Jump to content

German Islamic scholar exposes critical defect in Islam standard model


John Kettler

Recommended Posts

Found this on a different board, and it blew my mind, being familiar with such things as the Nag Hammadi Texts, the Cathars, etc. on the Catholic side of the discussion and having some acquaintance with Sufism on the Muslim side. What Bushby's THE BIBLE FRAUD did to Christianity, this may do to Islam, and it comes from within.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/JK18Aa01.html

Not only is the article very well written, but the classicist in me rejoices at the eloquent and catapult grog correct phrase "what all the ballistas of critics never could."

If you need intellectual stimulation, this article should supply it, for it gets into the academic evidence for what could be called "The Case of the Missing Prophet." The article has a hyperlink to an earlier piece on a somewhat related matter as well, "Indiana Jones and the Da Vinci Code." The latter gets into the little known to most connection between the Nazis and the Muslims during WW II, a connection still having effects in the present.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If it's anything like Bible Fraud (oh the irony!), then the amazing thing is that the reporter didn't recognize it as a poorly done conspiracy theory. Basically what Tony Bushby claims is that Jesus avoided crucifixion (you see, he had a twin brother!) and he became a British druidic priest. The more I hear stuff like that, the more I start to think that the conspiracy theorists are THE conspiracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it's anything like Bible Fraud (oh the irony!), then the amazing thing is that the reporter didn't recognize it as a poorly done conspiracy theory. Basically what Tony Bushby claims is that Jesus avoided crucifixion (you see, he had a twin brother!) and he became a British druidic priest. The more I hear stuff like that, the more I start to think that the conspiracy theorists are THE conspiracy.

Well, there is a person named Spitaler in one of the links. Just wondering if the full name of this person were Knecht Hos Spitaler. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sergei,

I read that, and found it most intriguing, from a variety of perspectives. It succeeds in resolving, for example, a series of traditions which otherwise make no sense, not to mention that oh so embarrassing chasm between the Prince of Peace ("Put down your sword, Simon Peter") and the guy who tells his followers to go go out and buy swords, hangs outs with cutthroats (search for the root word "sicarius") and rebels (Simon the Zealot). Nor would a nobody from the boondocks rate royal accommodation in Rome, but a hereditary king would, especially if also tied in with other dynastic structures of the period. Also, the excellent point was made in the book and elsewhere that the Bible is clear Jesus was a fully observant Jew, and Jewish males married.

IMO, the German Gnostic Islamist scholar has now shone the same sort of light on the Prophet that other researchers have shone on Jesus, in the process revealing the "remarkable overlaps" between him and the other big deals to emerge from that neck of the world, going clear back to the likes of Horus, Tammuz, etc. It seems that the Catholic Church isn't the only one good at repackaging!

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you will notice Emrys, the information was also seconded by The Church of the SubGenius. That alone should be enough, however if you look into the writings of the Church you will see that J.R. "Bob" Dobbs palled around with, and in turn Jesus fought along side "Bob". So he would know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How come Kettler bothers with this board is beyond me. He's obviously intellectually superior to many of the petty personal attacks, thread de-railings and unintelligent one-liner responses many of his interesting topics generate. Many of his topics are out of the standard box, granted, but they could generate interesting exchange of views. And no, this is not an attempt of sarcasm from my behalf. I'm just tired of all the ridiculing of an inquisitive man I've witnessed over the years.

Many here would evolve as intellectual human beings if they took the time to discuss topics in a rational manner. The BFC forum isn't what it used to be, either that or I'm not the same as when I started going here many years ago. I'm finding the exchange of important rational thought to have lessened over the years. This place has grown stale and predictable.

Ah well. Who cares. It's your loss anyway. I have other interesting people to debate with and open my mind to new ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

howardb,

What seems to be going on is the intellectual equivalent of Gresham's Law, with the currency devalued being ideas, not money. Given our worldwide membership, I fully expected quite a discussion on what I figured would be a very hot topic. Instead, all I see are the equivalents of raspberries and jeers.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully expected quite a discussion on what I figured would be a very hot topic.

you got it wrong again.

