Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What is the Koran?
atlantic monthly ^ | J A N U A R Y 1 9 9 9 | Toby Lester

Posted on 11/20/2002 3:13:18 PM PST by dennisw

J A N U A R Y   1 9 9 9What is the Koran?
Studying the Koran
Researchers with a variety of academic and theological interests are proposing controversial theories about the Koran and Islamic history, and are striving to reinterpret Islam for the modern world. This is, as one scholar puts it, a "sensitive business"

by Toby Lester
(The online version of this article appears in three parts. Click here to go to part two. Click here to go to part three.)

IN 1972, during the restoration of the Great Mosque of Sana'a, in Yemen, laborers working in a loft between the structure's inner and outer roofs stumbled across a remarkable gravesite, although they did not realize it at the time. Their ignorance was excusable: mosques do not normally house graves, and this site contained no tombstones, no human remains, no funereal jewelry. It contained nothing more, in fact, than an unappealing mash of old parchment and paper documents -- damaged books and individual pages of Arabic text, fused together by centuries of rain and dampness, gnawed into over the years by rats and insects. Intent on completing the task at hand, the laborers gathered up the manuscripts, pressed them into some twenty potato sacks, and set them aside on the staircase of one of the mosque's minarets, where they were locked away -- and where they would probably have been forgotten once again, were it not for Qadhi Isma'il al-Akwa', then the president of the Yemeni Antiquities Authority, who realized the potential importance of the find.

Al-Akwa' sought international assistance in examining and preserving the fragments, and in 1979 managed to interest a visiting German scholar, who in turn persuaded the German government to organize and fund a restoration project. Soon after the project began, it became clear that the hoard was a fabulous example of what is sometimes referred to as a "paper grave" -- in this case the resting place for, among other things, tens of thousands of fragments from close to a thousand different parchment codices of the Koran, the Muslim holy scripture. In some pious Muslim circles it is held that worn-out or damaged copies of the Koran must be removed from circulation; hence the idea of a grave, which both preserves the sanctity of the texts being laid to rest and ensures that only complete and unblemished editions of the scripture will be read.

Some of the parchment pages in the Yemeni hoard seemed to date back to the seventh and eighth centuries A.D., or Islam's first two centuries -- they were fragments, in other words, of perhaps the oldest Korans in existence. What's more, some of these fragments revealed small but intriguing aberrations from the standard Koranic text. Such aberrations, though not surprising to textual historians, are troublingly at odds with the orthodox Muslim belief that the Koran as it has reached us today is quite simply the perfect, timeless, and unchanging Word of God.

The mainly secular effort to reinterpret the Koran -- in part based on textual evidence such as that provided by the Yemeni fragments -- is disturbing and offensive to many Muslims, just as attempts to reinterpret the Bible and the life of Jesus are disturbing and offensive to many conservative Christians. Nevertheless, there are scholars, Muslims among them, who feel that such an effort, which amounts essentially to placing the Koran in history, will provide fuel for an Islamic revival of sorts -- a reappropriation of tradition, a going forward by looking back. Thus far confined to scholarly argument, this sort of thinking can be nonetheless very powerful and -- as the histories of the Renaissance and the Reformation demonstrate -- can lead to major social change. The Koran, after all, is currently the world's most ideologically influential text.

Looking at the Fragments
THE first person to spend a significant amount of time examining the Yemeni fragments, in 1981, was Gerd-R. Puin, a specialist in Arabic calligraphy and Koranic paleography based at Saarland University, in Saarbrücken, Germany. Puin, who had been sent by the German government to organize and oversee the restoration project, recognized the antiquity of some of the parchment fragments, and his preliminary inspection also revealed unconventional verse orderings, minor textual variations, and rare styles of orthography and artistic embellishment. Enticing, too, were the sheets of the scripture written in the rare and early Hijazi Arabic script: pieces of the earliest Korans known to exist, they were also palimpsests -- versions very clearly written over even earlier, washed-off versions. What the Yemeni Korans seemed to suggest, Puin began to feel, was an evolving text rather than simply the Word of God as revealed in its entirety to the Prophet Muhammad in the seventh century A.D.

