1,000-YEAR-OLD MUSLIM JOKE BOOK FOUND

An 11th-century book by a revered Baghdad Muslim scholar turns out to be a tongue-in-cheek guide for party crashers, according to the researcher who translated the book into English.

The tome was originally authored by al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, a well known scholar of the Prophet Mohammed's teachings.

According to Emily Selove of the University of Manchester, who did the translation, he wrote the book to remind readers "that every serious minded person needs to take a break."

She continued, "This book, which contains flirtation, profanity, and even a little drunkenness, is a lot of fun and offers a rather different perspective to the austere image Islam has from that period. The reality is that the Baghdad of 1,000 years ago was actually rather Bohemian -- it wasn't perfect by any means -- but not the violent and repressive society you might imagine it was."

Full article

Check out some of the side-splitting jokes that are in the book:

Once a man crashed another man's party. "Who are you?" the host asked him. "I'm the one who saved you the trouble of sending an invitation!" he replied.

Someone asked a party-crasher, "What's four times four?" "Sixteen loaves of bread," he said. "What is two times two?" "Four loaves of bread," he replied. And another time he said, "I waited the amount of time it takes someone to eat a loaf of bread."

A party-crasher walked into a gathering, and they said to him, "Nobody invited you!" "But if you didn't invite me and I didn't come," he replied, "think how lonely that would be!"

Bunan (a popular rogue at the time that Selove likens to a cross between Falstaff and Robin Hood) had eaten and eaten well, and someone said to him, "Slow down! You'll kill yourself!" "If it is time to die," Bunan replied, "I want to go well fed and well watered, not parched and hungry."

Once a party-crasher walked in the house of a man who had invited a gathering of people. "Hey, you!" the man said. "Did I say you could come?" "Did you say I couldn't come?" the party crasher replied.

they are more than likely from the Greek... Islam got their culture via conquest.

they haven't been too successful lately and it kinda shows.

Does it say anything against Allah,Mohammad,Islam,Sharia etc etc.
Because if it does it is time for another 'Innocence of Muslims' type of VIOLENT protests.

Originally posted by jburg6

Once a man crashed another man's party. "Who are you?" the host asked him. "I'm the one who saved you the trouble of sending an invitation!" he replied.

That's one's sarcastic enough to be funny I guess that they had snarky people back in the Twelfth Century, too.

Was this one in there?

"Q. What is the difference between the Prophet Muhammad and Michael Jackson?
A. One is a pedophile child rapist and the other recorded six platinum albums."

LoL

reply to post by SisyphusRide


You know the Romans were conquerors too, right? They conquered, pillaged, and converted others by force for a thousand years. Weren't they the ones who established Christianity? I'd say Christianity is just as guilty as Islam in this situation.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by SisyphusRide

 

You know the Romans were conquerors too, right? They conquered, pillaged, and converted others by force for a thousand years. Weren't they the ones who established Christianity? I'd say Christianity is just as guilty as Islam in this situation.

LOL
This thread is about a 1000 year book that was found.This is not about which religion is more guilty than the other.
But since you are talking about being guilty ,I present to you this,my dear friend ->

1,400 Years of Islamic Aggression: An Analysis

reply to post by svmpua


I didn't think so either until he brought up how the religion of Islam stole their culture. But I guess since I'm talking about Christianity it's off-limits now, huh?

Ever heard of the Crusades? Those were pretty violent too and they were commissioned by the Pope himself.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


en.wikipedia.org...

During the rule of Roman Emperor Constantine the Great (reigned 306–337), Christianity became a dominant religion of the Roman Empire.

So your comment about christianity isn't valid until after constatine became emperor

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by svmpua

 

I didn't think so either until he brought up how the religion of Islam stole their culture. But I guess since I'm talking about Christianity it's off-limits now, huh?

Ever heard of the Crusades? Those were pretty violent too and they were commissioned by the Pope himself.

