Well the Qur’an has stayed original over time. And today Islam is still perfectly implemental and sees no need to “adapt” to new times. Let me counter the question: Can you imagine that in order to operate a machine; you consult a manual other then the manufacture’s manual? Who is better to guide your life then your own creator?
In the dark ages earth was flat, and you are a heretic if you state otherwise.
In Islam we have always believed in scientifically accurate notions.
Religious leaders don't want you to think but follow blindly like soldiers, and the similarity continues as religion also sets out to destroy.
Islam invites to question, research and discover. As knowledge can only bring us closer to the truth.
Similar storys:
I was already familiar with the ancient Egypt believes, but the given description is inaccurate. The gods were related to the flood, but there’s really no similarities with Noah’s flooding. Which b.t.w. could very well have been the filling of the black sea who used to be a lake only half the size, 50 meters deeper, and filled in about a week. As for the references to baptism, baptism does not exist in Islam. As for the name, “argha noa”. I’ve tried to look it up, but the only reference I found were based on that movie. I’m not saying that it is false just because I didn’t find evidence, but I’ll need a lil‘ bit more then there mentioning to believe it.
http://www.google.be/search?hl=nl&q="argha+noa"+++egypt&btnG=Zoeken&meta=
Not a single thing that cannot be traced back to other previous religions.
That’s a bold statement. There’s numerous things from religion that were previously unprecedented. Of course there have been many prophets (according to Islam, 100 000), so it’s possible to find traces of similar rulings and revelations. But just because one prophet says the same as another doesn’t mean that one copied from the other, if they are both prophets in eth same religion.
A pharaoh changed the Egyptian faith from worshipping many gods to worshipping one God RA amen-ra. Pharaoh was the incarnation of god, who ruled for god on earth
It was never a monotheistic religion Amon-ra was the supreme God, something like Zeus having power over the other Roman Gods. There is no similarity between hours and jezus apart from the similar sounding name. The most well known name is the Greek Horus, representing the Egyptian Heru/Har, which is the basic element in most of the other names of Horus. Horus was so important that the Eye of Horus became an important Egyptian symbol of power. He had a man's body and a hawk's head. He only had one eye because after Osiris was murdered by his brother Seth, Horus fought with Seth for the throne of Egypt. In this battle Horus lost one of his eyes and later this became a sign of protection in Egypt. The pharaoh was not an incarnation of God, all the pharaoh’s (plural) were sons of God (halfgods). they were sent as intermediate between people and Gods. As for the simular ending of prayer. It is already mentioned in another topic that Amen has a difrent meaning in Hebrew, to which you replied it comes from the egyptian language none-the less. However that doesn't mean anything. Lets say tomorow a new religion origenates in arabia and they have a deity which they call Allah, then that doesn't mean that that new religion is inspired by islam. Allah means God, arabic christians call there God Allah. they'd only adapt the terminology because they use the same language. SImular, just because the hebrew word is derived from Ra, doesn't mean that any religion which uses that word is therefor derived from the religion of RA.
Then there’s a whole list of alleged similarities with other Gnostic stories, lets’ take a look at them:
*Lamb of god - dalai lama (deus lama) this religion originated around the year 1400A.D. How can this have been an influence? It’s more likely the other way around wouldn’t you agree? A.c.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai_lama
*Thulis ->search turned out blank
*Coite -> search turned out blank
*Thammuz -> Babylonian God, not a son of god no analogy with Jesus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tammuz
*Atys -> not son of a god, son a of a king. Are all princes a reference to Jesus?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atys_father_of_Lydus
*Hesus only link is the similar name, a simple coincidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hesus
*Bali is an ancient king who opposed the 5th incarnation of vishnu, no similarity.
*Indra is the chief deity of the Rig-Veda, and the god of weather and war, and Lord of Svargaloka in Hinduism. no parallelism.
*Iao Sabaoth is applied together or seperately as Gnostic archons; the Gnostic Iao is associated with both Abraxas and the seven headed dragon; he is sometimes referred to as the "Father of Lies.
*Mitra has again no simularities , but zoroastrism does carry traces of this deity, and there we see simular aspects like trinity. But there’s no indication Mitra has anything to do with that.
*Sakia -> search turned out blank
*Alceste was a princess in Greek mythology, Alcestis ("might of the home") was known for her love for her husband. Their story was popularised in Euripides's tragedy Alcestis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcestis
*Quexaicote was Mexican God, I didn’t even search this one. The ancient tribes in America didn’t have ships, only small canoes, they were isolated from other continents, and therefore couldn’t have influenced Christianity.
