Was Islam spread by the sword?

[RAYYAN]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waraka_ibn_Nawfal

Waraka and Khadija were also the first cousins twice removed of Muhammad

So he was his cousin as I stated

Waraka was a Nestorian priest

he was a priest as I stated


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nestorianism

Nestorius and his teachings were eventually condemned as heretical


He was a heretic as I stated


He also "wrote the New Testament in Arabic


he wrote Arabic bible as I stated


Waraka found a lost five-year-old boy wandering around Upper Mecca. This was Muhammad

Found a 5 year old boy wandering as I stated


As Muhammad grew in age, Waraka's knowledge of the scriptures increased.

Uh oh they studied together, just as I told you


Everything I said was truth and sourced with credible knowledge, all you do is refuse knowledge. You refuse to answer questions when asked.

You don't get to throw it all out because you don't like the source. What part is not credible in your eyes

I agree with everything except two points
* Met Mohammed as a boy (Even if that is true, what is the big deal! they live in the same town)
* Studied the bible together

These two points are taken from Maghazi book for Ibn Ishaq, which I mentione with a reference that is not authentic. If you say otherwise, you have to tell me why as I mentioned on a previous post

 

[outhouse]

scholars of Islam

there are no credible muslim scholars. Its like saying there are credible YEC scientist

Why isn't credible!

Because if it was muslim scholars would be able to change that wiki page to a more credible version if they had credible information, but they don't.


NOT ONLY THAT its not the only source I used.

And you don't get to throw all of his work away like trash, I know you agree with it when it goes with the koran. Sorry we don't accept your biased methodology.


What part of his work was wrong?

he was his cousin ?
was a priest ?
Found a 5 year old boy wandering ?

 

[outhouse]

I mentione with a reference that is not authentic.

It is an early source. regardless of redaction. Someone believed this took place.

So muhammads cousin with was a priest and who changed bible into Arabic, who lived in same town, and you think he never met his own family living in same town?

 

[outhouse]

what is the big deal!

The big deal is we just found koran pieces that possibly date to before Muhammad was born. We NOW have a possible origin for muhammads material.


The world does not believe the Gabriel origin, none of the world less muslims. SO we are searching for a plausible origin. And we may have found it.

 

[outhouse]

Not that factual evidence would change anyone's faith

http://www.inquisitr.com/2382300/th...-shake-the-foundations-of-islam-scholars-say/


Radiocarbon dating of a Koran manuscript found last month at the University of Birmingham’s Cadbury Research Library suggests that it could predate the Prophet Muhammad.


Radiocarbon analysis carried out by experts at the University of Oxford dated the parchment on which the Koran text was written to the period between 568 A.D. and 645 A.D. with an estimated accuracy of 95.4 percent, according to a release by the University of Birmingham.

 

[outhouse]

Waraka would be the creator of the koran, and muhammad spead the message for the old man

and imagine that! the old man was first to call muhammad prophet, old Christian priest started that tradition

 

[RAYYAN]

there are no credible muslim scholars. Its like saying there are credible YEC scientist
Because if it was muslim scholars would be able to change that wiki page to a more credible version if they had credible information, but they don't.

But Wikipedia is not an actual reference, it is a collection and it references to something else, in this case, the reference was Ibn Isaq

NOT ONLY THAT its not the only source I used.

And you don't get to throw all of his work away like trash, I know you agree with it when it goes with the koran. Sorry we don't accept your biased methodology.


What part of his work was wrong?

he was his cousin ?
was a priest ?
Found a 5 year old boy wandering ?

So, if there is no Muslim Scholar who is credible, Why are you using Ibn Isaq! He is a Muslim you know that right?

 

[RAYYAN]

Not that factual evidence would change anyone's faith

http://www.inquisitr.com/2382300/th...-shake-the-foundations-of-islam-scholars-say/


Radiocarbon dating of a Koran manuscript found last month at the University of Birmingham’s Cadbury Research Library suggests that it could predate the Prophet Muhammad.


Radiocarbon analysis carried out by experts at the University of Oxford dated the parchment on which the Koran text was written to the period between 568 A.D. and 645 A.D. with an estimated accuracy of 95.4 percent, according to a release by the University of Birmingham.

Carbon dating works on the material that things written on, it is not for the text itself. So isn't it possible that the text was written on an old paper! yes it is

 

[RAYYAN]

Waraka would be the creator of the koran, and muhammad spead the message for the old man

and imagine that! the old man was first to call muhammad prophet, old Christian priest started that tradition

Now I need an evidence for that

 

[outhouse]

So, if there is no Muslim Scholar who is credible, Why are you using Ibn Isaq!

We use his material and credible modern scholars determine what is historical and what is not.

He is a Muslim you know that right?

He was not a modern scholar.


Tell me one muslim scholar in the whole world, JUST ONE. Who uses koran for historical jesus study with credibility. [guess what, factually there are none]

 

[RAYYAN]

Can We also stay on topic and not mix things together please

 

[outhouse]

Now I need an evidence for that

If the dating is correct, then this is the true origin

 

[RAYYAN]

We use his material and credible modern scholars determine what is historical and what is not.
He was not a modern scholar.

That is a stupid point, sorry,
Then why don't you use other classical scholars like ibn Hisham for example?

 

[outhouse]

Carbon dating works on the material that things written on, it is not for the text itself. So isn't it possible that the text was written on an old paper! yes it is

before debating I encourage that you actually read up and know what your talking about, before debating. its obvious you do not understand the debate.

Paper was not used. Animal skin was. And we can see if it was used prior. It was not. That means the made the animals skin specifically for this writing event.

 

[RAYYAN]

If the dating is correct, then this is the true origin

Sorry, I am lost here, I said
GIVE ME AN EVIDENCE THAT WARAQA WROTE THE QURAN

 

[outhouse]

That is a stupid point, sorry,

That's because modern muslim cultures are not trained in what is credible historical studies. if the koran says it is credible in their eyes. I'm sorry but that is faith not historical study.

It may seem that way to you, but it would help if you knew what you were talking about.

 

[outhouse]

Sorry, I am lost here

yes we know.

 

[RAYYAN]

before debating I encourage that you actually read up and know what your talking about, before debating. its obvious you do not understand the debate.

Paper was not used. Animal skin was. And we can see if it was used prior. It was not. That means the made the animals skin specifically for this writing event.

I used the word "paper" just as an example, I know it was not written on paper.
so, they made a special leather to write the Quran on, in a town that doesn't produce leather........ you went too far in your assumptions here

 

[outhouse]

GIVE ME AN EVIDENCE THAT WARAQA WROTE THE QURAN

http://www.inquisitr.com/2382300/th...-shake-the-foundations-of-islam-scholars-say/


Radiocarbon dating of a Koran manuscript found last month at the University of Birmingham’s Cadbury Research Library suggests that it could predate the Prophet Muhammad.


Radiocarbon analysis carried out by experts at the University of Oxford dated the parchment on which the Koran text was written to the period between 568 A.D. and 645 A.D. with an estimated accuracy of 95.4 percent, according to a release by the University of Birmingham.

 

[outhouse]

they made a special leather

No they did not.

It was not really leather so to speak, and waraka was known to write Arabic heretical bible text. He did so on the same material.

But thanks for showing desperation and dancing all around the subject.