Koran Fragments
Yemeni Koran Fragments,
as they were found in 1972.
Photograph by Ursula Dreibholz
 
Since the early 1980s more than 15,000 sheets of the Yemeni Korans have painstakingly been flattened, cleaned, treated, sorted, and assembled; they now sit ("preserved for another thousand years," Puin says) in Yemen's House of Manuscripts, awaiting detailed examination. That is something the Yemeni authorities have seemed reluctant to allow, however. "They want to keep this thing low-profile, as we do too, although for different reasons," Puin explains. "They don't want attention drawn to the fact that there are Germans and others working on the Korans. They don't want it made public that there is work being done at all, since the Muslim position is that everything that needs to be said about the Koran's history was said a thousand years ago."

To date just two scholars have been granted extensive access to the Yemeni fragments: Puin and his colleague H.-C. Graf von Bothmer, an Islamic-art historian also based at Saarland University. Puin and Von Bothmer have published only a few tantalizingly brief articles in scholarly publications on what they have discovered in the Yemeni fragments. They have been reluctant to publish partly because until recently they were more concerned with sorting and classifying the fragments than with systematically examining them, and partly because they felt that the Yemeni authorities, if they realized the possible implications of the discovery, might refuse them further access. Von Bothmer, however, in 1997 finished taking more than 35,000 microfilm pictures of the fragments, and has recently brought the pictures back to Germany. This means that soon Von Bothmer, Puin, and other scholars will finally have a chance to scrutinize the texts and to publish their findings freely -- a prospect that thrills Puin. "So many Muslims have this belief that everything between the two covers of the Koran is just God's unaltered word," he says. "They like to quote the textual work that shows that the Bible has a history and did not fall straight out of the sky, but until now the Koran has been out of this discussion. The only way to break through this wall is to prove that the Koran has a history too. The Sana'a fragments will help us to do this."

Puin is not alone in his enthusiasm. "The impact of the Yemeni manuscripts is still to be felt," says Andrew Rippin, a professor of religious studies at the University of Calgary, who is at the forefront of Koranic studies today. "Their variant readings and verse orders are all very significant. Everybody agrees on that. These manuscripts say that the early history of the Koranic text is much more of an open question than many have suspected: the text was less stable, and therefore had less authority, than has always been claimed."

Copyediting God
BY the standards of contemporary biblical scholarship, most of the questions being posed by scholars like Puin and Rippin are rather modest; outside an Islamic context, proposing that the Koran has a history and suggesting that it can be interpreted metaphorically are not radical steps. But the Islamic context -- and Muslim sensibilities -- cannot be ignored. "To historicize the Koran would in effect delegitimize the whole historical experience of the Muslim community," says R. Stephen Humphreys, a professor of Islamic studies at the University of California at Santa Barbara. "The Koran is the charter for the community, the document that called it into existence. And ideally -- though obviously not always in reality -- Islamic history has been the effort to pursue and work out the commandments of the Koran in human life. If the Koran is a historical document, then the whole Islamic struggle of fourteen centuries is effectively meaningless."

The orthodox Muslim view of the Koran as self-evidently the Word of God, perfect and inimitable in message, language, style, and form, is strikingly similar to the fundamentalist Christian notion of the Bible's "inerrancy" and "verbal inspiration" that is still common in many places today. The notion was given classic expression only a little more than a century ago by the biblical scholar John William Burgon.
The Bible is none other than the voice of Him that sitteth upon the Throne! Every Book of it, every Chapter of it, every Verse of it, every word of it, every syllable of it ... every letter of it, is the direct utterance of the Most High!
Not all the Christians think this way about the Bible, however, and in fact, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam (1981) points out, "the closest analogue in Christian belief to the role of the Kur'an in Muslim belief is not the Bible, but Christ." If Christ is the Word of God made flesh, the Koran is the Word of God made text, and questioning its sanctity or authority is thus considered an outright attack on Islam -- as Salman Rushdie knows all too well.

