jesus existed, and mohammed, buddha, etc

[Guest guest]

Jesus existed as prohet mohammed existed. Even if it "was" a fake story the muslims would say that their prophet lied to them when he cited Jesus. I can accept that some items and stories of other religions could have inspired some of the Christian doctrine, but I think that the last prophet confirmed many times the existence of Jesus. The trinity concept and the idea of salvation, well, that another story. To be the oldest religiuous leader doesn´t mean that that´s the only truth.

[Guest guest]

Spain is a Catholic country. So for the

Spaniards Christ of course existed.

 

What did Muhammad know about the

historicity of Christ? He was not Christ's

contemporary or anything. The prophet of

Islam came many centuries later. He lived

from 570 to 632.

[Guest guest]

Jesus may or may not have existed but what he taught if he did exist is quite different from what the church says.

Mohammed did exist but whether or not he is a genuine man of god is debatable and a matter of belief. He was more of a conquror and leader, that the typicla image of a prophet. As for his belief in Jesus, 600 years is enough time to make a man out of a myth. But mohammed also believed Adam and Eve existed and their is no proof of this as well as it being highly doubtful. There are many things mohammed said that were untrue and some that cannot be proven.

 

Buddha did exist and there is proof of him and places associated with his life. Emperor Asoka did alot to preserve this.

[Guest guest]

Mohammed was a "conqueror" because of the historical circumstances. The holy war was nothing more than a legitimate defense of mohammed´s followers which have no other chance but to fight for their lives because they were constantly boicoted. The great Islam conquers came later and I I said before, the Islam leaders at that time used the name of God to slaughter ancient religions. It was not the case in Spain, were the arabs, christians and jews lived together with no conflicts for over 700 years till the catholic kings expulsed them from Spain. Don´t blame the prophet, he never wanted to expand an empire of blood. It is one of the principles of Islam to accept tolerance. Jesus existed for the christians and muslims, thats a fact. It´s a pity that as he had such a life without ornaments or luxury that he left nothing material. I hope one day all main religions sit down on the same table and reach an agreement. The lack of will to encounter religions is due to the religious fundamentalists and the human hipocresy.

[Guest guest]

There is voluminous, well-researched information

on the Net about Christ and Muhammad and

Christianity and Islam for those who want to

discover the truth about them.

 

Comments by "from spain" are at odds with what

is known today about Christ and Muhammad and

their ideologies of genocide and conquest.

[Sephiroth]

History shows that there is no traces of anyone named Jesus. Matter a fact, evidence begins to pop up stating that Jesus maybe fictional character based on Roman literature to convert Romans to Christianity.

 

Please read the book "Messiah's Christ" to know more details. You can find it on the Net.

 

What Muhammad did shows that he was no prophet of God. Muhammad heard all about Jesus and automatically thought that Jews had killed him.

 

When Muhammad tried to convert Jews to his way, Jews rejected him and his prophethood, especially after Muhammad begins to wage war - which is against Jewish beliefs of what a prophet should behave.

 

Muhammad begins to use "Jews are Jesus killers" as excuse to wage war against Jews and the notion that Jesus died on the cross remains. Christians uses this as excuse stating Jesus exists.

 

So, Islam and Christianity is just two side of a See-Saw - both supporting each other to exist. Once Christianity dies, there will be a big hole in Islam which will be enough to cut down Islam.

[Guest guest]

{It is one of the principles of Islam to accept tolerance.}

 

Oh really? Then why does the koran speak ill of non-muslims? Why did Mohammed wage war on non-abrahamic religions? He was hardly tolerant towards the people he slaughtered. Becoming a 'conqueror' for whatever circumstances does not justify the slaughter his followers committed. If muslims were really tolerant why were they not tolerant of the Indians? Why did they try to wipe out their religions? Why were they not tolerant to the Zorastrians when they drove them out of Persia? The only 'muslim' ruler who may be tolerant was Akbar but he wasn't even a proper muslim, had serious doubts about Islam and followed his own personal beliefs.

