Book by,Nicholas Wade,asks the question, Was Muhammad actually Jesus?

Mohammed was not a historical person but a concoction after the fact based on a misreading of slogans used by the Jewish/Christian sects that gave rise to Islam. His discussions of the inscriptions of the Dome of the Rock and the claim that Abd al-Malik and a radical interpretation of the ruler Abd al-Malik:

In defining a unitary creed for Arab Christianity, 'Abd al-Malik seems to have reached back to this early Syriac tradition of Jesus as a plain human prophet and used it to oppose the Trinitarian approach of Hellenistic Christianity. In the "Praise Jesus" motto he put on his coins and in his great building, the Dome of the Rock at Jerusalem, he referred to Jesus, the revisionists say, as the "messenger of God."

Thus in Arabic, 'Abd al-Malik's unifying motto about Jesus was rendered as muhammadun rasul allah -- 'The messenger of God is to be praised." Muhammadun is a gerundive, meaning "one who should be praised." rasul is "messenger" and allah is "God."

To anyone with a passing knowledge of Islam, this is a central phrase of the faith and has an entirely different meaning -- "Muhammad is the messenger of God."

What proof is there that 'Abd al-Malik meant rasul allah to refer to Jesus? The proof, say the revisionists, is unambiguous and is provided by the inscriptions that 'Abd al-Malik had written inside the Dome of the Rock, "Allahum salli ala rasulika wa 'abdika isa ibn maryam -- God bless your messenger and servant, Jesus son of Mary" states the text on the inner northwest-north face of the octogaonal arcade. The inner, east-southeast face includes the words, "Inma I-masih isa ibn maryam rasulu llah -- For the Messaiah Jesus, son of Mary, is the messenger of God."

ryviewpoint.blogspot.com...

I was posting on another topic when I found this book review, and an excerpt from the book, which I have not read , BTW.

Mohammed was not a historical person but a concoction after the fact based on a misreading of slogans used by the Jewish/Christian sects that gave rise to Islam.

"Inma I-masih isa ibn maryam rasulu llah,
"For the Messaiah Jesus, son of Mary, is the messenger of God."

This is written in the Dome of the Rock?

Just a test cause I can't find my post.

I dont buy it, i think there is plenty of historical evidence showing Muhammad was a real person. Besides Jesus and Muhammad were centuries apart.

Interesting notion, but not a chance. The differences are too vast.

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
Interesting notion, but not a chance. The differences are too vast.

Yea, it seems quite a stretch of the imagination, but I thought it was interesting, I think I might do a little more research,




thanks for posting you TWO,

reply to post by Stormdancer777

thanks for posting you TWO,

Well, heck Storm. This is the new ATS! You don't expect a large crowd to gather around something remotely intellectual, I hope?

Time to move on. Write about waking up to a succubus in bed with you, or something.

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

thanks for posting you TWO,

Well, heck Storm. This is the new ATS! You don't expect a large crowd to gather around something remotely intellectual, I hope?

Time to move on. Write about waking up to a succubus in bed with you, or something.

hahahahah, that was hilarious,

"Inma I-masih isa ibn maryam rasulu llah,
"For the Messaiah Jesus, son of Mary, is the messenger of God."

You know I was thinking, if this is really written there, aren't they acknowledging Jesus was the messiah?

OK so so there is another book out

Did Mohammad exist, by Robert Spencer,

I haven't read it, but it is a question I asked many years ago,

Did Muhammad Exist? reveals:
www.amazon.com...
How the earliest biographical material about Muhammad dates from at least 125 years after his reported death
How six decades passed before the Arabian conquerors—or the people they conquered—even mentioned Muhammad, the Qur’an, or Islam
The startling evidence that the Qur’an was constructed from existing materials—including pre-Islamic Christian texts
How even Muslim scholars acknowledge that countless reports of Muhammad’s deeds were fabricated
Why a famous mosque inscription may refer not to Muhammad but, astonishingly, to Jesus
How the oldest records referring to a man named Muhammad bear little resemblance to the now-standard Islamic account of the life of the prophet
The many indications that Arabian leaders fashioned Islam for political reasons

Why a famous mosque inscription may refer not to Muhammad but, astonishingly, to Jesus


Jerusalem isn't mentioned in the Koran yet they claim it is their third holiest city.