Oldest Koran
A page from perhaps the world's
oldest extant Koran, from before
750 A.D. Ultraviolet light reveals
even earlier Koranic writing
underneath. Photograph by
Gerd-R. Puin. 
The prospect of a Muslim backlash has not deterred the critical-historical study of the Koran, as the existence of the essays in The Origins of the Koran (1998) demonstrate. Even in the aftermath of the Rushdie affair the work continues: In 1996 the Koranic scholar Günter Lüling wrote in The Journal of Higher Criticism about "the wide extent to which both the text of the Koran and the learned Islamic account of Islamic origins have been distorted, a deformation unsuspectingly accepted by Western Islamicists until now." In 1994 the journal Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam published a posthumous study by Yehuda D. Nevo, of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, detailing seventh- and eighth-century religious inscriptions on stones in the Negev Desert which, Nevo suggested, pose "considerable problems for the traditional Muslim account of the history of Islam." That same year, and in the same journal, Patricia Crone, a historian of early Islam currently based at the Institute for Advanced Study, in Princeton, New Jersey, published an article in which she argued that elucidating problematic passages in the Koranic text is likely to be made possible only by "abandoning the conventional account of how the Qur'an was born." And since 1991 James Bellamy, of the University of Michigan, has proposed in the Journal of the American Oriental Society a series of "emendations to the text of the Koran" -- changes that from the orthodox Muslim perspective amount to copyediting God.

Crone is one of the most iconoclastic of these scholars. During the 1970s and 1980s she wrote and collaborated on several books -- most notoriously, with Michael Cook, Hagarism: The Making of the Islamic World (1977) -- that made radical arguments about the origins of Islam and the writing of Islamic history. Among Hagarism's controversial claims were suggestions that the text of the Koran came into being later than is now believed ("There is no hard evidence for the existence of the Koran in any form before the last decade of the seventh century"); that Mecca was not the initial Islamic sanctuary ("[the evidence] points unambiguously to a sanctuary in north-west Arabia ... Mecca was secondary"); that the Arab conquests preceded the institutionalization of Islam ("the Jewish messianic fantasy was enacted in the form of an Arab conquest of the Holy Land"); that the idea of the hijra, or the migration of Muhammad and his followers from Mecca to Medina in 622, may have evolved long after Muhammad died ("No seventh-century source identifies the Arab era as that of the hijra"); and that the term "Muslim" was not commonly used in early Islam ("There is no good reason to suppose that the bearers of this primitive identity called themselves 'Muslims' [but] sources do ... reveal an earlier designation of the community [which] appears in Greek as 'Magaritai' in a papyrus of 642, and in Syriac as 'Mahgre' or 'Mahgraye' from as early as the 640s").

Hagarism came under immediate attack, from Muslim and non-Muslim scholars alike, for its heavy reliance on hostile sources. ("This is a book," the authors wrote, "based on what from any Muslim perspective must appear an inordinate regard for the testimony of infidel sources.") Crone and Cook have since backed away from some of its most radical propositions -- such as, for example, that the Prophet Muhammad lived two years longer than the Muslim tradition claims he did, and that the historicity of his migration to Medina is questionable. But Crone has continued to challenge both Muslim and Western orthodox views of Islamic history. In Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam (1987) she made a detailed argument challenging the prevailing view among Western (and some Muslim) scholars that Islam arose in response to the Arabian spice trade.

Gerd-R. Puin's current thinking about the Koran's history partakes of this contemporary revisionism. "My idea is that the Koran is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad," he says. "Many of them may even be a hundred years older than Islam itself. Even within the Islamic traditions there is a huge body of contradictory information, including a significant Christian substrate; one can derive a whole Islamic anti-history from them if one wants."

Patricia Crone defends the goals of this sort of thinking. "The Koran is a scripture with a history like any other -- except that we don't know this history and tend to provoke howls of protest when we study it. Nobody would mind the howls if they came from Westerners, but Westerners feel deferential when the howls come from other people: who are you to tamper with their legacy? But we Islamicists are not trying to destroy anyone's faith."

