I'm not here to make your home-work, kid. Go and make your research from those I've listed. If you're knowledgeable on topic, which you're not.
You've described yourself perfectly here.
No, not my opinion and you can find the credible sources I've multiple of times cited if you had the ability to read the posts.
Your English made no coherent sense. I will repeat what you left out: it was a disclaimer warning the readers for the content that will be shown due to their...
I've never provided Assman as a source - that's a straw man fallacy.
That's all you're good at, fallacies and conjectures.
I like to see where your source is that NT has any historical value, you've only cited an open source article with no creditbility.
PS: I stated facts. Live with it.
^ You're a troll.
Nothing to answer, your question is polluting the thread, rubbish and self-defeating. I know your trollish tricks and I won't fall for them.
It was not from a paragraph, only an illiterate would claim that, it was a disclaimer warning the readers for the content that will be shown due to their unreliability. Your quote firstly contained a weasel word.
Please, @outhouse. Keep your comments in one post instead of multiple of posts.
Re-read my comment: He supports my statement, the sources of the Quran - indicating it's referencing the chronicles from the Bible and not "plagiarized" as you wrongly claimed.
Not an actual dictionary website - it...
I hope this is trolling. The article admits itself with mistakes. I could edit it, but it's waste of time. I study the history from primary credible sources, not some open source "encyclopedia" full of rubbish conjectures.
None of what you said is fact, they are subjective conjectures from poorly soured articles. I stated some facts here.
Alsop, public forum does not excuse you polluting the thread with off-topic posts - I need to call you out on that one.
In his context, it is.
He supports my statement, the sources of the Quran - indicating it's referencing the chronicles from the Bible and not "plagiarized" as you wrongly claimed. However, I'll say , yes, I know a bit more than* him. There were no Christians there, only Jews, Mandaens, Manicheans, Magians and Arab...
Stop polluting the thread. And the citation supports nothing of what you're saying, that it "plagiarize" from the Bible. It actually supports my point, Quran is directly referencing chronicles from the Bible.
Now, get off my thread or stay on topic - I will report you next time if you continue.
It's common knowledge on the Gospel-part. None of what I stated is opinion here, I've referred to actual sources, Assman gave simply his conjecture - none of what is accepted.
I've yet to see any credible sources from you, that is not Wikipedia or debunked.
Islamic Awareness is some blog...
Rubbish. If we have 1000 sources to an event in a time span of 200 years after the historical event, we don't need some annother one coming 600 years later - especially, when it claims to retell/refer the story, not being an eye-witness account. It's simply logic, something that you seemingly...
It's important to note your silliness, you said Quran were plagiarizing, when it's clearly referring to the Biblical events. I've presented actual plagiarizing from the Bible's side.
Once again, your confirmation bias and apologist conjectures are miserably pitiful:
This disclaimer have been...
Your refusal to be educated is stunning.
Once again, you cite something that is not credible and something anyone can edit. I don't need your miserable rubbish website, I study it from credible sources and history from credible historians and experts. But even then, your conjecture and...
Not false. Only two events recorded in the gospels are historical. The rest are not, that's the consensus by all credible scholars, I know this since I study the history and am subject to understand this, you quote rubbish things from a confirmatory biased mind - none of what you've said has...
Other than the Baptism event and crucifixion event. The gospels are absolutely invaluable from a historical viewpoint by all credible historians (not in the same way you're misusing the term "credible," I use it by its actual definition), this is because it's a book full of parables, metaphors...
I hypothesize it is the wish to contemplate yourself unto the universe without ignoring the blatant discord swimming in the air course, since we all know the atmosphere is made out of the void of vacuum - we usually do this due to how we ignore the mind absorbing information wherever it go, this...