Koranic Sources: Pre-islamic, Christian, and Qumranian Influences

Scholars have long known that the text of the Koran shows evidence of many influences from religious sources outside Islam. The influence of the Jewish Torah and Christian Gospels is obvious from the stories in the Koran about Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and other characters from the Old and New Testaments. But there is also evidence of borrowing in the Koran from more obscure sources.

In this anthology, the acclaimed critic of Islam Ibn Warraq has assembled scholarly articles that delve into these unusual, little-known sources. Many of the articles, originally in French and German, date back to the early twentieth century and are here translated into English for the first time.

In the first part of the book, Warraq presents nine studies that analyze the authenticity of pre-Islamic poetry. The authors show that if this literature is accepted as authentic, then some of it was clearly incorporated into the text of the Koran.

In the second part, the contributors explore similarities between various Muslim doctrines and ideas found in the writings of the Ebionites, a Jewish Christian sect that existed from the second to fourth centuries. They also point out interesting thematic parallels between Muslim literature and the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran.
www.amazon.com...
Finally, the third part considers the traditional biography of Muhammad and possible influences on its writing from Coptic Christian literature and other sources.

For anyone with an interest in the early history of Islam, this erudite anthology will prove to be informative and enlightening.

Yeah, Islam accepts Jesus as the Messiah. It always surprises me how few people actually know that.

The blurb from the "Did Muhammad Exist" book sorta shows how it attempts to use dancing with words to make up a weird opinion. For example, it talks about the "earliest biographical material" being 125 years after Muhammad's death. This might make you stop and think "Hey, wait...you mean there is nothing about Muhammad from before that?!" But it is just dancing with words. It is true, one of the first complete "biographies" of Muhammad was 125 years after his death. But that doesn't mean there weren't tonnes of first and second-hand accounts of him much before that. Heck, just 4 years after Muhammad was supposed to have died, an Armenian bishop wrote about his preaching of an Abrahamic religion, and his migration from Mecca to Medina.

reply to post by babloyi

Heck, just 4 years after Muhammad was supposed to have died, an Armenian bishop wrote about his preaching of an Abrahamic religion, and his migration from Mecca to Medina.

Can you give me more details on that?

Did Muhammad Exist?

Here is another article,

www.crisismagazine.com...

A careful investigation similarly suggests that the Qur’an is not a collection of what Muhammad presented as revelations from the one true God but was actually constructed from already existing mate­rial, mostly from the Jewish and Christian traditions.

I think maybe we could start here.

All I am finding is book reviews, but I am curious,

The Hidden Origins of Islam: New Research into Its Early History

www.religionfacts.com...

The standard histories of Muhammad and the early development of Islam are based on Islamic literature that dates to the ninth and tenth centuries - some two centuries or more after the death of Muhammad in 632. Islamic literary sources do not exist for the seventh and eighth centuries, when, according to tradition, Muhammad and his immediate followers lived. All that is preserved from this time period are a few commemorative building inscriptions and assorted coins. Based on the premise that reliable history can only be written on the basis of sources that are contemporary with the events described, the contributors to this in-depth investigation present research that reveals the obscure origins of Islam in a completely new light. As the authors meticulously show, the name 'Muhammad' first appears on coins in Syria bearing Christian iconography. In this context the name is used as an honorific meaning 'revered' or 'praiseworthy' and can only refer to Jesus Christ, as Christianity was the predominant religion of the area at this time. This same reference exists in the building inscription of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, built by the caliph 'Abd al-Malik. The implication of these and other findings here presented is that the early Arab rulers adhered to a sect of Christianity. Indeed, evidence from the Koran, finalised at a much later time, shows that its central theological tenets were influenced by a pre-Nicean, Syrian Christianity. Linguistic analysis also indicates that Aramaic, the common language throughout the Near East for many centuries and the language of Syrian Christianity, significantly influenced the Arabic script and vocabulary used in the Koran. Finally, it was not until the end of the eighth and ninth centuries that Islam formed as a separate religion, and the Koran underwent a period of historical development of at least 200 years.

