An idea of what our battle flag could look like unless someone has a better idea.
Posted on 04/05/2011 8:06:22 PM PDT by PROCON
In another example of a sort-of cultural suicide where western media types assume that all Muslims are blameless – while all Americans are at fault in this clash of civilizations between Islamism and the West – we have a recent episode of MSNBC’s Hardball with one-time Democratic operative Chuck Todd standing-in for host Chris Matthews.
Todd was discussing the riots in Afghanistan sparked by Islamist ire over the burning of a Koran by a Florida pastor. During the interview Todd and a guest stated that the Christian Bible was just a book written by men while the Koran was the “direct word of God.” The two implied that this excuses Muslims from murdering people over the book burning.
(Excerpt) Read more at bigjournalism.com ...
Chuck Todd and Mathews are most definitely Christian.
If they believe the Koran is the word of God “Why don’t they convert?”
Because they are intellectually flaccid with a rather large vacuous space between their ears. More over, they have someone counting cadence for them to breathe, lest they breakdown and asphyxiate.
"Wasn't it the Angel Gabriel?"
No, it was the other angel.
The fallen one.
Lucifer.
The Left is just an example of a collective “Stockholm Syndrome”.
They love people who are trying to kill them.
It’s called insanity.
The Collection of the Koran (pp. 12-13)
'Uthman was caliph from 644-656. He was asked for an official codex by one of his generals because the troops were fighting over which reading of the Koran was correct. Zaid was once again commissioned, with the help of three others. But…
1. The Arabic of the Koran was not a dialect.
2. There are variations between the number and names of the people working with Zaid. (One version lists somebody already dead at that time!)
3. In these stories there is no mention of Zaid's involvement in an earlier rescension.
Most scholars assume that the 'Uthmanic rescension is correct and the Abu Bakr rescension is fictitious, but they have no valid reasons for preferring it over the latter, as the same reasons for dismissing the Abu Bakr story (biased, unreliable, late sources, attempts to credit the collector etc…) can be applied to the 'Uthman story as well.
One major (and often un-addressed) question is – how much can we rely upon the memories of the early Muslims? Can we assume that they not only remembered everything perfectly, but that they heard and understood Muhammad perfectly in the first place?
Variant Versions, Verses Missing, Verses Added (pp. 13-18)
Modern Muslims assert that the current Koran is identical to that recited by Muhammad. But earlier Muslims were more flexible. 'Uthman, A'isha, and Ibn Ka'b (among others) all insisted that much of the Koran had been lost.
Codices were made by different scholars (e.g. Ibn Mas'ud, Ubai ibn Ka'b, 'Ali, Abu Bakr, al-Aswad). 'Uthman's codex supposedly standardised the consonantal text, yet consonantal variations persisted into the 4th century AH. An unpointed and unvowelled script contributed to the problem. Also, although 'Uthman tried to destroy rival codices variant readings survived. Standardisation was not actually achieved until the 10th century under the influence of Ibn Mujahid. Even he admitted 14 versions of the Koran. These are not merely differences in recitation; they are actual written variations.
Also, if some verses were omitted, why couldn't some have been added? For example, the Kharajites considered the Joseph story to be an interpolation, and most scholars suggest the addition of scribal glosses designed to explain the text or smooth out rhyme.
Scepticism of the Sources (pp. 18-34)
Muhammad died in 632. The earliest written material of his life is the sira of Ibn Ishaq (750), but Ibn Ishaq's work was lost. We only have parts of it available in quotation by Ibn Hisham (834). The hadith are even later. There are six authoritative collections of hadith: Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Maja, Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi, and al-Nisai. All are dated between 200 and 300 years after Muhammad.
The compilation of the Koran is so muddled it is impossible for anyone to determine the truth of any single word of it. It was the product of a semi-illiterate man who desired power and invented a way to gain it. He knew just enough of the Jewish Scriptures to borrow some of his ideas from it. Typical tactic of the devil. He used what he made up to control people and those who refused to be controlled were beheaded. That so-called book has perpetrated the longest running scam ever on the deluded people of the Mid-East.
Oops sorry. Here’s the link for those who wish to read more.
http://debate.org.uk/topics/books/origins-koran.html
This is going immediately into Bartlett's Quotations
“The Koran is the manifesto of an evil totalitarian political system. Check out what Ann has to say on these two wonderful videos linked at Gates of Vienna.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/04/manifesto-of-evil-totalitarian.html#more";
Thank you for the link,Ann is quite a American Woman!
Huston’s front row seat in hell is reserved...
Strange the videos are not loading anymore for me - are they still up?
He links to the clip and the title is entirely accurate and in context.
I can understand incredulity, but not laziness.
Does anybody read TIME any more, much less give credibility to its editor’s opinions?
Especially the guy in the clip who was extraordinarily ignorant of the basics of genuine Christianity.
An idea of what our battle flag could look like unless someone has a better idea.
Mohammed was either crazy, a liar, or possessed by a demon. Perhaps all three.
“The compilation of the Koran is so muddled it is impossible for anyone to determine the truth of any single word of it. It was the product of a semi-illiterate man who desired power and invented a way to gain it.”
Kind of the L. Ron Hubbard of the 7th century. Of course, Hubbard was just a scam artist. I hold open the possibility of demonic possession for Mohammed. He apparently went into a cave and had seizures when “Gabriel” spoke to him. So perhaps a scam artist possessed by a demon.
we’re not at war with Eurasia! We’ve never been at war with Eurasia! We’ve always been at war with Oceania!
“The Left is at war with the God of the Bible. Other gods? Oh, they’re ok. “
No they are not ok with Islam. Islam just serves their agenda to destroy the west. Better description would be “violent useful idiots.”
“This country is finished. Established as a Christian nation, God blessed us as a result. But whenever His children abandon Him, according to Bible history, he gives their land to their enemies. That’s what’s happening now. Liberalism/humanism/secularism has destroyed us.”
Agreed. We openly embrace homosexuality, adultery, abortion, Gaia and openly tell the Lord that we are our own little gods! We are beginning to suffer the consequences as the curse grows upon each generation. It’s going to get really ugly.
“Christian Book”
Interesting how many dated searches there are on the questions “Is Chuck Todd Jewish?”
Meanwhile, if Chuck believes his own spiel, he should be facing mecca and praying to his allah five times a day
Wilson.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.