris to al-Rihani and Husayn's later views of the West. Since these changes also reflected the political scene very clearly, the book is divided into three parts: the first (1826-1882) begins with al-Tahtawi's trip to France in 1826 and ends with the colonization of Tunisia by the French in 1882 and of Egypt by the British in the same year; the second (1882-1918) goes from the Western occupation until the end of the First World War; and the third (1919-1938) covers the period between the two World Wars.

http://www.amazon.com/Travellers-Western-Civilization-Nazik-Yared/dp/0863563368

 

[Michael]

haha...

anyway, OP?

You posted a link that said there is less evidence for the existence of Mohammad than the existence of Philip I Arabs. Don't you read your links anymore?

 

[S.A.M.]

Maybe you read links I have not yet given? I have no information on contemporary [by your definition] sources of Philips history.

 

[Michael]

I posted a marble bust and coins minted under his rule. That two. Now anti up or fold.


also.. this thread does have an OP, are you going to comment on it? I mean, presumably that was the reason you opened and read the thread...

 

[S.A.M.]

I posted a marble bust and coins minted under his rule. That two. Now anti up or fold.

Already did.

also.. this thread does have an OP, are you going to comment on it? I mean, presumably that was the reason you opened and read the thread...

I don't have anything to add I haven't already said before.

 

[Michael]

Already did.

Oh, you mean this:

a Greek text written during the Arab invasion of Syria between 632 and 634 mentions that "a false prophet has appeared among the Saracens" and dismisses him as an impostor on the ground that prophets do not come "with sword and chariot". It thus conveys the impression that he was actually leading the invasions.

Is this what you are referring to? That we reported AFTER. It's not contemporary.

an Armenian document probably written shortly after 661 identifies him by name and gives a recognisable account of his monotheist preaching.

Or maybe this? That was reported AFTER his death as well.


Unlike Philip I Arabs who actually ran an empire, minted coins and for whom there is a plethora of information ALL DURING his life time.

I don't have anything to add I haven't already said before.

and what was that? Oh yeah, you think the Qur'an is Perfect and everyone else holy books (Bible included) are corrupted and flawed. The upshot to this is your belief is true and theirs is corrupted and flawed.

Oh goody, not like that didn't lead to Crusades and Invasions or anything :bugeye:

 

[S.A.M.]

I'm not sure what your point is. Leaving aside the lack of archaelogical research in Arab lands, there is more evidence for Philip the Arab than William Shakepeare. There is more evidence for Mohammed than for Jesus. More for Jesus than for Buddha. More for Buddha than for Rama and Sita. So what?

 

[Michael]

You are the one who brought it up. Along with your trying to tear up a whole history of Arab people that occurred prior to the Islamic crusades. Maybe you think it's good for European to dote on the Xian Crusades? Hype them up. Kind of like you did about the Islamic crusades a couple posts back? Maybe the Europeans should celebrate the colonization of India? Like the colonization of Persia? The Great British Empire and all...

OR maybe if Arabs know they have a perfectly fine and respectable history RUNNING the ROMAN EMPIRE they wouldn't have to fixate and glorify crusading so much. Who knows, that just could be a good thing?

I suppose the first thing would be to recognize they have a history. And they do. You may be to that point now?

The second thing is to recognize other people's beliefs are equally as valid as theirs (goes to OP). It's probably not possible for someone our age to reach such lofty heights, it is very easy for kids - just like picking up a language. So, lets keep that out there in the public domain.

 

[S.A.M.]

Why do you think Arabs need a Roman Emperor from the 2 century BC with unevidenced Arab roots to feel better about themselves?
Do you believe people need to abandon their native roots for a white culture to feel good? Whats so great about Philips 5 and a half years of rule in Syria that trumps Mohammed's union of the entire Middle East and his influence over a fifth of the world? Logically speaking, the entire western world is under the same ideology that Islam represents. The Romans are passe, extinct, gone, kaput. They are yesterdays old news. The time for empires who threw Christians to the lions is passe. And Philip the Arab is a neglible and irrelevant portion of this past. The glory of Arab conquests far surpasses those of the Romans, because unlike the Romans, they left it after 100 years and yet, their culture still persists 1300 years after they left. And has reached far far beyyond what they may have imagined it would. Today, every person in the world knows Mohammed. You don't have to remind any Arab who he is. Nor any non-Arab.He is inarguably the most influential man in all history. And he is indisputably Arab.