1)He said "they are more than likely from the Greek... Islam got their culture via conquest. "

Lets break it down in two parts.
(a)"they are more than likely from the Greek" ->Here he is merely presenting a 'opinion' because he uses the word 'likely'.
(b)"Islam got their culture via conquest" ->Well proving this is beyond the scope of this thread so I will redirect you to ->
Islam spread by conquest and violence

2)You said "I didn't think so either until he brought up how the religion of Islam stole their culture."
He did not say how Islam stole their culture.He said "Islam got their culture via conquest."
There is a huge difference between "stealing" and "taking" aka getting in this case.
Here I present to you more resources,my dear friend ->
Greek influence on Islam

3)You say "But I guess since I'm talking about Christianity it's off-limits now, huh? "
When did anyone say that you are off-limit because you are bringing Christianity.
I merely said "This thread is about a 1000 year book that was found.This is not about which religion is more guilty than the other."
See the difference ?

4)You say "Ever heard of the Crusades? Those were pretty violent too and they were commissioned by the Pope himself."

Firstly read this ->
Crusades were defensive wars against the Muslims

Secondly you seem to think that I am a Christian when you say that
"since I'm talking about Christianity it's off-limits now, huh? "
Well let me tell you ,I am not .

reply to post by grey580


I'm not sure I understand your point. Yes, Constantine established Christianity about 300 years after Jesus' death but I don't see how that pertains to my post. Romans conquered and force-converted people for a thousand years, why would it be different for religion or ideologies? They did kill and persecute Christians around the time of Jesus, it just seems suspicious to me that they lied and killed for a thousand years only to turn around and tell the real "truth" after killing those that spread this supposed "truth". Sounds fishy to me.

reply to post by svmpua


I apologize for assuming something about you, my mistake. Your point about the crusades being a defensive war for Christianity doesn't make any sense. If they were trying to defend themselves then why order the attack like they did?

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by grey580

 

I'm not sure I understand your point. Yes, Constantine established Christianity about 300 years after Jesus' death

Constantine didn't "establish" Christianity, he merely legalized it. It had been a growing religion for the previous 250 years or so, but was illegal under Roman law since about 60AD.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by svmpua

 

I apologize for assuming something about you, my mistake. Your point about the crusades being a defensive war for Christianity doesn't make any sense. If they were trying to defend themselves then why order the attack like they did?

1) You say "I apologize for assuming something about you, my mistake."
We are just sharing knowledge,no problem.

2) You say "Your point about the crusades being a defensive war for Christianity doesn't make any sense."
There are many things in history that doesn't make any sense.
Somebody truly said "Anything before 1940's never actually happened."
So there is no point in fighting over Jihad or Crusade or anything of that sort .The reason I am anti-Jihad is because it is an issue that we are facing "now".

Anyways let us all get back to the original topic created by OP -
1,000-YEAR-OLD MUSLIM JOKE BOOK FOUND

reply to post by adjensen


Thanks for this. My point is that the RCC didn't exist until Constantine legalized it, so in a sense Constantine did establish Christianity, but that's semantics.

reply to post by svmpua


thank you... it's easy to get sidetracked here on ats. Afterall I just made an analysis of history.

you know the Greeks invented the concept of the Olympics... such a noble concept i'd say.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


no comment on the Romans... let's just say they seen the light eventually.

though your comments makes me want to look into how ling the rule was under Christianity. You know Rome was not conquered, it just moved on elsewhere after a new philosophy was adopted possibly.

reply to post by SisyphusRide


They saw the light then took it and hid it away.

I never said that Rome was conquered, I said that Rome was the one doing the conquering for a thousand years. Rome was under Christian authority for about 100 years before turning into the Byzantine Empire, though the Byzantine Empire kept Christianity as its official religion. The Byzantine Empire fell somewhere around 1450, so I'd say they were under Christian authority for about 1,000 years before falling.

double post

.

That is the driest humor i have ever seen. So funny i forgot to laugh. I got a better joke that beats all those.

Before the Boogeyman goes to bed, he checks his closet for Chuck Norris.