Prometheus the human who stole the fire from the Gods, again no similarity.
*Wittoba was another incarnation of Vishnu, the avatar named Wittoba or Vithoba ... This incarnation of Vishnu or CRISTNA is called Wittoba or Ballaji
*Quirinus a god in the polytheistic Roman mythology. No similarities.
*Chrisna -> here there actually are some good example of similarities. Probably the reason why they focussed on this one rather then the other examples. However most references are slightly changed and taken out of context to accentuate the similarity, this to hide the fact that it’s a stretch.
Egyptian symbolism
It is true that the western, Christian society has many symbols who come from the Egyptian myths. However there’s a reason for that. As Christianity spread, in order to easely impose it’s doctrine to the areas it conquered it adapted some of the symbols of the places so it would be easyer for people to accept. 25 December for example is a holiday they made up to compensate for the Celts who celebrated the shortest day of the year on that day; the decorating of a tree is a tradition that comes from then. The reason the put lil' chapels on crosroads in forests is an adaptation of teh roman mythology who thought forrests-nymphs attacked on crosroads. So the Romans put certain statues there to prevent them from attacking. this was a very common thing in the early christianity to adapt to new cultures. The Shepard, the iron staff, all similar things. It’s not that Christianity is born out of these influences, Christianity assimilated to these other cultures, but the original pure religion as thought by Jesus didn’t have all the se symbols and references.
Then the freemasons. As Christianity came to Egypt, a small sect was created that had both Christian and ancient Egyptian concepts combined. This sect was first allowed in Christianity but in the dark ages when Christianity started with it’s crusade this was labelled heretic ,and this sect had to flee underground, it is the beginning of the freemasons. And there were many influential people throughout history that were a member of this sect, and who in honour of it, placed references. The dollar bill, the obelisk in Washington, the pyramid in front of the Louvre in France, the obelisk a couple meters away from it.
The zodiac in the Bible.
It could be that there are actually references to astronomy in the bible, since Christianity adapted many concepts from other cultures, however a lot of the references seemed far fetched and totally ripped out of context. Is it that peculiar that there’s a story of a man wearing a pitcher? I mean it’s not like the pitcher is the aquarius’ copyright. If I wear a pitcher does that mean I believe in astrology to? The story wasn’t even about “the end of times”
The word “age “ can have many meanings.
Origine of names
There’s more to etymology then cutting it up in syllables and looking to anything that looks familiar.
*Israel:
O.E., "the Jewish people," from L. Israel, from Gk., from Heb. yisra'el "he that striveth with God" (Gen. xxxii.28), symbolic proper name conferred on Jacob and extended to his descendants, from sara "he fought, contended" + El "God." As an independent Jewish state in the country formerly called Palestine, it is attested from 1948. Citizens of it are called Israelis; the ancient people are Israelites (1382).
*Solomon:
masc. proper name, Biblical name of David's son, king of Judah and Israel and wisest of all men, from Gk. Solomon, from Heb. Sh'lomoh, from shelomo "peaceful," from shalom "peace." The Arabic form is Suleiman. The common medieval form was Salomon (Vulgate, Tyndale, Douai); Solomon was used in Geneva Bible and KJV. Used allusively for "a wise ruler" since 1554.
*Jonah:
masc. proper name, biblical prophet, from L.L. Jonas, from Gk. Ionas, from Heb. Yonah, lit. "dove, pigeon."
Mana is actually a mushroom since the bible says it's "a small round thing", and the high priest’s headdress looks like a mushroom, so mana must be a mushroom right?
Euhm, ok, were the chewing some while coming up with this?
Older religions also has similar prophets who received law from a mountain.
Yes Like I said there have been 100 000 prophets.
stretching it again.
why are the death sea scrolls so controversial?
Because they show how much they have they have diverted from their original religion.
Every religion has personified that deity.
Islam hasn’t. All we know about Allah are his 99 attributes (most just, most mercifull, without beginning, all powerfull, and the list goes on…)
Does doing religious deeds cultivate the soul?
Yes all rules have benefit both in this life as in the next. Not as a standard, but as a mercy of Allah, he could just as well have set rules that do not benefit us to test our obedience.
A spiritual man does not do what we witness done under the guise of religion.
The same contradiction as before, they acknowledge that it is only mankind who does this under the guise of religion, rather then religion itself causing this, yet in the same time they blame religion for it.
Finally one of the last topics is nothing new for us, the bible has indeed been changed and influenced to many times across history, it has indeed lost his reliability.