This same reference exists in the building inscription of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, built by the caliph 'Abd al-Malik. The implication of these and other findings here presented is that the early Arab rulers adhered to a sect of Christianity.
www.amazon.com...

All I have to work with is th ebook review,

The book "The Hidden Origins of Islam" deals among other things with the relationship between the Arian form of Christianity in vogue among the Arab aristocracies of southern Iran and eastern Iraq in the 7th century, the formation of the Arab empire in the power vacuum left in those regions following the Byzantine defeat of the Persians in 622 CE, the tangible evidence concerning religious ideas in the Arab empire in the 7th century, and the appearance of Islamic literary documents (other than the Qur'an) in Arabic in the 9th century.

So what is Arian form of Christianity?

and I need to check out 9th century non Islamic documents.

Origin of Islam from Arianism
en.wikipedia.org...
Oooooooooh

Nestorian Christians

NESTORIANS

This Christian sect that constituted a large part, maybe even the majority of Christians in Arabia and the Middle East during the time of Muhammad. This group was very missions oriented.

The Nestorians were equally active. They established schools in many towns. In their monasteries monks could be heard chanting their offices, so that the Arabs became accustomed to seeing the monks at pray day and night, prostrating themselves with their faces to the ground. In prayer the Christians turned to the east. Such men were a familiar sight on all the caravan routes of Arabia. The monastery at Hira was established by the Nestorians in the fifth century, and from thence Christianity was carried to Bahrayn. While Muhammad was a young man, King Nu'man of Hira was converted to Christianity. The church in the east was predominately Nestorian, though a fair number of Monophysites were to be found there. (Guillaume, "Islam", p. 15)

The following quotations are cited as found in "Sharing Your Faith with a Muslim" by Abdiyah Akbar Abdul-Haqq, pp. 11-13:

Professor Tore Andre, of the University of Upsala, has shown in his recent study of Christian origins of Islam ... that the opinion hitherto current, of sundry heretical sects to which Muhammad was indebted for his Christian ideas, is a mistaken one. He directs attention to the great church of Asia, the Nestorian Church, as the prime source of Christian thought and life in pre-Islamic Arabia. There are many points of simimlarity between Muslim teaching and Nestorian christianity, but the circle of ideas most prominent and characteristic, according to Tore Andre, is eschatology with its extraordinary stress on the day of Judgment. (Zwemer: Foreword to "Nestorian Missionary Enterprise" by J. Stewart, T. & T. Clark, 1928, p. 8)
J.W. Sweetman believes that it can be shown conclusively that Arabia came into contact with all three major sections of the Church, i.e., the Byzantine, Nestorian and Jacobite-Monophysite churches (Islam, and Christan Theology. London: Lutterworth Presss, 1945, Vol. I, p. 2) However, it is important to note that it was the Nestorian Church which exercised the most I significant influence on Islam. In this connection J. Stewart informs us:
Prior to A.D. 547 when the great Jacobite revival began, the only form of Christian faith known in the whole independant Arabia and Hirtha was that held by the "Church of the East," the so-called Nestorians, and it is practically certain that every presbyter and bishop in the whole of that area recognized and acknowledged allegiance to the patriarch of Seleucia. When therefore, mention is found of Christians in Mecca and Medina and even in the tribe of Koreish, one is warranted in assuming that all such, prior to at least, the middle of the sixth century, were in communion with the same patriarchate. When the suddenn rise of Islam took place it was the Nestorians who suffered most from the impact. (J. Stewart, op. cit., pp. 71, 72)
www.answering-islam.org...
Islam did not arise in a backwater from some obscure Judaic-Christian sect, but arose in the full stream of religious life in Asia. (R. Bell, "Origins of Islam in Christian Environment", London: Macmillan & Co., 1926, p. 9)

Archaeological evidence has even shown that this group had a presence as far as China during the Tang dynasty (635 A.D.) and Kirgistan.

So was Mohamed introduced to the teachings of Arianism, which was declared heretical. or the Nestorians, which I find had some of the oldest churches.
www.nestorian.org...