Not everyone agrees with that assessment -- especially since Western Koranic scholarship has traditionally taken place in the context of an openly declared hostility between Christianity and Islam. (Indeed, the broad movement in the West over the past two centuries to "explain" the East, often referred to as Orientalism, has in recent years come under fire for exhibiting similar religious and cultural biases.) The Koran has seemed, for Christian and Jewish scholars particularly, to possess an aura of heresy; the nineteenth-century Orientalist William Muir, for example, contended that the Koran was one of "the most stubborn enemies of Civilisation, Liberty, and the Truth which the world has yet known." Early Soviet scholars, too, undertook an ideologically motivated study of Islam's origins, with almost missionary zeal: in the 1920s and in 1930 a Soviet publication titled Ateist ran a series of articles explaining the rise of Islam in Marxist-Leninist terms. In Islam and Russia (1956), Ann K.S. Lambton summarized much of this work, and wrote that several Soviet scholars had theorized that "the motive force of the nascent religion was supplied by the mercantile bourgeoisie of Mecca and Medina"; that a certain S.P. Tolstov had held that "Islam was a social-religious movement originating in the slave-owning, not feudal, form of Arab society"; and that N.A. Morozov had argued that "until the Crusades Islam was indistinguishable from Judaism and ... only then did it receive its independent character, while Muhammad and the first Caliphs are mythical figures. "Morozov appears to have been a particularly flamboyant theorist: Lambton wrote that he also argued, in his book Christ (1930), that "in the Middle Ages Islam was merely an off-shoot of Arianism evoked by a meteorological event in the Red Sea area near Mecca."

Not surprisingly, then, given the biases of much non-Islamic critical study of the Koran, Muslims are inclined to dismiss it outright. A particularly eloquent protest came in 1987, in the Muslim World Book Review, in a paper titled "Method Against Truth: Orientalism and Qur'anic Studies," by the Muslim critic S. Parvez Manzoor. Placing the origins of Western Koranic scholarship in "the polemical marshes of medieval Christianity" and describing its contemporary state as a "cul-de-sac of its own making," Manzoor orchestrated a complex and layered assault on the entire Western approach to Islam. He opened his essay in a rage.
The Orientalist enterprise of Qur'anic studies, whatever its other merits and services, was a project born of spite, bred in frustration and nourished by vengeance: the spite of the powerful for the powerless, the frustration of the "rational" towards the "superstitious" and the vengeance of the "orthodox" against the "non-conformist." At the greatest hour of his worldly-triumph, the Western man, coordinating the powers of the State, Church and Academia, launched his most determined assault on the citadel of Muslim faith. All the aberrant streaks of his arrogant personality -- its reckless rationalism, its world-domineering phantasy and its sectarian fanaticism -- joined in an unholy conspiracy to dislodge the Muslim Scripture from its firmly entrenched position as the epitome of historic authenticity and moral unassailability. The ultimate trophy that the Western man sought by his dare-devil venture was the Muslim mind itself. In order to rid the West forever of the "problem" of Islam, he reasoned, Muslim consciousness must be made to despair of the cognitive certainty of the Divine message revealed to the Prophet. Only a Muslim confounded of the historical authenticity or doctrinal autonomy of the Qur'anic revelation would abdicate his universal mission and hence pose no challenge to the global domination of the West. Such, at least, seems to have been the tacit, if not the explicit, rationale of the Orientalist assault on the Qur'an.
Despite such resistance, Western researchers with a variety of academic and theological interests press on, applying modern techniques of textual and historical criticism to the study of the Koran. That a substantial body of this scholarship now exists is indicated by the recent decision of the European firm Brill Publishers -- a long-established publisher of such major works as The Encyclopaedia of Islam and The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition -- to commission the first-ever Encyclopaedia of the Qur'an. Jane McAuliffe, a professor of Islamic studies at the University of Toronto, and the general editor of the encyclopedia, hopes that it will function as a "rough analogue" to biblical encyclopedias and will be "a turn-of-the-millennium summative work for the state of Koranic scholarship." Articles for the first part of the encyclopedia are currently being edited and prepared for publication later this year.