 

Tolerance is not a word you would associate with Islam. It's funny how todays muslims are trying to convince everyone that they were always tolerant and peaceful, when history and the present world situation is showing quite the opposite.

[Guest guest]

 

 

It is one of the principles of Islam to accept tolerance

 

 

History says otherwise.

 

No one will disagree that Islam advocates the most barbaric methods of propogating religion, which is anything but being tolerant.

 

However, one point has always surprised me. Although Islam rulers ruled India for centuries, except for some stray incidents of religions suppresion by some fanatics, on the whole, they seem to have been OK with allowing Hindus to continue with their faith. I was expecting to find stories where people were lined up on streets and forcibly converted to Islam until everyone was a Muslim.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

Pre-Islamic India was Hindu-Buddhist and included

not only Pakistan and Bangladesh, but also Gandhara

which is now known as Afghanistan. Hinduism and Buddhism

have practically disappeared from these three regions.

 

Thousands of temples were looted and destroyed. People

were set upon and beheaded in the streets. Women were

carried away from homes and streets and forced

into sexual slavery in harems. Tens of thousands and

eventually millions were converted. There were simply

too many people to convert. A heavy tax was imposed

on those who could not be converted.

 

...........................................................

http://www.indiastar.com/wallia7.htm

 

Tipu Sultan

 

So what do the original sources tell us about Tipu?

The anthology includes excerpts from Tipu's letters

as researched by the distinguished Kerala

historian K. M. Panicker, which he reviewed in

the Bhasha Poshini magazine, August 1923:

 

1. Letter dated March 22, 1788, to Abdul Kadir:

"Over 12,000 Hindus were honoured with Islam.

There were many Namboodri Brahmins among them.

This achievement should be widely publicised

among the Hindus. Then the local Hindus should

be brought before you and converted to Islam.

No Namboodri Brahmin should be spared. "

 

2. Letter dated December 14, 1788, to his

army chief in Calicut: " I am sending two of

my followers with Mir Hussain Ali. With their

assistance, you should capture and kill all

Hindus. Those below 20 may be kept in prison

and 5000 from the rest should be killed from

the tree-tops. These are my orders."

 

3. Letter dated January 18, 1790, to Syed

Abdul Dulai: " ...almost all Hindus in Calicut

are converted to Islam. I consider this as Jehad."

 

The anthology also quotes from A Voyage to the

East Indies by Fra Barthoelomeo, a renowned

Portuguese traveller and historian, who was present

in Tipu's war zone in early 1790:

 

"First a corps of 30,000 barbarians who

butchered everybody on the way ... followed by

the field gun unit under the French commander,

M. Lally. Tipu was riding on an elephant behind

which another army of 30,000 soldiers followed.

Most of the men and women were hanged in Calicut,

first mothers were hanged with their children

tied to necks of mothers. That barbarian Tipu

Sultan tied the naked Christian and Hindus to

the legs of elephants and made the elephants

to move around till the bodies of the helpless

victims were torn to pieces. Temples and

churches were ordered to be burned down,

desecrated, and destroyed. ... Those

Christians who refused to be honoured with

Islam were ordered to be killed by hanging

immediately. These atrocities were told to

me by the victims of Tipu Sultan who escaped

from the clutches of his army and reached

Varapphuza, which is the centre of Carmichael

Christian Mission. I myself helped many

victims to cross the Varapphuza river

by boats."

 

Moreover, evidence of Tipu's atrocities

abounds in many contemporary church records

in Mangalore, Calicut, and Varapphuza.

...........................................................

 

A once prosperous nation was thus reduced to a faint

shadow of its former self.

 

Not only Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan are

gone, the partition of 1947 did not solve the Muslim

problem either. There is still a large Muslim population

in the country which should have left for Pakistan

long ago.

 

Just think about the geographical extent of the

subcontinent and the size of its Hindu-Buddhist

population before the 8th century and the state

of affairs prevailing now.

 

I have never seen a statement like yours before.

You say on the whole Islamic rulers seem to have

been OK with Hindus. And you are surprised by it.

 

Are you saying the savageries and mass murders

they committed are not enough for you? There are

enough Muslims in the country any one of whom

will be happy to separate your head from the

body with a sword imported from Saudi Arabia.

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

You missed the point.

 

My point is, I am surprised because I was expecting a lot worse. I am surprised that the majority of the country's population remained Hindu in spite of Islam rule. I am surprised that we have temples still existing from times before Islam advent in India.

 

Given the history of Islamic kingdoms in the middle east, one would expect them to have wiped out Hinduism in India as they had the motivation and the necessary resources. But they were lesser than 10% during the time of the British rule, which is a very small number. It just does not add up.

 

Cheers

 

[Guest guest]

I pointed out that the Indian subcontinent

was simply too big and the population too large

- bigger and larger than any other region they

had invaded. You didn't pick it up. If Hindus are

a majority today, they are a majority in a

severely truncated subcontinent. Loss of formerly

Hindu-Buddhist Pakistan, Bangladesh and

Afghanistan to Islam does not seem to figure in

your calculations at all. You still remain

surprised because Hinduism was not wiped out.

 

I often hear your kind of logic from Tamil Nadu

people. They will say Islam is really a north

Indian problem. Islam is OK. See, they did not

wipe out Hinduism. We are still a Hindu majority

state.

 

None of the other countries including Egypt and

Iran had any deep religious traditions with an

unshakable hold on their people. Certainly nothing

as profound, well entrenched and pervasive as

Hinduism.

 

Pre-Muslim Indian subcontinent was a

Hindu-Budhhist civilization. It was not a single

sovereign state under one ruler or emperor with

a national militiary. It was many kingdoms.

 

Hinduism is not a hierarchical religion headed by

a single Pontiff.

 

These facts are important. A single emperor defeated

militarily would have surrendered and the state Pontiff

would have called upon his co-religionists to accept

the religion of the invaders.

 

It is also worthwhile to point out that the Indian

subcontinent under a single emperor commanding a

unified military would have been a mighty force and

no invader would have considered challenging its

supremacy.

 

Instead of expressing your surprise at why Hinduism

was not wiped out, you should be expressing your

surprise at why such a large Hindu-Buddhist

subcontinent did not fight back and wipe out the

invaders.

[Sephiroth]

My point is, I am surprised because I was expecting a lot worse.

 

How worse it needs to be before you be happy that they are barbaric? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

 

Those temples you speak of; many of them of them exist in South India where the resistance is much stronger than in North. In North, almost all the temples of ancient times had been demolished or changed into Mosques to preach their god.

 

Example is Ayodhya temple which made into Babir Mosque which still becomes a major headache between Muslims and Hindus to this day.

 

They demolished thousands of Hindu temples YET defend to death even ONE mosque. In another word, your temples means nothing to them. That is how barbaric they are.

[Guest guest]

 

Still missing the point...

 

 

If Hindus are a majority today, they are a majority in a severely truncated subcontinent. Loss of formerly

Hindu-Buddhist Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan to Islam does not seem to figure in your calculations at all.

 

 

You are right, these areas did not figure in my original calculations. Yet this does not explain the absence of total decimation, and I am not convinced by your answer of size. They had the resources to do this if they wanted to, so the question remains on why this did not happen. They could have knocked down every temple in the country in less than a month, but that did not happen either Anyway, I will remain surprised until I get a reasonable answer. That is just the way it is. Do not let that upset you.

 

On the same note, Islam destruction is quoted as the major reason for the disappearance of Buddhism in India. Why did this not happen with Jainism? Buddhists like Jains were spread all over the country. Then, why only the Buddhists?

 

Why did Indians not fight back invaders?

 

Because we were a loose set of kingdoms with no concept of country back then. It was a simple task for invaders to take us one kingdom after another. So. although several kings fought against the invaders, due to lack of size and lack of support by neighbors, they always failed.

 

Cheers

[Guest guest]

You say Muslim invaders could have destroyed all the

temples in the country in less than a month. Who

told you that, Sir? Mr. Allah himself?

 

They had the resources to do it, you inform us. Can you

please tell us what resources they had, Sir?

 

Can you tell us how many temples there were across the

subcontinent and in which specific year they were counted?

And their locations?

 

Since this is your claim, please provide some

specifics. How they could have gone to each and

every temple in the subcontinent and pulled it

down? And reduced all of them to rubble in less

than a month?

 

You have pondered deeply about this matter we think

Sir. Please share your temple demolition, not to

mention your total decimation, expertise with us.

[Guest guest]

 

 

Who told you that, Sir? Mr. Allah himself?

 

 

Thank you for your question. Although this may be too much to hope for, perhaps you have heard of something called common sense. Usually people with average and above IQ have it. That is how people reason out a lot of things.

 

I understand where people like you are come from, though. You are letting your acute dislike for Islam, cloud your logic, thus making you incapable of being objective. What you would like to see is people talk only about the atrocities of the Muslims and leave it at that. No one should raise doubts of how hundreds of years of oppressive Islam rule still left India with more than 80% of Hindus and several intact temples. I understand such questions turn you off. But that is just the way it is. People have all kinds of questions and if want to maintain your narrow vision & cannot deal with such questions, then it is your problem. Sarcasm will not fetch you any points. Or you can stay sarcastic and narrow, but stop signing in as "scholar". It becomes a bad joke, otherwise.

 

Cheers

[narayanadasa]

Jai Sriman Narayana:

 

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/was_the_taj_mahal_a_vedic_temple.htm

 

http://www.stephen-knapp.com/recent_archeological_finds_confirming_Vedic_history.htm

 

You many find more articles on the home page of the site. It is interesting because in most cases concrete proof (sometimes photographs) is given.

 

 

[Guest guest]

It´s not probable what you say about islam dissapearing if christianity dissapears. Both religions as hinduism itself have no identical philosofies, even between them. Only a big genocide could make that possible, but that´s science fiction nowadays, in spite of the fact that there are still massacres betweeen religions. The Mogul empire did terrible things in India, but it´s not because of the prophet Mohammed or Allah, it was only a bunch of barbarians destroying many treasures of the Hinduist culture. The result: hate throughout centuries till nowadays. Only a deep gesture between our beliefs could approach us more, but for many the bloody history is more. Islam, Christianity and Hiunduism should evolutionate in order to live together. Islam is not bad, only the majority of its leaders throughout history. And the result you see it nowadays. It is simple: the Holy Quran accepts other religions. Allah didn´t give a conversion method to Mohammed. I believe that the escence of Islam is peace, but history demonstrate the contrary in the majority of the cases but only because of its corrupted leaders.

[Sephiroth]

You don't know much about Islam and Christianity, do you?

 

Both religions as hinduism itself have no identical philosofies, even between them.

 

They have common link - Jesus/Isa. In Christianity, Jesus is centre figure who is made into a god. But recent historical data and research indicated that Jesus most likely doesn't exist. This brings a gap in Christian belief and this kills of Christianity slowly.

 

When that happens, Christians will turn to Islam because Muslims believe in Jesus in form of Isa. And when they do that, they will analyse Islam and Muhammad thorougly and find its fault and shortcomings.

 

This faults and shortcomings then will be enlarged and that too will weaken the Ummah which already weakened now due to their own stupidity.

 

Islam, Christianity and Hiunduism should evolutionate in order to live together.

 

Question - WHY must we live together with them? I don't see a reason for it.

 

In my opinion, ONLY way Hindusm (Buddhism and Judaism) could survive is by become Self-Organized and Self-Dependant on themselves.

 

Businesses should be within a Hindus society members and with others like Buddhists (and Jews, if they like), all profits should be circuled within the society and used to stenght the society and this will promote their own culture and progress.

 

By adding Muslims and Christians and forcing ourselves to adapt to their idiotic ways, what you are doing is slowing down the progress which Hindus (Buddhist and Jews) could make in order to entertain this people who still stuck in Stone Ages.

 

It is simple: the Holy Quran accepts other religions. Allah didn´t give a conversion method to Mohammed.

 

Now I KNOW you know nothing about Islam.

Fact - Muhammad HIMSELF had send letters (which others wrote for him since he doesn't know reading and writing) which gave TWO options - Embrace Islam or FIGHT.

That is Islam to you.

[Guest guest]

I meant that the main religions have the same philosophy in its escence: to grow spiritually. Then is a question of faith what we find once we walk away. I also meant that christians, islam and hinduism can answer the same question in the street: There is only one God. Christians also adore "figures": saints. There are as many saints as erudite hinduists probably.

You said :"In my opinion, ONLY way Hindusm (Buddhism and Judaism) could survive is by become Self-Organized and Self-Dependant on themselves."

I totally agree with you, but let have at least a door open to communicate an interchange ideas. It is not useless to hinduism in its all expressions to change ideas with other beliefs. Not all christians or muslims are in stone ages, there are many ways of both christianism and islam. The fact that the majority of the main roots of those religions follow orders and laws made by men built this barrier that religions have. Jesus was important for that part of the world at that time, lets face it that way. The message is there, it arrived in a way or another.

And about mohammeds method to convert to Islam it was because of the historical events of the moment, but it didn´t mean something permanent. The events that happened after the Prophet Mohammeds death didn´t help the commuication between the already established religions.

If all main religions compromise each other every year to meet in a Congress many of the differences could be solved. The last important interreligious congress took place in the Barcelona Forum 2004. It´s a pity that this events happen very few times in history and that they don´t have too much repercusion.

 

[Guest guest]

"from spain" is anonymous. For convenience,

I will assume the person is a he. He wants

to promote interfaith dialog and goodwill

between the people of different faiths.

 

I endorse his sincere intentions. I think

he is a nice person.

 

But he should preach his philosophy of

tolerance and coexistence to the followers

of the aggressive and predatory ideologies

of Christianity and Islam both which have

a similar history - bloody and grisly.

 

Preach where it will do the most good. Preach

it to the Christians and the Muslims. If they

change their medieval behavior, become more

civilized and respect other religious and

spiritual traditions far superior to their

own, then the world will be a better place.

[Guest guest]

Thank you for your comment, and I agree when you say to preach the dialog to muslims and christians which are more likely to fall into predatory ideologies. I find very interesting the history of India and its faiths, and this is a place to charge with good intentions and culture. I have to agree that there are some intolerant hinduists, but this is not the case. regarding my nickname, its because by accident I came to this forum and I don´t usually write on religious forums, and didn´t registrate a name yet.

I can preach tolerance somewhere, but it´s always useful to me to read the most updated thoughts of the first official religion.

BRAHMAN bless you all

[barney]

Your responce: It´s not probable what you say about islam dissapearing if christianity dissapears. Both religions as hinduism itself have no identical philosofies, even between them. Only a big genocide could make that possible, but that´s science fiction nowadays, in spite of the fact that there are still massacres betweeen religions. The Mogul empire did terrible things in India, but it´s not because of the prophet Mohammed or Allah, it was only a bunch of barbarians destroying many treasures of the Hinduist culture. The result: hate throughout centuries till nowadays. Only a deep gesture between our beliefs could approach us more, but for many the bloody history is more. Islam, Christianity and Hiunduism should evolutionate in order to live together. Islam is not bad, only the majority of its leaders throughout history. And the result you see it nowadays. It is simple: the Holy Quran accepts other religions. Allah didn´t give a conversion method to Mohammed. I believe that the escence of Islam is peace, but history demonstrate the contrary in the majority of the cases but only because of its corrupted leaders.

 

____________

 

The Moguls did it in the name of Islam and Mohammed as its prophet. So, do not say it was not. In which surah does it say Islam accepts other fomr of religion besides the Oled Testaments and Jesus alone. Please quote the surah so that we may understand what Isam is all about. Get your facts.

 

"The Muslim expansion continued throughout the sixth and into the seventh century. In 711 the Berber Tarik invaded and rapidly conquered Visigothic Spain. Famously by 733 the Muslims reached Poitiers in France. There a battle, more significant to westerners than Muslims, halted the Muslim advance. In truth by that stage Islam was at its limits of military expansion. Tarik gave his name to "Jabal (mount of) Tarik" or, as we say, Gibraltar. In 712 Tarik's lord, Musa ibn-Mosseyr, joined the attack. Within seven years the conquest of the peninsula was complete. It became one of the centers of Moslem civilization, and the Umayyad caliphate of Cordova reached a peak of glory in the tenth century. Spain, called "al-Andulus" by Muslims remained was at least partially under Muslim control until 1492 when Granada was conquered by Ferdinand and Isabella."

 

The Muslims did not wait but decided to conqure all terrotories as per Instruction of their prophet. Read the hadith by Al' Bukhari and you will know why there are Muslim fanatics and sucide bombers to this very day. To Hindus Islam is a religion of destruction of mankind and culture. Our ancestors were brutaly murdered for not submmiting and even to this very day the Muslims in India are waiting to return to their glory of conqurering India if given the chance. Hindus in India should always be alert as these people cannot be trusted. Their predecessors were back stabers cox they had no guts to fight face to face but sneak at night through back door to attack. Hidnus were caught unawares when the Mogul barbarians attacked India.

 

Can you please name a county in histoy the Hindus invaded and occupied by force? Spain did it, Briton did it, America did it, Islam did it and Russia did it. But India you will not find any. Influence of Hindusiam you may find but not war against a nation to spread its religion.

 

[Guest guest]

Even as the fingers of the two hands are equal, so are human beings equal to one another. No one has any right, nor any preference to claim over another. You are brothers. (Final Sermon of Muhammad)

Qur'an also believes in freedom of conscience and declares la ikrah fi' al-din - 2:228 (i.e. there is no compulsion in religion). This principle is more important and it is in keeping with this principle that Qur'an says in chapter 109 that unbelievers can worship the way they do and Muslims will worship the way they do. Thus chapter 109 and verse 2:228 lay down freedom of conscience and principle of co-existence between religions.

There are many verses to this effect in Qur'an see, for example, 2:148 and 5:48. Normally these verses end with excel each other in good deeds. The matter of worship, dogmas and beliefs vary and leave it to Allah to decide and it is for people to live in harmony.

Not all Islam follows strictly hadith. And some even don´t care. There is a variety in Islam.

 

[Guest guest]

Hardly the spirit of Islam. Or the Old Testament.

Or the New Testament. Histories of Islam and

Christianity are a testimony to their insatiable

appetite for violence, aggression and conquest.

 

You have got to throw in a bunch of verses in

various chapters to give it the semblance of a

religious book. That's what the makers of these

ideologies are doing. Put in some good stuff here

and there in their military manuals to make them

look like holy books.

 

Along with a gang of fellow robbers, Muhammad

himself launched his religious career by attacking

caravans.

 

An earlier post presented a large number of

excerpts from the Koran that incite hatred and

call for genocide and conquest of others. The

moderators deleted that post. They were actual

quotations and not something the poster wrote

himself. They were verbatim excerpts and for

that reason they should not have been removed.

[Guest guest]

namaste

 

firstly you need to visit the site www.jesusneverexisted.com and then start talking about proof. also islam man what they have done the damage and so forth is just beyond comprehension. yet these people try to put down our glorious culture. YES WE HAVE PROOF THE THE VEDIC CULTURE PRECEEDS ALL THESE SO CALL BOGUS RELIGIONS. why you think that westerners are giving up christianity for eastern religions because they have realised how mislead they are.

 

recently the church of england said and i quote "we cant take the book of genesis and the book of revelations seriously" wow man thats really hectic to say that. that like shooting someone at point blank range.