My mistake. Sebeos wrote about Muhammad 25 years after his death, in his "Armenian Chronicles". However, the way he wrote made it clear that he had lived through, or had written those accounts from eyewitnesses. The 4 years after was a dated account by some Byzantine monk that was included in a codex that also included the Gospel of Mark. It referenced the Byzantine defeat by "the Arabs of Muhammad". For a named source, Thomas the Presbyter also talked about the "Arabs of Muhammad" less than 2 years after his death.

Sebeos assumed Muhammad to be a jewish prophet, saying:

At that time a certain man from along those same sons of Ismael, whose name was Mahmet [i.e., Mụhammad], a merchant, as if by God's command appeared to them as a preacher [and] the path of truth. He taught them to recognize the God of Abraham, especially because he was learnt and informed in the history of Moses. Now because the command was from on high, at a single order they all came together in unity of religion. Abandoning their vain cults, they turned to the living God who had appeared to their father Abraham. So, Mahmet legislated for them: not to eat carrion, not to drink wine, not to speak falsely, and not to engage in fornication. He said: 'With an oath God promised this land to Abraham and his seed after him for ever. And he brought about as he promised during that time while he loved Ismael. But now you are the sons of Abraham and God is accomplishing his promise to Abraham and his seed for you. Love sincerely only the God of Abraham, and go and seize the land which God gave to your father Abraham. No one will be able to resist you in battle, because God is with you.

Your second source again, where you say:

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
The standard histories of Muhammad and the early development of Islam are based on Islamic literature that dates to the ninth and tenth centuries - some two centuries or more after the death of Muhammad in 632.

Is also very indicative of dancing with words to attempt to prove a point from false information. Yes, the standard histories of Muhammad ARE based on Islamic literature from the sources almost 125 years removed from his death. This might make a person think again "What? You mean there are no references to Muhammad before the 10th century?!" But again, the clever trick here was to use the term "standard histories". There are LOADS of historical references to Muhammad before that. The earliest hadith of Muhammad were collected together (collected together, not written down- they were written down much earlier) by Hammam ibn Munabbih less than 90 years after Muhammad's death- the second generation after Muhammad, with many of the narrations narrated by one of the companions of Muhammad.

For cultures that place such great importance on Oral Tradition, it isn't surprising that there wouldn't be a biography of Muhammad written during his life. Why would anyone at the time have done that? HOWEVER, there ARE many fragments and bits of text that reference him as a person, not as a mistranslated epithet to Jesus.

reply to post by babloyi

Sebeos assumed Muhammad to be a jewish prophet, saying:

Thanks for the information, now that's interesting,

I have to buy some books I guess, funny I find the older books more reliable then some written today.

Seems like there are a lot of religious sects to go through to find clues.

Just gonna drop this in here for now,
www.gnxp.com...

only surfaces due to geopolitical considerations or current events. Otherwise, why would some Americans know of the Yazidi Kurds of Iraq? These obscure groups can sometimes be quite numerous, the quasi-Shia Alevis of Turkey form about 20% of that nation's population (something most Muslims who do not live in Turkey are totally unaware of from what I can tell). I use terms like "quasi-Shia" because many of these groups are secretive about their beliefs and consultation of 10 different sources will produce 10 different answers as to their theologies, customs and provenance. The secrecy seems to have a natural origin: persecution. Islam in the Middle East is a religion which has often proscribed heterodox cults. Toleration toward religious minorities was fixed rather early on to putative "Peoples of the Book," other groups were officially not tolerated. This resulted common "work arounds." For example, the pagans of Haran were tolerated as Sabians, a group referred to in early Islamic literature (I say pagans because the people of Haran seemed to believe in a religion which originally emerged from late classical paganism as opposed to one of the "world religions"). Another common way to finesse the issue of toleration has been the slotting in of various assorted groups into the catchall category of Shia. The Alawites of Syria for example have followed this path. Most Sunni Muslims accept that Shia are Muslim, even if substandard ones, so it is a good way to ensure safety. But even "Shia" groups like the Alawites and Alevis keep a low profile, culturally conditioned from centuries pf persecution at the hands of the Ottoman Sunni orthodoxy.