The Encyclopaedia of the Qur'an will be a truly collaborative enterprise, carried out by Muslims and non-Muslims, and its articles will present multiple approaches to the interpretation of the Koran, some of which are likely to challenge traditional Islamic views -- thus disturbing many in the Islamic world, where the time is decidedly less ripe for a revisionist study of the Koran. The plight of Nasr Abu Zaid, an unassuming Egyptian professor of Arabic who sits on the encyclopedia's advisory board, illustrates the difficulties facing Muslim scholars trying to reinterpret their tradition.

Continued...

The online version of this article appears in three parts. Click here to go to part two. Click here to go to part three.

 



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Free Republic; Front Page News; Philosophy; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: birmingham; birminghamkoran; cancerofislam; epigraphyandlanguage; faithandphilosophy; godsgravesglyphs; hagarene; hagarenes; hagarism; hagarist; islam; islamiccancer; koran; mohammed; moslems; muhammad; muslims; radiocarbon; radiocarbondating; rcdating; religionofpieces; rop; unitedkingdom; waronterror; yemen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-123 next last
To: secretagent; dennisw; Mitchell; Angelus Errare
"Other scholars are less admiring, referring to Wansbrough's work as "drastically wrongheaded," "ferociously opaque," and a "colossal self-deception."

The author does not bother to mention who these other scholars are.
Ayatollah Khomeini, perhaps?

This is not a particularly enlightening article
nor well written
but given that the source is the leftist pablum producer
Atlantic Monthly
I suppose we should be grateful.

21 posted on 11/21/2002 3:27:46 AM PST by Nogbad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: secretagent; Mitchell; JasonC; Angelus Errare; knighthawk
attribution of several, partially overlapping, collections of logia
(exhibiting a distinctly Mosaic imprint)
to the image of a Biblical prophet
(modified by the material of the Muhammadan evangelium
into an Arabian man of God)
with a traditional message of salvation
(modified by the influence of Rabbinic Judaism
into the unmediated and finally immutable word of God)
.

Or, in simple words, they took Mohammed and made him into Moses.
The return to Mecca is the voyage to the Promised Land, completed.

Any child not already brainwashed ought to be able to see through this.
The Emperor has no clothes.

The plots in Spider Man are more sophisticated and original than this.

The authors of the Koran are the most successful literary figures in all history.
They have fooled not only 1,000,000,000 Moslems,
but 4,000,000,000 gullible infidels as well.

22 posted on 11/21/2002 3:39:23 AM PST by Nogbad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Angelus Errare
can somebody please give the correct spelling of the Libyan dictator's name?

Using the usual rules of transliteration it is Qaddafi,
which means, by the way, "Slinger".

23 posted on 11/21/2002 4:04:16 AM PST by Nogbad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: secretagent
thanks for posting it
24 posted on 11/21/2002 6:01:39 AM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Nogbad

I agree. The Koran is the handbook for hypnotizing the gullible masses of Arabia and beyond. That the Koran is 50% lifting then perverting preceding scripture. That's it's as coherent and meaningful to the human condition as a low budget action movie.
25 posted on 11/21/2002 6:10:09 AM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Angelus Errare
which is to say that I believe that Mohammed wrote it.

Nobody, not even orthodox Moslems, believes Mohammed wrote the Koran.

26 posted on 11/21/2002 6:55:59 AM PST by Nogbad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Angelus Errare
The fellow from 100 yrs ago quoted has it most accurate. The Koran is one of the most stubborn enemies of Civilization, Liberty and the Truth which the world has ever known.

It is a compliation of crap without any redeeming features and reads like it was composed by an illiterate camel driver and caravan thief. Only among the ignorant could it have flourished. Only by killing its enemies could it have survived.