Instead, all I see are the equivalents of raspberries and jeers.

how you expected anything else is beyond me. You post a fairly outrageous thesis by an unimportant scholar & think that everyone will consider it important................sigh.......well it isn't.

It's not going to change anything...it's not relevant to anything......what's the point?:confused:

If you paste it up on a wall in Riyadh or Teheran...that would cause some localised change.......but only to you!! :eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you got it wrong again.

how you expected anything else is beyond me. You post a fairly outrageous thesis by an unimportant scholar & think that everyone will consider it important................sigh.......well it isn't.

It's not going to change anything...it's not relevant to anything......what's the point?:confused:

If you paste it up on a wall in Riyadh or Teheran...that would cause some localised change.......but only to you!! :eek:

(a) Why is the thesis outrageous? Please be specific, unless you haven't read it, but then again you couldn't call it outrageous as you would be clueless of it's content.

(B) So only important, and thereby established, scholars have ideas worthy of discussion?

© Let us hypothetically deem the article Mr. Kettler refered unimportant, or even flawed, for the sake of argument. Does that make the article unable to teach us something or expose us to a new way of thinking?

(d) Why isn't it relevant to anything and how are you certain it's not going to change anything? What do you build this opinion on?

Maybe you didn't really come here to discuss the article at all. Maybe you just came here to post some 'enlightened' one-liners on Kettlers expense while you're in reality clueless and ignorant? Maybe you have nothing interesting to contribute with at all?

Is fact a normative ideal seen from your perspective? Is any other deviant ideas and philosopies unworthy of discussion? Is the world black and white according to your perception? Can you hi-jack and de-rail any discussion not conforming to this ideal?

It's not about this article in particular. I've seen this behaviour over several years. Many of the BFC users are cowards and bulllies who move in unison picking on anyone that doesn't share their views. I'm not pointing at anyone in particular. You know who you are. The sad thing is that this once great forum is becoming more and more predictable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is any other deviant ideas and philosopies unworthy of discussion?

This is not "any other" philosophies. We know Kettler's world view fairly well, he's made sure of that. And we also know that discussing issues that interest him, whether it be 9/11 conspiracies, Jesus conspiracies, Nazi Moon base conspiracies or any other conspiracies won't get you anywhere, for the same reason why talking rationally to any hardcore conspiracy theorists or to anyone else with strongly deviant world views, like religious fanatics or militant vegans, will not work. Time after time he will bring you the most incredible reports and documents, and time after time they turn out to be completely without basis in this reality. Yet he never learns from his past mistakes, because he gets kicks out of that kind of stuff. I'm not sure if he really believes in all of it, but he certainly is willing to ignore even the most glaring errors in the theories that he brings here, and then others have to point them out to him, to no avail. This makes it a futile effort to discuss with him anything that stinks of "alternative views", because it will only be a repeat of the previous thousands of similar debates. Which is unfortunate, because John is a quite sympathetic gentleman as long as he sticks to something unconspiratorial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so Howard - yuo after enlightenment, or jsut trolling for an argument.

Did you read the article? It postulates that Mohemmed never existed. I think that's fairly outrageous. my opinion of course....am I allowed to have an opinion or must I come to the same conclusions as someone else jsut because they have been published?

Unimportant scholars who provide have ideas worthy of discussion usually become important scholars - this guy is still unimportant.....and I still think his idea outrageous.

anything can expose us to the new - this certainly does - I'd never heard of theories that Mohamed never existed. I still think it is outrageous - there is ample evidence of his existance.

But all that is new is not important, and vice versa. this is both new and unimportant IMO. And outrageous - did I mention outrageous?

Maybe I have nothing to contribute - except of course that you think I have or you would not have replied.

Did you have something constructive to add - apart from hypothetical questions and derailing the topic with personal attacks which you decry me for launching on JK?

what do you actually think of the article?

I would have thought that if you disagree with my conclusions (that it is outrageous and unimportant) that you would then have made some effort to actually discuss it.......??

So go on then - make some effort to tell me why I am wrong - I'm all sure we await your wisdom.:cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...