Today I "stumbled" upon another weird sect, this one very numerous in a nation of interest called Iran. The group goes by various names, Yarsan/Yaresan, Kakeyi, Ahl-e Haqq or Ahl-i Haqq. The Nizari Ismaili community published a description of the group in the 1940s, in part because people were confusing them with the Nizaris. I'm not going to summarize their beliefs except to say that it has some core overlaps with Shia ideas, but "extends" them rather far and introduces ideas like reincarnation which don't seem conventional in Islam. Looking on google books & scholar I can say this: 1) adherents are disproportionately Kurdish, but it is multi-ethnic and accepts converts 2) it is grudgingly accepted as Shia within Iran but this seems to be a pragmatic consideration because 3) estimates of its numbers range from tens of thousands to 5 million, but somewhere around the magnitude of 1 million seems about right. Most of these within Iran, so the group is probably a few percent of the nation's populatio

zoreled.org...

www.sacred-texts.com...

I stopped researching many years ago and was fascinated by the Yezidis

An article "a focus on the Philosophy of the Yezidi-religion"
presents the philosophical disputes in the Yezidi-religion, viz.
Ta'usi-Melek as God's representative on the earth and not as the
"Evil One", as other religions state, Ta'usi as the aesthetic
Phenomenon, interpreted as such and firmly held only by the
Yezidis.
The Yezidis hold that Ta�usi-Melek is as fire with two dualistic
elementary abilities: Fire as light, but also fire to burn: The
good and the evil are one and the same Person. Simultaneously is
a human being itself a mixture of two powers: good and evil, i.e.
every Yezidi has a part of Ta�usi-Melek in himself.
An ongoing research of the available Literature about the olde
religions of the Near East point to no direct connection between
the anmes before Sheihk-Adi with the names after him (in the
Yezidi-religion), except from a few similar Feasts and Words, for
eg. "Yazatas" = angel in Zorasthrianism/ Zarathustriansism)is
similar to the word "Yezidi" = those, who worship the angel. Our
intention here, is to present Customs, Feasts and Traditions.
which exist in Mithraism, Zorasthriansism and Yezidism.

www.luckymojo.com...

Now I always had this suspicion that Yezidis and Hindus were related.

that Originally from India and therefore related to the Hindus, they also have close connections with many other cultures and traditions they have lived among during their gradual migration westward to the Middle East. For example, they have close ties with the Zoroastrian religion they encountered in Persia, and they reflect some of the doctrines and rites of Islam which were integrated into Yezidism by the faith’s Sufi reformer, Sheike Adi, during the 11th century. Well before this time, as far back as 2000 B.C., the Yezidis were living in the Middle East and playing a role in the Sumerian, Babylonian, Assyrian, and Jewish civilizations.

www.yeziditruth.org...

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
OK so so there is another book out

Did Mohammad exist, by Robert Spencer,

I haven't read it, but it is a question I asked many years ago,

Did Muhammad Exist? reveals:
www.amazon.com...
How the earliest biographical material about Muhammad dates from at least 125 years after his reported death
How six decades passed before the Arabian conquerors—or the people they conquered—even mentioned Muhammad, the Qur’an, or Islam
The startling evidence that the Qur’an was constructed from existing materials—including pre-Islamic Christian texts
How even Muslim scholars acknowledge that countless reports of Muhammad’s deeds were fabricated
Why a famous mosque inscription may refer not to Muhammad but, astonishingly, to Jesus
How the oldest records referring to a man named Muhammad bear little resemblance to the now-standard Islamic account of the life of the prophet
The many indications that Arabian leaders fashioned Islam for political reasons

Why a famous mosque inscription may refer not to Muhammad but, astonishingly, to Jesus


Jerusalem isn't mentioned in the Koran yet they claim it is their third holiest city.

edit on 093131p://bWednesday2012 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)

Well...the same could be said about the Christian Bible being an jumbled concoction of historical documents, previous religious myths, and word of mouth.

Nothing about Jesus was written until at least two generations after his death.

The story of Muhammad is different than the story of Jesus, anyhow.