Unlike most high religion's scriptures it is devoid of beauty and eternal truths which is to be expected since it takes the tales of the Holy Bible and twists and perverts them into incomprehensible garbage. People need to read this junk or they will never comprehend the depth of the world's problem with Islame.
27 posted on 11/21/2002 7:30:02 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
The Koran has pretty much kept Islam in centuries-long Dark Ages.
28 posted on 11/21/2002 8:46:44 AM PST by lds23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: Primus
There is no value in Islame. It is a religion of death and always has been. There is nothing in the Koran except lies. Mad Mo merely grafted ill-digested parts of Judaism and Christianity into a doctrine fit for the savage and ignorant. As a freeper pointed out in a post yesterday Islame resulted from the adultry of Abraham. The Bible immediately pointed to the horror and evil to result from the descendents of Ismael. "Everyman's hand will be against him and he will be against everyman." And this prophacy was a couple of thousand years before Mad Mo (piss be upon his hand) was born.

Islame destroys everything it touches and the goodness of moslems is in inverse portortion to their faith. Good believers are rare they must ignore their religion to be good. This is the contrary of Christians and Jews whose goodness is strictly proportional to their following their religions.

Whatever crackbrained religion you are considering initiating it will immediately be superior to Islame and I am sure its texts will be far more literary than the Koran. ONly one created by an idiot with half a brain could be worse. It is the only religious text without a shred of beauty or truth. God has never had a thing to do with the collection of trash called the Koran. It is filled with Lies and thus can only be the product of the Prince of Lies.

"Pistic" ?
30 posted on 11/21/2002 10:58:55 AM PST by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Primus
There is no value in Islame. It is a religion of death and always has been. There is nothing in the Koran except lies. Mad Mo merely grafted ill-digested parts of Judaism and Christianity into a doctrine fit for the savage and ignorant. As a freeper pointed out in a post yesterday Islame resulted from the adultry of Abraham. The Bible immediately pointed to the horror and evil to result from the descendents of Ismael. "Everyman's hand will be against him and he will be against everyman." And this prophacy was a couple of thousand years before Mad Mo (piss be upon his hand) was born.

Islame destroys everything it touches and the goodness of moslems is in inverse portortion to their faith. Good believers are rare they must ignore their religion to be good. This is the contrary of Christians and Jews whose goodness is strictly proportional to their following their religions.

Whatever crackbrained religion you are considering initiating it will immediately be superior to Islame and I am sure its texts will be far more literary than the Koran. ONly one created by an idiot with half a brain could be worse. It is the only religious text without a shred of beauty or truth. God has never had a thing to do with the collection of trash called the Koran. It is filled with Lies and thus can only be the product of the Prince of Lies.

"Pistic" ?
31 posted on 11/21/2002 12:22:53 PM PST by justshutupandtakeit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RLK
You left out the part about the aledged reciever of the revelation Mohammed, being as psychotic as any NYC bag lady....
32 posted on 11/21/2002 12:33:25 PM PST by Kozak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
"what is the Koran?" A$$WIPE, or more politically correct, toilet paper. Period.
33 posted on 11/21/2002 2:27:04 PM PST by mn_b_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Primus
Man... you sure a screwed up. LOL Thanks for the laugh. I guess not all crazies are liberals! LOL
34 posted on 11/21/2002 6:01:15 PM PST by smoking camels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
I hereby piss on the Koran and on the false and evil prophet known as Mad Mohammered.

Wish I could get to Mecca. I'd take one might crap right on the site.

35 posted on 11/21/2002 6:07:01 PM PST by smoking camels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Primus
Do you worship at the entrance to that Womb-Temple?

I read your post again. Look dude... save your crapola false religion for another time and place. I don't want to see you posting this garbage here again. Understand?

36 posted on 11/21/2002 6:10:03 PM PST by smoking camels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: smoking camels
What a wacko post from that dude. Hahahhaha.
37 posted on 11/21/2002 6:11:40 PM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
did you get what I meant about worshipping at the entrance to his Womb-Temple? LOL
38 posted on 11/21/2002 6:16:03 PM PST by smoking camels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: smoking camels
did you get what I meant about worshipping at the entrance to his Womb-Temple? LOL...................

Not really. Mostly because I couldn't understand his Aliester Crowley type screed.

39 posted on 11/21/2002 6:19:14 PM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: smoking camels
Check out his profile page!

... I also want a military operation to remove embattled and persecuted Shristians from the Middle East.

LOL!

40 posted on 11/21/2002 6:20:55 PM PST by tictoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-123 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson